Windows Experience

Ken Springer wrote:

At least, you usually had a single starting point to find what you were
looking for.

Digging around Control Panel and wading through the sub-levels got very
frustrating (is it here, is it there) and time wasting that I eventually
found how to use commands to get to the wizards, and added a Control
Panel menu in my Start - Programs folder under which I added shortcuts
for all these commands. Some folks don't even want that and instead
want a flat list hence Godmode.

https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/god-mode-windows-10

1903 is going to separate into Cortana and Search. For now, I click on
the Cortana search taskbar button (I have it squashed so it isn't always
wasting space with an input textbox) and enter the setting that I'm
looking. Just be careful to look at the results because Cortana often
wants to dump you into the Web.

my question is, does unpinning them turn them off? Or, do you
have to go the extra step and turn them off first?

Only if the app is a tile can be it be live. If you unpin from the
Start menu, it can't be live anymore. But it can still run in the
background; i.e., you load it, you exit its GUI, but it continues to run
in the background.

Look that background apps setting. Yep, something you can search for in
Cortana. Just remember that some apps, just like programs, rely on
running in the backgkround to work. After all, who still loads their
e-mail client and performs a manual poll every 10 to 30 minutes to check
for new e-mail?

Background is just the new term for resident. Just because a GUI
disappears doesn't mean the program stops running. For example, you
loading the GUI for your anti-virus software and exiting the GUI would
make the AV worthless if it didn't stay background aka resident.

Most services configured for Automatic start on Windows startup are
going to keep running in the background, too. If you want to know what
is continually running on your computer, use Task Scheduler although I
prefer SysInternals' Process Explorer. Occasionally that is one of my
cleanup tasks: review what processes are running and decide if you want
them running. AMD loves to run the hotkey poller service because, gee,
I just must have a hotkey combo to switch screen resolutions despite I
never change the screen resolution. So, I go into services.msc and
disable their service. Be aware that if you delete a service, a program
might recreate it when you run that program. Usually if you just
disable the service, the rude program sees it is define but doesn't
bother to check or change its startup state.

Wonder how long I'll remember this... Not very long is a good bet. :-(

In Window XP and 7, you never right-clicking on the Start button or a
folder in the Start menu, like under Programs, to group into subfolders
and arrange the shortcuts how you wanted?

It does appear to work this way, regardless of which Programs folder
it's in. Caveat... I did this in the admin account, not the standard
account, so I don't know if the results are the same there. Caveat
#2... The files have to be on the computer, not on a thumb drive as
mine is.

You can always define a shortcut while the executable file is available
to find when you enter it as the command to run. Removing the USB drive
won't suddenly make fail the shortcut. You would have to double-click
the shortcut for it to then complain that the program cannot be found.
Of course, if you first plug in the USB drive and then double-click the
shortcut than it will file the executable specified in its command line.

Paul wrote:

Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/30/19 2:01 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:

Their plan is to move all of the Control Panel applets into the Settings
app. They've been overly slow to migrate. The result is users have to
look 2 places to find all settings.

True. It's things like this that **** off most of the people I meet.
Kind of gives things an "unfinished feel and look", don't you think?


The fact that the two sets of settings are segregated, is a good thing.

The hamburger icon is already too busy at the top level. And
the Insider Edition has added some "decoration crap" at the top.
They couldn't possibly pour both of those into the same bucket,
without "blowing out the seams".

I think mentally, it isn't that hard to figure out which
area you want. One contains "useful things" (which is why
they removed it from the right-click menu). The other
contains settings for the SmartPhone you don't own
(SmartPhone controls on a Desktop).

Tis why most tweakers are organized using a tree hierarchy. Branches
and subbranches are used to group the settings by category and
subcategory. As with the old and still current Control Panel, and even
some of the links in the Settings app, that start disjoint wizards,
well, a leaf in the tree could also be a link to the same wizard. Even
menues are trees (on their side with the menubar as the trunk and each
menu a branch, and continual branching out as you drill down the menu).
Likely that's why users find trees so much easier to find settings or
functions than a bunch of linked graphical blobs that don't really guide
you through the navigation to where you're trying to go.

On 5/30/19 10:20 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:

At least, you usually had a single starting point to find what you were
looking for.

Digging around Control Panel and wading through the sub-levels got very
frustrating (is it here, is it there) and time wasting that I eventually
found how to use commands to get to the wizards, and added a Control
Panel menu in my Start - Programs folder under which I added shortcuts
for all these commands. Some folks don't even want that and instead
want a flat list hence Godmode.

This is an area where everyone is different. What you want is highly
unlikely to be wanted by the next person. And I find that most people I
encounter who want to know something, don't have the knowledge and
computer experience to even want something like this. They haven't
reached the point where they say "There's got to be a better way".

https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/god-mode-windows-10

I keep forgetting about Godmode. LOL I need to add this to my W7 and
W10 systems admin accounts only. But, for most folks, this would be a
disaster waiting to happen.

1903 is going to separate into Cortana and Search. For now, I click on
the Cortana search taskbar button (I have it squashed so it isn't always
wasting space with an input textbox) and enter the setting that I'm
looking. Just be careful to look at the results because Cortana often
wants to dump you into the Web.

I read about the separation, but until I get a new W10 system up and
running, I'm stuck at 17xxx.

I don't have any of the web access settings enabled on my system, no
need for them. Cortana is off, location services off, etc. So I don't
get those web results when I use Cortana. I find those web results
extremely frustrating. But I've also learned Cortana doesn't always
find what's on the computer. In W10, it doesn't find Backup and Restore
in the Control Panel. In W7, it does.

my question is, does unpinning them turn them off? Or, do you
have to go the extra step and turn them off first?

Only if the app is a tile can be it be live. If you unpin from the
Start menu, it can't be live anymore. But it can still run in the
background; i.e., you load it, you exit its GUI, but it continues to run
in the background.

Which means, just because you unpin it, doesn't mean you killed it. But
I can't think of any of those live tiles that are the default
installation are things you need running in the background. Such as
Xbox stuff, news, stock quotes, etc. Weather, I configure for my area,
and let run.

Look that background apps setting. Yep, something you can search for in
Cortana. Just remember that some apps, just like programs, rely on
running in the backgkround to work. After all, who still loads their
e-mail client and performs a manual poll every 10 to 30 minutes to check
for new e-mail?

How many people even know what an email client is?

Background is just the new term for resident. Just because a GUI
disappears doesn't mean the program stops running. For example, you
loading the GUI for your anti-virus software and exiting the GUI would
make the AV worthless if it didn't stay background aka resident.

Terminate and stay resident. Why is it people in the industry insist on
confusing things by changing the names of something?

Most services configured for Automatic start on Windows startup are
going to keep running in the background, too. If you want to know what
is continually running on your computer, use Task Scheduler although I
prefer SysInternals' Process Explorer. Occasionally that is one of my
cleanup tasks: review what processes are running and decide if you want
them running. AMD loves to run the hotkey poller service because, gee,
I just must have a hotkey combo to switch screen resolutions despite I
never change the screen resolution. So, I go into services.msc and
disable their service. Be aware that if you delete a service, a program
might recreate it when you run that program. Usually if you just
disable the service, the rude program sees it is define but doesn't
bother to check or change its startup state.

I leave this type of stuff alone, unless I need to find a problem. "If
it ain't broke, don't fix it." For instance, no matter what I've tried,
something has killed indexing in W7 for me, and I can't get it back up
and running. With all the time I've effed around trying to fix it, I
could have reinstalled it twice, at least.

Wonder how long I'll remember this... Not very long is a good bet. :-(

In Window XP and 7, you never right-clicking on the Start button or a
folder in the Start menu, like under Programs, to group into subfolders
and arrange the shortcuts how you wanted?

By the time I moved to Windows, I found so much crap was hard to do
compared to where I was coming from, it killed my desire to learn
anything about it. When my XP computer died, I went shopping, bought a
Mac. Now, I have no desire to ever use a Windows system as my main system.

It does appear to work this way, regardless of which Programs folder
it's in. Caveat... I did this in the admin account, not the standard
account, so I don't know if the results are the same there. Caveat
#2... The files have to be on the computer, not on a thumb drive as
mine is.

You can always define a shortcut while the executable file is available
to find when you enter it as the command to run. Removing the USB drive
won't suddenly make fail the shortcut. You would have to double-click
the shortcut for it to then complain that the program cannot be found.
Of course, if you first plug in the USB drive and then double-click the
shortcut than it will file the executable specified in its command line.

I found the shortcut idea works. But, I'm not one for cluttering up my
desktop, so I have few icons on the screen. I find having tons of icons
on the desktop to be visually confusing. Thanks to having the Mac, I
find myself using the search field in Windows to access my most commonly
used programs rather than shortcuts or menus.


--
Ken
MacOS 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On 5/29/2019 3:13 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2019 13:23:48 -0400, Neil wrote:

On 5/29/2019 11:39 AM, Ken Springer wrote:

(big snip)

A lot of people are tired of the constant changes, they just want to
pick up where they left off with whatever their learning level is/was.
Windows 7 and earlier had a familiar UI so it wasn't difficlult to
change to the current version.Â* But with 8 & 10 MS scrambled everything.


One heard the same rhetoric when the Windows UI changed from 3.x to 95.
The fact is that the underlying OS has changed, and it's not going back.
Those who think layering a 3rd party app on top of the UI is a good idea
will eventually discover otherwise, just as they did with Win95. ;-)

"will eventually discover otherwise" sounds a lot like what we heard
back in 2015, when Windows 10 was becoming available and people,
including yourself if I'm not mistaken, suggested that folks should
adopt Windows 10 because that's the direction MS is going and eventually
you'll have to make the switch. Well, here we are, nearly 4 years later,
and there's still no need to make that switch. Someday, perhaps, but not
yet.

My statement is regarding changes to the underlying OS, and those
changes aren't going to be reversed. Those who don't understand the
technological changes may think that layering a 3rd party app on top of
the OS to make it LOOK like a previous version is the same as reverting
to the previous version of the OS, but it isn't, and eventually it will
impact them.

--
best regards,

Neil

On Fri, 31 May 2019 08:26:29 -0400, Neil wrote:

My statement is regarding changes to the underlying OS, and those
changes aren't going to be reversed. Those who don't understand the
technological changes may think that layering a 3rd party app on top of
the OS to make it LOOK like a previous version is the same as reverting
to the previous version of the OS, but it isn't, and eventually it will
impact them.

I don't think anyone thinks that.

Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2019 08:26:29 -0400, Neil wrote:

My statement is regarding changes to the underlying OS, and those
changes aren't going to be reversed. Those who don't understand the
technological changes may think that layering a 3rd party app on top of
the OS to make it LOOK like a previous version is the same as reverting
to the previous version of the OS, but it isn't, and eventually it will
impact them.

I don't think anyone thinks that.


Exactly. People want a familiar
menu back, that sort of thing.

Nobody believes the underneath somehow magically
becomes the same as it was 20 years ago. I've never
seen anyone use phraseology suggesting such a thing.

*******

Both the OS 20 years ago and the OS now, are preemptive
multitasking OSes. In terms of classification, they
share something in common. The scheduler treats
programs ever so slightly differently.

Twenty years ago, both the Program Loader and the
Task Manager had priority. On Windows 10, the
behavior instead is unbounded. In my VM version
of Windows 10, I've waited as long as 2 minutes
for GPEDIT.msc to start, as an example. And because
there is no visual feedback that anything is
happened, there is a real danger that a user will
try to load a program a second time, because
the user doesn't really know whether the first
attempt "registered" or not.

And we call this progress.

In all my years in computing, I can't think of anything
quite that pathetic (the lack of visual feedback,
the unbounded behavior).

But what do I know.

I'm just a user.

Paul

On Fri, 31 May 2019 11:32:57 -0400, Paul wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2019 08:26:29 -0400, Neil wrote:

My statement is regarding changes to the underlying OS, and those
changes aren't going to be reversed. Those who don't understand the
technological changes may think that layering a 3rd party app on top of
the OS to make it LOOK like a previous version is the same as reverting
to the previous version of the OS, but it isn't, and eventually it will
impact them.

I don't think anyone thinks that.


Exactly. People want a familiar
menu back, that sort of thing.

Nobody believes the underneath somehow magically
becomes the same as it was 20 years ago. I've never
seen anyone use phraseology suggesting such a thing.

*******

Both the OS 20 years ago and the OS now, are preemptive
multitasking OSes. In terms of classification, they
share something in common. The scheduler treats
programs ever so slightly differently.

Twenty years ago, both the Program Loader and the
Task Manager had priority. On Windows 10, the
behavior instead is unbounded. In my VM version
of Windows 10, I've waited as long as 2 minutes
for GPEDIT.msc to start, as an example. And because
there is no visual feedback that anything is
happened, there is a real danger that a user will
try to load a program a second time, because
the user doesn't really know whether the first
attempt "registered" or not.

And we call this progress.

In all my years in computing, I can't think of anything
quite that pathetic (the lack of visual feedback,
the unbounded behavior).

But what do I know.

I'm just a user.

Careful, you don't want to upset the "inevitable" and "eventually"
crowds.

But yes, I agree. You just have to keep in mind that "progress" doesn't
necessarily mean forward progress. It's just as easy to go backward or
sideways.

On Thu, 30 May 2019 09:29:07 -0600, Ken Springer wrote:

Just put the scroll bars back and stop ****ing users off, and
making things harder to learn.

Is this just a MSFT Store app thing ('cos bars are there all the
time in my machine)? In any case there's a setting for that (to
always show scroll bars):
https://www.howtogeek.com/365325/how...in-windows-10/

On Thu, 30 May 2019 23:20:07 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Just be careful to look at the results because Cortana often
wants to dump you into the Web.

There's a setting for that (restrict search to local files).

On 5/31/2019 11:00 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2019 08:26:29 -0400, Neil wrote:

My statement is regarding changes to the underlying OS, and those
changes aren't going to be reversed. Those who don't understand the
technological changes may think that layering a 3rd party app on top of
the OS to make it LOOK like a previous version is the same as reverting
to the previous version of the OS, but it isn't, and eventually it will
impact them.

I don't think anyone thinks that.

Not highly experienced folks like yourself, but most users are not of
that ilk. Comments by others in this topic reveal that. Can one really
make a Win10 browser work reliably on XP? It's not likely, considering
the functional OS changes that began with Vista and were even further
distanced from XP functionality with Win8.x. Task manager has not had
priority status since Vista...it's not a Win10 innovation.

So, we disagree about what people think.

--
best regards,

Neil

On Fri, 31 May 2019 12:01:58 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


But yes, I agree. You just have to keep in mind that "progress" doesn't
necessarily mean forward progress. It's just as easy to go backward


Regress.


or
sideways.


Sidegress?

In article , Ken Springer
wrote:

not wanting change would mean things could never improve. that's bad.

That's so true. But so is the converse... The changes made may be a
step or two backwards.

that's never the goal, but sometimes companies make mistakes.

It would be nice if they actually admitted mistakes more often. :-)

it would.

what usually happens is subsequent versions changes a few things
without coming out and saying why.

more often, anything different is considered to be worse, even if it's
actually better.

But better is often subjective. And, even if something different is
demonstrably better, it doesn't always win in the marketplace. Betamax
vs. VHS is one example.

there were several reasons for why vhs won out over beta, none of which
had anything to do with ui/ux (which on vcrs back then was a massive
cluster**** across the board).

And for me, many of the changes over the last few years by MS have been
in the backwards direction for ease of use for me.

perhaps so, but microsoft (or any company) isn't designing products
*just* for you.

True., but their design path, and to some extent Apple's, is doing a
good job of making it more and more difficult for an increasing number
of users. Part of this is the situaion that, unless you are a member of
that group, you may not realize it.

nonsense.

what matters is the aggregate.

As well as what is included in the aggregate.

yes.

In article , Ken Springer
wrote:


it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

where's the research to support that tabs are better? or is it just
your opinion?

the research is basic ui/ux and discoverability.

Any research is subject to mistakes. That's the way humans are,
imperfect. What's easily "discoverable" to one person isn't necessarily
discoverable to the persons on each side of that one person.

it's not about one single person, but rather the aggregate.

Tabs, at least, have text that should be helpful to *most* people. And
a delete icon that has an image that is recognizable as a trash can to
most people is more helpful than a square with a triangle on top.
Google used to use the square + triangle, but I see they've now got an
icon that kinda, sorta, maybe looks like a trash can. LOL

the problem is one word can't always summarize everything in a single
tab, and sometimes, an item qualifies for more than one tab, which
means that the overall design is not ideal.

it's also common sense.

Someday, if you're lucky, you'll realize that sentence is hogwash, pure
and simple.

it's not.

"Common sense" is based on what you already know. If the
subject is unknown to a person, that person will have no "common sense"
on that subject. I had this discussion with a friend, probably 30 years
ago, and when we were finished, never again did he use that phrase, AFAIK.

the point is that a good design is based on what people already know.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

they're not hidden.

In some cases, they may as well be. That thin line you hover over often
just looks like the window border. Sometimes hovering doesn't always
display the scroll bar. Some monitors may not display the line worth a
damn. (As well as some colors, unfortunately.} I know the last is
fact, as I'm using one right now. :-(

that sounds like a defective display.

it's designed to maximize usable space for the window. showing a full
size scroll bar all the time is wasted space when it's not in use. it
can also be distracting for photos, videos, etc.

Just put the scroll bars back and stop ****ing users off, and making
things harder to learn.

many people prefer the additional space that a minimized or hidden
scroll bar offers.

you don't speak for everyone.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

how would you make it better?

This would be a good subject for a new thread, as it would, or should,
encompass all operating systems.

not really, since most people want what they personally prefer, not
what's best overall, such as reducing errors, improving productivity,
etc.

and keep in mind, what *you* prefer is more than likely *not* better
for a mass market product.

I think a good design is something that works the best for the most
users.

exactly, which means what *one* person prefers doesn't dictate the
entire design.

What I fear is, neither MS nor Apple really have a "good feel"
for what most users would, or do, like.

they very definitely do.

To their credit, MS has added a
lot of "Give us feedback" options, but I'm not sure most people even see
them.

as has apple, and sometimes the companies even consider the feedback.
however, they have to be careful because they risk lawsuits.

they also have to make decisions that are financially viable.

good ui/ux is *hard*.

True again. To me, it's getting worse and not better. :-(

to others it's getting better, not worse.

as you said, a good design is what works the best for the most users.

In article , Chris
wrote:

the new settings is *much* better than that mess of control
panels (a few of which still remain).

Settings is *awful*. Even on a 24" 2560x1440 screen I need to scroll up
to
find all the settings. Previously everything was viewable on std
monitors.
There's so much wasted space and nothing seems to "fit" properly. you
need
a 4k screen to be comfortable.

it's a *lot* more organized and easier to use.

Nope. I don't know who's in charge of their HCI but they need a new job.

it's a lot easier to simply scroll one page versus clicking a bunch of
tiny tabs

Where's the research to support that? Or is it simply your opinion as per
usual.

where's the research to support that tabs are better? or is it just
your opinion?

So the instant I challenge you to support your assertion you challenge me
back?

you said it's bad. explain why.

How about answering the question?

i did:
the research is basic ui/ux and discoverability. it's also common sense.

win10 settings has largely been cleaned up and much better organized.

nothing is perfect, so there are still minor issues, but overall it's a
*huge* improvement.

there are still remnants of the old control panels in some areas. a big
mistake was doing an incomplete job, but at least those areas are not
often seen.

No such thing as common sense.

false.

You only know to scroll if more information is signposted somehow. In win10
that is woeful especially as it does the stupid thing of hiding the scroll
bar. Tabs at least are labeled and have meaning.

they're not hidden.

which sometimes move around, trying to find which ones hold
the relevant settings (and it's often more than one tab), only to find
what's needed is actually hidden behind an advanced button.

Win10 does both: stupid scrolling and hiding settings behind an advanced
button. Clearly poorly designed.

how would you make it better?

A combination of macOS Preferences and the old win7 Control Panel. It needs
more iconography and less empty space.

that's *very* vague.

more iconography and less empty space is not always good.

these are extreme examples, but does convey the point:
https://images.pcworld.com/news/graphics/152585-word_11.jpg
https://techwhirl-1-wpengine.netdna-...loads/2013/06/
WordToolbars.jpg

All pages need to fit on 1080p
screens (the most common resolution and displayable by 50% of monitors)
without scrolling.

which means nearly 50% will need to scroll, making it *not* a good
solution.

also, the popularity of ultrabooks means there's a *lot* of smaller
displays in use.

and keep in mind, what *you* prefer is more than likely *not* better
for a mass market product.

good ui/ux is *hard*.

Agree. MS are doing a bad job compared to previous and others. They have
gone backwards.

they have not.

On Fri, 31 May 2019 11:29:16 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2019 12:01:58 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


But yes, I agree. You just have to keep in mind that "progress" doesn't
necessarily mean forward progress. It's just as easy to go backward


Regress.


or
sideways.


Sidegress?

Thanks, Ken. :-) Have a great weekend.