[HN Gopher] Microsoft announces Windows 11
___________________________________________________________________
Microsoft announces Windows 11
Author : neogodless
Score : 406 points
Date : 2021-06-24 15:14 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| oramit wrote:
| Microsoft and Apple both said a few years back that they had
| "finished" their respective operating systems and were no longer
| going to do versioning like this.
|
| I wonder why the change of heart?
| charwalker wrote:
| New execs need to make their mark.
| binkHN wrote:
| I think I might switch to Chrome OS when this happens.
| priyanmuthu wrote:
| I see that it supports Android apps. Does that mean we have
| complete GUI support for WSL2? I believe it will use WSL2 in the
| backend?
| ewzimm wrote:
| Full GUI support is available now in preview, so by the time
| Windows 11 launches, it should be ready for mainstream support.
| It uses Wayland and RDP natively. I haven't seen any
| announcement of if this will be used for the Android support
| layer, but it will likely be using something similar.
|
| Edit: It looks like this will be using Intel Bridge Technology
| to cross compile into x86.
| https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-...
| janandonly wrote:
| After looking at these screenshots I'm more grateful to be using
| macOS now than ever before...
| 72deluxe wrote:
| Because it looks exactly the same??
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Wasn't 10 supposed to be the last Windows ever? Isn't that how
| some of the more annoying update habits were justified to the
| users?
|
| I am underwhelmed with Win 11. I did not see a feature that felt
| sufficiently useful to justify coming back. I am not sure, who
| would consciously choose it outside of business sector and
| gaming.
| thibran wrote:
| Looks like KDE with fixed magins :)
| speeder wrote:
| Snap layout felt to me a cute name for a feature I have seen last
| on Windows 3.1
|
| That said I did liked that feature I am happy it is back.
| russli1993 wrote:
| they are integrating teams, onedrive, office, microsoft 365 stuff
| directly into windows 11. Doesn't that spark anti-trust concerns?
| Think about Microsoft was fined for anti-trust for integrating
| internet explorer into windows and making it the default. Looks
| like every platform holder is just using the dominance of their
| platform to push their other stuff.
| wodenokoto wrote:
| How does word look using the new design language? Still ribbons
| or is it back to menus or something completely different?
| chris_wot wrote:
| 40% smaller Windows updates? I think they are missing the point.
| It's not the size of the download, it's the time it takes for
| Windows to work out its package dependency treee, it's ridiculous
| SxS system that was only ever a massive kluge, and the incredible
| number of forced reboots.
|
| If it takes me no more than five minutes to run an apt update &&
| apt upgrade ---yes with no reboots, how on earth is it that
| Microsoft is still so behind the eight ball? Note that apt
| upgrades _everything_ in _minutes_ , whilst Windows does not.
| literallyaduck wrote:
| Every time this happens someone says fuck it and installs Linux.
| After two weeks some of them come back, but the Linux market
| share grows.
|
| I want an OS that stays current on security patches, attempts to
| be as unobtrusive as possible, allows for Desktop Environment
| customization but has sane defaults. I don't want special
| integrations. The OS should follow single responsibility and
| defer special functionality to app developers.
| mdoms wrote:
| Wait until you see what happens with Ubuntu updates.
| miroz wrote:
| I did this when Vista came out. I said fuck it and installed
| Ubuntu, I had enough of Microsoft bullshit. Then Ubuntu
| upgraded and moved all window icons to the left side and
| rearranged them awkwardly. On the next update, they upgraded
| the sound subsystem and I was without sound until I bought my
| next PC. Another update came and computer went to sleep when
| watching movies, so I had to move the mouse every minute to fix
| it. I said fuck it and installed Windows 7. There's no escape.
| zamadatix wrote:
| The upside to Linux is when one of these kinds of changes
| happen you have the freedom to modify or swap out components
| to your liking.
|
| The downside to Linux is nobody actually wants to constantly
| modify or maintain components to their liking and nobody can
| agree what a good liking is so nobody likes the way somebody
| else does it.
| IshKebab wrote:
| Yeah and you can only do that if you have student-level
| free time. I used Linux as a student. I could keep it
| mostly working. Now I have a job and children and I like my
| laptop to last longer than 2 hours and connect to WiFi
| reliably.
| handrous wrote:
| My most recent attempt, last year, ended when xorg and
| Wayland both crashed, reliably, at least once per day, on two
| different distros (Fedora, Ubuntu) when just _using the
| desktop normally_ --not even running games or anything like
| that. Nope. Not accepting that shit in the year 2021. 2000-me
| would have been like, OK, cool, Windows does that too. Not
| anymore.
|
| ... and that's just for my screwing-around desktop machine.
| Work goes on macOS. I wish I had other decent options, but
| it's the only game in town. No time or patience for messing
| with my OS, these days.
| nicbou wrote:
| I had a similar experience. MacOS was the answer. For me, the
| moat around MacOS is so large that I refuse to consider any
| other laptop brand.
|
| This has been the most frictionless operating system I've
| used to date. It's not perfect, but it's good enough to make
| other options undesirable.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| May want to rethink:
|
| https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/
|
| https://sneak.berlin/20210202/macos-11.2-network-privacy/
| kylemuir wrote:
| I've been using Linux Mint for years now and really enjoy it.
| It looks good, works with most things out of the box and I've
| had minimal issues with it.
|
| It's a bloated distro since it tries to cater to most set ups
| and ships with drivers, etc that you might not need which
| will annoy the purists but for me the compatibility and
| things just working is more valuable.
|
| I only use it on a desktop PC so YMMV.
|
| These days I only use Windows for work as that's what my
| company uses and for games that don't work with Proton.
| lucian1900 wrote:
| For better or worse, the escape is macOS.
| dgan wrote:
| I said exactly that to myself when Windows 8 was out, quite
| happy since then:)
| jl6 wrote:
| So many questions...
|
| Will Win10 users be able to upgrade to Win11 for free or will
| they have to buy it?
|
| What's the end-of-life date for Win10 now?
|
| Will the minimum hardware requirements be increased?
|
| Will this be used as an opportunity to make backwards-
| compatibility-breaking improvements?
|
| Are they actually going to fix the _whole_ UI or just 80% of it
| and leave the remaining 20% as sedimentary layers of previous
| UIs?
|
| And I really really really hope they fix Teams' performance and
| stability issues before bundling it with the OS and running it
| continuously.
| MarcScott wrote:
| Some answers here -
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/24/22546801/microsoft-window...
| acwan93 wrote:
| More details here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/windows-11-specifica...
| ehsankia wrote:
| Great link, thanks!
|
| Found this unfortunate change deep down:
|
| > Taskbar functionality is changed including: Alignment to
| the bottom of the screen is the only location allowed.
| marcthe12 wrote:
| It's free and it's minimum requirements are bumped massively.
| salamandersauce wrote:
| Free. 2025. Yes, 32-bit CPUs are out. I guess with 32-bit mode
| so goes 16-bit support? Probably not to the last two?
| xxpor wrote:
| IIRC 16 bit support was dropped with 8 or 10?
| salamandersauce wrote:
| It still works in 32 bit Windows 10 but you have to install
| NTVDM which provided as a feature on demand.
| [deleted]
| 1-6 wrote:
| I think most people scratch their heads when they hear Windows 11
| because it seems like the same Windows but skinned with a
| slightly new UI. This is also from a company which puts function
| over form.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I'd love to watch the event stream but it is down.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| Except it will be the same old windows disguised.
| lupinglade wrote:
| Exactly, just more lipstick on a pig. They never seem to fully
| commit to anything.
| MaxBarraclough wrote:
| That's too broad, they fully committed to Direct3D, and
| they're more committed to backward-compatibility than anyone
| else I could name.
|
| They have real trouble committing to a UI toolkit or design
| language, though.
| aj7 wrote:
| That's all well and good, but I'd just like search to work as
| well as it does on MacOSX.
| nly wrote:
| Stealing all the advanced window management features from the
| Linux DE world... say repeatedly that no other OS does it.
|
| Stay classy MS.
| 1_player wrote:
| Ask the Linux DE world to put a patent on it and litigate
| everyone that tries to steal their ground-breaking ideas.
| pavlov wrote:
| Pop-up file previews with spacebar in Explorer please...?
|
| That's my #1 pain point when moving between Mac and Windows. It's
| so annoying that the spacebar does nothing.
| MikusR wrote:
| There is an app for that "good" feature.
| pavlov wrote:
| Windows has an admirable amount of API hooks, so there's
| presumably an app for everything.
|
| That's not an excuse not to improve base Explorer, though.
| fleaaaa wrote:
| Quicklook does the job fine
| dustinc1 wrote:
| seems there's free upgrade from windows 10 to windows 11, but not
| from windows 7 to 11.
| sumthinprofound wrote:
| still no windows explorer tabs?
| djdjdkdkdkd wrote:
| This. I thought they announced that feature as coming soon a
| couple of years ago.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| They did. Then they threw out the entire concept.
| TheDudeMan wrote:
| How about they just re-release Windows 7 instead?
| Koshkin wrote:
| Yet another related ongoing thread:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27619831
| dragonwriter wrote:
| The lack of support for start menu folders and named groups of
| apps probably means that not only with the Start Menu suck even
| worse than in Win 8-10, but third party replacements will no
| longer have the data available to restore a decent experience.
|
| As with the "task bar only can be attached to the bottom of the
| screen", um, "feature", I really don't get this. Okay, sure, MS
| targets a default UX that I'm not partial too, fine, maybe its
| better for more of the market; lots of it is subjective so I
| don't expect my tastes to be catered to in every default. But why
| throw roadblocks in the way of what people who _don't_ prefer the
| default experience have been doing for years to optimize their
| personal experience?
| zubspace wrote:
| It's even more annoying if the change just happens because of
| 'design'.
|
| Can you imagine being the developer who says:
|
| "Well, let's redesign that thing to make it look awesome. And
| well, let's also remove all those existing features, which only
| complicate the code. Don't need them."
|
| Never in my life could I work at my current company with this
| mindset without being thrown out in an instant. It's such an
| odd way to approach redesigns.
| DethNinja wrote:
| So taskbar extends horizontally and places icons in the middle,
| which means:
|
| 1. It creates unnecessary visual clutter in the right and left
| sides and takes up valuable space.
|
| 2. Users will have harder time clicking to start button.
|
| I'm having hard time seeing what is UX benefit of this?
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| The first rule of UX design, as far as I'm concerned, is: _Don
| 't make me think._
|
| Moving stuff around? You just made me think. You'd better have
| a _good_ reason for that, better than just "it will play
| better on touch devices". I'm not _on_ a touch device, so you
| just slowed me down to solve a problem _that I don 't have_.
| spaetzleesser wrote:
| I agree. Teams is pretty bad about this. Every few weeks some
| buttons get moved around so you have to look for them.
| Instead of fixing problems it seems they just keep changing
| the UI.
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| Why does MacOS do it?
| DethNinja wrote:
| But macOS does it differently, visually it looks far pleasing
| that what is shown here.
|
| I'm not a huge fan of macOS dock bar but UX wise it isn't so
| bad.
| [deleted]
| partiallypro wrote:
| You can move it back to the corner in the settings.
| Grimm665 wrote:
| But why the change at all? I wonder what their user story for
| this one was.
| partiallypro wrote:
| I have wondered that too, I don't like the look of the new
| taskbar, I was hoping they'd do more with it with some of
| the user concepts floating around (such as a rounded
| floating taskbar.) I'm sure the true reason is that is what
| MacOS does, so they just copied it.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| With (ultra)widescreens these days moving the Start Menu
| and Search boxes to the center of the screen makes a lot
| of sense. Literally brings them "front and center", and I
| guess if the menus/windows/boxes are moving to the
| center, moving the icons that open them to the center
| makes sense.
|
| As a vertical taskbar user (since way back in XP days)
| though, I'm definitely upset by all the wasted space. I'm
| perplexed why they aren't allowing vertical taskbars at
| launch. I'm sure telemetry suggests most users keep a
| bottom taskbar.
| partiallypro wrote:
| One thing that stood out to me as missing, was a file explorer
| demo. Have they just given up on revamping that?
| 72deluxe wrote:
| Let's hope it wasn't as bad as the "revamp" in Windows 10 where
| that dumb ribbon replaced a usable toolbar for good, where
| Quick Access apparently was necessary because obviously the
| file directory listing wasn't obvious enough...
|
| And pressing tab to get to the other pane now gave focus to the
| list header when in details view, forcing you to press tab 30
| times to get between the left and right panes.
|
| I think the most useful Explorer version was the Windows 98 one
| or possibly XP, but it went downhill in Vista.
|
| Let's hope they had a change of heart and just reverted to that
| old version!!!
| nprateem wrote:
| Could have been a release video for KDE.
| aplkorex wrote:
| I work at a company where the majority of the employees complain
| about every new version of Windows, some rather aggressively.
| They resist adoption until the last possible minute. Then when
| they upgrade, what do they do? -- continue to use Windows to make
| cool stuff so our company continues to grow and, in reality,
| persist with the same exact workflow they had the week before...
| it just looks a little different. Then the complaints die off,
| and, well, on to other things....
|
| Until the next version of Windows is announced.
| Shadonototro wrote:
| and then management have to upgrade PCs because it runs
| noticeably slower and tinker with services even more because it
| interrupts workflow (remember the windows update popups during
| weather forecasts?)
| chadlavi wrote:
| Quite a lot of stuff in that new UI looks directly pilfered from
| apple. And "you can run android apps" sounds like a direct copy
| of macOS running iPad apps.
|
| Even the (in windows' case, completely nonsensical) decision to
| center the taskbar feels like a ripoff of apple ui.
| only_as_i_fall wrote:
| It's OK, 2022 will be the year of the Linux desktop
| markus_zhang wrote:
| I think this actually going to convice me to move to Linux for
| daily use...
| agumonkey wrote:
| I'm still baffled it's still about moving windows and apps around
| (now with a global mute button).
| ThrowawayR2 wrote:
| > " _Microsoft is also integrating Microsoft Teams directly into
| Windows 11, for both consumers and commercial users._ "
|
| Not that I have any objections to Teams _per se_ but attempting
| to drive adoption by bundling got Microsoft in trouble in the IE
| era; didn 't they learn their lesson? Either way, probably the
| first thing I'll be doing after a fresh install of Windows 11 is
| uninstalling Teams.
| 0xEFF wrote:
| They didn't get in trouble for bundling IE. The got in trouble
| for legal and technical restrictions on using alternatives to
| IE.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...
| .
| nix23 wrote:
| They got in trouble in the EU, that's why they had to make a
| version without ie > Windows 7 E
| [deleted]
| ejh_hn wrote:
| If you can even uninstall it. That's honestly my biggest gripe
| about Windows besides the fact it's proprietary is all of the
| stupid shit it comes bundled with that you will never use and
| can't remove.
| sonofhans wrote:
| I think they learned their lesson very well. Microsoft suffered
| little for bundling Internet Explorer into Windows. The court
| case cost them some time and money, and in return they made no
| substantive business changes, and shut out browser competition
| for years. They had a plan and it worked. Why shouldn't they do
| it again?
| Iwan-Zotow wrote:
| it worked?!?
|
| they pretty much lost browser war to chrome and safari
| sonofhans wrote:
| Yes, it worked, and far longer than most corporate
| initiatives do. The antitrust trial was decided in 2001 and
| Chrome didn't launch until 2008. Microsoft owned the
| pathway to the Internet for Windows users for a solid
| decade.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Eh, I do have misgivings about Teams and such tight Teams
| integration since my company chose it as its default
| communication platform.
|
| My biggest beef is how limited I am as user with configuration
| ( the notifications are too big for my taste -- and I can
| either choose that they show or don't) and that UI somehow
| feels worse than webex.
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| I'm on MacOS, not Windows, but I really concur with you on
| the notifications. They're huge, they stay on screen too
| long, and they can't be dismissed early. I hate that they
| chose not to go with the standard MacOS notification system.
|
| Another MacOS annoyance: Teams seems to exist in every
| virtual desktop, so even if the main window is in (say)
| desktop 3 and I'm in desktop 2, if I cmd-tab to Teams it
| won't take me to desktop 3. I have to manually switch
| desktops to get back to Teams.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| Does that mean it's finally becoming a native app? By far the
| worst part of MS Teams is that it's slow and can't really help
| when it can't connect to its servers because it's just a web
| page.
| MikusR wrote:
| It's moving from electron to webview2
| jl6 wrote:
| Do you have any information about what problems this is
| expected to solve?
| WorldMaker wrote:
| WebView2 is shipped/serviced by Windows (auto-updates
| with Edgmium at roughly the exact same pace as
| Chromium/Chrome), and it's a shared control with a single
| install which Windows can optimize memory
| usage/performance. As opposed to Electron packages its
| own Chromium, updates have to be shipped inside the
| application at the application's pace (including and
| especially security updates), and the install size and
| memory usage/performance is bloated for every Electron
| app bundling lots of the exact same Chromium DLLs and
| whatnot.
| zeusk wrote:
| safari/iMessage/Facetime/Maps or every default app on iOS? or
| any preinstalled and uninstallable app on Android?
| nevi-me wrote:
| Yeah, I thought of this too when I saw the integration, but a
| lot of things have changed since the antitrust issues at the
| time. If there's bundling issues, then I don't know.
|
| The one thing I lament though is that using the same platform
| for work and personal communication tends to trigger some
| anxiety reflex in me.
|
| I sometimes dread the long "quick call" in Teams, so hearing
| the call notification even in a video has me looking for my
| headphones :(
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| I don't use any of safari/iMessage/Facetime/Maps and, gladly,
| they are sitting quietly in the corner. Don't think Teams
| stuff will behave like that
| kyriakos wrote:
| Skype does in Windows 10
| MajorBee wrote:
| Neither iOS nor MacOS are dominant in their respective
| categories. You can argue that the right metric to look at is
| market share by revenue and not by devices sold, and iOS does
| increase its footprint significantly at 42% of global
| smartphone revenue [1] (cementing itself as the single
| largest player), but still, arguably, not monopoly levels. I
| couldn't find a similar figure for the Desktop OS market,
| only (what I assume) is for devices currently running [2].
| Sidenote: I think it's interesting to note that Windows
| market share has been steadily declining over the years, from
| a peak of ~91% a mere 8 years ago to around 76% in 2020.
|
| Given this, by bundling a chat/productivity application (that
| has nothing to do with the OS product that Microsoft is
| selling), Microsoft is using its huge leverage in one
| category (OS) to increase its market share in another
| unrelated category (chat apps). This matches one of the
| conditions for US anti-trust action [3], and could even match
| the predatory pricing [uncited, hard to prove] condition
| (Microsoft bundling Teams for free indicates the cost of
| Teams is being absorbed by the Windows or some other business
| unit).
|
| [1] https://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-
| apple/2021/04/apples-....
|
| [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-
| sha...
|
| [3] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/antitrust-
| law.as...
| yellowfish wrote:
| It's just teams replacing skype and easy enough to disable,
| the issue with IE was strong arming I doubt Microsoft is
| going to strong arm slack at any other level.. same goes
| for Onedrive/iCloud
| MajorBee wrote:
| Relevant snippet from the Wiki article on the Microsoft
| antitrust lawsuit:
|
| "The plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft had abused
| monopoly power on Intel-based personal computers in its
| handling of operating system and web browser integration.
| The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was
| allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web
| browser software with its Windows operating system.
| Bundling them is alleged to have been responsible for
| Microsoft's victory in the browser wars as every Windows
| user had a copy of IE. It was further alleged that this
| restricted the market for competing web browsers (such as
| Netscape Navigator or Opera), since it typically took a
| while to download or purchase such software at a store.
| Underlying these disputes were questions over whether
| Microsoft had manipulated its application programming
| interfaces to favor IE over third-party web browsers,
| Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing
| agreements with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs),
| and Microsoft's intent in its course of conduct."
|
| To draw parallels between that lawsuit and this
| discussion:
|
| 1. I guess the download effort of Slack isn't really a
| concern anymore. And while I have no idea of the feature
| parity between the free versions of Teams and Slack, the
| free versions of both apps should probably be sufficient
| for casual users (i.e. the inertia of entering payment
| information is not a concern).
|
| 2. I have no idea if Microsoft has added any secret sauce
| to Windows 11 that would make Teams run better on Windows
| owing to tighter in-house integration. But if this is
| true, and Slack (or other competitors) won't be able to
| use this to boost their own performances as much, I
| suspect this could be a big deal.
| hackinthebochs wrote:
| I'm sure they will gladly accept a billion dollar fine for
| their video chat service to be dominant.
| addicted wrote:
| Doesn't Windows 10 come integrated with Skype? This would just
| replace that wouldn't it.
| bun_at_work wrote:
| Will uninstalling be an option? They say it's integrated, so
| that seems unlikely.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| I doubt it. What's important too is that you have to use a MS
| account to use teams, goodbye local windows accounts.
| bserge wrote:
| Most likely easy to disable. Pretty sure I have Cortana and
| Microsoft Store but I disabled the services, removed the
| Taskbar icons and never think about it heh.
| CursedUrn wrote:
| I wouldn't be surprised if both of those are still running
| in Task Manager's process list if you look, under
| unassuming names like SearchUI.exe. It's quite hard to
| disable Microsoft's malware in my experience, a lot of it
| relaunches itself, or comes back after an OS update. The
| number of running Microsoft processes goes up every year.
| swiley wrote:
| I've given up. If you have a computer with a spinning
| rust disk this crap alone will saturate the I/O and
| become completely unusable. (then you have OEM bloatware
| which has also become harder to remove and bloated
| software in general on top of that.)
|
| At this point I just hand people thumbdrives with PopOS
| on them when they complain that their computer is slow.
| Both OSes run Android apps and between that, the web, and
| wine most people hardly miss anything.
| DoctorDabadedoo wrote:
| I wish MS stopped doing redesign of their interfaces every couple
| of years and just fixed the broken stuff the introduced somewhere
| along the way.
|
| - Settings / control panel inconsistency and the other dozen
| places you can change configs for a single thing - Telemetry, ads
| and system crap - Package management and sandboxing
|
| And the list goes on.
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Most of those are actually features.
|
| 1. Old control panels: Drivers may overlay or modify the
| window, so you can't really change them (don't forget: Windows
| supports many obscure devices like DAWs and heavy machinery,
| many things Linux users have never even considered connecting
| to a PC, and all of those have custom drivers from the device
| manufacturer that Microsoft doesn't control)
|
| 2. Telemetry, ads: Yes, this is a serious "bug" that Microsoft
| needs to fix, how do they keep accidentally adding fully-
| featured invasive telemetry and ad platforms into their OS? I
| guess that's what copying code from StackOverflow gets you!
|
| 3. Package management: NuGet?
|
| 4. Sandboxing: All modern OSs support lots of sandboxing
| options, not sure what you mean by this
| Darvokis wrote:
| > 1. Old control panels: Drivers may overlay or modify the
| window, so you can't really change them (don't forget:
| Windows supports many obscure devices like DAWs and heavy
| machinery, many things Linux users have never even considered
| connecting to a PC, and all of those have custom drivers from
| the device manufacturer that Microsoft doesn't control)
|
| The bigger issue is that a fuckload of native _Windows_
| settings can only be changed through the old Control Panel
| dialogs. I hate the new Settings app, but they need to make
| up their minds about what they want to do instead of
| arbitrarily splitting everything up between the new shitty
| hotness and the old dialogs.
| infogulch wrote:
| Windows Sandbox is a thing as of this year:
| https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-
| pro...
|
| Ephemeral, clean, windows instance on demand enabled by
| hypervisor tech. Only on Pro though. :-/
| DoctorDabadedoo wrote:
| I meant broken more in the sense of "anti-pattern" practices.
| It's been a while I used Windows to develop anything, so I
| might be outdated on points 3 and 4.
|
| I understand the driver conundrum, from a user perspective,
| though, it's unbelievable how confusing and scattered Windows
| settings are by default (settings app / control panel /
| registry / AppData) and doesn't seem to exist a firm
| curatorship of that.
|
| On the telemetry, it's baffling that it may happen even on a
| paid license and we just put up with it.
| rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
| > 3. Package management: NuGet?
|
| WinGet is their answer to this one:
|
| https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/windows-
| package-m...
|
| It's not proper package management, but it's a start.
| stinos wrote:
| Powershell + ChocolateyGet (+ DSC if you want) does a
| pretty good job already. Apart from specialized software
| it's been years I had to install via tedious hunt for link
| + download + execute + go through wizards or similar. That
| being said, the meat of it is 3rd party so not having
| package management builtin is a valid builtin. Then again,
| if you think about what that would take: non-trivial.
| MarcScott wrote:
| Developers can use their own payment systems, and MS take
| nothing. That's a bit of a kick in the teeth to Apple.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Except for, twist, if you are an Android developer. Amazon
| takes it's 20% cut no doubt, and to avoid the cut you need to
| make a native Windows app. Which actually isn't an awful
| incentive structure, but it's not 0% in the Store across the
| board.
|
| Also it doesn't count if you make Xbox games. Microsoft still
| takes a cut there.
|
| So it's 0% if it's a native Windows app and it isn't an Xbox
| Game. So let's just say Epic Games will still not be satisfied
| with this.
| beerandt wrote:
| I'd be surprised if they somehow limited side-loading apks on
| a PC.
| [deleted]
| swiley wrote:
| No.
|
| It normalizes OS vendor maintained AppStores which is a huge
| deal for Apple. The only way to avoid them now is to install
| Linux.
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| Windows already had a vendor maintained App Store, though. It
| will just actually be useful now.
| dagmx wrote:
| Linux distros also have equivalents to App Stores, and really
| an app store isn't different than apt-get from a lay persons
| perspective. Assuming you ignore payment/cuts, but it seems
| you're opposed to free App Stores too.
| swiley wrote:
| Linux distro repos are maintained by the community not a
| corporation. The only app store like that is f-droid.
| seaorg wrote:
| Not at all. Because the lack of curation will make the
| ecosystem dead on arrival for 99% of users.
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| Lack of curation doesn't really matter for apps, where the
| user will find the software independently, and just use the
| MS Store for the final download.
|
| And for games, the curation will be where it matters - on
| Xbox games pass.
| seaorg wrote:
| I'm talking about filtering out malicious software ala
| Android App Store
| apozem wrote:
| Absolutely. Microsoft doesn't have a large existing Windows
| Store business to protect, so why not make Apple's life harder?
|
| I think it's also the solution that best meets the reality of
| apps in 2021. Big third-party devs like Netflix and Amazon will
| opt out of in-app purchase entirely before giving a cut to the
| platform owner. May as well let them use their own payment
| system so users get a better experience than signing up on the
| web.
| actuator wrote:
| It is such a welcome thing. Big platforms like Netflix,
| Spotify don't owe any revenue share to Apple, Microsoft or
| others. They made their own brand and have been responsible
| for their own success.
|
| These big OS/device companies in fact compete with them with
| unfair advantages like pre installed apps, prominent product
| placement on AppStore and closed/early integrations.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| > Microsoft doesn't have a large existing Windows Store
| business to protect,
|
| This is how you GET a large existing Windows Store business.
| flohofwoe wrote:
| It's not like Microsoft hasn't tried very hard in the last
| 10 years to emulate the iOS business model, but I guess
| Windows users don't like walled gardens.
| oezi wrote:
| But they messed up so bad with the Windows store. It is
| beyond belief:
|
| - By including Candy Crush and other bloatware in the
| store, the store started with a bad reputation already.
|
| - By allowing manufacturers to define apps you cannot
| uninstall via the store, this infuriated any power user.
|
| - By no allowing to delete any items from your "purchase
| history" you could never try out any free apps without
| them contaminating your history. They did so to prevent
| people from losing their purchases, but this was just
| stupid with free apps.
|
| - Discovery in the store was a joke. Search results
| showed apps with less than 100 installs. Descriptions and
| screenshots of apps are often so bad that there is no way
| to figure out what an app does.
|
| - Not finding a way to offer legacy apps in the store was
| such a fail, it is incomprehensible. It is 2021 and end
| users still have to download applications from CNet and
| Sourceforge. A security nightmare. Don't get me started
| on UWP and the UIs from hell caused by it.
|
| Finally, there is absolutely no reason that the Windows
| store couldn't have been what Steam is now. Just MS
| incompetence in their vision of where to start.
|
| -- Edit:
|
| It seems legacy apps are coming to the store with Windows
| 11. Yeah! Let's see how they mess up this time.
| ljm wrote:
| I don't think it helps that MS have been trying to build
| new UI and app development frameworks for the past
| several years, each one with varying capabilities. I've
| lost track, I think UWP is the latest one but it's not
| UWP any more, or something?
|
| It just seems harder to build and sell software that has
| that same quality look-and-feel that many MacOS apps
| have.
|
| I just wonder what they'd be capable of if they had a
| separate OS that didn't have to concern itself with
| backwards compatibility. It'd be a monumental undertaking
| to do all that from scratch, not really worth it from a
| business standpoint, but it'd be interesting to see what
| they'd come up with if they started off with Linux.
| [deleted]
| jmull wrote:
| Did something change?
|
| (Windows users/developers have always been able to use various
| distribution systems... likewise for macOS.
| MarcScott wrote:
| I might be wrong (not a developer), but I thought within the
| official stores, in-app purchases were subject to 30%, as
| standard, going to the platform provider. At least that's
| what I understand with regard to Apple and Google stores.
| pram wrote:
| You can install software on Windows and MacOS outside of
| the app stores jfyi
| zrobotics wrote:
| I mean, you can also do that on Android; in fact Epic was
| doing that for quite a while with fortnite.
| [deleted]
| pram wrote:
| Yes, inarguably true, my omission wasn't implying
| otherwise.
| wongarsu wrote:
| But now you can have your Windows Store presence and
| still keep all your money.
|
| Of course that's easy to offer while nobody uses the
| Windows Store, but e.g. on MacOS that would be quite a
| big deal.
| jmull wrote:
| I see now... the Microsoft store will let publishers
| collect payments in alternative ways.
|
| That's well and good, but I don't see that as a big deal
| because the microsoft app store isn't that important.
|
| The problem with the Apple ios app store isn't that they
| have a specific, restricted payments mechanism. It's that
| it's the only practical way for developers to distribute
| native software to iOS devices.
| flumpcakes wrote:
| I think this is important to Microsoft, and actually
| quite a smart move. By letting other people use the
| Microsoft/Windows Store app natively built into windows,
| with their own billing infrastructure, they basically
| kill off any reason to have other applications for
| buying/installing software.
|
| Imagine if Steam allowed Blizzard/Activision/EA to sell
| their games on the Steam store, and as long as they pay
| their own hosting/billing infrastructure costs, Valve
| takes no cut?
|
| I think that would immediately kill the need for
| EA/Ubisoft/Blizzard/etc. to ever need their own
| applications to sell software.
| TingPing wrote:
| They still get value from their apps, those won't go
| away.
| defaultname wrote:
| The change is that their current Windows Store is a
| tumbleweed wasteland with astonishingly little uptake, so
| Microsoft has offered some partners (I presume it's a subset
| or it'll just become a scam central) like Adobe to put
| themselves "on" the store, but not actually on it. Basically
| a package manager.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| The announcement was that "bring-your-own-commerce"
| platform was going to be open to all developers (it is
| becoming basically a package manager), _except_ for things
| categorized as Games, where presumably existing Xbox rules
| still take priority.
| Shadonototro wrote:
| meh, sounds like more of the same atrocities since Windows8
|
| no fundamental changes other than cosmetics
|
| no tabs on file explorer, why the heck they kept ribbon
| interface... wasn't windows 11 supposed to be about having an
| uniform and consistent design?
|
| no changes on filesystem? still have to wait 88486468468 minutes
| when deleting a folder with lot of files?
|
| --
|
| the only positive surprise was android apps, BUT quickly became
| uninterested the minute they mentioned amazon store.. yeah no
| thanks
| LyalinDotCom wrote:
| FYI the official announcement is here:
| https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2021/06/24/intro...
| nsriv wrote:
| Looks like a ton of nice little QoL improvements for the vast
| majority of people especially with Snap and Multiple Desktops,
| with monitor layout memory. Hope that taskbar can still have
| programs with "non-combined" windows, as opposed to dock style.
| Using PowerToys Run personally seems like it's going to sidestep
| most of the complaints I'm seeing from this comment section.
| mdldndndn wrote:
| My guess is they are just making a macOS style application
| taskbar default. I actually already use it that way on Windows
| 10, but there are occasions when I miss having minimized
| application instances in little rectangles. But these days I
| can run so many applications at a time that it quickly becomes
| too crowded to be of any use.
| danirod wrote:
| At this point, I feel I don't have the energy to hate unjustified
| changes in user interfaces anymore such as integrating Microsoft
| Teams with the taskbar.
|
| As someone who doesn't use Microsoft Teams, as long as I can
| right click and remove the button from the taskbar so that I can
| move on until the next "forced UI change", I'll be good.
| dang wrote:
| Related ongoing thread:
|
| _Introducing Windows 11_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27619354
| neogodless wrote:
| Integrated Android apps through the Amazon App Store (and
| Widgets). Otherwise nothing too significant announced yet.
| desktopninja wrote:
| But can it run winamp-v2.92? :)
| satysin wrote:
| So to summerize what they have announced (so far) -
|
| * A new look task bar. Centred similar to the macOS dock by
| default but lacking the ability to position on any other screen
| edge?
|
| * A new start menu design
|
| * Windows have rounded corners
|
| * Some built in apps such as the Xbox app and Microsoft Store
| have been redesigned (Xbox Game Pass and xCloud built into the
| Xbox app)
|
| * New touch keyboard (SwiftKey?) with improved speech recognition
|
| * New haptics when a stylus is used
|
| * Teams integrated into Windows
|
| * Support for Android apps built into the OS (using Intel Bridge
| technology whatever that is?). Apparently this works via the
| Amazon App Store although I am not sure what this actually means
| in a practical sense?
|
| * A new widgets fly out for weather, news, etc. (appears this
| will require you login with a Microsoft Account)
|
| * Improved windows snapping with a dynamic (based on your
| screen(s) size and layout) UI built into the maximize button
|
| * DirectX 12 improvements (unsure if limited to Windows 11 only?)
|
| * Auto HDR for games
|
| * Improved experience when switching between tablet and desktop
| modes
|
| * Apparently there will be "Windows 11 ready" PCs for sale
| "today"?
|
| * Microsoft say they have been working with AMD, Intel and
| Qualcomm to optimise the silicon for Windows 11
|
| * 40% smaller Windows Updates
|
| * TPM 2.0 and UEFI are hardware requirements. No legacy BIOS
| compatibility at all?
|
| * A Microsoft account and internet connectivity is _required_ for
| Windows 11 Home setup
|
| * 64-bit processor required (no 32-bit build at all?)
|
| * There is a universal mute button in the system tray so you can
| mute yourself system wide rather than in the app
|
| Probably some other things I have missed
| Black101 wrote:
| > * TPM 2.0 and UEFI are hardware requirements. No legacy BIOS
| compatibility at all?
|
| Could they try to block Linux installs?
|
| > * There is a universal mute button in the system tray so you
| can mute yourself system wide rather than in the app
|
| You could always click the speaker and mute it system-wide
| zamalek wrote:
| > Could they try to block Linux installs?
|
| Linux works just fine with UEFI, that's how I have it
| installed on all my machines.
| laurowyn wrote:
| I think the implication is TPM 2.0 and secure boot
| preventing users from booting unsigned code and installing
| Linux.
| Arnavion wrote:
| re: Secure Boot:
|
| >https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-
| hardware/design/dev...
|
| >For more information, search for the
| System.Fundamentals.Firmware.UEFISecureBoot system
| requirements in PDF download of the Windows Hardware
| Compatibility Program Specifications and Policies.
|
| >https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-
| hardware/design/com...
|
| >Windows 11 >Download Specifications and Policies,
| version 21H2
|
| This is a .zip file containing multiple PDFs. From
| "Systems.pdf":
|
| >System.Fundamentals.Firmware.UEFISecureBoot (page 99 of
| 184)
|
| >15. No in-line mechanism is provided whereby a user can
| bypass Secure Boot failures and boot anyway.Signature
| verification override during boot when Secure Boot is
| enabled is not allowed. A physically present user
| override is not permitted for UEFI images that fail
| signature verification during boot. If a user wants to
| boot an image that does not pass signature verification,
| they must explicitly disable Secure Boot on the target
| system.
|
| So if you want to boot an OS that doesn't work with
| Secure Boot, you're allowed to disable it. You just won't
| be able to boot Windows 11.
|
| >20. (Optional for systems intended to be locked down)
| Enable/Disable Secure Boot. A physically present user
| must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup
| without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also
| disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly
| authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-
| bandmanagement connection, such as to a baseboard
| management controller or service processor. Programmatic
| disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or
| after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible.
|
| So they don't disallow the OEM from allowing Secure Boot
| to be disabled.
|
| It does seem weird to see "must be allowed to disable" in
| a point marked "Optional", but maybe there's a strict
| definition of "systems intended to be locked down" that
| OEMs can't apply willy-nilly to any arbitrary consumer
| device. At the very least, they're not requiring the OEM
| to disallow Secure Boot from being disabled.
| vbernat wrote:
| Debian is able to use secure boot. I suppose this is the
| case of some other distros.
| xxpor wrote:
| It does, but every computer I've had with both has the
| ability to switch secure boot on and off.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| The BIOS vendor would need to prevent you from turning off
| secure boot. Windows can't do that, except where they also
| control hardware, so possibly on the Surface?
| michaelbrave wrote:
| > * TPM 2.0 and UEFI are hardware requirements. No legacy BIOS
| compatibility at all?
|
| This is a dealbreaker for me, guess I won't be upgrading and
| will use linux most of the time instead of half of the time
| going forward
| josteink wrote:
| Just out of curiosity, what part do you find troublesome?
| TPM, UEFI or both? And why?
| anakaine wrote:
| For me personally, TPM is the concern because of how
| integrated DRM is with it. Light DRM is fine, and prevents
| casual rights abuse by casual players. Stricter DRM gets
| used to lock things up and it becomes pervasive and hard to
| discourage. It chews extra resources, requires more power,
| and eventually means that some things that probably should
| be copied freely eventually cannot ever really be. Just
| imagine if Doom had been written with TPM in mind. You
| would never see it running on any of the myriad devices
| that people have had it running on, and the knowledge
| gained during those builds would not have come into
| existence.
| Semaphor wrote:
| > lacking the ability to position on any other screen edge?
|
| I didn't watch the video, and your question mark gives me hope:
| Was this actually said? A horizontal taskbar would be horrible.
| tummulfingur wrote:
| You have been able to move the task bar to left/right screen
| edges for years. If your task bar is not locked, just click
| and drag it to the window edges.
|
| A feature to Left align the buttons has been shown in the
| leaked builds.
| satysin wrote:
| Correct you can left align the buttons but there is no
| longer settings related to locking the taskbar and dragging
| it does nothing in the leaked build.
|
| Hopefully that changes however with the new widgets fly-in
| from the left side it may be locked to the bottom similar
| to the dock on iOS.
| moogly wrote:
| > You have been able to move the task bar to left/right
| screen edges for years
|
| Since Windows 95, even.
| spaetzleesser wrote:
| I remember during the Windows 95 days users at my company
| suddenly had their task bars stuck to the left or right
| side of the screen and nobody knew how to get them back
| :(
| satysin wrote:
| They didn't say however in the leaked build last week the
| taskbar could not be moved to the left, right or top of the
| screen as it previously could.
|
| Hopefully it was just a limitation in that particular
| developer build.
| Semaphor wrote:
| Thank you, I really hope that changes.
| aikah wrote:
| > * Support for Android apps built into the OS (using Intel
| Bridge technology whatever that is?)
|
| Interesting, why would they do that? I mean it's nice ;) but,
| is this the new MS mobile strategy? Android?
| beerandt wrote:
| Microsoft pivoting business model to being an Amazon
| referrer?
| kinjba11 wrote:
| I believe Apple is working on getting iOS apps working in
| future versions of Mac OS. Microsoft being able to run
| Android apps in Windows is probably in part a response to
| that.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Seamless interaction between phone and Windows is their
| mobile strategy. Windows 10 already did a lot in this
| direction, with the ability to link a phone, or to cast the
| phone screen onto a dedicated window. Allowing apps to run in
| Windows is a logical next step.
|
| The other part of their mobile strategy are tablets or
| tablet-substitutes. Basically their whole Surface lineup,
| which Windows 11 aims to improve.
| williamstein wrote:
| Except for one small detail, they appear not to support the
| latest Surface Go 2 tablet! According to the PC Health
| Check tool, my maxed out Microsoft Surface Go 2 that I
| bought new a few months ago (with 8GB RAM, 64-bit Intel
| core m3 processor) is NOT supported to upgrade to Windows
| 11. Wow. Their system requirements tool also doesn't say
| _why_ my tablet doesn 't meet the requirements, just that
| it doesn't.
| russli1993 wrote:
| they are integrating teams, onedrive, office, microsoft 365
| stuff directly into windows 11. Doesn't that spark anti-trust
| concerns? Think about Microsoft was fined for anti-trust for
| integrating internet explorer into windows and making it the
| default. Looks like every platform holder is just using the
| dominance of their platform to push their other stuff.
| kwanbix wrote:
| Microsoft was not fined for integrating IE IIRC. They where
| fined because they did not allowed you to install Netscape
| for example.
|
| I meant to said that they prevented OEMs like Dell, Acer,
| etc., to install Netscape. They gave them more discounts and
| such if you didn't install Netscape.
|
| They did similar with OS/2 IIRC. Is not that they prevented
| you from installing OS/2 as an OEM, but Microsoft will charge
| you for the number of PCs you sold, not he PCs with Windows.
|
| This was a long time ago, so I might be wrong.
| p_j_w wrote:
| No, you were always able to install Netscape. It was indeed
| bundling that they were fined for.
| sorenjan wrote:
| > A new look task bar. Centred similar to the macOS dock by
| default but lacking the ability to position on any other screen
| edge?
|
| This is confirmed on the Windows 11 specification site:
|
| > Alignment to the bottom of the screen is the only location
| allowed.
|
| https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-11-specifica...
| schmorptron wrote:
| Ughhh. This is legit something that'll stop me from upgrading
| for at least a bit. Gotten so used to having it on the left
| side that I really don't want to go back.
| DavidVoid wrote:
| > Alignment to the bottom of the screen is the only location
| allowed.
|
| That's incredibly disappointing! Having the task bar at the
| top of the screen makes a lot more sense for me. Application
| bars (tabs, urls, etc. in browsers) are at the top, so why
| place the task bar as far away from that as possible? It just
| doesn't make sense imo.
| EForEndeavour wrote:
| Thinking though how I use UIs, I like having one sidebar
| per screen edge because:
|
| - I can spatially separate OS-level and program-level
| controls instead of visually/mentally hunting around in the
| same general area of the screen
|
| - The effective clickable surface area of a button next to
| a screen edge is effectively infinite. For example, you can
| "crash" the mouse pointer downward onto a minimized window
| such that the bottom edge stops your mouse pointer from
| overshooting, and clicking will maximize that window. If
| you stacked OS-level and program-level control bars onto
| the same edge of a screen, one of them loses this UI perk
| moogly wrote:
| Well, hopefully something like this app still works
| https://github.com/CrypticButter/ButteryTaskbar (it makes it
| so the Taskbar is only visible when you press the Win key).
|
| I switched to having the taskbar on the left in 1999 or so,
| then when I got a super ultrawide monitor I just realized I
| don't need/want it visible at all and found the program
| linked to above.
| zubspace wrote:
| This is a shame. I always was the odd one who put his task
| bar to the right, but it makes so much more sense if you have
| many windows open. I can scan over the titles much faster
| vertically. There's more space for task tray icons and I
| could easily add multiple rows of quick start icons in a
| folder. [1]
|
| For some reason nowadays design trumps everything. I
| understand, it has to look good and I like how Windows 11
| looks on those screenshots. But sometimes those Microsoft
| developers seem to forget, that with every cut feature they
| will annoy some users. For example, I fear the day they will
| finally get rid of the old Control Panel.
|
| It's even more annoying if the change just happens because of
| "Design"...
|
| [1] https://imgur.com/a/q7gOlIG
| potiuper wrote:
| Why right instead of left as text is ltr?
| zubspace wrote:
| Somehow it is easier for me. Can it be that I can drag
| the mouse faster to the right as a right-hander? Maybe
| because the cursor is more often on the right, because of
| scrollbars on the right side? Maybe because many programs
| have their vertical menu on the left side (Outlook,
| Teams, etc) and therefore the left side would be too
| busy?
|
| But maybe I am just used to it.
| Kuraj wrote:
| To be honest, some of these are exactly the reason why I
| would keep the taskbar to the left - UI elements such as
| scrollbars or caption buttons are much faster to access
| with mouse, when they're glued to the edge/corner of the
| screen, because you can just "throw" your mouse cursor
| instead of having to aim for a 20x20px target. Having
| your taskbar to the right takes away that feature
| jannes wrote:
| That only applies if you maximise your windows. I
| personally never maximise anything. My ultrawide monitor
| would be too big for that.
| Exmoor wrote:
| Yuck. That'll keep me on 10 for the time being. With
| widescreen monitors it's so nice to be able to use as much of
| your vertical real-estate as possible.
| feikname wrote:
| > * Support for Android apps built into the OS (using Intel
| Bridge technology whatever that is?).
|
| Straight copy pasta from
| https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-...
|
| > Intel Bridge Technology is a runtime post-compiler that
| enables applications to run natively on x86-based devices,
| including running those applications on Windows. Intel's multi-
| architecture XPU strategy provides the right engines for the
| right workloads by integrating leading CPU cores, graphics
| technology, artificial intelligence accelerators, image
| processors and more, in a single, verified solution.
|
| looks like a JIT recompiler to me
| yyyk wrote:
| IMHO, The main things of interest are the 40% smaller Windows
| Updates, TPM 2.0 requirement and Microsoft account requirement.
|
| * Windows Updates need to be solved even more comprehensively
| (get rid of winsxs or use smaller backing, adopt sane file
| locking so that reboots are less required, etc.). Still any
| improvement can justify a new version by itself.
|
| * Per wiki, TPM 2.0 was released in _2019_. 2019 wasn 't that
| long ago. Does that mean older computers will be unable to run
| W11? Many more computers will end up running Linux eventually.
|
| * The account requirement is unfortunately. Really, MS didn't
| get enough users using the old method?
| pxeboot wrote:
| > TPM 2.0 was released in 2019
|
| This can't be right. I have 5+ year old PCs with 2.0 TPMs.
| stonogo wrote:
| It isn't. TPM 2.0 was standardized in 2015; the most recent
| update to the standard was published in 2019.
| jandrese wrote:
| CPU requirements are also significantly stiffened up. Intel
| Core i8 or newer or AMD Ryzen 2 or newer.
|
| https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/min...
| BoorishBears wrote:
| Incredibly misleading statement.
|
| You just linked to a list of processors for starting
| development of a new embedded Windows device.
|
| 99.9999% of people will never have to concern themselves with
| this. Microsoft would never limit support to CPUs released a
| few years ago.
| celsoazevedo wrote:
| > * A Microsoft account and internet connectivity is required
| for Windows 11 Home setup
|
| If that's the case, I guess Windows 10 is the last Windows
| version I will use on my machines.
| dean177 wrote:
| - Windows have rounded corners - Teams integrated into
| Windows - A new widgets fly out for weather, news, etc.
| (appears this will require you login with a Microsoft
| Account) - A Microsoft account and internet connectivity
| is required for Windows 11 Home setup
|
| No thank you
| FridayoLeary wrote:
| - A new widgets fly out for weather, news, etc. (appears this
| will require you login with a Microsoft Account)
|
| Sounds daft and pointless to me. Are they mistaking their
| software for Apple or Android? Is Linux a usable alternative?
| IMHO, Windows 7 is my favorite OS, also XP, I don't love
| Windows 10 but Windows 11 sounds even less exciting, maybe MS
| should make some kind of "special edition" Windows XP that
| can support new features as a novelty.
| usrusr wrote:
| Again, Microsoft seems to be genuinely incapable of
| understandng why anyone could havev ever liked the Windows
| already available. As if that was some crazy unthinkable
| impossibility. Perhaps at some point between 60 and 90%
| market share you should stop trying too hard to be like the
| others and consider the possibility that not everything
| you've done is wrong?
| megablast wrote:
| I stopped using windows when they bought out vista.
| FridayoLeary wrote:
| you should have waited 'till 7 - and stayed there IMO.
| ryan29 wrote:
| I don't get it either. I've never met anyone who liked any
| of the dynamic content provided by MS pretending that
| Windows is media platform. I think these are features the
| MS execs want, not users.
|
| > Is Linux a usable alternative?
|
| Who knows. Look at Ubuntu and some of the other distros
| that try to push the app store model, connected accounts,
| etc.. These people are building the software they want, not
| the software I want as a consumer.
|
| I pay for Windows. I'd gladly pay for Linux instead if it
| was good enough.
| falcrist wrote:
| Red Hat seems at a glance to be more focused on making a
| good workstation for professional use. Ubuntu seems to be
| more for beginners on their home computer.
|
| Admittedly, I haven't spent much time with Red Hat (stuck
| in windows most of the time due to embedded development
| tools). Can anyone who has used it (and something like
| Ubuntu) weigh in?
| IshKebab wrote:
| You forgot: moved the most clicked button away from the
| easiest place to click it.
| aarchi wrote:
| The Windows button is useless if you use the Windows key
| r00fus wrote:
| > - Teams integrated into Windows
|
| Is this just asking for antitrust? I mean, Apple can get away
| with sherlocking their opposition but they don't have a
| monopoly on desktop OS.
| da_chicken wrote:
| I don't really think desktops are a real source of tech
| competition anymore. If the FTC isn't going to do anything
| about vendor lock-in on iOS, MacOS, Android, or ChromeOS,
| they really don't have any business doing the same on
| Windows.
| UnpossibleJim wrote:
| I was going to ask, didn't they get sued in the 90's for
| something similar?
| wolfi1 wrote:
| history repeats itself.
| pookeh wrote:
| They got sued but IE also became the dominant browser. I
| think they must be factoring this decision into their
| Teams' CAC.
| dmt0 wrote:
| Gonna wait for Windows 11N
| bluescrn wrote:
| > Teams integrated into Windows
|
| How about fixing basic functionality like the ability to
| scroll back and view old messages, before integrating it into
| the OS?...
| MereInterest wrote:
| And having a client that can switch between tabs at
| something faster than a glacial pace. Switching from Chat
| to Teams took about 10-15 seconds, during which the program
| was entirely unresponsive. And yet it still claims that it
| goes faster by virtue of using a horrendous amount of RAM
| for a chat program.
| r_police wrote:
| You will eat ze bugs.
| zeusk wrote:
| I work on displays, AutoHDR and DX12 changes are coming to 10
| as well (unsure about win7 or dx12on11).
| Aerroon wrote:
| > _* A Microsoft account and internet connectivity is required
| for Windows 11 Home setup_
|
| I refuse. There better be easily accessible versions without
| this requirement.
| emteycz wrote:
| I expect the enterprise version to not have this requirement.
| Massive enterprises would refuse to upgrade if it did.
| satysin wrote:
| Correct, this is a limitation in the Home Edition only
| according to the system requirements.
| pkulak wrote:
| 5.12.12 was released on the 18th.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| Smells like you are forced to login with a Microsoft account
| and can't do a local account
| ziml77 wrote:
| You can use a local account as has been demonstrated by
| many people on YouTube when installing the leaked build.
| aksss wrote:
| Who uses home edition anyway? Your parents? It's not suitable
| for anyone that may want to lift the hood.
| XzAeRosho wrote:
| They mostly come bundled with laptops, which your parents
| and most users will buy without even caring about it.
| k12sosse wrote:
| Exactly, and if you do care, you can upgrade to pro
| without a wipe within the OS.
| agentdrtran wrote:
| Yes, it's probably called Windows 11 Pro
| ryan29 wrote:
| I _need_ a local account. I set up my PC with multiple
| profiles. I start with a local admin account and then I add
| Microsoft accounts for my day-to-day work. I have one profile
| logged in to my personal Microsoft account. Another is logged
| in to an Office 365 account that belongs to someone I do work
| for. Etc..
|
| Why is MS encouraging people to have one giant admin account
| with a work or school account connected? That's stupid. My
| personal account should be considered untrusted. Having it
| acting like the root account is just dumb, right?
| k12sosse wrote:
| Windows professional for professionals. Windows home for
| grandparents. Always has been this way. I'm ok with that.
| The tiers of OS have different requirements and features.
| Expected.
| ryan29 wrote:
| I use Win10 Pro, but have Home on a few computers for my
| parents and nieces/nephews. I set up the first user on
| all of them as a local admin and their account (local or
| MS) is always a normal user.
|
| It's such a simple way of making sure they don't trash
| their machine that I'm going to miss it. I'm sure
| there'll be a _new_ way of doing the same thing, but with
| 5x the effort and 1 /2 the effectiveness.
| Silhouette wrote:
| Windows Professional _used to be_ for professionals. I
| think there is a strong argument that since Windows 10 it
| hasn 't been, at least not for technically competent
| professionals. In 10, the Pro edition still has much the
| same user-hostile aspects as Home, which are
| inappropriate in a business context. If Windows 10 Pro
| had the same kinds of control over things like updates
| and telemetry as the Enterprise and Education editions,
| but without the volume licensing and large-scale
| management features that larger organisations want, it
| would still be suitable for small businesses or
| independent professionals.
| rektide wrote:
| since windows me it's been clear there's a product
| designed to be utterly unpalatable, a product whose
| purpose is to produce upsells by behaving rudely.
| squarefoot wrote:
| I always thought that Windows ME was designed to make
| users rush to XP, and Windows Vista to drive them to 7.
| smackeyacky wrote:
| Depends on the business. If you buy into the office365
| thing it actually makes it easier to set up a business
| network across a number of machines without having to
| dork around with Active Directory or anything hideous
| like that. Up to 25 people I think it's pretty good. I'd
| much rather set up a clients business on Office365 than
| have to install an Exchange/AD server on their premises.
|
| However the real reason to install Pro is to get access
| to the virtualisation services, which aren't enabled on
| Home. Most users doing development now benefit from that
| (think Android emulators, Docker desktop etc). The
| enterprise versions are just overkill for a lot of small
| businesses.
| Silhouette wrote:
| For me, as someone who runs small tech businesses, it's
| not about what you get with Pro, it's about what you
| don't.
|
| Specifically, I have a problem with any operating system
| that will update itself in arbitrary ways without our
| consent and at a time we have not chosen. We no longer
| have control of our own business's IT resources and
| whether they will continue to meet our business needs in
| this scenario. That is simply unacceptable in a
| professional context IMO. Moreover, I have worked in
| several places over the years where long-running jobs
| (days or more) were needed, and you shouldn't have to ask
| your equipment's permission to start a job like that
| before you can safely start it and expect it to complete
| uninterrupted, and you certainly shouldn't have to ask
| and risk being told no.
|
| I also have a problem with any operating system that will
| phone home with any data from our systems without our
| consent. That's all kinds of liability waiting to happen
| if you work with any sort of sensitive information,
| whether it's a client's trade secrets, personal data
| about customers, technical data you've been given under
| NDA, unreleased company statements, or simply whatever
| you're working on right now that you haven't chosen to
| disclose publicly yet. I don't care what Microsoft is or
| isn't doing _right now_ , partly because of the previous
| point. The fact that the technical capability exists at
| all without an absolute power to disable it is a deal-
| breaker, and the convoluted mess that is Microsoft's
| numerous legal terms and privacy policies offers me no
| reassurance at all on this point.
|
| Professionals control their own IT systems. It's really
| as simple as that. That's why the higher editions of
| Windows 10, which aren't just used by professionals but
| administered by IT professionals as well, don't try to
| pull these kinds of stunts.
| willtim wrote:
| > Specifically, I have a problem with any operating
| system that will update itself in arbitrary ways without
| our consent and at a time we have not chosen.
|
| I was sitting in a keynote talk at a conference once and
| mid-presentation Windows decided it was time to update.
| Very embarrassing for the speaker _and_ for Microsoft.
| nicce wrote:
| I think this should not be related for OS tiers. Every
| user should have possibility to use different accounts on
| their computer, and to adjust permission levels of them
| and choose which one to connect to MS account.
|
| One could be sceptical that with admin account required
| for MS account, telemetry collection and applying some
| other kind of restrictions is much easier to target the
| vast majority of the users.
| thesuperbigfrog wrote:
| There is a workaround for now: just press Alt-F4
|
| See https://www.neowin.net/news/windows-11-home-requires-
| interne...
| huhtenberg wrote:
| Probably intentional. They'll remove this in Windows 12.
| dmt0 wrote:
| Microsoft is continuing their long tradition of screwing
| up every other version of Windows.
|
| 98SE - ok, ME - bad, XP - good, Vista - bad, 7 - good, 8
| - bad, 10 - good, 11 - can safely skip it and wait for 12
| MereInterest wrote:
| I thought Windows 9 was the good one that would have come
| between Windows 8 and 10. Because 10 certainly isn't a
| good one (looking at you, fantastically broken start menu
| search that needs frequent re-indexing).
| k12sosse wrote:
| Version parity with competitors. It's stupid but a thing.
| At least they didn't straight up call it Windows X.
| wtallis wrote:
| It was less about version parity with Apple and more
| about avoiding bugs in applications that would have
| mistaken a Windows 9 for a member of the 95/98/98SE
| family.
| FridayoLeary wrote:
| It's not just me then;) Windows vista seems to be crying
| out for a Windows 7, XP is ok and Windows 8... I've never
| even _used_ Windows 8, it 's the most anonymous Windows
| imaginable.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| The way I see it, 8.1 was the (relatively) good version,
| and 10 has been... okayish. 8.1 did a good job walking
| back most of the interface travesties from 8, and still
| retained the best parts of the Windows experience.
| (Fullscreen apps notwithstanding.) 10 has been changing
| dramatically with every update, moving or replacing
| system/settings screens and making their own
| documentation obsolete.
|
| I hate 10 a lot less than I did 5 years ago. I'm hoping
| 11 will be a little less screwed up, but I'm not holding
| my breath.
| kleiba wrote:
| I'm not a Windows person but recently had to go through the
| setup process on my parents' newly purchased desktop machine.
| As far as I could tell, creating a user account _just
| locally_ was not possible, you had to have an online account,
| hooked up with a valid email address. Given that most free
| email providers require you to provide your phone number (I
| don 't own a phone), I had to do some digging--- all just to
| create a local user account on Windows 10.
| mvolfik wrote:
| iirc it is possible, but I recall you needed to click
| unobvious buttons or just do it while offline and connect
| only after that
| handrous wrote:
| It used to be a sneaky button, but last time I installed
| there was _no way_ to do it without disconnecting from
| the Internet. If you 're connected, you are not presented
| an option to create a local account, even in a way that's
| hard to find.
| Ndymium wrote:
| Last time I did it, the trick was to begin logging in or
| creating a new online account (forget which way), and
| from there you could actually change your mind and create
| a local account.
| dsissitka wrote:
| It looks like they removed it from Home but not Pro.
|
| https://i.imgur.com/vxs03rC.png
|
| Another difference: Cortana talks you through the
| installation on Home but not Pro. After years of
| installing Pro that was a bit of a shock.
| satya71 wrote:
| It's possible, but only if you don't connect to the
| internet. See https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-set-up-
| windows-10-with-a...
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| Yes which is why you don't connect to wifi right away.
| But I've installed Windows without an internet connection
| many times.
| satysin wrote:
| On a recent (i.e. the last 2 or 3 major releases) Windows
| 10 install (any edition) you can create a local account
| during the post-install setup assistant by selecting to
| make an offline account and then selecting "limited
| experience" when it tries to convince you an online account
| is better.
|
| You can see this in steps 8 and 9 at
| https://www.windowscentral.com/how-set-windows-10-local-
| acco...
| ziml77 wrote:
| I just did an install of Windows 10 this morning and can
| confirm that the option is still there in 21H1.
| jandrese wrote:
| It is available on Pro but not Home unless you disable
| all Internet access while doing the install.
|
| On Windows 11 it seems like they are saying you won't be
| able to install Home without an active Internet
| connection.
| squarefoot wrote:
| You can set up an offline account but you have to literally
| disable any Internet connection (pull the Ethernet cable,
| turn off the WiFi card, etc) so that it activates the
| option to tell the installer you want to install offline.
| FpUser wrote:
| >"As far as I could tell, creating a user account just
| locally was not possible"
|
| I do it all the time. Do not plug network cable and do not
| connect to WiFi. Windows then proceeds to setting up local
| account
| mdiesel wrote:
| If you do accidentally connect to a network, before you
| realise this, there's no way to get it to forget.
| Rebooting doesn't work. The only solution I found was
| walking 30m away to the other side of the parking lot out
| of range of WiFi.
| dolmen wrote:
| Disable WiFi in the BIOS.
| IshKebab wrote:
| Insane that you have to resort to that.
| garethrowlands wrote:
| You don't have to resort to that.
| torgoguys wrote:
| Start the install over from scratch. You can have wifi
| enabled when installing. Just don't plug in a network
| cable and don't connect to a wifi network when it prompts
| you to. Read carefully, you can avoid connecting and if
| you do you don't connect, you don't have to use a
| Microsoft account.
| rypskar wrote:
| >>Given that most free email providers require you to
| provide your phone number
|
| Didn't windows suggest to create a free email @outlook.com
| (or whatever MS have for free emails)? I have used that on
| a couple of computers, was no requirement for phone number
| and I have no idea about what the addresses I created are
| vsareto wrote:
| Can you make a Microsoft account at the time of install?
|
| I think I'm just going to make a junk account instead of
| linking it to any real account I use
| kleiba wrote:
| That's what I did, but I first had to find a free email
| provider that doesn't asks for a valid phone number.
| Aerroon wrote:
| > _As far as I could tell, creating a user account just
| locally was not possible, you had to have an online
| account, hooked up with a valid email address._
|
| It's usually an option that's hidden away. It's definitely
| there if you disconnect the computer from the network when
| you install the OS.
|
| Also, if you want the old type display drivers instead of
| DCH you'd have to do that. Otherwise Windows will
| automatically download and install DCH drivers which are a
| pain to uninstall.
|
| Edit: if you're wondering what the problem with DCH drivers
| can be, then the problem is that they can't come with an
| application. If you have Nvidia display drivers installed
| as DCH and want to use the Nvidia Control Panel then you
| have to get the Control Panel from the Microsoft Store
| separately.
| xxpor wrote:
| >40% smaller Windows Updates
|
| Was there anything about faster updates?
|
| Why does the Windows Update service take 50%+ of my CPU and
| multiple minutes to figure out if there's any updates available
| for me?
|
| I get Windows doesn't have a package manager, but given yum and
| deb can figure out the answer in seconds... there has to be
| some way to improve that.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Actually Windows does have a package manager now, it is
| called winget.
| xxpor wrote:
| So when is MS going to start using it for basic OS stuff?
| :)
| userbinator wrote:
| Hopefully once it's actually usable, which might be a
| _long_ time away --- the last I looked, it didn 't even
| support dependencies or uninstalling...
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| Well, I guess you haven't looked recently.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| > A Microsoft account and internet connectivity is required for
| Windows 11 Home setup
|
| Looks like I'll be skipping windows 11 and any future windows
| iterations if this is unavoidable
| philliphaydon wrote:
| Looking at windows 11 I might move back from linux.
| tryptophan wrote:
| I tried Linux mint recently and was impressed. My parents
| seem to use it without issue.
|
| As long as you don't game, need to use office or some other
| windoze software it seems like a viable choice.
| reader_mode wrote:
| Do you use a high DPI screen ?
| formerly_proven wrote:
| If you use _a_ high DPI screen things have been fine for
| many years. Mixed DPI is a different story, no idea if it
| works well, but it doesn 't really work well on Windows,
| either.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| Games should work fine on Mint. The only reason I can't
| recommend Linux for most people is that there is no
| usable office suite. And no the libre and open office
| really are not usable.
| indigo945 wrote:
| WPS Office is alright for most people, if you are okay
| with proprietary software from a Chinese vendor. However,
| it obviously doesn't cover e.g. Excel power user needs.
|
| Or you can just use Google Docs, or even the browser
| edition of Microsoft Office.
| tryptophan wrote:
| My parents mostly use google office for when they need
| it, which is like never.
|
| Libre-office seems a little rough around the edges, but
| it works for 95% of use cases I can think of.
| KozmoNau7 wrote:
| I've been exclusively using LibreOffice for ~10 years,
| and OpenOffice before that, and aside from just doing
| some things _differently_ (not worse) compared to MS
| Office, it 's been smooth sailing.
|
| And for most people Google Docs or... Office 365 are all
| they really need.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| It's simply cannot touch Microsoft Office. And Microsoft
| Office is already a dumbster fire. And good luck if you
| want interoperability.
| cassepipe wrote:
| Installed it for a friend. Most of his steam games were
| working and some who didn't I easily installed them with
| Lutris Iirc. Libre office may not look super polished but
| it really covers any normal person's use case and beyond.
| The only thing he does not get are updates but automatic
| updates are coming soon anyways. I am a programmer and I
| run Linux Mint myself on all my machines because it just
| works. Any software that's not in the packages I use an
| Appimage or Flatpak or language specific packages manager
| such as cargo.
| falcrist wrote:
| As recently as a decade ago, Linux was borderline
| unusable for a home computer. Lots of driver problems.
| Lack of software.
|
| In contrast to Apple's OSs (and increasingly Windows)
| which assumes you don't know what you're doing, Linux as
| a whole basically assumes you already know everything you
| need to know about what you're doing. Fixing a display
| issue could be a whole _adventure_ , complete with side-
| quests as you worked your way to a solution. Not the best
| experience TBH.
|
| Some time between 2010-ish and 2015, Linux (at least Mint
| and Ubuntu) suddenly became MUCH better. I'm not saying
| it's perfect, but things tend to "just work" much more
| often. A lot of the open source software improved by
| leaps and bounds during that period as well.
|
| Sadly for the past few years, I game at home, and I'm
| stuck using windows programs at work (embedded
| development), so I haven't really kept up well with
| Linux.
| ziml77 wrote:
| "from"? Is that a typo or do you really mean you are
| considering using Windows 11?
| mpfundstein wrote:
| just get Pro
| NeutronStar wrote:
| Pay more to remove features?
| symlinkk wrote:
| No. Why am I paying a company more money to fix a problem
| they caused? I think I'll just get a Mac.
| vetinari wrote:
| That's exactly happened when I disabled GWX in Windows 8
| Updater for about third time.
|
| "I'm too old for this sh*t", and by the next day, a new
| Macbook Pro was on my table.
| asdff wrote:
| If its anything like windows 10 was you could just never
| activate the license and nothing practically would be
| different, unless you wanted desktop backgrounds I
| believe. I barely notice the watermark anyhow telling me
| to activate windows for the last few years.
| cercatrova wrote:
| Or just get a Windows keygen/updater like KMSpico.
| npteljes wrote:
| There's a digital license way of activation that doesn't
| even need an active service like kmspico. Just a one time
| activation and you're golden.
| Roverlord wrote:
| Use your Windows 7 key if you have one.
| mk89 wrote:
| What a lame excuse to buy yourself a Mac. Totally
| recommended :)
| FalconSensei wrote:
| Totally recommend it too. There are a few things that I
| don't like on Mac, but overall, works really well. And
| you can have a local account
| handrous wrote:
| What's frustrating about the Mac is that every time they
| screw up bad enough that I try to switch back to other
| options (I was a Windows and Linux, among other things,
| user for 15 years before I started using Mac) I find
| they're still so much worse that I'd just be cutting off
| my nose to spite my face, by switching.
|
| I wish they had actual competition. It doesn't seem like
| anyone else is targeting the same market at all, despite
| technically having "competing products".
| ur-whale wrote:
| > And you can have a local account
|
| For now.
| wongarsu wrote:
| A second-hand Windows 10 Pro license costs like $25 (and
| used to be $5). That's a pretty small price for a
| substantially better experience.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| This is false. A _pirated_ Windows 10 Pro license costs
| like $25. These are not legitimate licenses, they 're
| overprovisioned enterprise keys being sold in violation
| of the license agreement. And yes, they register
| differently in Windows, and can be easily detected.
| (Command is slmgr /dli)
|
| Like, if you want to pirate software, go pirate software.
| If you're going to pay someone on a per-install basis for
| pirated keys, I'm gonna laugh at how easily you're being
| taken advantage of.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| Cheap key allows you to activate windows and to bind
| valid windows license to your hardware, so you won't have
| to enter any product key anymore. Using cracks is just
| not safe for most people. I'd recommend to buy cheap key
| over crack any time.
| wongarsu wrote:
| For $25 I can get a legitimate Windows 7 Pro license
| sticker that works like any Windows 10 license, which is
| perfectly legal all the way through.
|
| But depending on your jurisdiction, the $5 enterprise
| keys can also be entirely fine. Sure, in a way that's
| outsourcing piracy. But the law doesn't have to see it
| that way. There's nothing illegal about buying enterprise
| keys, and if they are overprovisioning keys that's
| between them and MS, I can't even know if that's the
| case.
| handrous wrote:
| Wait, are free pirated keys that work as reliably as paid
| technically-pirated enterprise keys and don't require
| downloading some probably-comes-pre-botnetted "hacked"
| Windows installer, but work flawlessly with the installer
| downloaded straight from Microsoft, readily available?
| Asking for a friend.
| hoopleheaded wrote:
| I tend to avoid accounts as much as possible but this seems a
| juvenile response. Do you use a smartphone?
| badsectoracula wrote:
| > this seems a juvenile response
|
| Why? Why not wanting to associate your computer with some
| Microsoft account is juvenile?
|
| > Do you use a smartphone?
|
| What does that have to do with anything?
| kinjba11 wrote:
| > Do you use a smartphone? >> What does that have to do
| with anything?
|
| I would bet 99% of iOS and Android users sign in with
| their Apple or Google account. Signing into an account
| for an OS is par for the course in 2021.
| rurp wrote:
| I sign into my phone with _an_ account, but not my
| primary personal one. I use a secondary one I use for
| this and some other throwaway uses. I 'm sure this isn't
| the norm, but I bet it's not that unusual, at least among
| tech people.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| A smartphone isn't a desktop OS. You're free to think it's
| juvenile, and I'm free to prefer a desktop OS that doesn't
| require an account like win10 or linux.
| hoopleheaded wrote:
| That's fair. I think I took issue with your tone which is
| 100% on me. My tone was not terribly constructive.
|
| I would certainly prefer it to not require an account.
| shp0ngle wrote:
| Android does not require a Google account, I'm not sure
| about Apple and iOS but I think also not?
| hoopleheaded wrote:
| Suppose you are correct that neither actually requires an
| account but suspect the user experience is not great
| without.
|
| Correct in that you can at least get through setup to
| have a functional device though.
| nguyenkien wrote:
| But if you want get android app from playstore, you still
| need google account. Same for iOS, and it's even worst
| than android, since you can't sideload apps
| nguyenkien wrote:
| @cronix, @BiteCode_dev, @gruez: I know we can sideload,
| but it's inconvenient. Fdroid have limited number of
| apps, and store like apkpure is security risk. Most of
| regular people just get an Google account.
| vetinari wrote:
| However, we are not discussing what's more or less
| convenient, but what can you do and what are you forced
| to do. Big difference.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| I used android for 5 years without an account. You can
| side load, use fdroid or apkpure.
| Guest19023892 wrote:
| Why not create a throwaway account? When you setup the
| phone, just go through the process of setting up your
| fake Google account, and don't use it for anything aside
| from the Play Store for easily downloading and updating
| apps.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Because once you have that account, it links all apps
| data to it, and you give enough data about yourself to be
| indentified somewhere else even without the account.
| gruez wrote:
| >But if you want get android app from playstore, you
| still need google account
|
| nope, just use aurora store
| dolmen wrote:
| From the terms of service
| https://auroraoss.com/de/download/AuroraStore/terms-of-
| servi...
|
| > You agree to defend, indemnify and hold us harmless
| from and against any and all costs, damages, liabilities,
| and expenses (including attorneys' fees, costs,
| penalties, interest and disbursements) we incur in
| relation to, arising from, or for the purpose of
| avoiding, any claim or demand from a third party relating
| to your use of the Service
|
| I'm not sure what is the worst: being tied to Google or
| being tied to a company which wants to push me in front
| of Google's lawyers if they get annoyed.
| cronix wrote:
| Yes, ONLY if you want to download them from the
| playstore. As you already noted, on Android you can
| sideload apps and get them from other places other than
| the playstore. So you can still get the same app from
| another source without an account.
|
| Some companies like DJI actually let you download from
| their site directly and bypass the playstore. Notice the
| apple version links to the apple store but the Android
| version downloads the APK directly from DJI:
| https://www.dji.com/downloads/djiapp/dji-fly
| dolmen wrote:
| Bypassing the Play Store is also a bad sign, especially
| from chineese company. This is bypassing the Play Store
| rules about permissions granted to the app.
|
| From experience, companies that provide apps directly
| have some malware to hide.
|
| Here is an example: GAN Cube is the world leader in
| Rubik's Cube. They provide an Android app by direct
| download [1]. Strangely this app has the permission to
| install other apps. That's obviously something not
| allowed to publish on the Play Store.
|
| [1] https://cubestation.com/
| voussoir wrote:
| I use Android with no Google account signed in. For the two
| or three Play Store applications I need, I use Aurora Store
| to download them.
| Datagenerator wrote:
| How to downvote?
| ttty2 wrote:
| I'm pretty sure the main point is to send more spam within the
| os. I hated Linux ux ui for long time but windows is pushing it
| to the limits... And I'm finally thinking to move to Linux.
| colechristensen wrote:
| I was happy with Windows 95 UI, really.
|
| Congratulations on incrementing a number and changing things so
| I'll be annoyed by a marginally different set of things? I can't
| raise to caring about something which should be _done_ at this
| point. To some people it is important I 'm sure but a lot of us
| just want the OS to keep doing the basics and get out of the way.
| swiley wrote:
| One of the biggest arguments I hear for using Windows instead
| of Linux is that people are used to the UI.
|
| I've been using the same FVWM config and shells inside Xterms
| since I started using Linux 18 years ago, meanwhile Windows has
| gone through something like 4 redesigns.
| [deleted]
| mandeepj wrote:
| "Teams" sound great in a work environment. But, at home - I'm not
| sure.
| uncomputation wrote:
| > Windows updates are 40 percent smaller, and more efficient as
| they now happen in the background. Hopefully that will mean that
| Windows 11 doesn't disturb you in the middle of work.
|
| I wonder why this was never done sooner considering Windows is
| basically synonymous with "enterprise."
| smusamashah wrote:
| The trailer made me feel like a dumb windows user who doesn't
| know how to do anything. Those big zoomed in windows, buttons and
| other interfaces felt popping directly on face. What does it
| offer for power users?
| polskibus wrote:
| I hope embedding Teams will lead to antitrust like IE did. This
| is basically making everyone use Teams and will cut out a lot of
| competitors and other companies who have some form of
| collaboration built-in into their product.
| kinjba11 wrote:
| I'm with you, but I doubt it. To my knowledge, Apple hasn't
| faced any antitrust pressure from bundling FaceTime and
| iMessage into iOS/Mac OS.
| sbelskie wrote:
| How does this make everyone use Teams?
| kinjba11 wrote:
| "Everyone" in a casual sense. You don't have to use Safari,
| iMessage and FaceTime on Apple devices, but for all intents
| and purposes "everyone" does because it's the default.
| Similar to Internet Explorer on Windows - clearly inferior
| product, but it took years for it to become common knowledge
| among the non-technical folks that you really should install
| a better browser.
| stewx wrote:
| The Xbox app is terrible, performance-wise. It feels like a
| poorly implemented Electron app.
| mmastrac wrote:
| Remember: always skip every second version of Windows!
|
| But seriously, 10 is pretty good and is there really a compelling
| reason to move?
| fastball wrote:
| But does it run on ARM?
| kyriakos wrote:
| Apart from the UI there seem to be some interesting gaming
| upgrades backported from xbox into windows (direct storage and
| autohdr). Autohdr in particular works really well on my xbox / tv
| combo.
| awiesenhofer wrote:
| > Windows 11 will be available through a free upgrade for
| eligible Windows 10 PCs and on new PCs beginning this holiday.
|
| _which_ holiday? Do they mean Christmas 2021?
|
| Edit: via
| https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2021/06/24/intro...
| Ecstatify wrote:
| Presentation is so cringe. Why does the main presenter sound like
| he's about to start crying and tell me he always loved me.
| JamesAdir wrote:
| Anyone has a good guess why Microsoft needed to bump the version?
| All of these updates seems something that can be easily updated
| to Windows 10 in several or one half year update. Is this
| something related to it's corporate clients or licensing
| services? Really can't understand why a need to create a new
| version with so much hype, when they've announced in the past
| that W10 will be the last Windows version.
| TonyTrapp wrote:
| Maybe they had to now that macOS finally arrived at version 11
| as well ;)
| somebody_amzn wrote:
| They wanted to drop support for quite some old hardware, like
| 32-bit only machines, which are no longer supported in Windows
| 11.
|
| (and some newer ones too, rumours say that a TPM might be
| mandatory to have, finally)
|
| Dumping support for HW and major UX changes without bumping the
| version number is a bad idea.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| I'm betting that getting out of support / lifecycle
| requirements is part of the major version bump. Internet
| Explorer 11 support is likely tied to the lifecycle of Windows
| 10.
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| Sadly, I'll still be supporting IE11 on Windows 10 for the
| next decade. The bane of a massive company with old people
| that panic at opening chrome.
| charrondev wrote:
| Should edge be replacing that?
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| I will be supporting it for as long as IE11 is installed
| on all computers.
|
| For reference, we extended Windows 7 support until just
| this year lol
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| > Really can't understand why a need to create a new version
| with so much hype, when they've announced in the past that W10
| will be the last Windows version.
|
| Money is the answer. It hurts sales prospects when you say it's
| the last version ever.
| [deleted]
| beardyw wrote:
| I am certain that they said 10 was to be the final version of
| Windows. On the strength of that I decided I didn't want 10 so
| my only option was to jump ship (to Linux). I wonder how many
| others did? Saying that I doubt I would want 11 either, but
| that's academic now.
| ddmma wrote:
| Also Star Wars was considered the ca last movies in the
| series. Different management will always have new vision.
| voidfunc wrote:
| Marketing noise and kicks off a sales frenzy for enterprise
| customers :)
| kyriakos wrote:
| For windows store I think its like hitting the reset button.
| Retric wrote:
| Wow, Windows just keeps getting worse. Anyone know who's
| responsible for the Mac OS inspired start menu?
|
| Presumably it's an easy to change default, but why exactly copy
| such a user hostile layout.
| aaomidi wrote:
| I do. It was Microsoft.
| 72deluxe wrote:
| Looks like Windows Monterey, with the "Start menu" now being a
| Spotlight clone!
|
| I am unsure if the removal of the titlebar is a good thing -
| there is still an alt-space menu to the left of windows that do
| not have an icon top left, and double-clicking on a titlebar is a
| convenient place to double-click; this isn't possible with no
| titlebar (eg. in Chrome/Firefox at the moment).
|
| Looks a nice modern UI refresh though.
| vmateixeira wrote:
| Does it come spyware free?
| Phil_Latio wrote:
| It's just telemetry bro!
| extrememacaroni wrote:
| It looks so much like a theme/skin from a linux distro to me.
| Can't put my finger on which.
| notRobot wrote:
| Can't we just go back to Windows 7 UI and UX with modern Windows
| 10 feature and security enhancements?
| plushpuffin wrote:
| It's hard to overstate just how bad the Windows 10 UI is
| compared to 7. Just look at this example of how Windows 7
| visually shows you the differences between the various desktop
| stretching/fitting options, and Windows 10 leaves you guessing:
|
| http://www.wwddfd.com/plushpuffin/personalize-desktop-7vs10....
| antisthenes wrote:
| W7 was the only MS product I ever paid money for (as a
| student), and feel like it was a great deal.
|
| Would gladly keep paying for security enhancements for it and
| don't really see anything that W10 (or W11 for that matter)
| offers over it for work or gaming.
|
| It's a real shame that taking away controls from power users
| seem to be more important than providing a great product. But I
| guess when you're a monopoly you can do whatever you want.
| NtGuy25 wrote:
| What control is taken away from power users? Most things can
| be toggled in the registry, and won't go away due to
| compatibility reasons. And patchguard can be disabled
| extremely easily. Same with DSE. I can't think of a single
| thing a power user can't do on Win 10 that they can on Win 7.
| themacguffinman wrote:
| - [Taskbar] Alignment to the bottom of the screen is the
| only location allowed. [1]
|
| - Touch Keyboard will no longer dock and undock keyboard
| layouts on screen sizes 18 inches and larger. [1]
|
| - [Start Menu] Named groups and folders of apps are no
| longer supported and the layout is not currently resizable.
| [1]
|
| - Windows 11 Home will require a Microsoft account [2]
|
| - TPM 2.0 is required [1] (some gaming/enthusiast mobos
| sell TPM modules separately AFAICT)
|
| [1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/windows-11-specifica...
|
| [2] https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/24/22548480/windows-11-
| home-...
| antisthenes wrote:
| Can you make the interface of W10 look like W7? How about
| easily removing bloatware without being an internet
| detective?
|
| Customize those ugly flat panels that MS stuck everywhere
| next to Windows 3.1 legacy selection boxes?
|
| Also, yes. I guess if you are willing to spend an extra
| 10-20hrs of your time to configure group policies and
| registry tweaks and removing telemetry to get it into an
| "acceptable" state...for exactly the same experience, then
| it's fine. Even then, I keep reading horror stories about
| settings being reverted after updates and the OS generally
| not respecting uptime over vague "security" updates.
|
| I don't find that acceptable, unless MS cuts me a check for
| wasted hours of my time every time I have to fix something
| that wasn't broken. For comparison, my W7 system has been
| rock stable since 2016, with most system downtime due to
| physical hardware changes and updates.
|
| To be fair, _some_ use cases were improved in W10. Mobile
| (bluetooth) connectivity seems to be working great. So are
| things like making a wi-fi hotspot and networking in
| general. (I don 't have in-depth knowledge about other
| improvements because they're outside of my use cases)
| yyyk wrote:
| >Would gladly keep paying for security enhancements for it
|
| You can (until 2023) via the (expensive) ESU program. There's
| also 0patch, not sure how effective is their approach.
| nsriv wrote:
| I think an interesting thing mentioned at the end about the
| Microsoft Store is that if developers use their own "commerce
| engine" they keep 100% of the profits.
| hughrr wrote:
| Sorry for the not very constructive comment but it looks like
| ass. Like a B grade KDE theme.
| voldacar wrote:
| OS aesthetics just seem so bland and meek these days. I think
| Win7 Aero/OSX Lion/Compiz cube thing was the peak and after
| that everything became homogenized and boring. I want my
| computer to look cool, goddammit
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| At least they aren't trying to make everything as white and
| minimalist as possible...
| hughrr wrote:
| To be fair that's actually working the best for me at the
| moment. Mostly because it is at least consistently white
| and consistently minimalist.
| dawnerd wrote:
| Microsoft needs to hire a proper UX/UI team. It looks like
| developers designed it.
| jtvjan wrote:
| If developers designed it, it wouldn't have all these rounded
| corners, superfluous animations, and useless padding
| everywhere.
| dawnerd wrote:
| It would if you have product people saying they want it to
| look like Macos but just lets the developers run with it.
| hughrr wrote:
| Yea as a developer if I did it, it'd still look like
| windows NT.
| fader wrote:
| Putting the start menu button in the middle of the panel rather
| than at a corner seems to forget Fitts' Law. Is this a push to
| make people use hotkeys more or just bad design?
| hackinthebochs wrote:
| With huge monitors becoming the norm, having important click
| targets aligned to corners makes little sense.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| The only people using ultrawide monitors (techy people) are
| the same ones that use the windows hotkey and search, press
| enter. No mouse movement needed. The UI scale can be changed
| as well if we are talking about size and not aspect ratio.
|
| Edit: Alt+Tab too.
| cunthorpe wrote:
| It doesn't? Because I think it's easier to throw the cursor
| at the absolute corner of the screen and click rather than
| have to carefully select a button somewhere along the X axis.
| Just a thought, I'm a macOS user myself.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| I use both windows and mac and I agree. It's why I hate
| that the menu bar on mac can't be moved (it clashes with
| the window buttons), and why I don't ever use the dock (I
| cmd+space for spotlight instead). Hopefully this is
| customizable
| cuddlybacon wrote:
| Moving to the corner requires a swipe, pickup, and swipe.
| Moving the mouse to the bottom can be done in a single
| swipe.
| hackinthebochs wrote:
| I agree it is easier to throw your cursor at the corner
| than to precisely target near the corner, but I would
| rather have the important click targets nearer to wear my
| cursor already is. I have a 34 inch ultrawide monitor and
| my cursor is more often near the center where my active
| focus is. When I want to switch apps, it's easier to move
| the cursor down rather than diagonal to the lower left
| corner.
| jerf wrote:
| Fitt's Law says that is exactly backwards. It is when your
| monitors are largest that you need the largest click targets.
| It's when things were 640x480 that small targets were easiest
| to hit.
| cuddlybacon wrote:
| But the corners are far away. Testing just now, it took two
| swipes to get my mouse where the start button would be. It
| took one to get to the dock.
| hackinthebochs wrote:
| Bigger, yes. But the issue here is where to position the
| target area. The less you have to move your cursor to reach
| frequently accessed targets, the better (as someone who
| doesn't use mouse accel this extra distance is very
| noticeable).
| bastardoperator wrote:
| The entire idea of a start menu just seems crazy to me at this
| point especially when it's being used to advertise garbage. Why
| would I mouse around when I can hotkey?
| OGWhales wrote:
| That might be the logic they used. Maybe it is easier to
| press it in the new location when using tablet mode and they
| figure people can use a hotkey for the start button on
| desktop.
|
| But having worked with plenty of users at work, it's very
| rare they use the windows key rather than dragging their
| mouse to the corner... if I tell them about the windows key,
| they act super surprised.
| addicted wrote:
| I think it's simpler than that.
|
| I suspect most people using a mouse also have their keyboard
| and so they just hit the Windows key instead.
|
| The centered start menu is extremely useful for touch users on
| the other hand.
| b0rsuk wrote:
| Ultrawide (21:9) and super ultrawide (32:9) are becoming more
| common. If you put the menu in the middle, it's more consistent
| no matter the aspect ratio.
| mehlmao wrote:
| It's only consistent as long as the number of
| icons/applications on the task bar never changes. Every time
| an additional program is started, the button will slide
| further towards the left.
|
| With the older left-aligned positioning, users can just flick
| their mouse to the left corner to open the start menu, or the
| right corner to minimize all windows. Buttons are in the same
| spot every time.
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| It's bad design in the sense that they took a part of the
| operating system that's been in the same place for a quarter
| century and moved it for seemingly no reason while leaving a
| bunch of other neglected issues to be dealt with later.
|
| I guess fixing the damned control panel and various settings
| apps isn't sexy enough.
|
| Frankly this whole update stinks of "oh we hired a bunch of new
| MBAs and they have to make their mark otherwise they're out of
| a job".
| OGWhales wrote:
| I cracked up at the video where he says "the start is
| centered... it puts YOU at the center" like no, you're
| clearly just trying to copy MacOS.
|
| I could see it being easier to hit for tablets when it's not
| in the corner, but I find the corner a good spot for things
| like that on a regular desktop.. Granted, I always use the
| windows key on my keyboard but the other corner button, the
| one that minimizing everything, I use all the time. Very easy
| to mindlessly drag your cursor to the corner IMO.
|
| Some of the other design features I really enjoy, but I would
| love a unified and sensible control panel before anything
| else.
| wvenable wrote:
| I think it's ironic how often HN discusses various software
| development methodologies, release early-and-often, etc. But
| Microsoft slowly iterating on the Settings panel over time is
| seen as a bad thing.
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| If they're iterating on this at all it's at a glacial pace.
| The settings and control panel workflow has been broken
| since Windows 8.
| wvenable wrote:
| They are iterating; the Settings panel gets more settings
| on every release. The first version on Windows 10 was
| incredibly sparse.
|
| It's also fair to say that there is a novice/expert
| divide -- Microsoft wants the settings panel to be as
| simple as settings on a mobile phone. That's great.
| However, occasionally I need to revert and diagnose the
| Wifi driver on my cheap Chinese mini laptop and I need a
| more powerful UI than most average people are never going
| to need.
|
| At this point, I can't think of a setting that my parents
| would need that isn't there.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| The problem isn't that settings are missing, the problem
| is that there are related settings in multiple, entirely
| disconnected locations that interact in subtle ways.
|
| I have 4 UIs on my windows machine where I can set things
| related to inactivity/power down states. That's
| unreasonable, and nobody was confused in windows XP when
| those were all in one place (with an "advanced Settings"
| fold).
| wvenable wrote:
| But you really only need the settings app. If you are a
| power user and want to mess with the individual details
| you hit "Additional power settings" and get the old UI.
| But so what?
|
| My point was Microsoft is doing exactly the right thing
| here -- iterating on an existing design and keeping old
| software around for those who need it. Everybody seems to
| want Microsoft to throw out everything and instantly
| redesign several decades worth of software and that is
| ridiculous. That's not the way anyone should develop
| software.
|
| > nobody was confused in windows XP
|
| I'm sure they were -- the new settings app is
| significantly less complicated.
| eitland wrote:
| > and moved it for seemingly no reason
|
| There is one good reason: some screens are getting really
| wide.
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| I swear nobody at Microsoft (and fewer people than I'd
| hoped on HN) actually talk to non-technical people that use
| their products.
|
| If they'd just added the option to move it I'd have no
| qualms but they decided to make it default and I'd be
| willing to put money down that the overwhelming majority of
| Windows users do not have super widescreen displays.
| eitland wrote:
| > I swear nobody at Microsoft (and fewer people than I'd
| hoped on HN) actually talk to non-technical people that
| use their products.
|
| >
|
| > If they'd just added the option to move it I'd have no
| qualms [...]
|
| I keep mentally blaming this on designers who want to be
| Steve Jobs (edit:)and Henry Ford and do daring leaps in
| design.
|
| Edit: I've seen quotes like "if I asked people what they
| wanted they would say a faster horse" a few times.
| There's a time for that but most of the time it is time
| for boring (not really, I love much of it if I'm allowed
| to) work on getting things right: make it work in all
| major browsers, make sure tabs work, make sure it works
| fast etc.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Right, which is more reason to move to vertical taskbars
| instead of filling far too many pixels with useless space.
| The specification note that 11 won't support vertical
| taskbars is infuriating as someone with an ultrawide. I
| don't need 1000s of pixels of unusable taskbar white space.
| Centering it is smart if I did want to waste all that
| space, but oof I do not want to waste that much space.
| dm319 wrote:
| I just can't understand how there can be so much argument
| about the position of a task bar. Why can't Windows just
| allow people to do what they like with it? I know plenty
| of people who have their taskbar vertically, surely it
| can't be hard to have a taskbar that can go vertically,
| horizontally, to the edges out centred.
|
| I will carry on using my dual bar layout on MATE because
| I didn't want to change to gnome 3 or unity.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Moving somewhat further off-topic, as a fan of vertical
| taskbars I also disliked Unity's take on it. In my own
| testing (going way back to Windows XP era), I found I
| much preferred right-hand side taskbar. As a left-to-
| right language user, when applications are full screened
| there are usually far more important application controls
| on the left hand side than the right. The obvious one
| being File menus on the immediate left edge, but that's
| not the only example. Unity tried to fix the File menu
| issue by doing the "merged global menu" thing similar to
| macOS, but it still didn't account for most of the rest
| of application stuff on the left hand edge.
|
| But I also realizes that not everyone agrees with my
| "right-hand" taskbar preference. I agree that allowing
| customization is probably the best bet. It's odd to me
| that when one of the messages in the Windows 11
| announcement was that they wanted it to be more
| personalizable that according to their notes they are
| removing an important personalization in taskbar
| placement. (Which has been supported to varying degrees
| of success all the way back to Windows 95 at this point.)
| ptx wrote:
| They can just do what they did in Windows 95 (possibly not in
| the very first version) where the start button doesn't actually
| extend all the way into the corner, but clicking the corner
| pixel teleports the cursor a few pixels inwards, so that the
| click hits the button.
|
| The same fix would work in Windows 11, although it would
| involve teleporting the cursor halfway across the screen.
| thomasahle wrote:
| > seems to forget Fitts' Law. Is this a push to make people use
| hotkeys
|
| I feel this is a general problem with Fitts' law: Anything
| that's used often enough to deserve to be in a corner should
| really only be accessed by hotkey.
| noen wrote:
| It's yet another effort by Microsoft to make Windows relevant
| to touch form factors at the expense of productivity, desktop,
| and keyboard/mouse/touchpad.
|
| It's astonishing how little (close to zero) human factors
| research is done, much less sought out or taken into
| consideration by PM or engineering on the software side of
| Microsoft.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Windows 8 had a ton (!) of smart human factors research done,
| but people gut reacted to all the individually beneficially
| changes horribly when released all at once (rather than
| taking some time to try adapting). I almost wonder if
| Microsoft learned the exact wrong answer from that and
| decided to ignore their own research more as they stripped
| out the beneficial improvements from 8 into 10.
| noen wrote:
| No it didn't. I worked at Microsoft for 14 years. I know
| exactly how Windows 8 UX design was designed and built.
|
| There was almost zero HF research, and the brunt of UX
| research done was trying to justify and fix fundamental
| issues with an already decided design direction, not to
| inform a valuable direction in the first place.
| themacguffinman wrote:
| I don't doubt they did research but I don't think they were
| individually beneficial changes. Nielsen Norman critiqued
| Windows 8 UX changes and found them fundamentally lacking
| [1]. If this is the outcome of their internal research,
| maybe they need better research.
|
| [1]
| https://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-
| usa...
| stan_rogers wrote:
| Just bad design. There's a setting to set it hard left, but
| it's not the default, and the vast majority of users will have
| to contend with important things moving around and being harder
| to hit. (There's a lot in the UI that seems to be borrowing
| from phones used vertically. Which would make sense if the
| target devices were phones being used vertically.)
| danirod wrote:
| While it is a totally legit point, the macOS dock hasn't been
| corner aligned since OS X 10.0 too and it seems people got used
| to it. Probably not a big deal after all most of the time.
| xoa wrote:
| The Dock isn't the equivalent to the Start Menu, the closest
| Mac equivalent is the Apple menu. That dates back to I think
| the very beginning of the Macintosh, and particularly in the
| classic era (Mac OS 1 through 9) shared a lot more in common
| with the Start menu. When Apple was just first barely dipping
| a toe in the waters of multitasking applications with the
| 1987 MultiFinder, the Apple menu let you switch between
| running applications. Also was where desk accessories went,
| though there were limits (which 3rd parties quickly created
| offerings working around :)). System 7 expanded it a lot,
| with a dedicated way to put aliases of docs/software in the
| menu. Mac OS X and the dock actually kind of split out some
| of that functionality for better or worse.
|
| But through it all the Apple has stayed glued in the top left
| corner of the screen, the furthest left thing on the menu
| bar. The one time they briefly contemplated eliminating
| it/moving it to the center was IIRC in the Mac OS X public
| beta (which I think I still have lying around here somewhere,
| would be a hoot to try to get it running again under QEMU
| maybe?). But there was harsh feedback from a lot of us in the
| PB on that one and it was restored from 10.0, so there was
| never a public release of a "Mac OS" without it. And even
| though it's visually offset a bit from the edge of the menu
| and when you click the highlight box also seems offset from
| the side, that doesn't actually affect the clickable area one
| bit. You can jam your mouse to the upper corner pixel blind
| and it'll still open right up. They've stuck with Fitt's Law
| on that one at least even amongst all their other GUI
| "innovations" in the last few decades.
| 1_player wrote:
| Nice history lesson, but for all intents and purposes the
| Dock _is_ equivalent to the Start Menu, as both are the
| main ways to start or switch applications for most users.
|
| The Apple menu has nothing to do with running applications
| in modern macOS versions.
| OGWhales wrote:
| Doc is equivalent to the apps locked to your taskbar..
| not the start button.
| 1_player wrote:
| OP is arguing that the Apple menu is used to start and
| switch applications, not the Dock. What?
|
| How is the Apple menu equivalent to Start in modern
| macOS? Do you click the Apple menu to start your apps? Or
| even switch to them?
| OGWhales wrote:
| I wasn't talking about the apple menu, though it is more
| similar in function to the start menu than the doc is...
| However, start does a whole bunch of things, so it's not
| really the same. Nobody switches apps using the start
| menu (that's what the taskbar is for), but people will
| search for apps (and files) that aren't on their taskbar
| already. I don't think people do that with the apple
| menu, I don't even know if you can do either of those
| things there on modern MacOS (they were talking about
| older versions in the above comment). I believe people
| open the launchpad for apps not on their doc. It's been a
| while since I have used MacOS, so please correct me if I
| am wrong.
|
| > the Dock _is_ equivalent to the Start Menu
|
| This is what I was referencing in my previous comment.
| This is not accurate. They are not even similar. The doc,
| however, is very similar to the taskbar. The doc and
| taskbar are used almost exactly the same way by users.
| I'd say they are effectively equivalent. That's all my
| first comment was trying to say.
|
| The start button is used for many of the things the apple
| menu can do, but also for searching for things, from apps
| to files. I am not sure you can easily compare it to one
| thing on MacOS, as it seems like those functions are put
| into multiple different places, many of which are
| discrete apps _on_ the doc... which may have been what
| you meant. The above user was saying the Apple menu _was_
| the same as the start button is now, but acknowledged
| that those functions have been broken apart since that
| time.
|
| edit: updated comment
| djrogers wrote:
| The start menu is a _single button_ , whereas the dock is
| a large number of icons. Corner aligning the dock would
| do no good, as any icon other than the _one_ in the
| corner wouldn 't be corner aligned either.
|
| Regardless of how you see the function parity between the
| two, the corner alignment argument just doesn't hold
| here.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| I feel like a more apt comparison would be moving the Apple
| Icon from the top left of the screen to the middle. That's a
| _close enough_ analogue to what the start button did.
| sharkjacobs wrote:
| I would argue that the difference is that there isn't a one
| most important button in the dock like the Start button. Even
| if the dock was corner aligned it would only make it easier
| to select either the Finder or Trash icon depending on which
| corner it was in.
| jodrellblank wrote:
| Is there anything stopping a click in the lower left corner
| from bringing up the start menu, even with nothing visible
| there? The other corners do magic surprise things in Windows
| (like charms bar, app switching) with no UI visible as a
| precedent.
| pndy wrote:
| It seems there's still an option on taskbar settings to move it
| onto left but new position seems to be default [1] - at least
| in the "leaked" build.
|
| [1] - https://winaero.com/how-to-disable-centered-taskbar-in-
| windo...
| fassssst wrote:
| There's a setting for left aligned, but Fitts Law is overrated
| for the Start menu. None of the apps on your taskbar have ever
| benefited from it, and you probably click those all the time,
| much more than the Start button.
| bsoft16385 wrote:
| Taskbar buttons absolutely benefit from Fitt's Law.
|
| Fitt's Law says that the time required to interact with an
| element depends on both the distance to that element and the
| width/height of that element.
|
| Putting an element on an edge (where the cursor cannot go
| beyond that edge) essentially makes it infinitely large in
| one dimension. Putting it in a corner makes it infinitely
| large in two dimensions.
|
| Taskbar buttons in Windows (or menu items in macOS) do
| benefit from Fitt's Law, just not as much as items in the
| corners.
| Shadonototro wrote:
| it's to make room for "widgets panel" since the right side is
| already taken by god's know what other atrocities are,
| including notification center
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| UI Designers don't give a rip about Fitt's Law or any of these
| self-proclaimed design "laws". Unless it's a useful authority
| to appeal to for beating opposing UI Designers.
| nly wrote:
| My hunch is that it's a controversial change made for no
| purpose other than to deliberately get people talking about
| W11.
|
| It's easy to 'fix' via preferences so serves no other purpose.
| eljimmy wrote:
| I wonder if Microsoft would ever release a flavor of Windows
| targeted at the user who wants a minimalist but equally powerful
| OS which gives the user absolute control.
|
| Someone who wants local only accounts, bare-bones UI, no tablet
| or touch screen support, no app stores or telemetry, no
| integrations, just plain old Windows.
|
| Wishful thinking, probably.
| achn wrote:
| Very wishful, unfortunately. The entire goal of this update is
| to move windows closer to an AppStore model where MS makes
| money off of driving the behaviour of its users and monetizing
| external developers. Even on the server, admins have less and
| less control over the services running.
| bigtex wrote:
| Will Windows 11 run on ARM and be publicly available?
| aloer wrote:
| First screenshots look like they have a normal curve for rounded
| corners. Not that special apple curve thing. Is that protected in
| any way?
| schlotzisk wrote:
| It's mind boggling to me, that Microsoft went with a redesign
| here. Personally the Windows UI never bothered me that much. I
| just feel like that they could have focused more on things like,
| stability, the search functionality or, and I'm not even kidding,
| printer and scanner support.
| ehsankia wrote:
| There's nothing wrong with redesign as long as they do it
| consistently across the whole OS, but from my experience, they
| reskin like 30% of the stuff and everything else stays
| inconsistent [0]. If they're gonna work on UI, I'd like to see
| them actually grow that 30% rather than keep changing things
| up.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27556754
| IshKebab wrote:
| I agree, they should have done the boring but worthwhile work
| of updating the control panel, font selector, etc. But nope.
| Add more inconsistency. And make the start button harder to
| click while you're at it.
| mdavid626 wrote:
| Hmm, nice improvements, but is it just me who doesn't care about
| them at all? Most of them feels like change just for the sake of
| change, but not an actual improvement.
| dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
| Not you, re not alone, and some of them (like no local
| accounts) seem like a step backward.
| satysin wrote:
| To clarify there are still local accounts in all versions.
| However to complete the setup a Microsoft account is required
| in the Home edition. You can then create other local
| accounts.
|
| In other editions you can create a local account during
| setup.
|
| In the leaked build it is possible to cancel out of the
| forced Microsoft account requirement in Home by closing the
| screen with a simple Alt+F4 however that may be changed in
| the final build.
| marcthe12 wrote:
| There is a severe bump in hardware requirement. Prob the main
| reason the even did this (big enough to warrant some kind of
| LTS). Obviously that doesn't sell so there so other random
| changes
| silicon2401 wrote:
| > change just for the sake of change, but not an actual
| improvement.
|
| That's a lot of software change. I couldn't care less about
| aesthetic changes in MacOS, windows, android, xbox, but they're
| all forced on the users no matter what. If I had the choice,
| I'd still be using whatever android version my galaxy s3 had,
| the windows 95 UI, and the Mac OSX UI. But the easiest way to
| make people want something new is to make it look new I guess
| watertom wrote:
| macos
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| I can't wait to see if "Device Manager" still uses the same
| Windows 95 GUI.
| CursedUrn wrote:
| If you're lucky they've built a new one with reduced
| functionality and a button to open the old one. That's how they
| usually handle things.
| kleiba wrote:
| > "Microsoft is also integrating Microsoft Teams directly into
| Windows 11, for both consumers and commercial users."
|
| Have they not learned from the legal backlash with IE back in the
| day?
| WesleyLivesay wrote:
| Not really different than Apple including iMessage and
| Facetime.
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| I think we're beyond that now. So many illegal monopolistic
| activities have happened in the past decade that I've lost all
| faith in the US government. If a new Teddy Roosevelt doesn't
| come around soon, it's gonna be the railroads owning the
| country all over again.
| meamin wrote:
| > Android Apps
|
| Not long till the Surface Dou will be running Windows 11 instead
| of Android. Then comes the Surface Phone.
| nsriv wrote:
| Not a fan of the Android apps installable and discoverable onto
| Windows...but through the Amazon appstore. Weird, and I'd much
| more prefer installing to PC from Google Play itself.
| jccalhoun wrote:
| Probably not google because google wouldn't play ball. I wonder
| if users will be able to (easily) sideload android apps since
| not everything is in Amazon's app store and apps there are
| often not updated as often as the google play store version.
| nsriv wrote:
| Right, that was my assumption too. Sideloading would be my
| way around, but I'm guessing there may be some runtime
| signing or containerizing involved as well, else every
| Android vulnerability just became a Windows vulnerability.
| yellowfish wrote:
| I think amazon's appstore is free of google play services which
| could be a big reason
| fooey wrote:
| Not having google play services is a big reason the amazon
| store is a barren wasteland
| jannes wrote:
| Do you really think Google would allow that?
| nsriv wrote:
| Honestly, yes. Someone else mentioned Google Play Services
| being a probable point of contention. Overall, with Surface
| Duo, Microsoft Launcher and Google's work towards making
| Flutter along with the leverage and developer interest they'd
| gain through having the Windows install base using the Play
| Store, it seems like a fair relationship.
| was_a_dev wrote:
| I have my taskbar vertical on the left of my screen - so that
| will be interesting in Windows 11
| twobitshifter wrote:
| Me too is that no longer an option?
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| Getting rid of tiles and similar seems like a substantial
| improvement, and might address part of people's complaints about
| Windows 10. The most important question, though: is Windows still
| "evergreen" with free updates, or will people have to buy Windows
| 11? The latter would mean we can't count on Windows systems being
| up to date. I was happily looking forward to the day when
| software could _just_ support Windows 10 and no other Windows
| version.
| rhengles wrote:
| I found a link to a tool[0] that checks your PC compatibility
| with Windows 11, but it seems that many many people with
| powerful devices are getting a "No" answer.
|
| [0] https://twitter.com/_h0x0d_/status/1408075658350108674
| neogodless wrote:
| Looks like AMD systems might mostly be coming back as "This
| PC can't run Windows 11."
|
| > Trusted Platform Module (TPM) version 2.0
|
| Possibly most AMD motherboards don't have TPM integrated? I
| don't know a lot about TPM though.
|
| Someone said...
|
| > enable tpm in your bios i did it and it worked for me, I
| have a 3080, 5800x, 16gb of ram
|
| EDIT: My motherboard (Asus Prime X470 Pro) lists TPM as a
| separate module you buy, but the connector is present. $12
| module, for example: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1
| 237446-REG/asus_tpm_...
|
| The manual does list an fTPM setting as well, but I have not
| tested that yet.
| izacus wrote:
| > Possibly most AMD motherboards don't have TPM integrated?
| I don't know a lot about TPM though.
|
| Ryzen CPUs do have TPM onboard - at least my Ryzen 3800X
| does have it. It's disabled by default for some reason.
|
| Funny enough, Apple laptops don't have it so Windows 11
| won't be usable in BootCamp on Intel Macs.
| OGWhales wrote:
| Thanks for this info.
|
| Supposedly the fTPM should work with Ryzen CPUs and offer
| TPM 2.0, but I can't confirm now either.
|
| Similar deal to yours, my Gigabyte x570 board offers TPM
| cards: https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/TPM-Card. I
| am assuming this is unnecessary tho, but good to know.
| Deathmax wrote:
| Posting from the other Windows 11 post, I can confirm
| that a Ryzen fTPM will get a checkmark from the PC Health
| tool at least.
|
| Screenshot of the security processor page:
| https://i.imgur.com/ZWtq8EO.png
|
| Screenshot of the PC health check:
| https://i.imgur.com/Rb3eZIc.png
| blibble wrote:
| of the 20 or so machines I've owned in the last 15 years I
| think only one of them has had a TPM, and that was an
| enterprise laptop
|
| no gaming motherboard I've ever had has had a TPM
|
| edit: seems like the intel PTT bios option counts, so maybe
| not a huge problem (though it's off by default everywhere)
| ewzimm wrote:
| So now we finally know that 2025 will be the year of the
| Linux desktop. There will be no more supported Windows
| version for older hardware, and Microsoft's love for Linux
| will finally blossom into forcing migration for millions of
| computers. This is the most interesting part of the
| announcement, and I hope that desktop Linux distros will
| take advantage of the situation. Of course, Microsoft could
| reverse course by then.
|
| edit: Looks like TPM 2.0 is not a hard requirement, only
| 1.2. This will likely still result in a lot of users left
| out of Windows, but the year of the Linux desktop may be
| delayed again. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/compatibility/windo...
| xeromal wrote:
| I have a badass gaming rig and I got the not compatible
| message. lol. Oh well.
| zamalek wrote:
| > is Windows still "evergreen" with free updates, or will
| people have to buy Windows 11?
|
| It's a free upgrade, just like 8 -> 10.
|
| I assume Microsoft is doing this because of the hype that
| typically surrounds new Mac OS versions. I have no doubt that
| this could have been one of the evergreen updates, if only
| Microsoft hadn't been calling Windows 10 updates 'exciting'
| things like "21H2".
| partiallypro wrote:
| I believe they have said, or hinted, that it will be a free
| upgrade. Microsoft has an incentive itself to get as many
| people on one build itself to lower legacy costs.
| po1nter wrote:
| Windows 11 will be a free upgrade:
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/24/22546801/microsoft-window...
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| Looks like that news just came out. Glad to hear it.
|
| Now let's hope it's an _automatic_ upgrade for as many
| Windows 10 users as possible.
| npteljes wrote:
| I hope so too. The more they annoy the users the better.
| Laarlf wrote:
| The update will come automatically as you can read here.
| https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-11 This is
| basically Windows 10 21H2. Just naming it differently
| because... New UI i guess?
| pitterpatter wrote:
| No, once 20H1 was released it got cut into its own
| release branch. 20H2, 21H1 and 21H2 are all just updates
| on top of that branch. You can tell because their build
| numbers are all 1904x.
|
| Windows 11 is based on the mainline branch after the
| above (though it too has been cut into its own release
| branch now). of course, some changes might be ported back
| and forth between releases.
|
| So machines not eligible to be upgraded to Windows 11
| will stay on Windows 10 and get 21H2 and who knows how
| many more updates.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| That makes sense; perhaps they're changing the name to
| help entice people who didn't like Windows 10 to take
| another look.
| [deleted]
| throwawayay02 wrote:
| Oh Windows users, what a crazy bunch. I personally would
| never use a piece of software that updated (or downgraded,
| depending on the perspective) against my wishes.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| Let's not, because I have no interest in windows 11 from
| what I've heard so far.
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| Let's hope not, thank you.
|
| It's one thing to force an update that just makes
| background improvements. It's another thing entirely to
| force a UI update that breaks your workflow.
|
| Most of us just got the people we support used to the new
| design now they're going to up and change it completely
| again.
|
| My Grandmother has basically given up using the computer
| because she doesn't have the mental energy to relearn a UI
| every time some MBA comes along wanting to "disrupt" the
| status quo.
|
| It's basically akin to the company that manufactures your
| car showing up at your house while you're sleeping, moving
| the steering wheel to the center of the car, re-arranging
| buttons on the console, blacking out two of the windows
| because it looks cool, then leaving a nice little note on
| your front porch: "We upgraded your car, it's so much
| better!"
| rurp wrote:
| I agree with this 100% and it blows my mind that so many
| in tech take the opposite stance. For the people who just
| see a computer as a tool, which is probably the vast
| majority of users, they just want it to work and then get
| out of their way. Very few are interested in spending a
| bunch of time relearning a new UI just to keep up with
| the latest design fad.
|
| All of this bias towards churn is probably great for my
| career options so I guess that's something. But stories
| like this make me really feel for the millions of less
| tech-interested users who get frustrated by big changes
| like this. Within the tech bubble it's easy to forget how
| many things we take for granted as simple are actually
| quite hard for many people.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| Software developers around the world don't have to build
| software compatible with your old car, and get blamed for
| any incompatibility.
|
| There have already been posts showing that there's an
| option to put the start menu back on the left if you want
| that. Hopefully there will be options to deal with other
| inconveniences. As it stands, this already looks like it
| _fixes_ many of the complaints people had about Windows
| 10; in that regard, parts of it are exactly what many
| people asked for.
|
| I don't want people to deal with a UI they dislike. I
| also don't want developers having to deal with a no-
| longer-evergreen OS. Windows was the last OS to move to
| the evergreen model; when Windows 10 came out, it was a
| great relief to many developers, who saw a point on the
| horizon where there was only _one_ version of Windows
| they would have to support, and it would always be up to
| date.
|
| Remember, the alternative isn't just "oh well, I guess
| we'll support Windows 10 and Windows 11". One alternative
| is "guess we'll build a web app instead", or "guess we'll
| drop support for Windows 10" (in which case people still
| need to upgrade, but they blame app developers instead of
| Windows).
|
| I'm sure the option will exist to _not_ upgrade, at least
| for a while. But if the default is to upgrade, app
| developers get much less of the blame if they expect and
| depend on that upgrade.
| lp0_on_fire wrote:
| > Software developers around the world don't have to
| build software compatible with your old car, and get
| blamed for any incompatibility.
|
| That sounds like a problem for software developers, not
| my grandmother. Now she can't use _any_ software because
| she has to relearn the OS every few years. She doesn't
| have that much time left on this earth and I don't blame
| her for not wanting to expend the mental energy on
| learning something that's just gonna change for no
| apparent reason a few years down the road.
| stonogo wrote:
| Cars have standards for user interfaces to prevent
| _exactly this problem_.
| cjaybo wrote:
| As an audio application developer who still supports
| users on OSX 10.6.8, I have to ask, what is this about
| "Windows was the last OS to move to the evergreen model"?
| Do the breaking changes in MacOS version updates somehow
| not count anymore?
|
| If developers don't want to support multiple versions of
| an OS, there are plenty of domains where that isn't an
| issue. The desktop seems like a weird place to complain
| about this issue, though, since this is a challenge
| inherent in the fact that users have choices and
| freedoms.
|
| Completely disagree with your attitude here.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| I'm not suggesting that apps should drop such support
| instantaneously or gratuitously. Rather, I'm just
| suggesting that in the normal course of development, as
| an OS version becomes sufficiently old _and_ has genuine
| issues that make support non-trivial, and if the upgrade
| to a newer version is free and automatic (so it 's
| reasonable to expect people to upgrade), an app developer
| may at some point say "we expect at least this OS
| version; if you're using an older version, _you 're
| welcome to try_, but we don't test on those OS versions
| so we can't offer any support or respond to bug reports
| from those OS versions".
|
| I absolutely believe that the "you're welcome to try"
| part of that is important, assuming there's no _known_
| issue (which there may sometimes be). Developers also
| have an upper bound on available support bandwidth. I don
| 't think apps (or websites) should _prevent_ users from
| even trying, unless there 's some specific technical
| reason (e.g. a known incompatibility that's producing
| substantial support burden just to triage, or a library
| or API that simply doesn't exist on the older version). I
| do think it's reasonable to say "please upgrade and try
| again, and if you're still experiencing the issue we'll
| take a look".
|
| Along the same lines, if a user reports an issue to a
| website where it doesn't function properly in Chrome 12,
| or Firefox 9, it's entirely reasonable for the site to
| respond with "please upgrade, we don't support outdated
| browsers". It's a little more questionable for a site to
| say that about a version released the previous month,
| unless the site is a tech demo for bleeding-edge
| technology. But at _no_ point do I think a site should
| actually _block_ users attempting to use older browsers;
| at most, it 's reasonable to show a "not supported or
| tested, might not work" message.
| MrOxiMoron wrote:
| yeah, no... I know a hospital that just upgraded to Windows
| 7...
| roblabla wrote:
| That hospital is dumb and will likely face issues in the near
| future then. Win7 isn't supported by Microsoft since early
| 2020, which means no more security updates. Given hospitals
| are getting more and more frequently targeted by
| ransomware... Well, we'll see how that goes.
|
| There's still win8 and win8.1 to worry about though, and
| win10 also has LTSC releases that stay supported for at least
| 10 years IIRC.
| zten wrote:
| A buddy of mine with a Subway franchise is finally being
| prodded by corporate to upgrade his Windows 7 hardware.
| They still have support for Windows 7 for a little while,
| but not long -- it's apparently done by August 31st this
| year. And, their upgrade path is Windows 10 LTSC, which
| will expire in 2026.
| mrweasel wrote:
| What I don't get is hospitals buying things like MRI
| scanners, with Windows based "controller" with no upgrade
| path. The hospital, and the manufacturer, knows that the
| version of Windows they're running will be EOL before the
| hardware, yet nobody ask the manufacturer how they plan to
| deal with that fact.
|
| The promise of Windows 10 being the last Windows could have
| but an end to that nonsense.
| lovich wrote:
| If it's not networked does it matter if it gets updates?
| Aerroon wrote:
| Why does it matter? Just don't connect it to the internet
| and there should be no issue. Why would you _want_ to
| update software that could potentially break your super
| expensive machine if it already works?
| anderskaseorg wrote:
| So what you're saying is, this can't have happened
| because nobody would be dumb enough to buy a convenient
| Internet-enabled smart device and then _actually_ connect
| it to the Internet:
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/17/wa
| nna...
|
| And also that this problem definitely won't get worse as
| more and more of these devices are built on platforms
| that want to _require_ you to sign in with a cloud
| service...
| Aerroon wrote:
| Of course people are going to do silly things, but you
| can't protect people from stupidity.
|
| > _And also that this problem definitely won't get worse
| as more and more of these devices are built on platforms
| that want to require you to sign in with a cloud
| service..._
|
| Which is why it's so important that not giving network
| access to medical machines becomes standard practice.
| ziml77 wrote:
| It blows my mind that any would be accessible from the
| internet. These devices shouldn't be networked at all if
| possible. But at the very least they should be on their
| own network, preferably physically isolated instead of
| VLANs.
| mrweasel wrote:
| But they know that it has to be network enabled. MRIs
| connects to a PACS. That's how you actually get any
| useful information from an MRI.
| mimsee wrote:
| > ...with no upgrade path.
|
| The manufacturer of the MRI machine doesn't care. In
| their mind the "upgrade path" is to buy a new one. That
| might support the current iteration of Windows + their
| drivers until the next Windows is released. Sure it's
| nonsense but the hospital can't just not have an MRI
| machine. They need one and someone will capitalize on
| that need.
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| MRI machines aren't like a copier. They're million-plus
| dollar room-sized installs that require massive
| facilities support, custom spaces, and in many places in
| the US, a certificate of need to allow you to purchase
| and install it (distributed geographically by population
| and governmental formulas).
|
| I suspect the 'replacement' or 'upgrade' market for such
| machines is very very low. Major capital expenditure
| intended to be amortized/depreciated over many years.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| Windows 7 is absolutely still supported through an ESU
| subscription through 2022. There are plenty of
| organizations who are using that program to continue to use
| Windows 7 in places where it makes financial sense.
| virgulino wrote:
| No AMD Zen 1st gen support:
|
| https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/min...
|
| Zen+ supported.
|
| I wonder why.
| bloggie wrote:
| Only 8th gen and up Intels supported... 5 year old computers
| are unsupported. Surprising.
| easton wrote:
| I bet the TPM isn't 2.0. I was hoping buying into AM4 would
| mean I could keep this board longer too, but the but the 5xxx
| chips aren't compatible with the original chipset.
|
| My machine is super fast, but I guess unless I feel like
| staying on insider (which will have the TPM requirement patched
| out for the next little while according to MS), I'll need to
| upgrade sooner than I planned.
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| There are some hardware issues with the first gen. Could it be
| related?
| scoutt wrote:
| So the first tweak would be something like:
| .bar_icons { float: left; padding: 10px;
| }
| bun_at_work wrote:
| Now is the time to abandon Windows.
|
| I don't know what can replace it right now, for non-technical
| users, but the market is ready for an OS that isn't tied to
| hardware (MacOS) and doesn't require as much expertise or effort
| as Linux variants (especially when running specific software).
|
| Microsoft is here with Windows 11, integrating teams into the OS,
| because they want to shill it, not because it's what users want.
| They are making claims about it being more performant, but that's
| hard to imagine when considering their promises for backwards
| compatibility.
|
| Windows is a bloated nuisance OS that only stays around because
| of legacy software and DirectX. The folks at Microsoft who work
| on Windows have demonstrated for decades now that they care more
| about implementing new features than they care about user
| experience, consistency, and reliability. Here comes another UI
| overhaul instead of simply fixing the trash menus and numerous
| other problems the OS has. Why?
|
| It's time to move on from Windows.
| seniorThrowaway wrote:
| >Windows is a bloated nuisance OS that only stays around
| because of legacy software and DirectX
|
| The reason it stays around is because of it's entrenched market
| share at very large enterprises. Until there is a replacement
| for managing huge numbers of end user devices centrally that is
| as easy or easier then Active Directory that won't change.
| bun_at_work wrote:
| Ah yeah, AD is another reason it stays around, however, like
| DirectX, it can be replaced. It's a ripe market opportunity.
| nsriv wrote:
| I think Teams integration is more of an acknowledgement that
| video-calling and workplace collaboration is a default usecase
| for desktop computing (like email, calendar, calculator, text
| editing).
|
| >They are making claims about it being more performant, but
| that's hard to imagine when considering their promises for
| backwards compatibility.
|
| I can run Windows 95 programs on Windows 10, not sure where the
| knock is coming from on backwards compatibility.
|
| >Here comes another UI overhaul instead of simply fixing the
| trash menus
|
| From the leaked ISO, the menus are much improved and
| overhauled. Sure, I want a modern tabbed File Explorer too, but
| it's clearly being worked on.
| bun_at_work wrote:
| The knock on backwards compatibility isn't a complaint about
| backwards compatibility, per se. It's about how so much of
| the OS is held back due to that support for old software.
|
| The trash menus I'm referring to, while the language is a bit
| strong, are how there is no unified design throughout the OS.
| It reeks of implementing new features halfway and rushing it
| out, since most of what the user sees is now "new".
| [deleted]
| yellowfish wrote:
| Windows works well enough for me it's just a tool
| jodrellblank wrote:
| > " _Now is the time to abandon Windows. I don 't know what can
| replace it right now, for non-technical users_"
|
| ???
|
| Complaint: Microsoft have spent years adding many features and
| even people with no expertise can use it. This is, somehow,
| bad.
|
| Suggested course of action: Abandon it.
|
| Complaint: There is nothing else comparable, because everything
| else has fewer features is harder to use, and can't run
| software people want to run.
|
| > " _the market is ready_ "
|
| The market is still giving money to Microsoft hand over fist.
| Consumers have basically run to Android phones, iPads,
| Chromebooks, Kindles, Alexa devices, macBooks, and away from
| desktops entirely. What are you looking at which suggests it's
| ready for a change of consumer desktop/laptop OS?
| n_io wrote:
| Am I the only one who feels like Windows 11, at its core, is just
| one giant telemetry upgrade with a shinier UI?
| Ajedi32 wrote:
| Looks like some pretty nice improvements, particularly in regards
| to window management.
|
| From the video, it sounds like they're adding persistent grid
| layouts, with apps able to be assigned to specific tiles in the
| grid, and Windows remembers and restores those positions when you
| restart apps or switch monitor layouts (e.g. when connecting a
| laptop to a docking station). Looks like they've also expanded
| the multi-desktop feature to integrate nicely with these new
| persistent grid layouts, with labeled desktops for particular
| tasks.
|
| The new native support for Android apps also seems like it could
| be really useful, depending on how well-integrated it is with the
| rest of the OS.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| We fired shots at BlueStacks and Zoom. Rejoice with us.
| ZoomZoomZoom wrote:
| I would really like to know if there's _anything_ positive
| besides UI and up-to-date security this brings to a user 's table
| compared to Windows 7.
| sbadger wrote:
| 24 years ago my company moved from mac to windows (granted macs
| would crash every 20 minutes). At the time we were given a
| windows laptop to try for a bit, with the rollout a month or so
| later. When I went to shut it down I asked how to... 'press
| start', I was told. I thought 'nope, they still don't get it...
| pressing start to stop... send it back to them and tell them to
| try again and harder'. Its still true.
| Crono wrote:
| That old joke ... But i have a solution for you: You could use
| that fancy thing called a "power button" - no joke, it will
| actually help you in turing of the computer - or do you want to
| only start it with this button?
|
| Jokes aside: cmon, its not a big deal to open the windows menu
| to power of the machine. The Word "Start" is now missing since
| Windows Vista which released 2007 - nearly 15 Years ago!
| _benj wrote:
| I honestly was expecting more "innovation", more daring decisions
| and deep convictions that "this new way", even though it might
| get some backlash, will prove to improve the wellbeing of it's
| users, even if they don't know it yet.
|
| I haven't seen anything like that since the days of Steven Jobs
| and it kind of saddens me. Have we reached a plateau in tech? Are
| we just up for making more of the same, just a little different,
| as long as we can get VC or increase the stock price? Are there
| no more Wright Brothers? Alex G. Bell? Elon Musk for more
| industries?
|
| Sorry for the sad comment, but this release just disappointed me.
| Idk what I was expecting, but it wasn't just another Windows...
| tomtheelder wrote:
| Desktop OSes have been basically stagnant for almost 20 years.
| There's plenty of software innovation out there, but not in
| this space.
| rhengles wrote:
| They tried that with Windows 8, the backslash was so enormous
| that I think they will be on the safe side and stick with
| 'familiarity' for the foreseeable future.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| I was hoping 11 would get rid of a bunch of old Windows
| backwards compatibility cruft. Make Windows 10 the long-run
| version and Windows 11 the forward looking one. Almost like
| what Apple did with Mac OS X.
| marcthe12 wrote:
| Well did drop 32 bit and bios. So they probably dropped a
| huge chunk of kernel code
| timw4mail wrote:
| 16bit support isn't legacy enough? No 32bit install?
| wvenable wrote:
| Mac OS X has direct linage from NeXTStep that was first
| released in 1989 -- four years before Windows NT.
|
| When it was originally rebranded OS X there was so much
| backlash from developers and Apple had to go back and spend a
| year creating a new API (Carbon) to mimic the one in Mac OS
| classic.
|
| There is no reason to complain about "backwards compatibility
| cruft". An OS exists to run software and an OS that runs less
| software is less useful. Over time this backwards
| compatibility stuff is less and less significant -- you can
| run several copies of Windows 95 entirely in the L2 cache of
| a modern system.
| arathore wrote:
| I am looking forward to performance improvements. It would be
| great if the core window services were optimized to use less
| resources to improve the windows experience on less impressive
| hardware.
| nevi-me wrote:
| I didn't hear anything about availability, previews, etc. Did I
| miss something? I listened to the live stream in the background,
| and also skimmed through The Verge's article and live stream.
|
| As a happy Windows user, this looks exciting.
|
| I hope that there'll be a Windows Pro upgrade path that's not
| pocket-heavy, so I can update my 8 year old laptop, and my recent
| desktop without paying too much.
| dolmen wrote:
| "people will be able to discover Android apps in the Microsoft
| Store and download them through the Amazon Appstore"
|
| 3 big tech in one sentence from Microsoft.
| typh00n wrote:
| I really do like Windows, but it has a lot of issues for me:
| Pushing its users to Microsoft Accounts, telemetry, ads,
| bloatware it automatically installs, and last but not least
| inconsistencies all the way through the OS - and adding another
| design-layer with windows 11 wont help that. I think microsoft
| really need to address some of this and get back to the needs of
| "prosumers". I personally want a slim but nice looking OS.
|
| The only thing keeping me away from Linux at this point are
| games. I know, Proton opened huge possibilities but unfortunately
| it is not enough in my case. Either games won't work because of
| DRM (e.g. FallGuys), or the game itself runs fine but needed mods
| to run online-multiplayer are not possible on Linux. (e.g.
| Command & Conquer 3 + CnC-Online)
| npteljes wrote:
| "Pushing" really is the thing that bother me most about
| Windows. Just so pushy about a lot of stuff. Putting things
| here, there, switching it around, turning it off when it was
| always on, and vice versa. I just have the feeling that it very
| strongly wants something, and that's not what I want.
|
| Windows as a requirement is really unfortunate. I have the same
| reasons as you to keep it around. Win compatibility came a
| really, really long way, but anti-cheat will always be a
| problem, which cuts out a good chunk of games.
| Icathian wrote:
| I've said for years the day I can reliably play League of
| Legends on Linux you'll never see me using anything else at
| home again. Just frustrating that gaming is still largely a
| best-effort crapshoot despite all the work by Valve and others.
| fermentation wrote:
| Last summer all I had was a linux box to play games, and I
| found that a lot of games I wanted to play (like the witcher
| 3) worked surprisingly well via Proton. I think the main
| issues come from the massive GaaS like LoL and Destiny that
| have so many moving parts and points of failure.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-24 23:01 UTC)