NoelC

I do understand, and I'm really WITH you both. All what I'm suggesting is to not let it get to you. The world is what it is, and maybe just a little of what we make of it. We're all complex creatures. Surely I prefer quality. I would rather pay for a polished, robust product than one that's not. However, if it's up to me to fill some dents, paint, and put some polish on, it's no different than my car. It's doable and at the end of the day I have a shiny sports car. Doing good system integration is more powerful and important than most people realize. To say that the quality of OSs is down since the 1990s isn't reasonable. The kernel of Windows has been getting better, even if you consider just Vax/VMS NT. Maybe not at every single update, and maybe not if you compare with the era that ended in the 1980s, that's a different story, based on different economics. To bring up WFWG... Just silly. It was a toy (that I polished and ran an entire engineering department on). It was an enabler in its day. That day is gone. The dawning of the PC era brought about a significant shift in cost - and loss of rigor - from computer hardware and software. Did/does it HAVE to be bug-ridden? No. COULD it have been / be done better? Sure. Did we ENJOY paying only a few bucks for slightly buggy software with hundreds or thousands of man-years of development time? You betcha. Windows 8.1 (and before it 7) are operating systems for the computers I dreamed about using my entire career. I don't have ANY problems with reliability. My systems work. Of course there are parts that would irk me if I used them - but I don't choose to do so. Instead I optimize ways to use them that work. In short, I make the best of it. I sound as if I'm arguing FOR the loss of rigor in engineering, the loss of quality. I'm not. But the world is what it is, and I don't sell modern systems short. There are parts of them that actually work, and can provide pleasure when used. During pre-releases I complain and I provide all the feedback I can. In the end they make whatever they make. They always do. I could personally do it a lot better - if I had 100 years and the funding to work on it. But none of us do. Looking forward, there will be parts of Win 10 that actually work. Parts that might even provide good value. It's up to us to coax them out and exploit them for all we can. It might be that for individual needs Win 10 won't be better than 7 or XP. But there will come a time when what's required to run those old systems will be so much more expensive that the return on investment will go negative. Make no mistake, they're Microsoft. At the end of the day it's going to be yet another version of Windows, with all its bad parts and maybe a few good, and Microsoft may really be too big to fail. I guess my point, though I'm no fanboy and I complain with the best of them, is don't let it eat you up. Like Luke Skywalker, carry a good light saber and always try to find the good in Darth OS. -Noel

I wonder if it might ultimately be possible to restore a reasonable Alt-Tab view to Windows 10... Replacing the entire screen with rearranged smaller views of the windows I have open... Maddening. -Noel

Hear hear, Jorge!! And hooray for buttons that you want to push! For some of my first web site work I made a texture that might have been leather, or maybe the texture from the dashboard of a 1970s car, and I thought (and still think) it added a lot of class. I think I may even still have it as the background for something... Ah yes, an ancient personal page... Microsoft is now allergic to even such things as drop shadows. It's all just an attempt to set a fashion trend with the ultimate goal of herding users. Utter ridiculousness. Fashion has no business influencing operating system design. It will all change, then they will tout how they listened to users, and how their studies have shown that actual 3D things (such as you can see with their HoloGoggles) are so much better. -Noel

I don't really care what most people do. In some cases it may be less than what I do, and what that usually means is that the makers of the thing think that working at the level I do isn't important, and so they dumb it down. That's just wrong. If a power user / engineer can't get what he needs from a system, then it's going to fail for a layperson as well. That layperson, if they should decide to dive deep into something - say a long session of working with a spreadsheet or the need to open a really big document - may meet with disappointment. Why? Because they couldn't be bothered with trying to make the most of their system. Because they thought integrating it should be someone else's problem. What's important is that when whomever wants to do something it's actually doable - without muss or fuss. Windows is like a new sports car that badly needs a tuneup, and maybe has a few spark plugs missing (e.g., built on a Friday afternoon). Unless you take the time to make it better it can be disappointing. I can read disappointment between the lines of many of your posts, jaclaz. I spend virtually all my time just doing my work. Sometimes it's demanding stuff. Yet I can't remember when I had to worry whether I could do more multitasking as needed, or when I had to "save often" or worry about lost data. I've installed each of the versions of Windows ONCE, tweaked them ONCE, and then they just work. I barely ever even reboot. I've been making systems into more since long before Bill Gates dreamed of Windows. I was expert at the one whose architecture was plagiarized to become NT. What's sad is that most folks really don't know how well Windows can work. Perhaps they think that taking time to get all the performance and reliability they can out of it is frivolous. Though I love to engage in reminiscing and perspective exercises, it seems to me just silly to tout how much less RAM was needed by a dinosaur OS that if run on a modern processor would crash on average every 47 seconds. There is really no comparison. I understand your sensibilities may be offended knowing today's systems could actually be more efficient. But does it really matter? If it helps, think like this. The computer box you have now is the same size as those from back then. If they were cars, and your 1992 model would go 75 mph, your 2015 model would be able to go twice the speed of sound yet use less fuel and cost less. So what if it could really go four times the speed of sound if it were only made the way you'd do it. You don't have time to make your own hypersonic vehicle. I wonder whether perhaps you ought to buy yourself a better computer - a good one. It might just be so light and fast that you'll forget all about Windows for Workgroups 3.11. I can help you set it up. -Noel

Sure, way back then we got some work done on Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. We had editors that ran in command windows and could keep up with our typing, we could compile code, we could make things work. That being said, what we did back then was mere child's play compared to what we do today. The magnitude of things we could do was not as significant. That's where the more modern systems shine. They track things instantly, give you interactive assistance, and don't make you wait. And we can now do 1000x as much computing for days, weeks, or months at a time without it crashing. Remember "Save Often"? Do you have to do that now? We don't have to reboot first thing in the morning, at lunch time, and when leaving the office so the nightly build will complete. Now we can do a build of a far more complex software system every 30 seconds if that's helpful. And I can collaborate interactively, sharing a multi-monitor desktop and with high quality 2-way hands-free audio, with someone on the other side of the planet, without even feeling the overhead of the process. I do this all the time. While I agree that by no means are current systems the most efficient or effective they could be, there is really no comparison between developing content / software today and using an OS from 25 years ago. Windows for Workgroups was flawed and inefficient for what it did. -Noel

Already did that a long time ago. SearchUI.exe still runs. -Noel

While we weren't looking the process of testing the TP edition has become now more a "let's get it over with" situation... Right now, in build 9926, I have: Added a whole bunch of tweaks and tuning to make it into what I need.Aero Glass working great.Big Muscle's extra tool to make Apps have glassy borders.My own theme atlas well-tuned.Classic Shell working great.Accessories Folder Options X, Wizmouse, ShellFolderFix, Send To Toys, FastPictureViewer Codec Pack, grepWin, etc. all installed and working.All the applications I need in and tested, so I know they work.UAC almost tamed to where I can mostly do what I want without nags, and I can still test Apps. If Microsoft just didn't change anything more I know I'd be able to use Win 10 just about as effectively as I use Win 8.1. But that's not going to happen - they ARE changing things. So it becomes: "Let's get the process of seeing what else they've deleted or screwed up over with already. Ugh." I have golden, fond memories when it used to be: "Ooh! Let's see what new and exciting things they've added!" I don't think it's me who's changed. I still get the "Ooh" feeling about other tech. No smileys in this post, nosiree... -Noel

I have the Windows Search process disabled, am using a local account, and yet still see Search in my list of Background processes. The process is actually searchui.exe, and appears to be related to Cortana. This does not appear to be a service. Maybe it's what mans the search box (which I am not displaying) on the Taskbar, but at this point that's just a wild guess. So... Let's figure out how to kill it and what the implications are. Win 10 has WAY too many processes running. Edit: More info... It's not listed by Autoruns Process Hacker shows it as having been started with this command line: "C:\Program Files\WindowsApps\Microsoft.Cortana_1.3.1.444_x64__8wekyb3d8bbwe\SearchUI.exe" -ServerName:CortanaUI.AppXwbw90g5vtrwjvhq9gjet3rhd0cy7ctte.mca Attempting to start the "Search App" nets 4 of the following errors in the System Event Log, and nothing comes up. The application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation permission for the COM Server application with CLSID {0C0A3666-30C9-11D0-8F20-00805F2CD064} and APPID {9209B1A6-964A-11D0-9372-00A0C9034910} to the user W10VM\NoelC SID (S-1-5-21-3809759404-3132761862-3099056430-1000) from address LocalHost (Using LRPC) running in the application container Microsoft.Cortana_1.3.1.444_x64__8wekyb3d8bbwe SID (S-1-15-2-128907917-1049808183-3772720920-2589851895-2273257875-2082631859-2896883434). This security permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool. Killing it from the Task Manager doesn't seem to get a recurrence in normal desktop usage, until the next logon at least. Who could not want to waste their computer resources on Cortana? -Noel

Yeah, I suppose. Trouble is, I can't think of any other explanation. But I've edited the above post to add a smiley. Hope it's not too subtle. -Noel

Is it just me are anyone else's senses OFFENDED by the icons having no perspective? Who imagines orthographic projection for human user interfaces would be good? I wonder if an age demographic might be involved in this perception. I'm an old codger; been around in the real world a long time. Do young folks find stuff like this less bothersome? -Noel

Well, it's just barely possible this is Microsoft giving up trying to forge their own path, since the engine works better if it's made to look like other browsers - implying it acts more like those others, which are likely closer implementations to the standards. IMO, IE has a decent security model. Why Microsoft would configure it to be so promiscuous out of the box is anyone's guess. Microsoft seems to be the very embodiment of... -Noel

Apparently it was just too hard to actually do. All that glitz makes the poor programmers have to work so hard. And then the testers were just sooo picky and wanted it all to actually function too! How unfair is that? Doggone reality. It bites. -Noel

Oh, come now, Windows 8 isn't all THAT much worse than its predecessors (they were pretty bad too). A true Master Of The High Tech Universe tames the latest version into submission. Hyah! Bow down before me, Windows 8.1! -Noel

...if you set the agent string differently. ​I tried the "Experimental Web Platform Features" of the web browser shipped with Windows 10 TP some time ago, and found that most sites with editors (e.g., this forum) just didn't work. So I reported a frowny face, sent Feedback, and switched it off. ​But what I didn't realize until recently (thanks to JorgeA for a link provided to a discussion with Mary Jo Foley and Paul Thurrott) is that the new engine could benefit from NOT being treated like Internet Explorer, but more like WebKit-based browsers et. al. by web sites. ​SO... ​I tried turning on the suggested Custom User Agent string provided in the Experimental Features section accessed by navigating to about:flags and voila, more things work. -Noel

I could boot Win 8.1 to the desktop directly, using only Microsoft-supplied options. Resurrecting something that resembles a Start Menu isn't really useful. Pretty much everyone agrees that the myriad start menu replacements are better. The most important cue, in my mind, that takes Windows 10 in exactly the opposite direction is EVEN WITH Big Muscle's Aero Glass tool, the elegance and usability of the desktop is REDUCED. Flat, non-delineated buttons on the Taskbar? Apps that don't have the same chrome as applications? Going through some motions for press releases all the while making the desktop harder to use in actuality doesn't "embracing" make. I *hate* this modern marketing-driven BS where "perception is reality", and if you say something enough times shallow people start to believe it. I'm basically going on "how good can it be made by tweaking and augmentation" when I compare versions vs. "what does it look like out of the box". I sound confrontational here, but it's not to you Jorge. I know your heart is in the right place. -Noel

Everyone who had anything to do with the Windows 8 pre-releases told them. But on another level... What's all this BS implication where the shills are proclaiming Windows 10 is "embracing" a PC resurgence? What about Windows 10 embraces a PC any more than WIndows 8? The only two things I can remotely associate with this concept are... Metro/Modern Apps can be run in windows on the desktop. But how does running a useless web page-like (but less functional) App help a computer user? The return of the Previous Versions feature - though without the UI that was removed in Win 8.1 for setting up the System Image backups that make it actually useful. Is there something more I'm not sensing? Windows 10 is really just Windows 8.2 as far as I can see, but with more things screwed up. -Noel

I'm not a big fan of the "yet" concept either (i.e., that one day all we'll have are Metro/Modern Apps), but Microsoft IS going to kill off the desktop, regardless of whether it's a good idea. I just think it shouldn't be done until we really DO have something completely viable to replace it. Maybe that'll be whatever follows Metro/Modern/Universal Apps, I don't know. But it will be mature and viable only when the majority of people use it because it's actually BETTER, vs., when they're herded there. I'm thinking that a Windows 10 code base could have selected things from the past resurrected. They're already doing SOME of that - e.g., the Previous Versions feature is back. But more is needed - e.g., real desktop polish like Aero Glass, things like a full-featured Windows Backup UI. And then actual IMPROVEMENTS on the desktop, such as, I don't know, maybe better mechanics for window positioning (e.g., "open it where I last used it"). Sure, I can imagine developers using a "big" system would want to be able to run their Metro/Modern Apps in a window. Fine. FULLY integrate such things, so that while the desktop is king, it's possible to have a Metro/Modern App run right there (possibly with size presets easily available to emulate certain devices, etc.) I'm flabbergasted that more is not being made of virtualization in that area. It's not like Metro/Modern Apps actually integrate with other desktop applications in any meaningful way anyway (e.g., cut/paste, drag/drop). Given as much as I've been able to make of the desktop in build 9926, I have confidence that it could still be pulled off without throwing away the code base, but by resurrection. And this would have to be Microsoft doing this - not some 3rd party. I'm also imagining a "Windows Corporate" brother to "Windows Content Creator" that might be better received by businesses as a viable Windows XP / 7 successor. -Noel

Microsoft likes to push the myth that an OS will just drop dead after the "end of life" date. That unspeakable things will happen; that you'll have all kinds of hackers crawling all over your system. It's not really true that it will stop working. You can run your old OS as long as you like. That being said, getting a new computer is always fun. Perhaps I misinterpreted your April 2017 reference, and that's the day you've planned to break the piggy bank and get that new 24 core system you've been dreaming about... -Noel

Hi lgriffith, Glad to see you here. Imagine an OS that cost $1,000 or more. Maybe "Windows Content Producer Edition". That would be the price of admission to creating content, and with many perks. Imagine for that Cleveland you get not only a stable OS made (and maintained) by the most serious people but with all the best productivity bells and whistles enabled - highly tuned for productivity. Certified on workstations, tested on multi-monitor systems, no resource limitations. Beyond that, there's someone who speaks your own language natively that you can interact with, not only to discuss problems but to engage in "next generation" thinking/planning. Imagine not having to struggle to find The Good in your OS. Imagine not feeling it's dumbed down for someone who doesn't use a computer AT ALL the way you do. Imagine not being criticized for not toeing the consumer line. We can only dream. I've always thought that Microsoft, since they use their own system to develop their next products, would have to maintain a system that was capable. Plus the App Store is quite obviously oriented toward USER-produced content, off which Microsoft can skim profits. It seems awfully self-destructive that Microsoft is actively shunning power use of their system (without anything viable to replace it yet). -Noel

This is possibly ill-timed, as a new build is supposed to be coming out in the near future, but I had a few minutes and I've made some small tweaks to my theme atlas for build 9926... Very slightly rounded button borders, better looking button illumination, slight tint to the minimize and maximize buttons for the active window to enhance the subtle sense that the window is active. Note that this version still carries some blue coloration for the active window borders because I cannot get the system to composite enough of the active window color by itself and still provide a high level of transparency. Perhaps Big Muscle can look into enhancing the algorithm (with a suitable registry setting) to add more color to the borders? http://Noel.ProDigitalSoftware.com/ForumPosts/Win10/RoundedCorners_2015_02_28.png -Noel

Kind of a shame that's what it feels like, but... That's what it feels like. -Noel

Very true. ...And of course since we've been talking about what we can do with the OS to move it back toward a small measure of sanity, Microsoft people will have been working to close off the avenues for customization, so it may not be possible in the release or even the next build. -Noel

By the way, speaking of being wary of updates... Did you notice that the Lithuanian currency update released a few days ago required a reboot? 1. Why a reboot? 2. Couldn't it wait until the next scheduled set of updates? I haven't put that one in all my systems yet. -Noel

I'm sorry that I can't help you on that, specifically, as I did install the big update not long after we had the discussion here, and after reading a lot of other anecdotal info. Not sure I can give it ultimately a positive recommendation or a thumbs-down, based on experience since... As far as I can remember there were no new features brought by it that I found useful. I've had mostly stable operation, but I did experience a system crash on my main workstation late last year. However, the crash was when I was trying a 3rd party block caching system (PrimoCache) that had tested out seemingly okay on a VM but failed on my hardware, so it's hard to say whether the crash was due to anything other than my choice of unstable system software to try to run. Without the caching software, which I promptly removed, I haven't had instability since. Performance seems about the same now, though one key subsystem, Direct2D, dropped markedly in performance right after the November 20 Windows Update, then magically seems to have popped back (mostly) with the most recent updates of February 12. All in all, so far my strategy of keeping up to date with each Windows update - after of course waiting a bit and learning what others find with it - has been workable. My development and test systems still seem to run fine. But I'm always wary of the next update. -Noel

How is it an improvement at all? I'm just not feeling it. -Noel