NoelC

People have grown tired of rearranging graphics to match each new build - especially in light of the fact that when Big Muscle releases new software that supports a particular build, he's already set it up to handle the mapping to the new graphics atlas layout (through .layout files). The condensed version is this: Theme atlas .png files that have a companion .layout file will work on the new Windows build once Big Muscle releases Aero Glass software to support the build. I know it's not worth my time to update graphics in a throwaway fashion in light of the above facts. That folks (understandably) want theme atlas graphics to work brings to mind this: Will Big Muscle grow tired of trying to keep up with changes to Windows 10? We certainly hope not, but if he does those of us who can't stand to use Windows 10 without this wonderful Aero Glass desktop improvement are basically screwed! I've already personally dropped off the pre-release testing cycle, and I might even switch to the 3 month deferred upgrade cycle, just so basic things like Aero Glass might work by the time *I* install the new builds. -Noel

And unfortunately, hundreds of millions apparently do. People are getting downright stupid about technology. You'd think it would go the other way, but nooooo... -Noel

How about gathering some actual benchmark results? Passmark's PerformanceTest is a good one to use. -Noel

Speakin' of the store (which I have banished from my systems)... Going through my event logs as I sometimes do, I see that there's still a small part of it trying to run, and I'm trying to figure out why... Specifically, in the Applications and Services Logs > Microsoft > Windows > Store-Client-UI event log, I see events a few times a day that imply a small vestige of the store is still running. I've been through the task scheduler lists, and I don't think it's starting from there. A look through the loaded modules reveals Explorer is the one with WSShared.dll loaded (not surprising I guess). I don't think WSShared.dll is actually able to do anything, as the Windows Store App is removed entirely, and I've verified no online comms are occurring - but it still bothers me that the system is occasionally trying to start it. Any ideas what to tweak to stop even this much from running? Probably an Explorer registry setting... Thing is, as it only seems to happen once or a few times a day, it's tough to trace. -Noel

Hm, that could actually matter. Gamers wield lots of money (== power). -Noel

I did some pretty detailed performance comparisons, and Explorer's access to the file system (e.g., if you enumerate all the files and folders on C: with right click - Properties) is MUCH slower in 8.1 than 8. That being said, actual file system access by applications themselves is generally faster than with 7, and on par with 8. Programmatic network activity (e.g., the ability to read a file across the network in an application) is also sped up in 8.1 vs. 7 (and I'm not completely sure how 8 fits into that). Then there were specific updates that did things, for example, like slow down Direct2D a lot. It's kind of impossible to generalize; Microsoft must have been mucking about making some basic architectural changes to shoehorn the Metro/Modern/Universal environment into Windows, and that changed quite a few things. -Noel

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there could be (and probably are) a whole bunch of things "going wrong" that aren't obvious. It's possible that something could be failing, and internal robustness logic to work around the problem continues to have to work around it. In short: Not everything that goes wrong results in an obvious failure that you can see. Look, for example in the event logs. There are (and always have been) many warnings and errors that no one quite knows how to get rid of, and that imply something's gone wrong. I wonder how many folks comb through all their hundreds of event logs looking to solve problems... A minor example, for which I have sought remedy several times and just happened to look up again this morning (only to find no one's yet published a definitive way to avoid it) is a Warning that shows up in the Applications and Services Logs > Microsoft > Windows > Known Folders > Operational states: The folder exists, and appears to have the proper permissions, yet the warning is logged (multiple times a day). IDEALLY, Microsoft would be notified about this via telemetry and work to correct it, in order to make a more perfect operating system. But note that the content of the message has personal information in it. -Noel

>Windows 10 and telemetry: Time for a simple network analysis The article summary comment that states... ...completely ignores the fact that some of us have no interest in spending even the least of our resources to help Microsoft improve PC applications and services. Focus on the word "taking". Ever since telemetry came out they've done essentially nothing to improve things. Is Windows 10 improved? But even more fundamentally, the taking of information is STILL an invasion of privacy. Even just the timing of when I log into my computer is more than I'm willing to have anyone else know. And let's not forget how far away from defaults we are when discussing this... I sure as HELL don't want recordings of what I'm talking about in my office sent to a Cortana speech recognition server! Yet I have to seek out ways to turn that off. When I put data online it's exclusively because I choose to do so. If they can't make an operating system better without knowing what I'm doing with it, then they need to fund their own test lab and make it work to specifications. For the dyed-in-the-wool geeks among us, consider implementing your own DNS server and watching the logs. I've done so, and it's eye-opening all the names that get resolved into IP addresses (or not, if you've chosen to blacklist the name resolution for certain sets of sites) even by a Windows system that's been configured in every way possible to be private. -Noel

That's just it, what REALLY ought to be published with every update is the real nitty gritty of what was changed, rght down to code snippets. People weighing risk need to know EXACTLY what was changed, and how well it was tested. Microsoft doesn't document their updates well, and has taken to doing less descriptive writing than ever lately. Not exactly the behavior of someone I want to partner with! I can't honestly imagine the majority of Enterprise users being willing to go down the "trust us" path either. Business CARES whether their computer systems work. They didn't just all get stupid at once. Even today migrations TO Windows 7 are occurring. Somehow I just don't see those shops suddenly embracing "Windows as a Service". That's not to say there aren't stupid decision-makers in business - there are. But when the rubber meets the road they know that if they roll out an OS "upgrade" that obviously screws everyone in the company, heads are going to roll! -Noel

Your tweaks are good, no doubts there eh? Nice to meet a like-minded person. I like Win 8's Explorer windows a little more than 7's and Vista's because you can have less boilerplate at the top - leaving more room for actual file data. I'm not that big a fan of ribbon bars, but at least they can be collapsed into single word "menus", and I've always preferred menus. And like you I've eliminated stuff I don't want to see in the namespaces on the left... Classic Shell adds back some things in the status bar, and some registry metrics tweaks reduce the size of the title bar and borders a little bit. Tweaking an older OS to give it a new look and feel can quell a craving for a "new, updated" experience from a newer OS - especially a flatter, more lifeless one such as that of Win 10. -Noel

For me it's less about trying to achieve the look and feel of some older system and more about maximizing usability. Whichever direction you go, an elegant UI certainly goes a long way toward making a system a pleasure to use - and that boosts productivity. It's something Microsoft completely fails to understand. For those of you who haven't yet, see also: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173976-craving-an-updated-ui-experience-re-skin-windows-81/ -Noel

I find it hard to argue against the "more education needed" camp, though, even if the extremists are trying to get you to be a dyed-in-the-wool computer geek in order to use your computer. The extreme in the other direction is for the geeky stuff to just be removed altogether, because it's simply so troublesome to support, and (as one who has coded a sed script in the past day) I'm here to tell you THAT is most definitely bad. Balance is good. Humans don't communicate that way, though - they want to polarize to extremes. The silent majority I imagine would want balance. But they're just not motivated to be Dick from the Internet. -Noel

For what it's worth, I've chosen not to accept any recent updates on my Win 8.1 and 7 systems. There's just too much risk, and not enough benefit when the systems run perfectly as is. At this point it's not clear whether Microsoft is doing good work even on its security patches, though apparently there haven't been too terribly many screams of anguish I guess. Regarding what to turn Windows into... I've found that my "downconfigured" 8.1 system (i.e., silent online, no cloud, no Apps, resurrected Aero Glass) has been the best I've ever used. Haven't been able to make 10 into something that good yet. -Noel

Well, when newer is better, it is. Otherwise it isn't. Will it be again? Who knows? Honestly, it's looking more and more like staying with the "old, traditional" is justifiable, and the only real way out of the mess wrought by the decline of Microsoft's technical prowess. With me, since I'd put the big effort into tweaking 8.1 into "old, traditional" functionality, it's the system I'm staying with on my workstation (and 7 on my small business server, since it just works). I have to say, if I'd not had the ability to do the level of tweaking I have, I'd still be on 7 on my workstation as well. It's reasonable that we wouldn't all arrive at the same decision at the same time. It could be said that you saw the decline sooner. Like Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, I'll continue to try to "find the good" in Windows 10, and like you if I should find it somehow NECESSARY to use it, it'll be a better known quantity. -Noel

By the way, some very good comments on Woody's blog by wdburt1: It's rare to come across folks that "get it" as much as the folks like wdburt1 commenting there, though I differ slightly in my thinking than wdburt1, in that I think that if they CAN do it they WILL do it. After all, other parts of their company have already shifted into being predatory, and it's quite possible that with closed source software it could already be harboring things we don't want in there, just time-delayed so that we don't detect them. No, I'm no tinfoil hat wearer. Just conscientious. Of course we already know that Microsoft doesn't think they need to do anywhere NEAR the amount of testing they used to. That's what customers are for! -Noel

Windows Update was once a thing we required of Microsoft, so we would accept their buggy, unfinished releases. Fast forward to today, when we find ourselves running mature, stable Windows 8 and earlier systems. My current Windows 8.1 setup has been running glitch-free for 35 days straight under hard use 24/7 on the same bootup. I have a WIn 7 system running 74 days, again without fault. Woody Leonhard has just changed his MS-DEFCON level to 3, implying the current set of security patches haven't brought the world down in flames, at least not en masse... Many of us have already embarked on hiding at least some updates, since some time last year, to keep the GWX and related garbage out. The $64 question is, given Microsoft's recent demonstrated lack of concern for users and aggressiveness in pushing Windows 10: Do we trust them even to do proper security patches any more for our older systems? I think I have a pretty good handle on security risks, given my usage of my systems in my environment, and I personally am holding off doing ANY updates on my Win 8.1 and 7 systems. One thing that bothers me is that no one seems to pay much attention to how much performance is lost by applying security fixes. I mean, we all hope that most of them are just changes to use safe mode string copy commands and such, but what if a security patch actually adds a huge amount of overhead. After all, we can't ever have "too much" security, right? What are your thoughts? -Noel

Same here, but when I do it just seems to work. I have done nothing to alter the standard set of video decoding software available on my Win 8.1 Pro / MCE system, yet I seem to be able to watch everything I try to see - I can't recall any failures. YouTube always seems to work. Videos posted by people showing screen grabs of problems show okay. Where are people finding videos they can't watch? Are we talking about Win 10 here? (Yes, I know Dedoimedo was ranting about Linux) We already know that media playing capability has been reduced in Windows 10. Is it a case where the news of that is so old now that people are rediscovering it? I hate it when "normal" gets redefined and things take a step backward. -Noel

Just thinking out loud... Someone sufficiently endowed with funds and time could write a whole new OS. It's not like it's an impossible or forbidden task. Just somewhat impractical. And it's not like you would have to start completely over... For example, Digital's VMS could be resurrected and expanded upon, and a Win32 API written for it. I guess a question then becomes clear: Does this hypothetical new OS (HypOS) get taken in a direction where the developers could become insanely wealthy by it? And if so, how would that differ from where we are now? And... What about hardware? Does HypOS strive to follow so closely in Windows' footsteps that it uses the same hardware (but probably more efficiently)? -- Another pie-in-the-sky idea might be to have a government develop a general purpose OS for all as a Public Works project. Something with nothing other than the common good in mind, and with a charter to advance the state of the art in an open way to make sure it stays for the common good. Would a government-sponsored OS ever actually get done? Would it work? Would it be as bloated and inefficient as a government (which may STILL be better than Windows is today)? Would it be loaded with surveillance logic? -- Maybe everyone should just continue to use Windows 7 (or maybe a tweaked, non-cloud 8.1) for their general purpose computing until something actually better comes along, and just not buy hardware that doesn't support these old systems. THIS seems the most likely. -Noel

Thanks. That's exactly it. I unchecked that "same way" box not long ago. -Noel

Agreed, that's just ridiculous. I'm absolutely convinced there's a design magazine or something (certainly a mandate at Microsoft) that says something like "The UI should disappear if you want your App to look Modern", and the design hipsters take it literally whenever possible. I assume opiates or acid must be involved whenever design hipsters (try to) think. I believe Windows 10 is putting (admittedly fairly light) drop shadows around all windows now... I wonder if that same software on Windows 10 would get a drop shadow... If so, perhaps this is a secret initiative where you're supposed to like the declining level of integration on your old system less and less, and ultimately feel the need to "upgrade" to Windows 10. I might suggest you take it as just another indication that the people who program Norton software aren't the brightest tools in the shed, er, sharpest bulbs in the lamp, er, whatever and just avoid Norton software entirely. What is it you feel you need a download manager for? I don't claim to know what such a tool even does, except to say that I've not felt the need for one. -Noel P.S., I blew off Office 365 (2013) because it was just all "polar bear in a snowstorm" too, and dropped back to Office 2010. I hear the latest versions are no better. On an older system desktop applications such as Microsoft Visual Studio and Adobe Photoshop don't drop any shadows on anything, but usually these take up almost all the screen anyway due to their nature. There is a way to tell the OS not to composite any borders, and the programmers for such applications have taken all the button management, etc. on themselves - in other words they've gone out of their way to make their applications NOT follow the theme. How twisted is that?

I noticed on a Win 7 VM that the updates I had previously hidden were shown in italics. Is everyone seeing that? -Noel

Have you checked to see if you can generate a donation.key file yourself? Visit this page: http://glass8.eu/login.html Avez-vous vérifié pour voir si vous pouvez générer un fichier donation.key vous-même? Visitez cette page: http://glass8.eu/login.html -Noel

There will be people who feel throwing in with Microsoft will be good for them. But you're right, it's hard to argue with stability... -Noel

That's a reasonable take. Thanks. One man's garbage is another's treasure. Microsoft clearly thinks that big-font, dumbed-down, flat UI Apps are their future. Somehow they suspend disbelief and push forward with making software for the least common denominator. Smart users who want general purpose computing are NOT the majority. Perhaps Microsoft is trying to reach the other 80% of the people on the planet - who have no pressing need for a tech gadget at all. Hey, you like money too? We should hang out. I've often said they're adept mediocrity managers in Redmond. Given the millennial programmers and managers who believe programming must be a commodity activity, they have no doubt realized they're not going to be able to do cutting edge work any longer. Ergo, big-font, dumbed-down everything. People in-the-know see it as at best a lack of progress, and at worst, morphing of the company into just another author of PUPs or worse. When you haven't got the goods, you have to get more aggressive. -Noel

Can't quite tell to whom you're speaking, vinifera, or whether it's a personal conversation or one of concepts. I don't do politics. I prefer reality. Personally haven't adopted Win 10 for mainstream use, because it can't (yet) be molded into something better than what I already have with 8.1, which is better than I ever accomplished with 7, which was better than Vista, etc. I only run Win 10 in a VM as a curiosity, and I still have more physical computers running 8.1 and earlier than I do VMs running 10. My choice not to "up"grade (yet) is a decision based on knowledge, not hype from others. I don't suggest others "up"grade either, though everyone's needs and situations are different (some may, for example, just may not be able to live without DirectX 12). Frankly, so far I very much like being able to de-bunk the hype based on personal experience. -Noel