Windows 10 - First Impressions

[Formfiller]

I don't buy it that they will stay course in the long run with this.

 

"Eternal Windows" will turn stale, very quickly. Especially when Google and Apple continue to release whizz-bang releases. They will get Apple-envy yet again.

 

"Eternal Windows" will also be a total nightmare to support, especially the business users: They will be locked between the need to support a "version" for a longer period and churning out point relases. What happens is that "devices" will be on Windows 10.21 while the business users are still on Windows 10 RTM. Not to mention the breakage of applications in general. They will never be able to fix that. Even their metro apps have breaking changes between minor versions (8 to 8.1). So much for win32 being "legacy" and metro care-free.

 

This is all far more complicated to handle than regular Windows releases. They might try it, but they will give it up again. That's my take at least.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Formfiller

[JorgeA]

Slowly, the truth trickles out. Looks like our suspicions about the intended phaseout of Win32 applications are well-founded. Check out this discussion from Windows Weekly 406:

 

Mary Jo: He, he moved over to the Xbox team and we never heard from him publicly again and now they're starting to let Don Box speak again, and this is great, because Don Box always says a lot of really great tidbits when he talks and he shares a lot of things that we need to know, and somebody has to say them. One of the things he said at WinHec China when he was talking, was that Microsoft has come up with a replacement term for Metro style apps. You know how they couldn't use the word “Metro” anymore and we were calling them Metro styles, then we started calling them Universal apps, but Don said at WinHec China, that they are going to be called Windows apps. Which I've heard a lot of people hating on this idea too but, you know what, Universal apps in the Microsoft world they mean Windows apps, that's what it means.

Paul: Yeah

Mary Jo: It doesn't mean Universal apps going across all platforms it means apps, Windows Store apps that are just for Windows. So they are going to call those Windows apps, he says, and they are going to call what we've been calling Win32 apps, Windows Desktop apps. I actually like this naming convention. I know there are going to be haters for it, but now at least we have a way of referencing this when we talk about it moving forward. So lets hope Don is speaking for the whole company when he said this-

Paul: (Laughs) Well-

Mary Jo: -but he did say this publicly.

Paul: Two things I would just add is um, one uh, the actual app platform he referred to is, as you kind of eluded to, Windows Universal apps, right, to differentiate them from truly generic Universal apps.

Mary Jo: Right

Paul: Um, he also very specifically described Win32 apps as, you know, desktop apps again and again as legacy, as we still support this on desktop PCs only, because you know we have to when there are decades of, you know, background there and all that kind of stuff but, you know, just to be clear because people like, “oh the Metro model thing failed and we're moving on”, and it's like, not exactly. Like everything else in Windows 10, this Windows app platform, the Windows Universal app platform is really just an evolution of Metro, of modern. It's really just the next gen of that. It is an evolution, it's not a new thing, it's not “yeah we're going back to the desktop” you know, for all the desktop orientation of what Microsoft's been talking Windows 10. His talk you can go see it for yourself on channel 9.-

Mary Jo: Yep

Paul: -Very, very much DE-emphasizes the desktop. I mean it's spoken to as something we're bringing along because we have to but we're not advancing it we're not doing more with that, it's all Universal apps or Windows apps.

[corrected mistranscribed name for "Win32 apps"]

[emphasis added; highlighted portions edited for clarity]

 

On a more ridiculous note, see how Metro which became Modern which became Universal has now become "Windows apps." Truly a NCI, as @jaclaz designated it.

 

--JorgeA

 

[jaclaz]

Ideally the good MS guys could adopt the acronym (paying a fee to me for its use of course ) changing the meaning of it from the original

Nameless Crappy Interface

to (say):

New Custom Interface <- two lies as it is not new nor custom oriented or customizable

or 

Naturally Confusing Interface <- more correct, but maybe counterproductive

or possibly

Neoteric Cloud-oriented Ideal^[1]

and get rid of the senseless naming or misnaming....

 

jaclaz

 

 

^[1] Ideal in the perverted minds of the MS executives that pushed and push for it, Nadella's Clear Inadequacy would also come to mind...

[TELVM]

Nonsensical Clueless Idiocracy?

[rn10950]

Not Considered Inteligent?

[JorgeA]

^^ Any of those suggestions for NCI will do...

 

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

The Windows rumor that refuses to die (and probably for good reason):

 

Windows Cloud operating system to arrive in 2020, according to new rumor

 

The predominant theory for the future of Windows has Microsoft turning the company’s traditionally licensed operating system into a Software-As-A-Service (SAAS) model. The idea started floating around on ZDNet as a journalist and Microsoft news insider Mary Jo Foley began noticing patterns of unbundling and rebranding of Microsoft services leading up to the Windows 10 unveiling. With speculation becoming fact regarding a free Windows 10 upgrade, the SAAS theory seems beyond plausible. In fact, the SAAS approach seems to be the only reasonable course Microsoft has after their 'free upgrade' announcement.

 

Bet the NSA would be delighted with such a development: everything you do on your computer will go through their men-in-the-middle. And imagine the possibilities for remotely controlling the devices of political opponents and other inconvenient people. Talk about a "kill switch."

 

--JorgeA

Edited May 9, 2015 by JorgeA

[JorgeA]

And another bit of Windows news:

 

'Windows 10 is the last version of Windows'

 

Windows has historically seen major, monolithic releases every few years, a system of development that was born decades ago. As we’ve known for some time, of course, all of that is changing, and the words of developer evangelist Jerry Nixon bear that out. He had this to say during the Ignite conference (spotted via The Verge):

The last version of Windows… what does that mean? It means that from now on, Windows is going to be built in such a way that it can be continuously updated – in other words, a service. For example, by separating out many of the features into their own apps, Microsoft can update each piece with bug fixes or feature requests from its users.\

“Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10.”

 

Along with the previous post, the status of the Windows user seems to be evolving from that of "owner" (where you pay once and never again) to that of "renter" (where you must pay regularly, over and over again, on pain of loss of use).

 

Unless Windows is turned into a "free" product, in which case we become "the product."

 

--JorgeA

Edited May 9, 2015 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

OT, but not much, read here:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/msrc/archive/2015/01/08/evolving-advance-notification-service-ans-in-2015.aspx

We are making changes to how we distribute ANS to customers. Moving forward, we will provide ANS information directly to Premier customers and current organizations involved in our security programs, and will no longer make this information broadly available through a blog post and web page.

ANS has always been optimized for large organizations. However, customer feedback indicates that many of our large customers no longer use ANS in the same way they did in the past due to optimized testing and deployment methodologies. While some customers still rely on ANS, the vast majority wait for Update Tuesday, or take no action, allowing updates to occur automatically. More and more customers today are seeking to cut through the clutter and obtain security information tailored to their organizations. Rather than using ANS to help plan security update deployments, customers are increasingly turning to Microsoft Update and security update management tools such as Windows Server Update Service to help organize and prioritize deployment. Customers are also moving to cloud-based systems, which provide continuous updating. 

 

I would understand if they decided to stop ANS altogether (that would be coherent with the "evil plan") but continuing producing the information, only distributing it to less people (speaking of electronic documents) makes really really little sense.

 

However the news are that set apart the end customers that are moving to Cloud (and continuous update) it is the lazyness of large corporation IT managers that "wait for Update Tuesday, or take no action, allowing updates to occur automatically" that is to be blamed for this nonsensical change, see also:

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-advance-security-notification-service-no-longer-publicly-available/

 

No more Patch Tuesday, no more a way to know in advance what will be continuously delivered....

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

"Most don't use it, so we'll stop doing it."

 

Completely rational at the first sniff.  Makes business sense, right?

 

But does it?  What if, say, 1% of 1 billion users were to find it important?  Microsoft just drops millions of users on their heads.  Millions!  "Meh, I'm feeling lazy, and since only 10 million people need this feature I think I'll just delete it instead of my continuing to maintain it."

 

I wonder if a majority of users do any one thing in Windows.

 

I wonder if 1% fewer people will choose to use Microsoft software without this feature.

 

-Noel

[jaclaz]

"Most don't use it, so we'll stop doing it."

Yep , but that would be still "logical" ("wrong" but understandable or "consequential"), here the point is "most don't use it, so we'll continue doing it as before BUT make it available only to a lesser number of people".

 

I would say that the cost (and trouble) is in putting together these info, not in distributing them, and the "trend" is preoccupying, as said before we risk to go into a "democratic" design of the OS, and (also because of the lack on transparency in the process) as an example we don't actually know if (as I personally believe) the whole "feedback" on the technical preview is a huge fake and the good MS guys will do whatever they see fit disregarding each and every report, opinion or suggestion or actually the vast majority are demented users that nowadays only use the PC on a touch enabled device for sending and receiving (lousy) e-mails, a little internet browsing, and some Twitter and Facebook nonsense.

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

I interpreted that seemingly illogical move as just a first step to discontinuing it entirely, because at some point they'll be able to say "NOW really only a tiny number of people have opted in to get this info, so it's not really needed."

 

I always think about the things that caused something to be done in the first place, and what has changed...

• Has computer security become less important?
• Do people rely on computers less for important business?
• Has Microsoft reached a point where they feel they're invincible, and don't actually have to provide value?

 

I can't shake the feeling that one day they'll raise their collective heads above the cubicle walls and say, "Wow, we're failing!  Who could have seen this coming?"

 

Death by a thousand small cuts.

 

 

Edit:  I'm imagining the justification for the removal of the UI (but not the guts) that made Windows Backup work in Windows 7 (well, really 8.0) and earlier, and which was subsequently removed on justification of "only 6% of users set up Backpup". 

 

Sure, the geeks amongst us figured out the wbadmin command line and moved on, and many others just bought (quite likely better) 3rd party backup software.  So Microsoft figures they get to keep being the OS supplier for everyone while not actually having to do the hard work to make it do what everyone needs.  Trouble is, it's a balancing act, and at some point, even with a long pole and all the effort he can muster, a tightrope walker can actually fall...

 

Remember when they actually used to be able to get a few hundred dollars a license for Windows?  Now...

 

-Noel

Edited May 11, 2015 by NoelC

[jaclaz]

Yep, on the other hand another couple questions is more preoccupying to me:

Has MIcrosoft in any way shown such a high reliability in the last few years of automagical patches to justify its adoption - no questions asked - by IT managers?

Does the vast majority of IT managers actually trust and fully rely on MS automagical patches mechanisms?

 

Please consider that those same IT managers are likely to be the same ones that manage documents related to your money, identity, SSN, properties, taxes and what not.

 

This is really scary.

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

Absolutely terrifying, to be honest.  The electronic world as we know it could be crumbling before our very eyes.

 

But try and speak up about it anywhere besides here, where we're (mostly) friendly to people who actually think, and most assuredly we'll be labeled as "haters".  Such is the universe of users Microsoft has cultivated.

 

-Noel

[JorgeA]

Apparently the latest Win10 build includes some improvements to the Start Menu:

 

Windows 10 build 10114: Start menu has more customization options, can turn off the 'ad'

 

Other options include displaying recently opened items in the Start and taskbar, showing the recently added apps group, displaying recently opened programs in the Start menu (this is different from the first option as it omits the taskbar) and turning on/off the app and content suggestions in the Start menu.

 

It's the last option that will allow you to turn on/off what many will consider the ad that Microsoft is placing in the menu. The idea is that by suggesting apps to you, the company can increase exposure to its app store and hopefully persuade you to download more content. For those of you who don't want this feature on, you can turn it off, although that functionality is currently grayed out in this build.

 

If the part about "displaying recently opened items in the Start and taskbar" is a resuscitation of the Recent Items list, that for me would be a significant improvement.

 

Still a long way to go, though. The Win10 start Menu won't be satisfactory for my purposes until they let me replace the tiles in the right panel with links; let me decrease the width of that panel; let me disable Web search from the search bar and do only local search on my computer; and put the items listed in the left panel closer together to minimize the amount of scrolling required.

 

Which probably means that if I ever have to use Win10 on a daily basis, I'll be using Classic Shell or StartIsBack.

 

--JorgeA