Even the classic Control Panel from previous Windows (3.x / 9x) was much better. From the icons you know what you wanted to change. Now I have to type in a search box...

Windows 3.x

Windows 9x

Windows 10

activate pls

bfcastello wrote:

I just can't accept the stupid automatic updates and the (unnecessary) overhauled start menu. The original menu from Windows 9x was extremely simple and very good. Can't they just K.I.S.S. ?

I honestly like the start menu. All of my favorite programs are to the right of the whole list and I can either click the big icons with my mouse or just use my finger/pen to access them. There is also an option to display the most used programs on the top of the list or quickly access common folders on the left side of it. So many functions on such little space - to me, that is very well done.

Windows 95 is much more cumbersome, especially if there are a lot of programs installed. Navigating through submenus is very annoying. On 95, the start menu at least went into multiple columns, starting with 98 you have to scroll for ages if you want to access a program that starts with the letter Z. 😜

I also don't get the hate against the search function. Most programs I'm looking for are displaying just after typing in one or two letters. So even if I don't have Photoshop already pinned in the start menu, I can just type "PH", Enter, done. That's useful and I don't know how I would make it better than that.

dr_st wrote:

There are certain system configuration options that are accessed through the modern UI, and then some that are accessed through the legacy UI.

That is really annoying! As much as I like Windows 10, Microsoft had so much time to put everything in one place by now and they just didn't do it! It looks like they abandoned this approach after copying over most of the settings and just left it that way.

Every time I install Windows 10 on a new PC I always have to look for the option to put the My Computer icon back on the desktop. I know it's somewhere in the Appearances setting, hidden in a small text link on the right sidebar. But it's so stupidly placed, I always forget where it is.

MS should really focus on finally abandoning the control panel of Windows 7.

oeuvre wrote:

activate pls

That's not mine, mine is activated. This is an image I got from the google search, HA! 😁

schmatzler wrote:

I also don't get the hate against the search function. Most programs I'm looking for are displaying just after typing in one or two letters. So even if I don't have Photoshop already pinned in the start menu, I can just type "PH", Enter, done. That's useful and I don't know how I would make it better than that.

Well, I'd rather go from my mouse instead of both mouse + keyboard to open a program. Personal preference, I guess.

schmatzler wrote:

That is really annoying! As much as I like Windows 10, Microsoft had so much time to put everything in one place by now and they […]
Show full quote

dr_st wrote:

There are certain system configuration options that are accessed through the modern UI, and then some that are accessed through the legacy UI.

That is really annoying! As much as I like Windows 10, Microsoft had so much time to put everything in one place by now and they just didn't do it! It looks like they abandoned this approach after copying over most of the settings and just left it that way.

Every time I install Windows 10 on a new PC I always have to look for the option to put the My Computer icon back on the desktop. I know it's somewhere in the Appearances setting, hidden in a small text link on the right sidebar. But it's so stupidly placed, I always forget where it is.

MS should really focus on finally abandoning the control panel of Windows 7.

Again, personal preference - I'd rather use the legacy control panel instead of the mess they did with the Settings UI. It's super simple compared to the confusing Settings screen.

EDIT: But I agree that MS had more than enough time to fix this and come with a solution to put everything in one place.

I don't think you guys realize how difficult it is for MS to move away from the control panel and you can imagine the uproar if when Windows 10 was first released and you had to use settings and there was no control panel, likely businesses would have waited until MS fixed it. Windows 10 is an ever evolving mess so they are slowly moving away from it.

I tend to just type in the program names directly "ncpa.cpl" and "sysdm.cpl" ftw.

What I'm more worried about is when mmc snapins get dropped like with Exchange. Then the noobs have to use the shitty web interface or be advanced enough to use powershell whereas at least MMC was familiar enough for point and click.

dr_st wrote:

schmatzler wrote:

I am undecided about this. I used to love the Win9x simple start menu and for several years would meticulously organize my start […]
Show full quote

bfcastello wrote:

The original menu from Windows 9x was extremely simple and very good. Can't they just K.I.S.S. ? Why do they have to put so much bloatware on it? I hate the alphabetical order.

I am undecided about this. I used to love the Win9x simple start menu and for several years would meticulously organize my start menu folders, and so the constant changes to the design would annoy me, but then I understood the following things:

• Keeping everything organized is rather annoying if you frequently install/uninstall programs; most of them do not let you customize their start menu locations, and if you move things manually, then the uninstaller later can't find them, or it updates and puts new folders/shortcuts back in the original location, etc. You find yourself constantly chasing loose ends to keep it organized.
• I actually don't use the Start menu all that much, because the hierarchical organization is slow to navigate. Frequently accessed programs I put on my desktop / quick launch / taskbar and usually have a shortcut key combo assigned to them.
• When I do need to hunt for something that I don't frequently used, I found that the improved search options of the start menu (where you start typing the name and it just brings it up) typically outweigh the lack of organization. So I stopped caring at all about organizing start menu entries on anything Win7 and newer.

Still, for someone who wants the start menu to follow a very particular method, Classic Shell (yes, a third party tool) typically offers a plethora of configurable solutions.

No we get a big, alphabetical list that you have to scroll through (if you don't have pinned to the activities panel). What could be more intuitive than that?

Raising frequently used items to the top was a superior mechanic.

oeuvre wrote:

activate pls

Never had to do that in my life on ANY system 😀 I did like OS/2s dancing elephant though.

gdjacobs wrote:

No we get a big, alphabetical list that you have to scroll through (if you don't have pinned to the activities panel). What could be more intuitive than that?

Raising frequently used items to the top was a superior mechanic.

It looks like you were replying to me, but I didn't quite get the point.

What is it with windows UI related discussions. Wish there was some more science in what is desirable vs undesirable, instead of Microsofts continual change and then the different opinions.
This was good stuff: The Windows 95 User Interface: A Case Study in Usability Engineering
This was a good effort as well: https://xpwasmyidea.blogspot.com/
I suppose windows 98/2000/XP already suffered from the Internet Explorer UI merge. Also the default XP style and background was rather cheesy.
What about white backgrounds and eye strain?
Why did the Ribbon take vertical space while widescreens were the norm? Why did it often bring a needless 'Moded UI' with different tabs to select, even when all tools originally could fit the screen?

Maybe continual UI change is an actual business objective at Microsoft? That is no sarcasm. Doing it a bit different and wrong on purpose, then correct it in some way, only to do it different again later.

dr_st wrote:

gdjacobs wrote:

No we get a big, alphabetical list that you have to scroll through (if you don't have pinned to the activities panel). What could be more intuitive than that?

Raising frequently used items to the top was a superior mechanic.

It looks like you were replying to me, but I didn't quite get the point.

Sorry, got the nesting wrong. I was replying to Schmaltz.

The Windows 10 menu somehow manages to use more space to be less intuitive and usable. I think that's impressively bad.

Isn't everyone changing their designs over the years? Compare Android 1.x to Android 10, for example - it's completely different. Gone are the grey dropshadow buttons, there is no dedicated menu or search key anymore - more gestures are used instead of buttons.
Even Apple changed their designs drastically. Many years ago brushed metal and glossy buttons were the hot shit, but no one is using them in 2019 - instead, the dark mode gets heavily pushed and even adopted into a web standard.

With devices and user habits changing, there need to be adjustments. I can't imagine navigating through Windows 95 menus and interfaces with my convertible notebook. Change is inevitable. People can be angry about it, whine about it and write their lengthy blog posts that would put George R.R. Martin to shame but in the end, these are probably not the majority. The majority wanted forced Metro apps gone on Windows 8 and made that loud and clear - so it got removed with Windows 10. The majority doesn't care about things like the appearance of the copy file dialogue or why the Windows logo doesn't have rainbow colors anymore. And to be honest, these are kind of irrelevant.

Studies can age, too. Maybe MS did many things right on Windows 95 if you look at it from the year 1995. Technology has changed drastically since then, though. There were no smartphones or tablets back then and most people just used mouse and keyboard as their input devices. There are people now that never owned a computer and probably never will - they just handle all of their business on an iPad or a phone. These people need a completely different UI and UX design.

gdjacobs wrote:

The Windows 10 menu somehow manages to use more space to be less intuitive and usable. I think that's impressively bad.

I don't see how it uses more space - it's uses more horizontal space than before. Doesn't it make sense to do that, now that widescreen displays are widely adopted? We're even starting to move away from 16:9 screens and make them even more wide. 21:9 curved screens are sold in every major electronic store.

It uses more horizontal space to show useless blocks of stuff that I don't even use - I have never used them since their introduction on Windows 8. First thing I do whenever I install Windows 10 into any machine is get rid of them until I get a smaller, tidy Start Menu. I just can't get rid of the alphabetical order menu.

I get that the design evolves with the time and changes from period to period, but sometimes it just doesn't evolve - they simply change to something completely different. This is not evolution. Was it an evolution from Windows 98 to Windows XP? I don't think so. XP looked horrible even with the Royale theme.

What I see is that more and more of these arguments boil down to people just defending what they're used to. In the end it's all about "it was fine the way it was and I was comfortable with it, and I hate it now that they've changed it". There is little objectivity in it. If you take someone who grew up with today's UI design and then make them use Windows 95, they will probably be just as confused and unhappy.

schmatzler wrote:

Isn't everyone changing their designs over the years?

The big businesses set the trend here. And I include GNU Linux in that category as well, for my own reasons. The smaller parties try to follow them for better or worse.

schmatzler wrote:

With devices and user habits changing, there need to be adjustments.

Sure. That is a factor of course.
The other one is that humans do not change biologically, culturally a little. UI being an interface from computer to human.
Some of the examples in my the previous post suggest backwards design choices. Arguably by short-sightedness or on purpose. I can not explain it sufficiently on changing hardware or shift in intended audience.

dr_st wrote:

What I see is that more and more of these arguments boil down to people just defending what they're used to. In the end it's all about "it was fine the way it was and I was comfortable with it, and I hate it now that they've changed it". There is little objectivity in it. If you take someone who grew up with today's UI design and then make them use Windows 95, they will probably be just as confused and unhappy.

Does that mean there is no good or bad design. I wish I could do my work that way. 😉

dr_st wrote:

What I see is that more and more of these arguments boil down to people just defending what they're used to. In the end it's all about "it was fine the way it was and I was comfortable with it, and I hate it now that they've changed it". There is little objectivity in it. If you take someone who grew up with today's UI design and then make them use Windows 95, they will probably be just as confused and unhappy.

You reminded me of a meme where there is a girl with a game boy. She was trying to use the screen like if it was touch screen instead of the buttons. I had to laugh.

But isn't it the point of the discussion? I mean, the UI is a big part of the reason why some ppl refuse to upgrade from Windows 7. For others, like me, it's the automatic updates.

I have no problem with people expressing their preferences, only when they try to pass their preferences as objective truth, which happens a lot.

I myself have things I don't like with Win10 UI, and then there are things I like with it that I miss on Win7, or Vista, or XP, etc. I just try to adapt.

For what I can see so far, automatic updates is a non-issue on Win10 Pro/Enterprise; my update experience with it is not any different than with any other Windows.

However, I stand by my principle that every version of Windows runs best on contemporary hardware, and I would not upgrade a system to an OS much newer than it, as I will most likely suffer from sub-par hardware compatibility. I also don't believe that "end-of-support" spells imminent doom and gloom, so I would have no problem just keeping Win7 on whatever systems that have it.

bfcastello wrote:

It uses more horizontal space to show useless blocks of stuff that I don't even use

You are in control of these blocks - don't blame Microsoft if you simply don't want to put your own useful applications in there.
I don't use Skype, Xing and Edge either - so I throw them out and put the Adobe suite in there. It's not that hard.

dr_st wrote:

What I see is that more and more of these arguments boil down to people just defending what they're used to.

100 percent agreed. Every time a major operating system version gets phased out, we have the same discussions. It's just like Groundhog Day. "I'm using my damn XP until I die!"

When software stops supporting these legacy OSes, people will switch anyway - until the cycle continues with the next iteration. 🤣

There are things I hate on every operating system. A lot of things I hate on OSX, a little less things I hate on Windows 10, more than enough on iOS, probably as many on Android and even more decisions on certain Linux distributions...in the end I use the operating system that gives me the least headache. 😀 Nothing is ever perfect, otherwise I'd need to write my own OS and I'm not capable of doing that.

dr_st wrote:

I .However, I stand by my principle that every version of Windows runs best on contemporary hardware, and I would not upgrade a system to an OS much newer than it, as I will most likely suffer from sub-par hardware compatibility. I also don't believe that "end-of-support" spells imminent doom and gloom, so I would have no problem just keeping Win7 on whatever systems that have it.

In Windows maybe. That is certainly not the case with Linux. I installed Debian 8 on my P166MMX with 256megs of ram that came out in 1997 or so and the equivetent apps and WMs, apart from the biggies like KDE or gnome run as fast as they did in 1999. Very surprised I was expecting a totally different out come with added advantages such as USB 2.0 and wireless nic support.

OK, then... now back to the subject... What to do when Windows 7 support ends in a few weeks time?

Well... Nothing! It's not like it will stop working. It will still work for many years, with the right maintenance (from yourself) and security measures. Like schmatzler said above, it will still last until all your apps stop working on it. Microsoft actually doesn't seem to care if you are still on Windows 7 - considering that they are about to launch a new Edge version based on chromium that still works on 7, 8, 8.1 up to 10. I get they want to kill IE asap and I am glad for it. About IE, browser wars, this is a discussion for another topic.