Under construction?
If you find a country with lots of houses that are still apparently under construction, one reason may be that you don't pay taxes on it until it's complete.
If you’ve travelled at all around suburban or rural Greece, Turkey or North Africa you’ll wonder why almost every other house seems to be permanently under construction. There’ll be a house extension underway that can take decades to complete. Sometimes it’s because there just aren’t enough builders or because more tax has to be …
Everyone I've ever asked has stated (without even thinking about it!) that it's a continuing investment for the future, like a retirement account. Makes sense, when you think about the dodgy banks in such areas ... that an the fact that common-or-garden "bad guys" will steal your gold/jewelery, but are unlikely to steal your house.
Odd.
On my two W10 devices - a Dell laptop on insider slow and Surface Pro 4 on insider fast - I can't replicate the same problem. When I pin C:\Users\Steven.Original to Quick Access I get Steven.Original in all the views.
Not suggesting it's not something that's probably broken - the OS is half baked regardless of what build or version of Windows 10 you use. It's very nature is that it'll never be done.
Would like to replicate it though...
All this turd-polishing might be all fine and dandy, but it ignores my main issues with Win10
(1) It constantly spies on me, and its almost impossible to stop this (and if you do, they change things next update so its doing it again)
(2) It depends more and more on the cloud, which removes control from me and puts it somewhere dependent on external factors to work. And if they go wrong, it doesn't
(3) They keep trying to shove what THEY feel is a wonderful 'experience', like Cortana, down my throat, giving me no options to say 'sorry, don't want this particular feature'
Until these issues are resolved, you can polish it to your hearts content, I'm still not touching it.
"(2) It depends more and more on the cloud, which removes control from me and puts it somewhere dependent on external factors to work. And if they go wrong, it doesn't"
Does it? I don't use cloud anything and haven't found W10 to be hamstrung because of that, not once.
"(3) They keep trying to shove what THEY feel is a wonderful 'experience', like Cortana, down my throat, giving me no options to say 'sorry, don't want this particular feature'"
I've hidden Cortana and she hasn't popped back up. Whether she is actually turned off or not is another matter. Perhaps I should unhide her and actually talk to her, that seems to turn off most women I know! ;)
Is it an OS for me to run my applications, or is it a market stall for MS to flog stuff to me and about me?
Just because its free doesn't mean I'll accept anything the vendor wants to take from me or shove in my face.
The Cluedo version of who dunnit: How did Windows die? In a VM, on Linux, with a last copy of Visio 2010.
What's the thumbs down for? Android's primary function (and IOS to a lesser extent) is to harvest and monetize every bit of personal data users can be persuaded to generate. And all Android apps regardless of seeming utility are merely adjuncts to that primary function; whether by Google or by the app creators.. Do you refute that? How?
Here's my list of things that would make WIndows 10 be worth using:
1. Windows 7 style updates. This is key.
I've heard Microsoft's explanations as to why the forced, monolithic, cumulative updates are good, and the reasons they state are not totally without merit, but it requires a degree of trust that I do not have for Microsoft. It's way, way too easy for MS to abuse forced updates, and they've already shown us they will take liberties that they should not when it comes to pushing their agenda. As such, the big monolithic updates that are more like mini service packs have to go.
I should not have to swallow whatever non-security updates MS has dreamed up (like not being able to disable Cortana, that kind of thing) just to get the ones I want (security updates and bug fixes). One of the reasons behind the forced updates is that it will increase security, but is that really true if people find a way to block ALL updates because that's the only way to stop some particularly egregious change from being made to their systems?
So lets get back to the old way: Have each update address only one specific issue, and have them all available on an a la carte basis, non-cumulatively, where skipping one update doesn't block ALL security updates from now on. Have Windows set to download and install security updates by default, but have the option to notify about available updates, but don't download or install them until I say so.
2. A telemetry OFF button.
The first time Windows is run by the end user on a new PC where it is preinstalled, or during the installation process otherwise, Windows needs to clearly state that they collect data and send it back to Microsoft. In reasonably-sized text that is easily visible against whatever background is present. Next to that, have a clearly-marked button to Edit Data Collection Options.
If that button is pressed, it will open the privacy settings, which will be similar to how it is now, with one exception: The first option will be to disable ALL telemetry except Windows Updates (include a link to the Update options), and it will be clearly marked as such. Any disclaimers MS needs can be included... "not recommended," "services such as Cortana will be unavailable with this setting," or whatever else they need.
It would go a long way in getting some trust back, and they're sorely lacking trust at the moment. Let it be a reminder that it doesn't matter what Microsoft's reasons are for wanting telemetry, and it doesn't matter how misguided MS feels customer desires to turn off telemetry are. What matters is that the customer owns the machine, and the owner gets to decide stuff, not MS. It's that simple.
3. Ability to uninstall everything.
There's no reason Cortana, Edge, Windows Store, IE, etc., need to be on every Windows 10 PC. Let the user uninstall them all from the usual "add or remove Windows features" dialog. Warn them, if you will, of the tragedy that may befall you if you do so (like when I removed IE in Win 7, which never caused any issues, but I don't have any enterprise stuff that relies on it either), but then do it. Don't just disable or partly uninstall them, either; do a full uninstall.
4. More options!
MS is busy taking options away: Cortana can't be used with non-Bing. Cortana can't be disabled. Web search (from the taskbar) can't be turned off. Lock screen (which can be used to display ads) can't be turned off. App ads (and even unwanted installations) can't be turned off. Windows Store can't be turned off.
We need more options, not less. It's pretty simple to do, Microsoft; just pretend you're trying to make the Windows user happy rather than pushing your corporate agenda. The rest will fall into place! Give us the ability to change all the colors in Windows, like in the Classic days; give us a range of Window themes to choose instead of forcing us into the flat ugliness of the default theme. (Yes, you can install aftermarket themes, but MS makes it deliberately difficult to do).
5. UWP for phones and tablets, Native Win32 for traditional PCs.
UWP is not suited to the attributes of a desktop PC or traditional laptop (not all-in-one; dedicated touchpad for pointing). Those platforms are best served by the kinds of UI we've had all along before "apps" came to the PC. Let any Windows user whose device has a keyboard, a mouse, but no touchscreen see only the Win32 UI by default, including support for Win 7 style transparency effects in themes (if the user chooses). Everything would be rendered in this style, including the notification center, all menus and dialogs, the task manager, the default Windows applets like Calculator, Picture Viewer, etc.
For devices that have a touchscreen but no mouse/touchpad or keyboard, Windows would use UWP UI by default. It's meant for such devices; let it go where it is meant to be.
For convertible or all-in-one devices: UWP by default when undocked; Win32 by default when in laptop mode.
All of this would be user-configurable. It would require each menu or program to have UI for both "design languages," but the increase in program size would be unnoticeable. The code to describe a Win32 window is very compact; the costly part is the widgets, common controls, etc., and those are going to be there one way or another.
Start working on that stuff, MS, and you will have a hit the size of Windows 7 to deal with. Until then, the actual 7 (and Mint as a dual boot option) will continue to do the job for me.
It's not all black. The screenshot of the right click context menu posted here is from office which for some reason has it's own theme that overrides windows settings. The actual black theme in windows 10 only applies to the new UWP system. Conventional win32 applications are still same as they ever were. Which actually pisses me off. I wanted that dark theme for file explorer.
Unfinished houses or an OS in progress: it's probably a good idea to level the foundation, firm up the wall studs, anchor strong support beams, test the wiring, flush the plumbing, replace leaky faucets, patch holes in the ceiling and roof, and install a safe heating system.
Nobody gives a shite about the shiny, shiny siding (or the lipstick on the pig's snout) until the fundamental structure is sound.
"We're told that Windows 10 is “more democratic” than ever, which means it reflects the views of the same self-selecting group of people (ie, computer enthusiasts with lots of time on their hands) who volunteered for the Windows 10 Insider programme have been. These people have an even greater say this time."
Pardon me for laughing it out after reading this. Because if you follow Microsofts track record on valuing user input then you'll realize just how ridiculous this sounds.
I present you: Visual Studio 2012. Wouldn't you agree that Microsoft's development environment is the key to the kingdom? The one thing they want to get right because this could easily persuade people to jump onto the Windows bandwagon and use their design skills to come up with better and new stuff to be used on their operating system?
So wouldn't it also seem logical that you really want to keep this in-crowd as happy as possible because these are the guys who will most likely also advocate your system?
Yeah, about that... So VS2012 came with an 'awesome' new design which changed the layout to match that of the new and hip Windows 8 environment. Why the heck a developer platform had to follow the same themed style as a consumer environment is still way beyond me up until this date, but hey: this is what happened. Worse yet: Microsoft also deemed that all those colors and icons and such were way too distracting. Like Office we needed a plain flat looking environment. So all icon colors got removed and were plain black (rings a bell?). The only choice us devs. had were 3 themes and that was it (the default even gave me headaches, seriously).
So dozens of developers cried out on Microsofts feedback platform to bring color & sanity back to Visual Studio. Where a suggestion would normally get around 600 to maybe 900 votes this one managed to gain an easy 6,000 votes in one week.
The end result was basically another theme, and a somewhat crude theme editor which wasn't even officially released by Microsoft but a developer working for them, all made in his free time (or so the rumor went which I picked up).
Soon afterwards VS2013 came out: "We listened to our community and added extra color detail to our development environment". Of course the only thing they wanted you to do was cash out for another license because upgrade policies are things which Microsoft never heard off (giving existing customers a small discount for upgrading).
Those we're paying customers who got fully ignored. And it also cured me from ever wanting to buy a Visual Studio license again, even though I actually like the program.
If this is how they treated paying customers, do you really believe this story about valuing user input over a freebie? Because I sure don't :)
Besides: I think Windows 10 has other issues to deal with than its looks.
Micro$ only listened to what they wanted to hear. The never heard any of the Tens Of Thousands of requests for Aero, for the return of the 3D intuitive interface, for the return of Media Center for recording encrypted cable channels, for the return of the classic menu system and desktop viz Windows 2000 for lab PC's and equipment. No they only heard what they wanted to hear. So I responded with blocking Windows 10 from my 12 PC's and my friends and family were on their own if they upgraded to 10. If they needed support I will wipe what is on there and put 7 back on the PC's I built for them. I am a happy 7 user who hopes the current administration in charge at Micro$ realize they are heading in a direction some of their users are not going. They will eventually.
Just yesterday, in an expansive mood, I thought it would be fun to start a rock group called "Windows Nine". On stage, the group leader would ask the audience: "A lot of you have asked what the nine stands for," followed by appropriate noises from the bassist and drummer. "And nobody asks about Windows, we just like to break 'em."
In my humble opinion, the goal of a unified UI is similar to chasing a unicorn. Application of process management rules should be followed as each device will be used in different ways. The result of a unified UI is that everything that should be at our fingertips from the start (or Desktop), gets buried deep in a folder, is hiding behind a right click or worse yet, a slide to view screen. Dr. Who's solution is a sonic screwdriver. Unfortunately, not everyone is a time traveling scientist so its utility will be lost on many. Power users are still executing DOS commands. This begs the question as to why so much time and effort is being wasted on a unified UI when there are so many things that could use a little graphic interface love. Besides, once Microsoft figures out how to make Cortana fully functional, our UI will be our voice, assuming we don't need to remember the DOS command to access the function we need.