Blue seems brighter
Hmm, my Turbo Pascal(*) editor's background will get brighter, don't know if that is comfortable.
(*) well, the Free Pascal imitation
Microsoft's making over the Windows Console, the tool that throws up a command line interface and which has hung around in Windows long after DOS was sent to the attic and told not to show itself in polite company. The company's revealed that in Windows 10 build 16257 the Console will get new … colours. Yup, that's all. …
Ha! It's nothing but a thinly veiled attempt to bolster the productivity of Windows programmers (or cut the coffee expenses of their employers), pushing them to stay up and work further on into the night - blue light _allegedly_ prevents you from sleeping after all... Now, where that tin foil hat...
blue is like 15% luminosity or something like that, so "brighter blue" would be easier to read, especially if you're old...
I'm glad MS is brightening up the default colors. Now, will this be done with gnome/mate shells, too? default colors on THEM are like the old CMD defaults. I'm always forced to "unalias ls" and "unalias grep" and things like that to get rid of the colorized trext, because I CANNOT READ THAT DAMNED COLORIZED TEXT half the time (dark blue or dark purple on black - what dim-bulb thought THAT was a good idea?).
So a big well-deserved KUDOS to Microsoft <--- spelling their name properly when they do something right
Yes, it is.
Personally however, I only use the classic black & light white command prompt. It never had colours when we had black and white monitors, so why change now? ;)
Or maybe that's just very 1980's of me. Personally, i'd prefer that the engineering time was put into something i'd notice such as putting the start menu into server 2012 as an alternative to the mobile phone interface.
Maybe, but the point is valid - did you take a look at the image in the article? I can confirm the new "dark"-blue-on-black test is readable, but the old one definitely has a "something's there but I have no idea if it's even letters" quality to it, uniquely among the rest of the colours...
If I'm getting a chocolate monitor then I don't want any of this crappy, modern LCD stuff. I want a 30" CRT made of solid chocolate. I want to get my money's worth.
Now to find a fridge large enough to fit it in.
Oh and I'd better book some more gym sessions, so I can lift it.
It might be explained poorly, but it meshes with my experience running Emacs in Linux text terminals. The dark blue portions of syntax highlighting are extremely hard to read on an LCD that's adjusted for proper photo and video viewing. I actually think the problem may be the opposite of what they say -- LCDs tend to compress the dark end of the contrast range, losing detail in the shadows. CRTs, with their truer blacks, had a wider range.
Mine was set to nearly black and light amber, or vice versa, I forget, like the nice Amber CRTs that superseded Green CRTs. I stopped using it last November 2016. Quite happy with customisation of Mate on Linux Mint.
The only thing ever that was a problem was some sorts of CGA cards stuck on Slug Death colors (black, cyan, magenta, white). There was a nicer alternate (black, red, yellow, green). It was horrid going to shiny CGA from a matte ACT Sirius 1 (800 x 400?) mono (Victor 9000). The Sirius 1 arrived marginally before the IBM PC, with its Text only or CGA. Hercules mono (720x350) was later and still inferior to ACT Sirius 1/Victor 9000 (as was entire IBM PC), but better than CGA Mono 640 x 200.
Why don't they simply fix their broken & totally flat GUI to one suitable for a laptop or desktop? Which is ALSO better for 10" tablet with keyboard than their stupid GUI for a 4" phone.
if you are running Emacs with Syntax highlighting you are
1) Not getting the full unadulterated experience of Emacs. Like good chocolate, Emacs should be used in as a raw a state as possible, just the way Stallman intended.
2) You identify yourself as a newbie (e.g. someone with less experience than say 25 years) with Emacs.
You might as well say you're a VB fan running code in a MS IDE and have done with it.
I suspect they're mostly focusing on the contrast between foreground colors and a black background, since that's the most common situation. The slightly lighter blues make a big difference in that scenario.
Maybe Microsoft could do something really useful and make a web browser smart enough to figure out that white-on-light grey text should be rendered as white on black.
There are still lots of bits and piece of Windows that could do with a makeover. I still find it odd that a company with the vast resources at Microsoft’s disposal produces an OS that has bits and pieces that look like they’re from decades ago. You’d expect absolute GUI consistency across Windows 10’s own components. Surely it can’t be THAT hard to achieve.
"produces an OS that has bits and pieces that look like they’re from decades ago."
Its not the age thats the problem , after all unix/linux still has plenty of ancient shells and tools which work fine - its the fact that even back in the day the DOS CLI was an underpowered POS that was only really useful for listing directories and starting programs. Doing anything more complicated was either a PITA or impossible. It would have been relatively easy for MS to port one of the *nix shells over to Windows and intergrate it nicely but I suspect Not Invented Here syndrome got the better of them so instead they waited 20 years then came up with powershell which can be rather arcane at the best of times.
If they could make ADUC put the cursor in the Name field of the Find dialog it would save me hours.
It's been like that since forever, the gripe about it has been passed down from generation to generation, nothing will ever change.
So the only chance of consistency is if we accept consistently inconsistent, and frequently rubbish.
I think that's all part of the game. Over the years that OS has had increased and decreased functionality. The new format makes it easier to decrease functionality and then, at some point, charge to get that functionality back.
Why I remember when...(old guy, me ;), continues rants as he walks off)
"If they could make ADUC put the cursor in the Name field of the Find dialog it would save me hours"
You know what pisses me of with that thing?
You right click / find at the top , start typing the name of a person or a PC , or group
press search , didnt find anything
Then you realise that for some fucking reason you have to tell the thing which of those you are going to be seaching for (you dont on my command line vbscript replacment i can tell you!)
So you drop the dropdown , select 'computer' and you're eager to get going buts its popped up a little dialog saying "This will clear your current search results" Well no fucking shit! when has any other application that has a search function (which is most) thought it neccassary to say that??? so you waste more time clicking ok on that , and start typing again .
Then you realise that despite informing the app that you are indeed ready to start a new search , and that you are aware this will wipe previous results THE CURSOR ISNT IN THE FUCKING SEARCH BOX!!!
That added to the fact that no wildcards are allowed , so you have to know the exact prefix for the group / pc that some sysadmin pulled out of his arse years ago makes me conclude :
"Could do better"
In fact given a day or 2 I could probably do better
In fact i bet people already have....
MS to port one of the *nix shells over to Windows and intergrate it nicely but I suspect Not Invented Here syndrome got the better of them
Or, more likely, the fact that most of the decent shells are licenced un GPL and, as such, a cancer that must be eradicated^W embraced and extinguished.
There are still lots of bits and piece of Windows that could do with a makeover. I still find it odd that a company with the vast resources at Microsoft’s disposal produces an OS that has bits and pieces that look like they’re from decades ago. You’d expect absolute GUI consistency across Windows 10’s own
components. Surely it can’t be THAT hard to achieve.
True, if they could just jettison all Windows 8 GUI code, return Aero, remove all "Apps", get rid of "Settings," that would be a start.
"Console windows are used by lots of things other than the command prompt." yup - you'll find things getting launched as "cmd.exe /s [something]". Yes, it's probably just laziness, but in many cases, it's effective and simple and simple means less likely to have bugs.
Personally I'm of the opinion that they should just go all-in on bash support. cmd.exe can stay around for legacy support if needed, but is kinda optional. PowerShell, on the other hand, should be given the Old Yeller treatment, as soon as possible. It's kind of the worst of all possible worlds.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018