W10 is just less efficient to use as a tool
(note, this is all from the point of view of a K+M desktop user only)
I have to agree with just about everything Andrew points out. I have been collecting a very similar list over the preview period.
OK. Progress is of course a very good thing, with the promise of better integration with services, continuum, faster loading, new browser and so on. All great.
My problem is with the ‘breakthrough’ simplified, flat, whited (call it what you will) interface: W7 has subtly different designs for different functional zones, controls and icons, all of which makes for a more EFFICIENT working environment for people who wish to use a PC as a workplace tool, rather than a style statement.
Personally I think the interface as current developed is less easy to use, ergo less productive environment. This MATTERS for enterprise. Some examples that I notice all of the time…
It now takes LONGER to identify where the Menu / Ribbon / Status / Media zones are.
It now takes LONGER for us to select and use ‘simple’ scroll bars
It now takes LONGER for us to identify where sidebar and list functional areas start and finish
It’s now MORE DIFFICULT to read grey text on grey backgrounds (and no, I do not need the Hi-Viz themes) or blue on blue (See Skype). Why would you do that? Oh, sorry, it’s ‘style’
Selection and resizing handles of windows is inconsistent – the active zone on the sides and bottom are actually OUTSIDE the window, where on the top, the active zone is just inside the window. This appears to be as a result of reducing the border from ‘significant’ to ‘insignificant’.
Identification of the active window is now more INEFFICIENT; the shadow is less obvious, there is no title bar colour change, and the lack of the subtleties of W7 Aero shading means that valuable brain time is used in working out where you are focussed on the desktop.
Many ‘graphics’ are only revealed as functional controls when hovered over – this is both INEFFICIENT, TIME CONSUMING and OBSTRUCTIVE – not to mention that many of them are again grey-on-grey. Doh.
The Start menu has generated a lot of discussion too – I don’t find it too bad now in 10162, and the right-click option is absolutely invaluable. However, I do think the alpha separators in the ‘All’ list are a total waste of space. They make the scrolling process more INEFFICIENT. (And when I go back to W7, it just seems, well, more useful and obvious.)
So, if we focus on making the OS easier and more efficient to use, I think W10 is heading for a major fail (and all of the MS apps as well). Which is sad, because the technical improvements seem to be good. I was/am a great fan of the effectiveness of the subtle EFFICIENCY factors of the W7/Aero UX; colour (whatever happened to colour?), gradients, shading are all used by the eye and brain in identification and familiarity; it may only be milliseconds each time, but it all adds up. It seems that (nearly?) all of those EFFICIENCY and EASE OF USE factors have just been cast aside in the apparent quest for style ‘simplicity’ (ie ‘flatness’). It’s not as though PCs are so desperately low on processing power that the resources required to render the Aero UX was a limiting factor. I can just about buy that argument for phones (but even then most of the target devices are as powerful as the first Cray 1), but it just doesn't make sense on the desktop to ditch these useful UX mechanisms. At the very least make it a theme.
I could go on - about the inconsistency of new settings and configuration menus and dialogs, the lack of configuration, removal of options in IE11, bugs brought forward from W7/W8.x etc, but I'm *hoping* they are just V 0.9 issues.
Not least, there is still no plug-in support in Edge, the browser selection seems to be broken requiring me to answer a question every time I click on a link in an e-mail, and IE11 restarts when I shut it down.
So, to summarise: 10162 still has many clunky bugs and overall W10 IS a backwards step in FUNCTIONAL EFFICIENCY (IMHO). A triumph (?) of style over function?