91–100 of 134 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not fine. File explorer context menu, taskbar, it was a half baked OS when first released. It improved, but they shouldn't have release it as it was. Taskbar is still a mess, sometimes I have to reboot to get it working again. And still I can't move on the side.
There is a decade old rule: don't upgrade to the next windows version before the first Service Pack is released.
Apple is getting there too, but it's not as blatant as Microsoft. However, their opinions on how I should be using my computer tend to be even more sweeping and system-wide than Microsoft's. "Like that 32-bit software you've been running forever? Well fuck you, user, you can't anymore!" "You want to modify that file on your filesystem? Nope. Oh you got root? Still nope. Get lost."
Computers are supposed to serve the user, and only do things that the user commands them to do. Now, more and more, they are serving their manufacturers and the OS vendors, not the user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft let some designers who only use Mac OS do the design I was wondering why Win11 ripped off that central icon taskbar thing from MacOS instead of keeping their iconic and proven layout. That explains everything.
I think the reasoning is that ultrawide / larger monitors are becoming more common and it's easier / faster to access the taskbar from the center than moving the mouse to the far edge. And if it's not easier, they have an option to move it back to the left. This is one of the least egregious changes, really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They broke that streak at the turn of the century. 95 was bad, 98 was good, 2000 was good, XP was good, and then Vista was bad.
Extremely hot take: Vista was not actually that bad. It was just too many new things at once and required such a massive hardware upgrade. Windows 7 was not that fundamentally different, but by the time it came out the bandaid had been ripped off.
The first could have been easily avoided, but I genuinely don't know how MS could have avoided burning a version on UAC. Maybe if they had shipped it in a service pack first so that XP SP4 was the thing that got a miserable reputation? That clearly wasn't a reasonable option after the Longhorn disaster, though.
There were also a lot of small problems that got fixed on the way to Windows 7. 7 did feel a lot like Vista SP2 with some visual tweaks, but it would have been a really impressive SP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Extremely hot take: Vista was not actually that bad. It was just too many new things at once and required such a massive hardware upgrade. Windows 7 was not that fundamentally different, but by the time it came out the bandaid had been ripped off.
Vista had two major problems: Microsoft understated its minimum requirements and allowed it to be shipped preinstalled on machines that were far short of what it actually required, and UAC was specifically designed to make poorly behaved software unpleasant to use, which was a major problem when every Windows program was poorly behaved. The first could have been easily avoided, but I genuinely don't know how MS could…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were a lot of regressions that upset me. The option for seconds in the system time was removed. Right-clicking the WiFi/internet connection in the taskbar no longer has the context menu option for "Troubleshoot connection", forcing me to go to options, search Troubleshooters, click "Other troubleshooters" (Because troubleshooting internet is so uncommon, right?) and THEN troubleshoot the internet connection. Fr…
There does seem to be a "Diagnose network problems" in the context menu when right-clicking on the internet connection icon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even with most unsupported CPUs you can upgrade to Windows 11. (edit: I think everything newer than 1st gen Intel core is still working) And there is not one piece of software I know of, that promises infinite support time. Windows 10 keeps its promised EOL dates.
See the comment a few levels up about windows 10 literally promising to be the last version of windows and only updates from now on.
And seriously, nobody ever promised there will be updates for old hardware for eternity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The wayland transition hasn't done linux any favors, but thankfully most distributions are slow rolling that change.
a slow roll would be delaying the inevitable and holding back linux as a windows alternative. fortunately no relevant distro is doing what you describe.