Windows 10

It does not matter how practical it is for the designer if the consumers do not buy into it. The market place rules and we see where Windows 8.x went with its flat design to the UI. After 2 years plus of being beat over the head by the majority of their consumers you would think they would have learned by now.

Also if you want to sell to consumers make the icons familiar and most consumers love eye candy. You know they are out there saying how cool it looks and/or how pretty. Make it look bland, dull and boring is a quick way to a marketing death.

Thought process here is make it look like the design is where the entire market is heading. Just another marketing ploy.

 

It was very practical when having multiple windows you had no idea of which one was active... which I have never had on "oldish" Windows 7 Aero.

One old man came to a CEO of Microsoft and told that he wants to marry her with his son. "Hell no!" answered the CEO. But my son is the deputy of director of the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development! Oh well... then why not!
Then this old man goes to the headmaster of the EBRD and asks him to make his son the deputy of director. Hell no! answered he. But my son is married on Microsoft's CEO! Oh well... then OK.

See the main point? That flat design is just a bubble of cr@p. Everybody does it because it's competitors do it. It doesn't represent the full picture.

 

Yeah, and I can't find the trashcan/delete for voice messages I don't want anymore... I think they forgot to put it back in while modifying things.

Seems they do that a lot lately

 

Except consumer *are* buying into it. "It" being a flat design UI.

iOS 7 adoption rate hits 85 percent | TUAW: Apple news, reviews and how-tos since 2004

We've already beaten the Win8 adoption rate horse to death. I'm not going to turn this into another one of those threads.

 

You are talking phones and tablets here, try real laptops/desktops, or did this forum change without telling us? Now your argument may, or may not, be valid against say Android.

 

ok, desktop OS.

https://www.gosquared.com/global/mac/yosemite/#launch

OS X Yosemite has a 29% adoption rate in under two months. And "point oh" OS X releases are *notoriously* problematic but still more than 1/4 of all users took the leap anyway.

 

Well, they are both from Apple, and OS software update in the Apple user base happens much easier for some reason.

Not to say your agreement is invalid, but even for the generations when UI style didn't change much, new Mac OS adoption happened much faster than new Windows adoption, so we might be looking at some kind of bias here.

 

I'm not quite sure what exactly you are arguing for here. I hope you understand that flat design and skeuomorphism are not mutually exclusive. In fact, in the very Wikipedia article that has been quoted on this, you can find a statement to the effect that "Some designers believe that a combination of both skeuomorphism and flat design is eventually where flat design will end up."

It turns out that this is exactly where Google is heading with their new Material Design: " The fundamentals of light, surface, and movement are key to conveying how objects interact, [...] Realistic lighting shows seams, divides space, and indicates moving parts." My guess is that the pure flat design you seem to be promoting is already on its way out, and will quickly be relegated to the dust bin of history, where it belongs.

In addition, while I'm also unclear about what it is you think you've grown out of, having icons that represent widely accepted symbols for common actions is clearly valuable. As an example, fundamentally the same folder icon is used in pretty much all existing operating systems. The reason for that is not anymore that people are thinking of physical manila folders but simply that this icon has come to symbolize filesystem folders.

I have news for you: resolution-independent vector graphics image formats have been available for close to 40 years now, and they are perfectly capable of representing icons for any design style you like. Display scalability has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with design language.

I will also mention that, the above remark notwithstanding, it is well understood that both graphics and typography of UI elements need to be optimized for their specific physical display size. In the case of typography for example, a 14-point font needs to look different from the corresponding 10-point font scaled up to 14 points.

 

Instead of making Windows 10 closer to 7.......it looks like they are making it closer to 8.....

Bye bye Control Panel

Windows 10: New leaked screenshots reveal brand new UI for Settings; death of Control Panel?

 

Well instead of quick access from visual identity of an icon from the control panel now we will have to read the screen. The design is more of an issue in that they try and categorize. Even with the current panel in Windows 7 I do not use categories.

 

It's funny that with those high density displays and powerful graphics processors, machines of today are more capable than ever at rendering complex non-flat UI effects. But somehow designers decided to throw that out of the window and go in the opposite direction.

This "keeping our brand image" madness makes it much worse. Why the F can't I choose my own theme?

 

Hm, this argument again. As S.Subzero said, its beating a dead horse. Yes, Windows 8 didn´t sell very well. Thats something we know when looking at the market share. But we don´t know anything more just from looking at the market share. How do you know the main reason was the design theme? Are there any studies on that topic, or polls? I don´t think so.

I think, the main reason for the failure of Windows 8 was the fact that it:
a. Was too different from what people knew before in the user experince (the startscreen, Apps always fullscreen, didn´t boot into the desktop)
b. Came out after an incredible successfull predecessor - Windows 7 in contrast came out after an incredible unsuccessfull predecessor

Some people, a very vocal group in the Internet, may not like the "flat design". But that was no way, never, the reason for the failure of Windows 8. There are also enough people who like the flat design and the largest group of people who just thinks "eh, I don´t care, as long as I get my work done".

And regarding the "eye candy" - I don´t think so. Maybe it was like this 15 years ago, after years of the incredible dull, grey Windows 95 design, when people wanted more and more eye candy, because eye candy was seen as part of the evolution of the design and the innovation in the industry. But also do notice, that many people hated Aero when it first came out - Windows Vista failed, too, but that also was not because of Aero.

No. They are just removing the leftovers of Aero from Windows 10 that made Windows 8 look so inconsistent.

The good thing about Windows 10 is: It can be set to either behave like Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 in terms of the user experince (start menu, apps etc.), you can choose. But not the design, rather than an unneccesary and unwanted return to Aero, they are about to make the UI consistent, its like Modern UI 2.0.

In fact, you can. Or does Microsoft hinder you if you want to install your own Theme-pack via UXTheme patcher?

Its just that if you build a product, you have to have a clear concept, and the product has to be consistent. Having infinite Theme options might be nice for some people, but it becomes a horrible mess if you have too many options. it becomes Frankensteins monster (like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96_eExtauPA). There is a point where you can´t built everything into you product.

if you want a product you can customize in every way possible, install a Linux distribution. But even there you have a preinstalled UI (which you can change of course easily. These customization options are great for some people, but most people ("the average PC user") always uses the standard, preset options.

Yeah, because the point of the flat UIs is not really to save power anymore. Its more about simplicity, user experince...

I think the UI is still work in progress.

 

I know this as clear as how Earth moves around the Sun and not vice versa.

 

Really? That interesting. Because if you look further, Microsoft has not only adapted the flat design for Windows, but also for all their websites, which before were using Aero as a design theme. The general consensus on these sites is that they are much better than the former Aero based sites, because they are less cluttered, which makes them simpler and easier to use. Remember hotmail or old versions of MSN?

If it were like you say, most people would have had no problem at all with Windows 8, but dismissed it mainly because of the design. But thats madness. Most people just had problems to use Windows 8 and didn´t like it because it was different to use compared with Windows 7, Vista, XP etc. - Windows 8 just wasn´t very easy to use if you used a mouse and not a touchscreen. The design of the window frames had nothing to do with that.

Besides: Windows 10 is not Windows 8 and it will contain a new version of the flat design. A more refinded version (which you already see with the current Windows 10, for example, Windows are nearly framless now - which looks much better than the fat borders of Windows 7 or 8).

We will see how well Windows 10 will perform on the market.

 

I thought "we don't know anything more just from looking at the market share"?

Whoah, you're kidding, right? An unauthorized patch replacing a core Windows DLL with a crude hack??? You must be joking: Microsoft most certainly does all they can to prevent people from doing just that. It requires some very serious overrides of built-in OS protections to install the patch you are referring to.

Hmm, that's some interesting information you seem to be privy to. Who was that again who said that "we don't know anything more just from looking at the market share"?

 

Well, to be anal about this, since Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, in fact we do not know this; it turns out that both points of view are exactly equivalent in a very specific sense.

 

Exactly! Only such people who dare saying what you said also don't believe that people didn't like Windows because of it's look. I pointed this in my previous post already but I guess writing this directly is better for someone's understanding.

 

Yep. We don´t. This is just what my guess is on that topic, but I am not basing this on market share. Unlike the people who say that Windows 8 failed because of the design.

Its not really a crude hack. If MS wanted, they could prevent this completely of course, but they don´t.

This is something everyone could hear and read when Windows 8 came out. People didn´t say "hey, this doesn´t look like Windows 7, there is no Aero, this is bad". They did say thing like "How can I shut down my PC", "How can I close this (full-screen) app" and "Why is the Start menu fullscreen". You know, things that are connected to the user experince and not to the design.

These are the things you can read in any Windows 8 review, media coverage etc. - nothing about the lack of Aero like you suggest. Whats was more requested - the start menu or Aero? Ask yourself this, and then say again "the main reason why Windows 8 didn´t sell well was the lack of Aero". This claim is just completely without evidence and also not logical. Sure, design does play a role - but for most people, other aspects of an OS are more important - performance, user experince, stability. Most people are fine with either Aero, or the flat design, or even Luna - the one thing about design that is important, is that it doesn´t look old, like the old grey Windows 95 design.

If they continued to use Aero instead of the flat design, would it have been successfull? No, I certainly don´t think so.

 

Anecdotal evidence. Dismissed.

 

Tons of the users here want Aero back as well. Not too sure how you missed those posts? Remember too that the "flat design" is part of 8.x desktop UI as well as metro. As one was failing and turning off consumers it was bringing the other down with it.

IMHO this web site flat design spreads everything out more and makes it all that much more confusing. Plus it is just plain old Fugly.

 

I'm one of those persons who "whine" about the absence of Aero glass. Overall I'm pretty fine with Windows 8 on some machines, but I would really love to at least have an option to turn the Aero glass on/off, just like in Windows 7. On small screens (i.e. 10") flat design looks pretty well, but try looking at it on 16" 1366*768... Meh...
Back in the day when Windows 8 still had transparency (some preview, forgot which one), it looked pretty neat, flat+transparency, I liked it. Nowadays it's one of the main reasons why I don't install it on my "main" machine.

Yes, yes, and once again, YES! Why the hell anyone would want look at a mobile website on a proper computer monitor with KB+M. I know, from financial/maintenance point of view it makes more sense to sort of unify websites, but why make it a mobile website? Could be due to some statistics (I read something like majority of websites are now being viewed on mobile devices than on PCs, sorry, can't quote you on that) why most of them opt for mobile websites, but for me as a user, it's counter productive, when you only get around 1/3 instead or 1/2 or your screen with useful information, and links, instead of being just a clickable sentence, are turned into blocks which take up 1/10 of the screen.
Sure, some websites even with "modern" looking designs look/function nice, but there are a lot of which really don't.

 

I doubt the users here are a representative sample of average users.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yeah. My father IS a represantative sample of average Joe who bought Sony VAIO laptop with Windows 8 or 8.1, went home, opened it... closed and went back to BestBuy where exchanged it for a Macbook.
He didn't know what to do and even where to start with Metro UI. End of story.

 

This is how I see that sentence "Bla-bla-bla-bla". Not very techy, I know. But that's how I see everything which has bored "give me incontrovertible proof" nonsense where each next argument with sense of bigger force of argument is beaten off by request about an order of magnitude evidential proof... where it finishes with... it never finishes actually because it just depends on how stubborn is original claimant.

People with common sense understand that your example is way less frequent than mine. Because you will be more used to smth which is more familiar. Period.

 

I don't think that a lot of people decide to go with Macbooks either... I mean yeah, if your dad bought a Vaio for $999 which he didn't like, so exchanging it for a similarly costing Mabbook makes sense. Or maybe your dad wanted an OSX machine.
However I personally didn't meet so many such people. Actually none. And a lot of people buy 500USD/EUR machines. Try finding a new Macbook for that price. A lot of people I know usually just leave Windows 8/.1 (obviously doesn't mean they like it). The rest either ask shop assistant or do it themselves and install Windows 7. My dad too bought a new desktop, a year or so ago. Anyway he bought it without OS and installed Windows 7 which was already familiar for him.

 

This is alot of rosy opinion not what it really shows...most get Window 8 and install StartisBack and force it back to Windows 7 look alike. I read alot of users doing this so this also tells me they aren't to happy with Windows 8 as well. Also if what your saying is so true why is Windows 10 coming back with Windows 7 Start menu....so your own evidence has a big hole to fill....as Windows 10 for laptop/desktop version will install to Windows 7 desktop mode not the Metro and now User can get rid of Meto gride. So more evidence from Windows 10 itself telling you again that your rosy view is in the minority already.

 

Try that with a > 20" external monitor.

Good luck with trying to find a legitimate copy of Windows 7 for sale.

 

They still are up for sale in my parts.

 

Since when is Mac OS more Windows than Windows?

 

Aha, that was funny Windows 8 has something to be proud of.

 

It's even funnier in a thread where people compete with (grand)father's average-ness.

Well, if you put it that way, MS has not hindered Aero on Windows 8 neither. The relevant binary has been updated for many times, and yet 3rd party Aero on Win8 patches still work just fine.

I do agree that theming functionality has not been completely disabled technically, as long as you allow 3rd party patches. But it is obviously less and less encouraged in recent versions of Windows. Back in pre-XP times all theming configurations could be accessed easily in display properties, which is just right click on the desktop. Then XP came with its new appearance style, which affected mostly window decorations. With this new style turned on, you're officially left with only 3 choices of colour themes, but you can still config size, font, etc., for the decorations, and almost all the old options for the rest of the UI widgets. Or you can go back to the old style if you like. With Vista and then 7 introducing Aero, the old style is officially dead, taking all the old options with it. Without a 3rd party patcher all you have is the Aero effect switch plus RGBA sliders. Now in Windows 8 and 10, even the Aero function is gone, taking the alpha slider with it. You do have two sets of non-transparent colour controls (desktop + Metro) though.

My original comment was not focused on Windows. The other major desktop, namely Mac OS, isn't officially supporting highly configurable themes neither, so the job is left to 3rd parties. The same applies to iOS and WP on the mobile side of the fence. Android is a kinda mixed bag.

FLOSS DEs for GUN/Linux desktop and such have always been like that, but they are targeted at a totally different tribe anyway.

 

OK, sure not a problem.

 

I am sure that most of people touching water feel wet. I can't proove it because have no monitoring data but that is obvious to me. Same goes to Windows 8... Windows 8 out of the box looked less Windows than Mac OS X, funny ha?
It's look was the biggest WTH and hence why that should be the main reason of it's Fail. On par with driver's/bugs/driver's bugs sure but see what! Now it is 8.1 and has less bugs but people still don't jump on it.

Nope. I am saying that OS with DESKTOP with CURSOR and ICONS feels familiar to him than METRO squares. Even I used Shift+Start button at the beginning before found that there is a square called Desktop there.

 

It shouldn't look like OS X to be not Windows. It's not a system of 2 coordinates like "plus" and "minus" and that's it where if it does look like "-" then it is surely not "+".

 

Sorry to have derailed this thread. the intent was solely to show that the Flat UI on a PC desktop as of yet has not proven itself. The fact is most users under this environment have shown not to like the flat interface. If this were not true then even back to windows 8 beta days there would have been a clamoring for the metro UI or at least its style, as is evident there was/is not.

IMHO Windows 10 should walk away from the flat designs as well. This just for the reasons above. Not because of my personal preference but because I do want to see it succeed. Just like I, and others, wanted to see Windows 8.x succeed but again our advice was just ignored. So I say who is it that is supposed to be listening this time?

 

Flat or not, what does MS has to offer that will trick the average Joes to adopt it instead of staying with Win 7?

 

Average joes buy new computers. (maybe)

 

There in lies the rub. Why a new computer. Prior to Windows 7 days you really needed to replace the old computer as the hardware was getting faster and better. To keep up with OS and program requirements Since Vista days you could at times just upgrade but that was for systems that could be and users that were capable. You also had the gee whiz factors along with keeping up with the Jones's.

For a while now, other than gaming, there are no software capabilities demanding newer hardware. The average Joe looks at a new PC with Windows 8.x or Windows 10 and is not impressed compared to the machine already at home. Replacing damaged equipment a lot of those same users look for Windows 7 options to get them back to where they were, I include this as direct OS or at least ways to change look/feel/function.

Right now Windows 10 will just win over users not willing to install a third party start button but have no other reason to hold out. TBH I doubt that there are many out there holding out just for that reason alone. I think they need to bring a lot more desktop functionality back, and add, to the PC desktop. The new OS really needs to win their core consumers back, both in the consumer and business markets.

 

Actually, I needed a new machine as the previous one was almost 6 years old. I had updated functionality (eSATA/USB 3.0) via expresscard on it but the new one offers those functions as native ports. New machine also has an HDMI port, expresscard slot, SATA III, 64 bit Intel Haswell processor and Win 7 Pro x64, as well.

 

HDMI could be a reason to upgrade but SATA III requires a super fast SSD to saturate and in real world you will not notice it over a saturated SATA II, even saturated SATA I, port. Express card, unless there is something you really need there. Native USWB 3 is a plus where you have high powered devices. As far as CPU, I am not sure how constricted you were from the get go. Unless there was something you just could not do on the old machine, a true must have, then really it was more a want than need, again other than possibly HDMI for a monitor.

I would have been more than happy, even today, with my 2009 Gateway P79xx and Windows 7. At the time I upgraded only to be sure as possible I would survive to 2020. Then again with a low budget system from back then I would probably today want a new system or at least some upgrades. Upgrading such an old system though is probably counter productive.

Back to the point, users again with a new system are forced into Windows 8 or beyond. There are still some options to get back to Windows 7 or again functionality. TBH even in the worst case it most likely is better to get a new system and pay for the Windows 7 than try and upgrade a 6 year old system, budget or otherwise.

 

FWIW, the internal system disk drive is specified as 500 Gb, 7200 rpm SATA III. Also, my backup solution is to a 750 Gb, 7200 rpm, SATA III WD Black mobile disk drive housed in a SATA III enclosure and connected to system via a native SATA III eSATA/USB 2.0 combo port. Expresscard slot is now redundant, but I'm sure I'll find a use for it in future.

I don't have the time for this machine to get ready. It boots in under one minute.

Back to the point though, Win 7 Pro x64 is a very fast OS. I hope Win 10 can keep up.

 

For this problem without even knowing what make/model your asking about no one can really give definite help on? And if Desktop well then that would need to go to Desktop Forum...area....I recently for example update my complete Tower to i5-4690K but kept my HDD and changed my Main C to SSD with AsRock extreme 6 board and still use Windows 7x64 Ult Sp1. And to make all the hardware live happy together downloaded the drivers from the site not using the cd drivers and they installed and all work fine together. Trust me human will not be able to truly measure the boot difference other then numbers. What you should be concerned about is will the O/S be able to install and use my software that is the real test of how good a O/S works and helps you in return.

 

My postings here are concerned with laptops exclusively as I haven't had a desktop machine in years and won't go near one if I can avoid it.

My new machine is an OEM custom build,; all internal components are well integrated by them, so that isn't a concern as long as everything is within applicable industry standards.

 

I'm curious who you asked to do this for you especially at much lower volume and cost.

Most vendors in UK and US, I got quoted doing custom mobile (common laptop parts) design goes in the almost a million.
Or at low 100K to do a minor change on existing boards like replacing a specific network chipset.

Sorry about being off Topic

I do like the upcoming Flat UI

 

No need to go to a one-off shop when OEM will customise machine for you inexpensively.

Peruse Dell Precision, Toshiba Tecra or Lenovo sites and you'll see what I'm on about. OEM let you choose specific processor, disk drive, OS and other items at competitive rates that are close to a bog standard machine. No need to struggle with Win 8.1 when all you need do is select Win 7 Pro as default OS. BTW, OEM included Win 8.1 Pro x64 media in the same box as new laptop.

I started my search for a new laptop with an expresscard slot (hard to find) and the machine I'm typing this on is what I came away with.

 

Not what I had in mind Thanks.

 

I'll stick with W7U until I see performance gains from anything else. Or until drivers are no longer available.

 

If WinX doesn't pan out then most people will stick with Win7.

 

I think a lot of people will move to different platforms even more so.

 

That's wishful thinking....at the end of the day Windows for many detractors or fans will still be the O/S of the Day....