|
Thanks for your concern, but I've already been there. It can do anything Windows can do and more. The only thing that keeps me from using it is the effort of setting it up. W8 blew a big breach in that barrier...
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Looking forward to your rants experiences. 
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Discoverability means you don't know enough to start typing...
With CUA, you could browse through the start menu and app menus to see what was available.
I am just glad I had Windows 7 to train me so that I do know what to type.
Similar problem: The ribbons in office.
I understand that ribbons make it easier for non-power users, but vendors used to solve that problem with beginner vs. advanced menus.
With the ribbon, I have to use a dialog to dig through all of the additional commands (that used to be on menus) to find a few of the items that I then add to the "Quick" bar. If I had not used those items before, I may have never found them.
I never use a mouse with spreadsheets. I am just glad that many of the old context menus are still supported (at least in Office 2010)
Excel: Alt+E, I, D (Edit, fIll, Down).
|
|
|
|
|
englebart wrote: Discoverability means you don't know enough to start typing...
With CUA, you could browse through the start menu and app menus to see what was available
you obviously don't know how to view all apps in W8.
It is easy to do. Google is your friend.
englebart wrote: Similar problem: The ribbons in office
That has nothing to do with W8, but I am beginning to see a pattern.
You need to go back to Windows 3.11 and the earliest edition of Office. 
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: When I work, I usually have windows maxed. For many of them, the easiest and fastest method to close them is clicking on the top right corner. Similarly, resizing the window is best done by pulling the bottom right corner. Guess what happens when I move the mouse in either corner! 
Right-click the taskbar and select Properties -> Navigation. De-select the "When I point to the top right corner show the charms" option. Use Win+C if you ever need to show the charms bar.
There isn't an option for the bottom-right corner, but I think that only applies if you auto-hide the taskbar. When the taskbar is showing, the hot corner is inside the taskbar, so moving the mouse to the bottom-right corner of the window doesn't have any effect.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
Now that you mention it I remember reading about that in the W8.1 feature list. I have my own reasons not to upgrade to W8.1 though, so, sadly, this won't help me.
I think I read that the current version of ClassicShell also has similar features. Will have to check...
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Clifford Nelson wrote: Windows does not work well with either Visual Studio managed code applications or the Web
If "Windows doesn't work well with VS managed code apps", what does? What works better?
|
|
|
|
|
Paragraphs would be nice.
|
|
|
|
|
Clifford Nelson wrote: I have certainly come to had Windows 8.
I don't know what that means you have come to had Windows 8?
Clifford Nelson wrote: I am using windows 8.1 and what I like is what is like Windows 7.
Windows 7 is the new XP.
Clifford Nelson wrote: Just not the right OS for doing multiple things at once. I have always felt that Microsoft has failed because they refuse to create and truly effective UI group, and Windows 8 is another example ... Would think it would also be poor for anyone one with a large pad since it would have enough screen real estate to be able to work with multiple applications at once. In the mean time see so many cases where Microsoft could have done better at increasing the capabilities of the programming environment.
So you never learned to snap windows left and right to use two applications on the same screen. That works just like Windows 7!
With 2 screens that means I can work on 4 applications at once without having overly small displays. Of course Windows always allowed you to adjust the size of a window to be able to see more than one at a time, but being able to snap a window to either full screen of half screen makes it easier to do.
Clifford Nelson wrote: Windows does not work well with either Visual Studio managed code applications or the Web,
I don't agree with that. I am using Windows 8.1 to type this and have no problem. I also have managed code applications I wrote a while back running with no problem.
What problems you are having are related to your attitude about Windows 8 and not any shortcoming with the OS.
Clifford Nelson wrote: now there is no supported environment for creating desktop applications, now that WPF is basically unsupported.
You really should be thinking about moving on.
I switched to web development over desktop applications about 12 years ago because that is the way things are going and have not looked back since.
The only desktop applications I develop are (usually small) utility applications I need to execute on a schedule to update some background resource; database, XML manifest, etc. They usually run in the middle of the night at a time when they will not interfere with scheduled backups.
I use WPF for those but shrink the display area to a one by one pixel display because no one will be looking at it anyway.
I think you need to realize that the world is moving on and the way you did things in the past were done that way because that was the way things were done at the time.
These days there is a push for HTML5 and CSS so applications will execute on many different platforms. I think that is a good thing as opposed to building custom applications for each different platform individually.
Clifford Nelson wrote: Microsoft senior management has been so stupid.
Yes they should have frozen Windows development at Windows 3.11. They could have saved a lot of money on development!
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
JimmyRopes wrote: I switched to web development over desktop applications about 12 years ago because that is the way things are going and have not looked back since.
Even if you are still developing desktop (like I am) Microsoft has only vindicated that form of development. Notice they still fully support it in VS2013. I write customized systems for desktop use. The desktop ain't going anywhere. You may have also noticed that in more recent versions of the thing they're driving the product to be more desktop-centric rather than less. I think even Microsoft has realized that they made a massive mistake trying to supress the desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that eventually all applications will use a browser as a presentation format.
Desktop applications are starting to have the look and feel of a legacy application.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't Java supposedly the answer to the question of how to write cross-platform applications?
While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Wasn't Java supposedly the answer to the question of how to write cross-platform applications?
Right! 
GuyThiebaut wrote: While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Have you heard about JavaScript? 
GuyThiebaut wrote: While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Have you heard about JavaScript?
GuyThiebaut wrote: Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
Only if the control is from a foreign web site. If the browser is deployed as a thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service. The operations running will depend on the service's authorization on the local machine.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
modified 19-Jul-14 8:49am.
|
|
|
|
|
JimmyRopes wrote: thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service
In which case wouldn't the service need to be written for a specific architecture?
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: GuyThiebaut wrote:
Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
Only if the control is from a foreign web site. If the browser is deployed as a thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service. The operations running will depend on the service's authorization on the local machine.
GuyThiebaut wrote: JimmyRopes wrote: thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service
In which <layer>case wouldn't the service need to be written for a specific architecture?
Yes in that specific case it would be written for a specific architecture.
In a general case where you are not targeting a specific architecture, then the application can be used on any architecture, which is more the general case.
The point is that the browser can be used for the specific case or the general case. It would just be a presentation format.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Thin clients? That's a Novell idea.
I may not last forever but the mess I leave behind certainly will.
|
|
|
|
|
Herbie Mountjoy wrote: Thin clients? That's a Novell idea.
I never claimed that I thought of it first.
It is an idea whose time has come.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
JimmyRopes wrote: Clifford Nelson wrote: I have certainly come to had Windows 8.
I don't know what that means you have come to had Windows 8?
That got me scratching my head as well, until I realized he mant "hate", not "had".
JimmyRopes wrote: With 2 screens that means I can work on 4 applications
Not enough. Not even close. Not to mention that for many apps you only need a fraction of the screen, not half of one! There's no good reason why there are only two possible window sizes for every application. That's fine for a phone screen, but not for a tablet, laptop or desktop!
JimmyRopes wrote: Clifford Nelson wrote: now there is no supported environment for creating desktop applications, now that WPF is basically unsupported.
You really should be thinking about moving on.
That may not be feasible. If you program for a living, the clients define the target platform. For a professional developer, it may therefore be more sensible to stick with W7. At least until the clients move on to W8. For the time being, W8 will run most W7 programs in desktop mode, no problem. The reverse isn't true at all. That makes W7 the better developer platform for desktop applications.
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: That got me scratching my head as well, until I realized he mant "hate", not "had".
That makes more sense.
Stefan_Lang wrote: There's no good reason why there are only two possible window sizes for every application. That's fine for a phone screen, but not for a tablet, laptop or desktop!
I am not on a windows system right now so I can't test this out but I think you can shrink a metro app horizontally, not just full or half screen.
this may help for metro apps[^]
You are not limited to two sizes on the desktop. You can stretch or shrink the window from a non-metro app just like before.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
That may not be feasible. If you program for a living, the clients define the target platform. For a professional developer, it may therefore be more sensible to stick with W7. At least until the clients move on to W8
Unless you are working from home the client will provide you with a workstation with the proper OS and development environment.
That does not preclude moving on in you personal life. The added advantage is when the client does move on you will be ahead of the learning curve.
Even if you do develop from home there is no reason that you cannot develop desktop apps on a W8/8.1 machine.
Visual Studio still installs on W8/8.1 so just choose the proper solution type for the target environment.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
I only brought up the size (and number of windows) limitation because you mentioned it. Me, I do not use Metro. At all.
The link you posted is interesting, but in another way than you intended. It proves my point about lack of discoverability. Why is there no obvious way to change window arrangement? Why does it need an article to show users how it works? What was so bad about resizing windows by pulling at the borders that Metro is incapable of providing that feature?
A Windows border that changes the mouse pointer to another icon when it's moving over it - that is a discoverable feature. A setting hidden in a jungle of badly organized option dialogs? Not so much! (and if you want to know where I got my bad attitude about W8 option dialogs from: just look at that article again!)
I do realize that on a device with no mouse attached, and with a limited screen size, it may be difficult to catch and move a window border. But if that UI is meant for all devices, why on earth did the MS designers then focus all their efforts on creating an UI that only makes sense on a phone? Yes, there's a desktop. And, yes, on the desktop, resizing works just as we're used to (unless the charm bar gets in the way of course  ). But MS made a point about Metro being the future, and the desktop UI going away. Once that happens it's no longer about who moved my cheese - it is about who stole it!
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: MS made a point about Metro being the future, and the desktop UI going away. Once that happens it's no longer about who moved my cheese - it is about who stole it!
Get over it!
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Desktop applications will be around for quite sometime. I consult for government agencies that have considerable investment in Win 3.11 thru Win XP based applications. In a recent costs analysis, conversion to Win 8.1 in a small (4000 terminal) agency equated to $1.6billion just to upgrade the hardware. Add training and software conversion costs to make the existing systems compatible, you start looking for further reductions in staff. The cost just rose to $7.8BILLION. (No wonder the Chinese are saying NO to Win 8.1.)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I'm following you here. You can do anything on 8.1 that you can do with any version of Windows. If you don't like Metro (like I don't) simply don't use it. The desktop system (still really central to the whole thing) is just as functional as it always was.
Paint me confused. What's the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
CodeBubba wrote: I'm not sure I'm following you here. You can do anything on 8.1 that you can do with any version of Windows.
Yes. You can. But it takes longer now. In terms of more mouse clicks/key press/screen swipes. Try performing the following actions
1) take a screenshot of this page and send the image by mail to some one.
2) add up figures on a web page using the calculator.
And that charms bar or what ever they call it is downright annoying. It pops out when it's not required and does not when you need it.
Und wenn du lange in einen abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Sahir Shah wrote: And that charms bar or what ever they call it is downright annoying. It pops out when it's not required ...
Right-click on the taskbar. Select Properties -> Navigation, and de-select the "When I point to the top right corner show the charms" option.
Sahir Shah wrote: ...and does not when you need it.
Win + C
Take a few minutes the learn the keyboard shortcuts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KjmBJxjNhs&sns=tw[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
