Click here to Skip to main content
15,885,216 members

Welcome to the Lounge

   

For discussing anything related to a software developer's life but is not for programming questions. Got a programming question?

The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.

 
GeneralRe: Overlooking the obvious (a mouse tale) Pin
Peter_in_278022-Nov-22 10:09
professionalPeter_in_278022-Nov-22 10:09 
GeneralRe: Overlooking the obvious (a mouse tale) Pin
jmaida22-Nov-22 14:36
jmaida22-Nov-22 14:36 
GeneralBack to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 3:06
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 3:06 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Amarnath S22-Nov-22 3:45
professionalAmarnath S22-Nov-22 3:45 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Daniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 4:46
professionalDaniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 4:46 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
pmauriks24-Nov-22 19:08
pmauriks24-Nov-22 19:08 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Daniel Pfeffer24-Nov-22 19:43
professionalDaniel Pfeffer24-Nov-22 19:43 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
trønderen22-Nov-22 5:58
trønderen22-Nov-22 5:58 
I can understand your frustration. Sometimes the UI changes are 'unnecessary'.

But then: There is a shortage of available resources - not in manpower or CPU cycles, but in input alternatives. I have been arguing with *nix (/x11) people who reject Windows because you cannot simply left click a word (or double click for the line), and then right click to paste it somewhere else: Windows designers decided that we cannot occupy the mouse buttons for one single functions! Sorry, you *nix oldtimers, even though your old cut&paste was very efficient, you will have to abandon it. Mouse buttons must be available for other functions as well.

There are only so many F keys available, so many control keys, Alt-keys, ... Furthermore, we would like functions to be reasonably logically grouped: Win<key> functions make one functional group, Ctrl<key> another one. If we want to keep some order, not even all the theoretically available functions can be used. Keystrokes are in short supply.

You have a similar situation with menus: Which entry should be on top? Which should be in the main menu, rather than the submenu? Different demands can go into a dogfight, and sometimes, the "newcomer" wins, and the old established top menu entry is moved. For several applications, you can allow them to report 'telemetry data' to some statistics center: One essential purpose is to see which functions are rarely if ever used: In the next release, those are moved over to a submenu, or maybe even left out.

One curious example: A generation ago, HP introduced a new 'scientific' calculator - it may have been with HP-41C, but I think the story is even older. Some users complained to HP that the calculator could no longer do factorials (!), which had been available on all earlier scientific models. 'Oh yes, but it can do factorials', HP support replied, 'it is just that we didn't have any key position available for it!' Factorial was provided in a math plugin, which calculated it 'longhand', as if user programmed - several times slower than the old built-in one.

For menus such as right click in the task bar, there is no hard limit on the number of entries. Studies have shown that an average person can overview seven menu entries at a glance. Beyond that, we have to search the menu from top down. My current Win10 context menu has 14 entries. If Win11 really would like to add, say, another six entries that are more requested by users, they could accept a huge 20-entry menu, or shorten it down by removing those entries used by very few. Sure, it doesn't cost lots of resources to keep that one menu entry available to those six users worldwide who still use it, but if it is just clutter to ten million other users, can we sacrifice it anyway?

Sometimes, the explanation is code internal. I have myself been cleaning up old code, doing fundamental refactoring, and adapted dozens of UI level functionality to new kernel code. Then comes a couple user functions that I haven't heard of anyone using for many years, and they require some functions or data structures that no other 'modern' function makes use of. Should I keep significant parts of the old kernel code, and some semi-obsolete user functions that no one uses anymore? Or should I clean up the code to make it smaller and more maintainable?

Sometimes, developers decide to do the cleanup. Sometimes that reveals that the functions wasn't obsolete after all ... In my first job, 40 years ago, the maintainers of the internal system programming language Planc distributed an internal memo "To: Everyone in R&D, Everyone in SW support. Subject: I/O of reals will be removed from Planc." - that was all. It caused the developers to march three abreast to the offices of the Planc maintenance guys, and I/O of real values was not removed from Planc.

Maybe Win11 developers misjudged the users when they decided to remove the shortcut to Task Manager. They wanted to simplify the UI, making it as simple as possible, not simpler. But this was. So they backed up.

For those who enjoy stories of backwards compatibility issues: Raymond Chen has published a book with a large selection of his blog posts at The Old New Thing[^] (which is also the title of the book). Quite a few of the stories included in the book regards backwards compatibility, and several of them have a crazy humor to them. Highly recommended! (That goes for the day-to-day blog as well!)
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Mike Winiberg22-Nov-22 22:15
professionalMike Winiberg22-Nov-22 22:15 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Member 1065208322-Nov-22 22:37
Member 1065208322-Nov-22 22:37 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Single Step Debugger22-Nov-22 7:24
Single Step Debugger22-Nov-22 7:24 
JokeRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 7:39
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 7:39 
JokeRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Daniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 8:00
professionalDaniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 8:00 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 8:36
Mircea Neacsu22-Nov-22 8:36 
JokeRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Daniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 17:40
professionalDaniel Pfeffer22-Nov-22 17:40 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Mircea Neacsu23-Nov-22 5:47
Mircea Neacsu23-Nov-22 5:47 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
LucidDev23-Nov-22 7:07
LucidDev23-Nov-22 7:07 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
ProfessorDan23-Nov-22 5:09
ProfessorDan23-Nov-22 5:09 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
sasadler23-Nov-22 6:37
sasadler23-Nov-22 6:37 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
ProfessorDan23-Nov-22 8:39
ProfessorDan23-Nov-22 8:39 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
sasadler23-Nov-22 11:08
sasadler23-Nov-22 11:08 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Rene Koenig22-Nov-22 22:04
Rene Koenig22-Nov-22 22:04 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
maze322-Nov-22 22:33
professionalmaze322-Nov-22 22:33 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Member 916705723-Nov-22 1:05
Member 916705723-Nov-22 1:05 
GeneralRe: Back to the Future - MS Edition Pin
Martin ISDN23-Nov-22 3:30
Martin ISDN23-Nov-22 3:30 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Praise Praise    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.