I'm not even sure that the video is legit. The Obama & racist stuff at the end makes me think that it's possibly a joke. However, I've heard far worse from Tea Baggers & the like, so anything's possible. I'm basically just responding to him as if it's legit, knowing that it may very well not be. Either way, his concern about updates has been raised by a lot of people.

As far as OSs in general, I think that they're all pretty damn good these days. OSX is probably my least favorite of the major 3. I'm enjoying Windows 10 on my gaming rig though ideally I'd prefer to buy or roll my own Steambox, but that's not in the cards ATM. I switched from Ubuntu to Debian recently & am enjoying Gnome3 but am not yet knowledgeable enough to know which side of the systemd debate I fall on. The lack of a proper ebook reading software (with an emphasis on ePub) that can handle annotations, notes & highlighting is a drag though. In my world, that's one of the most important problems that needs solving in Linux. It's also one of Microsoft's major shortcomings (they don't even have a proper ebook store). The Surface would be perfect for that sort of thing, & while Edge's Web Notes is a step in the right direction, it leaves much to be desired. Granted, much of this problem lies in the hands of the W3C.

I found it on 4chan originally. Somebody later uploaded it to youtube.

It's a stupid design, and the fact that Microsoft intended it to be stupid is not a valid excuse.

And the same goes for drivers that "stop working" for no reason, but can be fixed by reinstalling them... for some reason :iiam:

I'm glad to know though that testing the stability of my product on a consumer version of Windows isn't a legitimate use case.

Well, I suppose that Microsoft is crashing my program for me every few days, so it doesn't really matter.

It's a public service. They're serving the greater good.

I'm not interested in defending Microsoft. However, things just stop working in Linux & OSX too, so it's not fair to insinuate that this sort of behavior is Microsoft-specific. I used to run Ubuntu (arguably one of the more user-friendly distros) on my iMac using rEFIt (before rEFInd was around) & that'd take a **** after every major update, resulting in me having to go in & manually configure refit.conf in order to boot. If I were a more casual user, that'd be a deal-breaker (nevermind the fact that they'd never figure out how to install rEFIt or Linux). If that had been my only computer, I'd have to go to an Internet cafe & scrounge the web for solutions that'd permit me just to get back into my OS. I've also had issues with Ubuntu locating available wireless networks (this'd usually be resolved by a reboot). Granted, it's difficult to blame the kernel for everything bad that happens, which is a convenience that Linux users have over Windows users in many cases. I guess that I'm just saying that everyone's **** stinks. I remain unconvinced that any Linux distro is more user-friendly than Windows 10, & that goes from nearly everything, if not everything, from installation to everything in the user space, really. There's other factors that make this more likely as well, such as the probability that these people have used previous versions of Windows. If Windows 10 doesn't boot, that's a quick fix for any Geek Squad n00b or maybe even a slightly geeky family member or friend. I don't think that those same folks are going to repair your Linux installation. I've worked for one of the larger computer repair companies & one of the larger communication companies, & I can tell you that the former didn't deal at all with Linux & the latter would only help you out if you knew how to do things like find your IP address, release/new, ping, etc. & they sure as **** weren't going to help you find Terminal (they'd literally tell you that their policy was to no give any Linux-specific instructions) like they would for OSX or Windows 10. I think that if you think that Linux is as simple to use as Windows 10 for a casual user, you're probably so many tiers beyond said designation, that you can't even remember what it was like.

I just ran across this a bit earlier today & thought others may be interested in it.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/microsofts-windows-10-push-is-effective-damaging-desirable-and-deceptive/

Speaking of Microsoft, whats with MS's move to acquire LinkedIn?

>_>

Hopefully by killing LinkedIn off?

LinkedIn isn't bad if you use it as a better Tinder.

GBK, I heard that there's a Tinder for Cakes? Is that what it's called?

"Tinder for Cakes."
If I see a cake, and I'm into it, I swipe right.

Uh. I don't get it.

Is the cake swiping back? Or...?

Ugh, Bundt Cake? Naw, son. I ain't even 'bout that!

You need to explain to me what's happening with these cakes. Any topping involved?

Dude, totally. I was just in Applebees, right? And I ****ted all up in some guy's Southwest Egg Rolls.

.... and how did he feel about that?

Oh, well, he didn't like it. He wished that I had pooped somewhere else.
:\

Microsoft, where interface design follows one rule: Make it simpler, but in only ways that decrease usability and intuitiveness for users of every competency level. This is usually achieved by making screen items really big, so very little information can be displayed on the screen on one time. This makes it possible to layer functionality very deeply, so it can be organized in a way that is intuitive only to a committee, once.

Oh, and want to do anything at all with your network? HAHAHAHA!

Speaking of forced updates, I recently got a Galaxy S5, and put off updates once or twice, then just 30 min ago it forced me to update during an important conversation. Wtf?

I suspect that the major players have discovered that protecting their users against themselves is generally mutually beneficial.


I don't agree with this at all. I find their current focus on aesthetics & minimalism to be refreshing. The Windows 10 Metro/Start thing, for instance, was really just Microsoft getting ahead of itself by showing the world where Android/ChromeOS, iOS/macOS & Windows 10/Mobile, etc. are going to end up--unified across devices (e.g. UWP, which doesn't require a certificate in futurism to appreciate). Personally, I thought it was a nice step in the right direction, but it was certainly unpolished & lacking some important features. Live Tiles are more creative, customizable & informative (& can be even more so) than Apple/Google/Linux icons--even with their near useless badge counters. I don't know what you're referring to with "making screen items really big" but am interested in finding out.

Yeah, no. That's cute, though, thinking that software management would spend resources on anything that didn't directly drive sales. In reality, some VP got an MBO to improve the update experience, so he ordered his group to game the metrics. That's the end of it; Microsoft did the literal same thing to goose the Win10 adoption rate ahead of FY2016, so I'm pretty sure pushing out critical updates isn't any more altruistic.



I also disagree: I don't think interface design at Microsoft follows any rules.

Live tiles is a cool idea. So were Gadgets, Active Desktop, and OLE. Smart watches are a cool idea too, and even Aspect Oriented Programming is neato. They're all cool ideas for pretty much the same reason: they promise to let you do [x] without having to do [y]. And it keeps sounding great until you give it just enough critical thought, and you realize that [x] really is one thing, and [y] is an embarrassingly tiny price to pay. And then you're asking yourself why sane app developers would invest in a technology that's only ever useful for weather/weather/weather/embedding images/weather/logging, and the whole thing falls apart in front of you.

I don’t think that “mutually beneficial” implies altruism. It’s not difficult for me to imagine a scenario where a company is somewhere on the spectrum between only being concerned with their bottom line & attempting to make a product that their customers will appreciate. Those two extremes aren’t even mutually exclusive, necessarily. I doubt that I’m any less cynical about Microsoft than any of you, but if they’ve determined that pushing updates is beneficial to them & to the majority of their customers, this strategy is rational, regardless of ethics.

I think you’re being short-sighted on Live Tiles, but you’re not alone, judging by the Metro/Start fiasco. Badge Counters are a promise to let you do [x] without having to do [y] but I haven’t seen any posts about those. My entire point was that Live Tiles have potential & since they’re already arguably superior (in some ways) to icons & since they’re obviously still evolving (they were recently updated again), I don’t see any reason that [x] really only needs to be one thing (assuming it is now, which I’m not entirely sure about). You say that [y] is a tiny price to pay (so was getting to Control Panel & My Computer in Windows 8 but just look at the nerd-rage results), but few of these things are “expensive”. Sure, we can all just open applications entirely or go down the same clichéd Growl-esque route, but Live Tiles has the potential to be much more than those things & it already is. I think that the potential for Live Tiles goes quite a bit beyond the cases you mentioned. However, I'm despondent about Microsoft being up to the challenge, given their track record. I do like a lot of what I see coming out of Redmond these days though.

Edge is a pleasure to use compared to Chrome, Firefox, & Safari, even despite its shortcomings. Visual Studio Code is decent too--a viable alternative to Atom. With a bit more polish, I could see myself getting a Surface or Windows Phone in the near future. Especially if they can get Web Notes to function properly with ebooks & OneDrive or whatever.

If everyone used Windows as a mobile OS, it would be fine. But no one does this. This is an example of interface design following the wishful thinking of Microsoft leadership. Microsoft was way too late to get on the mobile train, and now they are trying to push their desktop market into becoming mobile users.

Except all their desktop users already did that for the use cases where that make sense, years ago, and enjoy an established ecosystem on the platforms that they moved to. When people use a desktop OS, it's for application where the mobile user experience doesn't make sense. When I boot to windows, I am using a mouse on applications that are not in Microsoft's walled garden. I'm not on a tablet using my finger, because if I wanted to do that, I'd be using an iPad. Microsoft looked at iOS, and figured that if Windows was that way, they could make a ton more money. So they are trying to push Windows to be that way, but offer exactly no good reasons that people should want that, and in the process break usability for everyone still using a mouse and keyboard, which is the core market for windows. I'm not going to type or program, or do any kind of involved research or productivity on a freaking tablet.

Seriously, the OS is called Windows, and the big push for Windows 10 are apps that can't be windowed. That's a usability concession for devices limited by a touch interface, not "a step forward".

Also the information density is too low to display anything useful (other than weather), and it uses up valuable screen space, affecting both perceived accordance (because you can't immediately see what things are possible) and your brand as an app author (since it is much less likely that your app will get a spot on the users main page, so you will have more user churn).

Basically it is a terrible deal for users and app developers. But it's okay for Microsoft, I guess? Maybe? Since at least their OS looks distinctive?

This is a bit of an exaggeration, even if you redefine “mobile” to not include tablets & notebooks. I think that you may be overlooking the trend towards touch screens. I also think that it won’t be too long before the majority of desktop computers are all-in-ones with said interface. It’s true that Microsoft was late to the game but I think that Apple & Google’s offerings are far too similar & have become stagnant. I don’t think they’re just trying to push them into being mobile users—they’re trying to prepare for what they think is coming, instead of missing the train like they did with mobile.



There are plenty of use cases where this isn’t necessarily true & even if it were, I don’t buy the assumption that it needs to be that way. Have you tried using Office on a Surface? It’s not an unpleasant experience.



Except it’s not breaking usability. There may be aspects of usability that are now less efficient for advanced users, but those compromises may increase usability for other users. I would argue that Windows 10 is the most usable OS that Microsoft has produced to date. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to want to change the minds of people who prefer something like Android or iOS/macOS because of their reputation for simplicity.

Jakob Nielsen strongly disagrees.

First thing I did when I installed windows 10 was to make it look as much like a desktop OS as possible, and then be perplexed about why they bothered to integrate facebook with windows 10

I get push notifications on my desktop for facebook stuff, the only thing I can ask is why?

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/windows-10-upgrade-will-soon-be-easier-to-reject/

It wouldn't be the first time that Nielsen was incorrect (e.g. the iPad—which I also remember defending on this forum). I don't want to come off as some sort of anti-intellectual expert-denier, but his initial criticism of Windows 8 seems a bit like a grandparent complaining about these kids today with their rap music, & there are certainly others in his field that disagreed with him (e.g. Hobbs). Besides, many of his initial complaints are no longer unique to Windows (e.g. his criticism of flat style which all of the major players are now using in one form or another) & many more are merely options that can be toggled on/off (e.g. “hyper-energized” Live Tiles). I don’t even entirely disagree with much of his criticism—it’s just exaggerated & short-sighted to the point that makes me not take it too seriously.

I was going to Gimp up what I think would be some interesting uses for Live Tiles because I’ve been thinking about it quite a bit since the launch of 8, even prior to this discussion, but I’m leaving for vacation in a few days, where there's unlikely to be satisfactory, if any Internet access & I have a lot to get done before then. I hope that doesn’t come off as a copout but some of these things are difficult for me to describe with language & they’re not even necessarily things that I think Microsoft would implement. I just think that they’re potential solutions. Anyways, if I get a chance, I’ll try to do something, but if not, maybe if by some miracle this discussion is still going on in Aug., lol. However, I’ll just say briefly that I disagree with you on information density because that doesn’t need to be true (Twitter, with its constraints, has demonstrated this), even though it certainly is in many cases. I’ll have to think more about the other things you mentioned because they hadn’t occurred to me.

Just because a lot of people like something doesn't mean it is "good".

Nielsen is rarely wrong. If Nielsen were wrong, you would present evidence that his methods are flawed, not a defense of the products he criticizes. The truth is that you don't really care about usability, you've just been trained by marketing to assign too much significance to HCI to abide usability criticism of a product that you like and have successfully used.

So anyway, 10 is the best Windows to me so far. My only gripe is with the yet-increased compatibility issues with older software, which prompted me to consider building a separate Windows XP computer that I wouldn't hook up to the internet after downloading all the available updates. I have almost all the old hardware to do that, anyway, I'd just need a PSU and a case.

No one said that.

One more note about usability, while I'm thinking about it.

A lot of people think usability means the same thing as making the product approachable for inexpert users. In truth, those are very different goals. Systems may be approachable without being usable, and vice-versa. Consider an airplane cockpit, for example: they must be extremely usable to prevent mass death, but they need not be comprehensible to laypeople. Or something like a gun, which is highly approachable but also very unusable.

Really, usability is about three things:

1. Clear communication with the human user. That means always telling the user the state of the system and what they can do, in the user's language (following standard conventions of the platform and the problem domain).
2. Preventing accidents. That means it should be difficult to initiate an unintended behavior, and it should be possible to cancel or roll back accidental or regretted actions.
3. Efficiency. Routine operations should require few actions, ideally on a per-user basis.

(The Unix CLI scores well on #1 and #3, assuming you are a systems programmer. Windows only has #2, unless you're using it on a touchscreen.)

So to clarify, a gun may excel at #3, but things like:

its lack of clear information of how many rounds left in the magazine makes it fail at #1?

its lack of clear indication that a single round is still chambered (potentially leading to an AD) makes it fail #2?

You got it.

The trouble with Linux is that software tends to be developed with the attitude that you have to be an active developer of the software in order to use it. It's technically possible to solve anything, but so much is a broken mess of dependencies that would take an absurd amount of time to untangle. And it's not compartmentalized and abstracted either, so you are left hoping that either you have a common enough configuration that it's a known issue, or else you have to start tracing through the sources of some massive project.

I'm a full-time professional Linux, but I don't really understand what this post is saying...? I agree with the broader point that Linux software tends to be difficult to use (QA is boring and expensive, and nobody is willing to pay for it). But for the life of me, I can't figure out how either dependency management or... er, compartmentalization/abstraction (?) is a headline problem.

Most Linux users know about nm and readelf -d anyway.