5 ms·

I had been using Windows 8.1 and consider it to be one of the worst desktop operating systems I've used in the last 10 years. Why? It's Windows 7 with a fe

I had been using Windows 8.1 and consider it to be one of the worst desktop operating systems I've used in the last 10 years. Why? It's Windows 7 with a few improvements. I'm vaguely aware that there's this "Metro" stuff that people dislike, but aside from dismissing the 'start screen' when you reboot - and there may very well be a configuration setting to bypass it and go directly to the desktop - you otherwise literally never have to deal with it.

jwcooper 11y ago
My biggest issue was the metro stuff; mostly the default apps that would open in full screen mode. Opening a PDF or an image in a new Windows 8 installation was always a frustrating surprise. The start menu was confusing, and anytime you'd go into a metro-type application it was jarring.
- WalterGR 11y ago
  Ah. I guess my experience was different because I installed apps that I preferred over the built-in ones and found a start menu replacement.
  - tbrock 11y ago
    Wow. Sounds like Microsoft really nailed the experience on that one. Step 1: replace everything with something else.
    - WalterGR 11y ago
      I don't know what you mean. There are pre-installed apps on OS X, Linux, and Windows. If you don't care for the pre-installed ones, you can install ones that you prefer. Same with the kind-of default 'controls' like the Start Menu, or the Dock, or what various Linux distros call their equivalents. Windows 8/8.1 is Windows 7 with a few improvements and some "Metro" stuff that you can almost entirely avoid.
      - banachtarski 11y ago
        Needing to replace the start menu, which is an integral part of the desktop manager hardly qualifies as a standard practice for a consumer-grade operating system. I found the shipped state of Windows 8 unusable as a power user so I needed to replace it as well. I consider that a complete failure.
        WalterGR 11y ago
        Needing to replace the start menu, which is an integral part of the desktop manager hardly qualifies as a standard practice for a consumer-grade operating system. And I find the OS X Dock to be an utter abomination. I took advantage of the power I have to install software and installed a replacement. I found the shipped state of Windows 8 unusable as a power user so I needed to replace it as well. Good on you. Though, I still don't understand what the comment I was replying to meant by, "Step 1: replace everything with something else."
        petersellers 11y ago
        > Though, I still don't understand what the comment I was replying to meant by, "Step 1: replace everything with something else." If you have to replace things like the "start menu", the built in pdf reader, the built in settings app, etc. etc. all because of the same UI design flaw it starts to feel like you are fighting with the OS to get to the level of productivity with which you were previously accustomed. If you feel the need to have to do that, then something is wrong with the design of the OS. Obviously this is a subjective opinion that can differ for each individual, but considering the horrible adoption rate of Windows 8 it seems likely that this is an opinion shared by many. Objectively, forcing apps to run in fullscreen mode can be a huge waste of real estate for large computer monitors. The gestures required to summon the "charms" bar and the app switcher are completely unintuitive and awkward for a desktop UI. Things like that make far more sense for mobile devices, but it appears like Windows 8 tried to combine mobile and desktop UIs in a confusing, frustrating, an inefficient way. It's quite telling that these were major design errors as Windows 10 backtracks from that philosophy almost completely.
    - WorldWideWayne 11y ago
      You have to add and replace all sorts of things to make OS X usable. Apple just added the ability to resize a window by it's edges a couple of years ago! And there still is no tiling. And the finder still sucks. But it's got the all-important Unix underpinnings and it's not from Micro$oft.
      - Qwertious 11y ago
        This can often apply to Linux, too. So every major desktop OS requires replacing stuff here and there. Not sure what conclusions we can draw from that, though.
        WorldWideWayne 11y ago
        The conclusion that you can draw from this is that the person I was replying to has no point.
        kdevrou 11y ago
        It is true that this can apply to Linux as well. There are plenty of distros available that package as little as possible or provide choice during initial installation. That is where I know that Linux wins over everything else. A huge number of applications, where there is always at least 1 good alternative. Microsoft and Apple can't compete on choice.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
reedlaw 11y ago
Don't you have to deal with Metro when the control panel applet or app you need is Metro-style? I have to see that screen when I hit the Super key to search for an application by name.
- yareally 11y ago
  Control Panel accessed from the desktop in Windows 8 is the normal Control Panel from previous Windows versions. Tried searching for control panel in the start menu and it launch the desktop control panel for me in 8.1
  - wldcordeiro 11y ago
    If I remember right it's because the Metro app was called "Settings" but the control panel still existed as well. I would always just do Win+E then click on the control panel icon in the ribbon.
  - reedlaw 11y ago
    I was trying to uninstall something and I hit the Super key and started typing "programs" and up came some Metro app that showed a few apps sorted by size. It didn't show all installed programs. For that I had to find the old Add/Remove Programs control panel which has a regular desktop interface.
  - ino 11y ago
    IIRC, some settings were only accessible through the metro settings and not the normal control panel. (user config maybe?)
qmalxp 11y ago
My "screw this" moment was when I discovered you needed an internet connection to play Minesweeper.
- MikusR 11y ago
  You don't. It works without internet. As Minesweeper is simply a program you can use the old one in Windows 10.
  - Qwertious 11y ago
    The Windows Store version does, IIRC.
davnicwil 11y ago
> there may very well be a configuration setting to bypass it and go directly to the desktop You're right, there is. The ability to configure this was one of the updates in 8.1 from 8.0 and was included presumably because of so many complaints in user feedback about it forcing you to click through the metro screen to get to desktop on every reboot.
bobbles 11y ago
These comments are always like this, but the 'aside from XXX its not bad!' is different every time, and writing off a horrible user experience like solitare not being in a freaking window is not a minor thing. Its a huge fucking annoyance
- WalterGR 11y ago
  True - and every operating system has these little niggles that are huge annoyances to some people - c.f. the person who switched to Linux because one version of Minesweeper in Windows needs an internet connection. But if solitaire not being in a window leads one to the conclusion that the solitaire-containing version of Windows is one of the worst desktop operating systems a person has used in the last 10 years - or that it's indicative of a horrible overall user experience... well then I think one is being at best hyperbolic, and at worst complaining about something that would get a person run out of a discussion about any other operating system - after you're given a selection of about a hundred different solitaire programs to try.
  - Qwertious 11y ago
    >True - and every operating system has these little niggles that are huge annoyances to some people - c.f. the person who switched to Linux because one version of Minesweeper in Windows needs an internet connection. That was what 'caused the "screw this" moment', i.e. it was the straw that broke the camel's back.
cm2187 11y ago
So you don't mind that when you right click on something the contextual menu appears at the bottom of the screen, far far away on a 4k display. Or that if the system wants to tell you something, instead of a discreet notification on the bottom right of the screen, a big banner will cover half the screen while you are in the middle of something. This system was full of moronic design decisions, only some of which have been reversed in windows 10.
agumonkey 11y ago
Win8 wasn't properly finished. Vista failed but it was a massive change from Xp and they couldn't, I believe, tailor it properly. Win8 was a reactionary attempt at following multidevice OS / smartphone UX trend with the new found creativity of Metro, but really it felt like a demo, things were too big, too frail, too crude. Win10 doesn't convey that for me, they took the nice elements of Metro design language, adjusted and integrated them into a flat win7 UX.

jwcooper 11y ago

My biggest issue was the metro stuff; mostly the default apps that would open in full screen mode. Opening a PDF or an image in a new Windows 8 installation was always a frustrating surprise. The start menu was confusing, and anytime you'd go into a metro-type application it was jarring.

WalterGR 11y ago
Ah. I guess my experience was different because I installed apps that I preferred over the built-in ones and found a start menu replacement.
- tbrock 11y ago
  Wow. Sounds like Microsoft really nailed the experience on that one. Step 1: replace everything with something else.
  - WalterGR 11y ago
    I don't know what you mean. There are pre-installed apps on OS X, Linux, and Windows. If you don't care for the pre-installed ones, you can install ones that you prefer. Same with the kind-of default 'controls' like the Start Menu, or the Dock, or what various Linux distros call their equivalents. Windows 8/8.1 is Windows 7 with a few improvements and some "Metro" stuff that you can almost entirely avoid.
    - banachtarski 11y ago
      Needing to replace the start menu, which is an integral part of the desktop manager hardly qualifies as a standard practice for a consumer-grade operating system. I found the shipped state of Windows 8 unusable as a power user so I needed to replace it as well. I consider that a complete failure.
      - WalterGR 11y ago
        Needing to replace the start menu, which is an integral part of the desktop manager hardly qualifies as a standard practice for a consumer-grade operating system. And I find the OS X Dock to be an utter abomination. I took advantage of the power I have to install software and installed a replacement. I found the shipped state of Windows 8 unusable as a power user so I needed to replace it as well. Good on you. Though, I still don't understand what the comment I was replying to meant by, "Step 1: replace everything with something else."
        petersellers 11y ago
        > Though, I still don't understand what the comment I was replying to meant by, "Step 1: replace everything with something else." If you have to replace things like the "start menu", the built in pdf reader, the built in settings app, etc. etc. all because of the same UI design flaw it starts to feel like you are fighting with the OS to get to the level of productivity with which you were previously accustomed. If you feel the need to have to do that, then something is wrong with the design of the OS. Obviously this is a subjective opinion that can differ for each individual, but considering the horrible adoption rate of Windows 8 it seems likely that this is an opinion shared by many. Objectively, forcing apps to run in fullscreen mode can be a huge waste of real estate for large computer monitors. The gestures required to summon the "charms" bar and the app switcher are completely unintuitive and awkward for a desktop UI. Things like that make far more sense for mobile devices, but it appears like Windows 8 tried to combine mobile and desktop UIs in a confusing, frustrating, an inefficient way. It's quite telling that these were major design errors as Windows 10 backtracks from that philosophy almost completely.
  - WorldWideWayne 11y ago
    You have to add and replace all sorts of things to make OS X usable. Apple just added the ability to resize a window by it's edges a couple of years ago! And there still is no tiling. And the finder still sucks. But it's got the all-important Unix underpinnings and it's not from Micro$oft.
    - Qwertious 11y ago
      This can often apply to Linux, too. So every major desktop OS requires replacing stuff here and there. Not sure what conclusions we can draw from that, though.
      - WorldWideWayne 11y ago
        The conclusion that you can draw from this is that the person I was replying to has no point.
      - kdevrou 11y ago
        It is true that this can apply to Linux as well. There are plenty of distros available that package as little as possible or provide choice during initial installation. That is where I know that Linux wins over everything else. A huge number of applications, where there is always at least 1 good alternative. Microsoft and Apple can't compete on choice.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

reedlaw 11y ago

Don't you have to deal with Metro when the control panel applet or app you need is Metro-style? I have to see that screen when I hit the Super key to search for an application by name.

yareally 11y ago
Control Panel accessed from the desktop in Windows 8 is the normal Control Panel from previous Windows versions. Tried searching for control panel in the start menu and it launch the desktop control panel for me in 8.1
- wldcordeiro 11y ago
  If I remember right it's because the Metro app was called "Settings" but the control panel still existed as well. I would always just do Win+E then click on the control panel icon in the ribbon.
- reedlaw 11y ago
  I was trying to uninstall something and I hit the Super key and started typing "programs" and up came some Metro app that showed a few apps sorted by size. It didn't show all installed programs. For that I had to find the old Add/Remove Programs control panel which has a regular desktop interface.
- ino 11y ago
  IIRC, some settings were only accessible through the metro settings and not the normal control panel. (user config maybe?)

qmalxp 11y ago

My "screw this" moment was when I discovered you needed an internet connection to play Minesweeper.

MikusR 11y ago
You don't. It works without internet. As Minesweeper is simply a program you can use the old one in Windows 10.
- Qwertious 11y ago
  The Windows Store version does, IIRC.

davnicwil 11y ago

> there may very well be a configuration setting to bypass it and go directly to the desktop You're right, there is. The ability to configure this was one of the updates in 8.1 from 8.0 and was included presumably because of so many complaints in user feedback about it forcing you to click through the metro screen to get to desktop on every reboot.

bobbles 11y ago

These comments are always like this, but the 'aside from XXX its not bad!' is different every time, and writing off a horrible user experience like solitare not being in a freaking window is not a minor thing. Its a huge fucking annoyance

WalterGR 11y ago
True - and every operating system has these little niggles that are huge annoyances to some people - c.f. the person who switched to Linux because one version of Minesweeper in Windows needs an internet connection. But if solitaire not being in a window leads one to the conclusion that the solitaire-containing version of Windows is one of the worst desktop operating systems a person has used in the last 10 years - or that it's indicative of a horrible overall user experience... well then I think one is being at best hyperbolic, and at worst complaining about something that would get a person run out of a discussion about any other operating system - after you're given a selection of about a hundred different solitaire programs to try.
- Qwertious 11y ago
  >True - and every operating system has these little niggles that are huge annoyances to some people - c.f. the person who switched to Linux because one version of Minesweeper in Windows needs an internet connection. That was what 'caused the "screw this" moment', i.e. it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

cm2187 11y ago

So you don't mind that when you right click on something the contextual menu appears at the bottom of the screen, far far away on a 4k display. Or that if the system wants to tell you something, instead of a discreet notification on the bottom right of the screen, a big banner will cover half the screen while you are in the middle of something. This system was full of moronic design decisions, only some of which have been reversed in windows 10.

agumonkey 11y ago

Win8 wasn't properly finished. Vista failed but it was a massive change from Xp and they couldn't, I believe, tailor it properly. Win8 was a reactionary attempt at following multidevice OS / smartphone UX trend with the new found creativity of Metro, but really it felt like a demo, things were too big, too frail, too crude. Win10 doesn't convey that for me, they took the nice elements of Metro design language, adjusted and integrated them into a flat win7 UX.