4 ms·
Wow, they are actually starting to care about quality. Color me surprised.
by solarkraft 5mo ago
Wow, they are actually starting to care about quality. Color me surprised.
- Almondsetat 5mo agoDon't worry, once enough people come back, they'll roll back in the ads and the intrusive performance-killing features and the cycle will repeat all over again
- brokencode 5mo agoMicrosoft has long had a tick tock cycle for Windows. 98: great. ME: bad. XP: great. Vista: bad. 7: great. 8: bad. 10: great. 11: bad
- qzw 5mo agoMaybe “great” is going a bit far for some of those. “Not bad” vs “bad” seems more realistic.
- kelvinjps10 5mo ago10 was bad 11 is a little better but no enough. With win10 they started with more annoying ads and the start menu with apps and the click bait news in the start menu
- Levitating 5mo agostill leaps better than windows 8
- sunaookami 5mo agoAside from the start menu no, not really. Windows 8 is the most performant operating system. No laggy animations (thanks to DirectUI), fast boot time, especially fast on older systems. Windows 10 started the whole lagfest.
- bigstrat2003 5mo ago"aside from the start menu" is one hell of a caveat. When you screw up one of the main UI elements as badly as they did, it really drags the whole experience down.
- sunaookami 5mo agoWell most people just press the Windows key and type to open a program which works exactly the same on Win8. And personally I loved the start screen. And how often do you really need the start menu?
- Citizen_Lame 5mo agoThat's the most brain dead take I've seen in a while. Yes, forget about start menu and lets just search everything or use giant pictorials designed for 'blind' people.
- sunaookami 5mo agoNot what I said.
- donkeylazy456 5mo agoexactly! I don't understand why people hated it so much. It was snappy, clean OS. I've always thought it was better than Win7. Of course, absent of start menu was terrible choice. And I meant 8.1, not 8.
- thewebguyd 5mo agoIt was, eventually. In the beginning 10 was literally just Windows 8.1 (it even ran the same NT6 kernel) but with the classic UI slapped back on. They called it 10 to get away from the Windows 8 branding that everyone hated. I recall it being pretty mediocre at release, just a reskinned 8.1. 10 started to come into its own much later after NT10
- hypercube33 5mo agoWindows 8 was ultra stable. I've seen uptime well over multiple years on it. The original UX was beyond awful and 8.1 made it ok but the core of the OS was solid.
- kelvinjps10 5mo agoIdk, I literally skipped Windows 8.
- contextfree 5mo agoA fundamental problem with this is that "8" is two different releases (8.0 and 8.1), "10" is about 9 different releases, and "11" is three different releases so far (21H2, 22H2, and 24H2). It doesn't make much sense to lump all of them together because they share the same marketing name; technically there's no difference between going from 8.0 to 8.1 or from 22H2 to 24H2 and going from Vista to 7 or 10 20H1 to 11 21H2
- CrimsonCape 5mo agoMaybe Windows 12 will be the promised "last Windows" which 10 was supposed to be. I'd love to know the exec who ordered Windows 11. It stinks of "I need a product on my resume that I launched because being Windows 10 "maintainer" sounds so pathetic on a resume."
- kristianp 5mo agoI mean, apart from killing the start button and all the touch first applications, windows 8 felt really satisfying to me by eliminating transparency effects and having simpler, clearer window decorations. I hate the transparency effects in windows 7, and performance was improved in Win 8.
- JamesStuff 5mo agoYou can always really on the MBAs
- runjake 5mo agoI can't downvote this comment, because I've observed exactly this practice happen, again and again, over the past three decades. I still remain naively hopeful and cheer them on, however.
- dgellow 5mo agoAnyone who tried to do serious native windows dev has been burnt so often by Microsoft. I really wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt with WinUI 3 but I really cannot anymore. Until proven otherwise I expect absolutely nothing to improve meaningfully. It’s extremely sad for those of us who were dumb enough to think Microsoft take on modern GUI would be interesting to follow closely, we are in 2026 and WPF is still the way to go IMHO.
- Rohansi 5mo ago> we are in 2026 and WPF is still the way to go IMHO. Why not Avalonia? It's not Microsoft but it is a spiritual successor to WPF, cross-platform, and open source.
- dgellow 5mo agoSure, Avalonia is fine. I meant specifically Microsoft offering
- Rohansi 5mo agoWhy limit yourself to Microsoft's offerings? They've dropped the ball on all of their UI frameworks I don't see why anyone would trust them to build software on. Give it a few more years and MAUI will join the list of abandoned UI frameworks and another one will pop up
- dgellow 5mo agoI was specifically talking about my frustration with Microsoft. MAUI was indeed pretty much on arrival, what a waste of the Xamarin name…
- vrighter 5mo agoThat's the one I use now. But it still feels laggy to me.
- jimjimjim 5mo ago
- iknowstuff 5mo agoTheir recent post about explorer performance was “we raise clocks when you launch explorer” rather than an actual fix
- pjmlp 5mo agoNah, mostly marketing. The only people that still buy into this are folks that never developed anything with WinUI, aka WinUI 3.0. Since Windows 8, they messed up the development experience so bad, that they managed to turn many advocates like myself into vocal critics. We avoid anything WinRT unless there is no way to do the same with Win32, classical COM (WinRT is an evolution of COM), or regular .NET (Forms/WPF). And also post regularly about the actual state of the tooling unlike Microsoft's marketing posts. Example, they keep mentioning about WinUI being supported in C++, but never mention how bad C++/WinRT dev experience has become, or that the framework is in maintenance, and has been superseded by WIL.