To be fair, Microsoft killed desktop gadgets and removed the website where you get gadgets while they were still selling an operating system (Windows 7) that listed it as a feature. They literally killed a feature that people had just paid for and didn't change the feature list while continuing to sell it.
I suppose all you guys have Vista/7/8 era event viewers that populate instantly too, just as fast as XP, right?
If I drag-copy a folder from it's original location to a completely empty folder, Explorer will randomly ask me if I wish to overwrite a file -- despite the fact that I'm copying to an empty location. This happens about three times a week and I first saw it with Vista.
When dealing with a large number of files, I will regularly see the dialog box sit there at "Calculating" for several minutes. This has been going on since Vista and is still present and I've observed it on every Vista, 7, and 8 installation on multiple brands of PCs. Anyone who says they haven't seen it is either lying or doesn't do any file operations with more than a dozen or so files.
What I remember is that all of a sudden after Windows 8 came out, that apparently people had been complaining and up in arms for years about the existence of windows with borders on them, buttons, title bars, and the evils of non-full screen apps.
I apparently missed all those complaints over the past two decades. If you believe all the stuff coming out of Microsoft and the Windows 8 fans, apparently non-full screen apps, close buttons, menu bars, and title bars were some intractable evil that people had been picketing in the streets over.
Apparently, everyone also hated the start menu with a burning passion, yet until Windows 8 came out, the only complaint I ever heard was the stupid "har har, you have to press start to shutdown."
Hopefully this goes better than Google's two factor authentication. Google implemented this but, for some reason, didn't feel it necessary to make all of their mobile apps *actually work with it*. I had to stop using Google's two factor auth because I wanted to actually use their mobile apps.
It seems to me that shoehorning a server context menu into a button built into the RDP client is basically saying "we know the Metro UI sucks for servers that are managed remotely, so we're going to take the RDP client, which is used for accessing both workstations and servers remotely, and kludge some macros into a button shoehorned into the titlebar that brings up some server stuff on the remote session." Doesn't seem very elegant, but I guess that's what you get when you try to provide some functionality for a server that has the wrong UI to begin with.
Sure, and remember how Windows XP was hacked to hell in back over a decade ago around the same time?
We can play that game of comparing unsupported, not presently sold, and decades old software all day. As I said in my post, there is a belief that consumers nowadays will accept the same crap that computer geeks accepted over 10 years ago (which is when the products you just mentioned and Windows XP came out). My point is that when you take into account all of the bugs/issues with the current iterations of both OSX, Windows, (and Linux), iPad, Surface, (and Android), and iPhone, Windows Phone, (and Android), the bottom line is that Apple products generally don't need to have additional work done to them by the person who bought it to make them work as advertised or have glaring system level issues that prevent functionality or break during normal use (Windows Update prompting to restart the computer when TrustedInstaller is still in the background still only about half of the way through a patch in the middle of copying files, for example -- yes Windows update still breaks spontaneously, nearly in every case requiring a reinstall because PSS doesn't know what the error codes mean).
A shitty app in an update? Big deal, that happens to OSX, iOS, Windows, Android, and everything else. Fundamental parts of Windows come out of the box broken, planned to be fixed in a service pack, get fixed in a service pack, and then break again in the exact same ways two entire releases later even though those parts haven't even changed.
Also -- the supported platform of a phone OS at the time of release being web apps is not a bug. And to my point -- that phone worked as advertised, right out of the box.
I just don't see the point in "tablets" that small. Phones are starting to creep past 5 inches already. I'm hoping to grab the Surface Pro this Friday, and this will be the smallest I would ever go for a tablet PC form factor. Maybe if I were to go smaller it would be a Kindle or something for reading...
I think putting quotes around 'tablets' was really the way to go, actually. I think at this point, what we call these things is slightly a bit off anyway. We're trying to call something which does more than make phone calls a phone by throwing the word 'smart' in front of it to make 'smartphone' -- and calling anything bigger a tablet, but now we have the form factors meeting up somewhere in the middle around 5-7". It's really all the same thing now except for one little thing -- the one thing that's left, other than size (which IMO is meaningless now), that really distinguishes a "phone" from a "tablet" --- the appearance of a line item on your bill that says "voice."
What happens when we're all using Skype/Facetime/VoIP for all of our calls? Moving toward that trend, at some point, when we're all using VoIP to make a regular calls, the one remaining vestige of "voice service" will probably be the ability to make a reliable and instantly traceable 911 call. It won't be called voice service anymore since we'll all be using VoIP for our calls, we'd only be using their "voice" service for emergency services. So it'll end up being called "emergency services" on our bill.
So at that point, will we distinguish between a "phone" and a "tablet" based on whether you can call 911 on it?
I think we should just call them all PDAs with different sizes for different purposes, small, medium, large, grande, venti, whatever.
Yeah, and that's why we get into situations where "Vista was fine after service pack 1" .. but the thing is, no one cared and they waited for 7 because to them, "Vista sucked" because it came out of the box that way on computers that shouldn't have had a "made for Vista" sticker on them and selling "upgrade" retail boxes as if there were XP computers at the time capable of running it.
It's as if first impressions are not even a consideration when selling a product as well as the apparent belief that the general consumer nowadays will put up with the same crap computer geeks put up with ten years ago -- e.g. unfinished products being sold to them.
It is the most misunderstood aspect of consumers of Apple products -- they don't buy them because they're sheep, they buy them because they appear and function like a finished product on the day they're released.
But back on topic -- I'm happy about Flash being included, as long as I can turn it off too. I whitelist flash-enabled sites in Chrome, so I only get Flash in browser when I deem it necessary.
That has to do with Android's UI/threading model more than anything else. (Eg: in iOS, UI updates preempt all other threads. Which is not the case in Android. So UI updates can seem more sluggish, especially if there is a lot of stuff going on in the background).
I think the best out of the pack are the Samsung Galaxy devices (although, funnily, not the original Galaxy tab), as they seem to me to be the "least laggy" but it's still noticeable -- at least to me -- some say I'm too sensitive to those kinds of things though -shrug-
edit: corrected stupid spelling mistake.