On 7/31/2010 6:47 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> I'm looking, but cannot find an NG for Windows 7.
>
> Gotta be one, right?
>
> But where?

alt.windows7.general

Microsoft is discontinuing all their newsgroups in favor of web forums.

--
Peter Taylor

 

On 08/01/2010 01:58 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Peter Taylor:
>> Microsoft is discontinuing all their newsgroups in favor of web forums.
>
> Are these the same guys that designed the Windows 7 UI?.... -)

No, the people who did this are in the control freak department.

--
Alias

 

On 08/01/2010 03:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Alias:
>> On 08/01/2010 01:58 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>> Per Peter Taylor:
>>>> Microsoft is discontinuing all their newsgroups in favor of web forums.
>>>
>>> Are these the same guys that designed the Windows 7 UI?.... -)
>>
>> No, the people who did this are in the control freak department.
>
> But I bet both departments are under the Gratuitous Changes With
> No Added Functionality But Much Added Inconvenience division....
>
> I'm no technophobe and I'd say that Windows 7 has gotten to a
> degree of arcane-ness that's approaching Linux.
>
> If somebody has XP down cold, they should not have to spend time
> trying to figure how to perform functions that they have
> programmed into their lower brain stem along with how to tie
> one's shoelaces.
>
> Seems like when MS is crafting a new OS/UI, there should be a
> committee or something that developers have to go before to
> justify any deviation from the prior OS' UI.

I don't find Win 7 to be all that much different than XP. New eye candy
and some changes as to where things are but basically same old same old
Windows. The "aero" seems like a poor imitation of Compiz, though

--
Alias

 

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
>
> If somebody has XP down cold, they should not have to spend time
> trying to figure how to perform functions that they have
> programmed into their lower brain stem along with how to tie
> one's shoelaces.
>
> Seems like when MS is crafting a new OS/UI, there should be a
> committee or something that developers have to go before to
> justify any deviation from the prior OS' UI.


+1

 

On 08/01/2010 07:45 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Alias:
>> I don't find Win 7 to be all that much different than XP. New eye candy
>> and some changes as to where things are but basically same old same old
>> Windows. The "aero" seems like a poor imitation of Compiz, though
>
> You didn't have any problem with the Control Panel and having to
> drill down through all those arbitrary categories before finding
> something that used tb right there on the screen?
>
> I finally found the "Small Icons".. or whatever they call it...
> option. But until then.... geeze!

XP has the same problem and the solution is similar.

>
> And even then, I'd like to hear their rationale for changing
> "Add/Remove Programs" to "Programs and Features"..... Smacks of
> techweenies to me.

Agreed.

>
> I *still* haven't figured out how to do all of what I used to do
> with a FolderWindow | Tools | Folder Options | View | Apply to
> All Folders.

Nor have I

>
> And if "Aero" means those pop-up thumbnails from TaskBar
> MousOvers... that made me crazy until I found TaskBarTweaker.
> It's also quite confusing to a new user.

I like that feature but I've been using it in Linux for years.

> Maybe I'm just getting old and crabby......

Then cheer up. You're still alive ...

--
Alias

 

On 08/01/2010 11:43 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Alias:
>>> I finally found the "Small Icons".. or whatever they call it...
>>> option. But until then.... geeze!
>>
>> XP has the same problem and the solution is similar.
>
> That has not been my experience in, maybe, 20-30 XP installs.

It has categories by default. You probably change it out of habit
without thinking. I'm not in XP to check at the moment to check so I
could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time

>
> I have forgotten what Control Panel's view defaults to
> (Thumbnails, Tiles, Icons, List, or Details.... probably one of
> the icon-ish views) - but they are all the same in that they are
> granular: i.e. there is no higher level that the user has to
> drill down through... just a plain alphabetical presentation.
>
> If 7's default were Icons, it would save a lot of "WTF?!!!"s by
> XP migrants.
>
> Stuff like this might sound nit-picking - and I would agree that
> complaining about any single instance of UI change probably is
> just that.
>
> But when you add up dozens and dozens of little differences added
> for no apparent reason other than to be cool or to differentiate
> the product, you get quite a significant hit on usability for a
> person coming from the previous UI.
>
> Multiply that hit by 12,000-13,000 people working in a big
> building and that's some serious time and money - for what?
> Nothing, IMHO.

I agree but what are you gonna do? I use Linux most of the time.

--
Alias

 

On 08/02/2010 02:03 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Alias:
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree but what are you gonna do? I use Linux most of the time.
>
>
> I dabbled in Linux for a few months trying to get a freebie
> Tivo-On-Steroids app whose name I've forgotten (the bad memories
> fade....) working reliably.
>
> Since then, I've tended to diss Linux - more, I think, bco the
> nightmare of trying to get that app to work than anything else.
>
> Now, having built a few Windows systems for technophobes who only
> want to browse web pages and do email, I'm coming around to the
> suspicion that somebody who really knows that they are doing
> Linux-wise (that's NOT me....) could set up a box for said
> technophobes that would be just as reliable as a Windows box,
> significantly easier on the user and, of course, cheaper.

Not to mention no malware problems.

--
Peter

 

On 08/02/2010 04:46 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Peter:
>>> technophobes that would be just as reliable as a Windows box,
>>> significantly easier on the user and, of course, cheaper.
>>
>> Not to mention no malware problems.
>
> I hadn't thought about that.
>
> That's a significant consideration too.
>
> Even though I can set up a box with a freebie anti virus like
> Avast, the time will come when the freebie license expires and
> the user is confronted with a renewal dialog.
>
> In fact, I had one box totally hosed when the user chose "Ignore"
> on one of Avast's virus warning screens.

Avast doesn't do that anymore. One time registration is enough. That
said, viruses aren't the only malware out there.

--
Peter

 

: Avast doesn't do that anymore. One time registration is enough. That
: said, viruses aren't the only malware out there.

Avast Free still requires annual renewal.

 

On 8/2/2010 57 PM, Do Dah Zippity wrote:
> : Avast doesn't do that anymore. One time registration is enough. That
> : said, viruses aren't the only malware out there.
>
> Avast Free still requires annual renewal.
>
>

Hm, you're right. I could have sworn that I saw that was changed when I
updated to 5.0.

--
Peter Taylor

 

On 8/2/2010 66 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Peter Taylor:
>> Hm, you're right. I could have sworn that I saw that was changed when I
>> updated to 5.0.
>
> What's changed is that you don't have to go through having them
> email you the new registration code and paste it into the app.

Now I remember!

--
Peter Taylor