This is also meaningless. What is wrong with people? are you're arguments so ill-conceived and difficult to back-up with real-evidence you have to resort to pure ad hominem?
but the problem is that doesn't actually improve from Windows 7.
I've been using each Windows version since 3.1. When I first started using Windows 95, I used the mouse for the start menu. I couldn't use the Windows key, because my keyboard didn't have a Windows key. Then I learned about Control-Escape to open the start menu. It ruled. In fact I still use it occasionally without thinking about it on occasion.
So, what did I do with the win95 menu:
Control-Escape, R <command> this was the most common. In fact I ran most of my programs this way. winword, excel, etc.
The Programs menu
This replaced Program Manager groups, and allowed essentially subgroups. It was really just a menu-based view of the aggregate folders from All users\Start Menu and the current profile's start menu folder. Populated primarily with shortcuts. This was a novel idea, but it did make navigating to programs a bit harder. With Program Manager, you had ONE set of groups, each which contained icons, so they were no more than two double clicks away, activating Program Manager notwithstanding.
Windows 95's Start Menu complicated this. Think about it: to start, say, Paintbrush in Windows 3.1 took two double-clicks from the desktop. With win95, you had to click the start menu or press control/escape or the windows key, go into Programs, go into Accessories, and click Paint. The bigger cost was actually in the navigation. It worked, and at the time people were getting SO many programs it made sense to allow the groups to be further grouped, but over-organization is as much a problem as not enough, since it can just as easily make things hard to find.
Windows 98SE was what I used next. Mostly the same. I had a keyboard with the windows key so I slowly switched over to using it instead of Control Escape, as well as learning the various shortcuts such as Win-E and Win-D and whatnot. (I don't know if these were in win95, not having a windows key at the time and all). Other than that, usability was pretty much the same. Crappy but usable.
Next I used Windows XP. This was more of a jarring switch. I originally switched the start menu to classic as well as the theme. The former because I thought the new layout to the start menu was oversized and confusing, the latter for performance reasons mostly (I only had an ATI Rage Pro Turbo at the time).
Eventually I warmed up to it and switched to use the theme as well as the XP start menu. It half-solved some of the older start menu problems, in particular it allowed for pinned programs, and didn't expose an API to programs for it. This way, the User determined what got pinned. This is in contrast to earlier versions- install Office 97 and it puts itself right on your start menu. Among other intrusive behaviours. It was still limited though, and the All Programs menu still sucked.
Then they got to thinking about the problem. Why have a heirarchal arrangement of menus when we could just have a box that let you search through some of your stuff? Thus the Search Bar was born. Typing directly into the Start Menu to list search results was a freakin genius idea, and IMO increases usability by about a bajillion. And it expands environment variables, too, thus why %APPDATA% works.
Vista's implementation didn't make the best use of screen real-estate for the feature, and Win7 toggled it up, and made the search results take up the entire Start menu popup. 7 also increased usability across the board and made minor tweaks to some old features, as well as implementing a few other "whiz-bang" enhancements.
Windows 8, I feel, really extends upon the entire philosophy.
How many of us really use the Start->All Programs menu in Vista and 7? I used it for a little while after switching to Vista originally from XP, but once I started to use the Search Bar, it's become a novelty. In fact, every single other entry in the Start Menu is practically wasted space- for me, since I never use it. I'd imagine the Win8 Shell team got usability results back and discovered that a lot of the features of the Start Menu were really wasted space.
Win8 extends this by removing the Start Menu entirely, replacing it with the Start screen. This is a bit of a jarring change to those of us used to the little popup in the corner, but IMO it's not a bad one as people suggest.
1.The start menu was old and disgusting. The All Programs menu is a freaking Joke, and hardly anybody uses anything but search, unless you are on XP. When I have to use Windows XP, not having the search bar almost feels like I'm missing a limb, and the time wasted going through the ridiculously nested All Programs menu to find something that should be a simple search is frustrating.
They expanded it. It is no longer a Start Menu, but a start screen. And it expands the search feature- that is, the feature for which the start menu is most often used- quite a lot.
Semantically, it still works the same as Win7, it just presents the information differently. It's worth noting that I just tested it. in Windows 7, pressing the Windows Key and typing "%APPDATA%" and enter takes me to my Roaming folder. When I do the same in windows 8, it... well it takes me to my roaming folder, so I really think you might have made up that little morsel, or you are doing something differently. Personally I usually used Windows Key R and typed "explorer %APPDATA%" into the run dialog, which works the same in both. And yes I know the "explorer" there is redundant.
Also.... Control-Escape STILL shows the Start Screen, that's freaking awesome. I don't even have to change the latent muscle memory that goes back to Windows 95 for win8.
As far as restart/shutdown, I have to acquiesce there. It's different than Windows 7. However, I would also argue that it is actually more sensible. I still have to do a double-take when dealing with that on win7. (the button says what it will do, but I always expand it and want ot select that default in the menu, and of course it's not there).
Of course, a modern machine you can save all your work and just press the reset or power button on your PC case and it does that action in the OS, so one could also argue that having that feature in the OS at all is overbearing, in a way.
Given that I've been using Windows ever since you had to type the very pragmatic sounding "win" into a DOS command prompt to start it, and I haven't had any major difficulties adjusting, I'd say that a lot of the noise about it is either "it's different so now it sucks" or simply a case of chicken-littling those changes. Or even inventing scenarios (eg. "I was always told to go to start and type in %appdata% to get to the appdata.") Which is fine, because that still works the same way on Windows 8. The big difference is in how the information is presented and that it shows a lot more information, which is a good thing because Search is one of the most commonly used features of Vista and 7. MS focussing on and attempting to improve a feature that is used frequently- and managing to do so without changing the semantic and "muscle memory" of it, is actually pretty cool.
I won't deny that when I use my laptop and go to search for something there is a moment of uncertainty because pressing the windows key now changes the entire screen, but Most of what I actually do requires me to do very little differently. Again, perhaps it's just me, but Like I said it's not like Windows is a new environment to me.
A lot of the issues people are having might be if they switch from XP to Windows 8. Then there is a usability barrier- but that barrier is no different than it would have been with Vista or 7. Which is to say, you basically have to learn to use the Search Bar. With Vista and 7 it provides pretty much the same stupid and fecking pointless "All Programs" menu where companies can advertise their crap. "Start->All Programs->Microsoft Office->Microsoft Office Tools...", so people could always fall back to using the inferior method they were used to. Eventually, people would learn about the search bar- I mean it's hard to miss, really- and type something. Poof. Their result was there. And over time they used it more and more until the All Programs menu was never used, as it should be.
Basically, the Start Menu- more specifically, the "Programs" or "All Programs" menu worked for Windows 9x. This was because the systems simply were not powerful enough to perform on the fly searches. But hardware has inexhorably marched forward, and it is stupid for us to have to fidle through menus searching for that "somewidget" program, when we could have the computer do that search for us. Thus teh search bar. Type somewidget and press enter and there it is.
if I was using XP and the programs I use ran on it, starting them would be something like this:
Visual Studio 2010:
Start->All Programs->Microsoft Visual Studio 2010->Microsoft Visual Studio 2010
Visual Studio 2012:
Start->All Programs->Microsoft Visual Studio 2012->Microsoft Visual Studio 2012
Visual Basic 6:
Start-All Programs->Microsoft Visual Studio 6.0->Microsoft Visual Basic 6.0
etc.
On Win Vista/7 and Win8, it is now:
Visual Studio 2010:
Windows Key type "2010" and press enter.
Visual Studio 2012:
Windows Key type "2012" and press enter.
Visual Basic 6:
Windows Key, type "Visual Basic" and Press enter*
Usability skyrockets. I'm happier because I don't have to bend to antiquated software methodologies of searching through a menu when I know what I'm looking for, and I save time because I don't have to do that as well.
That is just my experience.
Basically, if for no other reason, it improves on Vista and 7 by focussing on that which usability studies confirmed to be used frequently- eg. the search- and removed things that are essentially only there for people that got used to them (eg All Programs menu). At the same time it removed the idea of it showing up as a menu- because there really is no good reason for it to be confined to a little corner of the screen, anyway. part of Windows 8's UI Focus I think was in eliminating screen noise, by making things more focussed. a Good example of this is Office 2013, which uses much of the same style; the menu is a screen of it's own, which let's you focus on the fact that you want to do something to the file.
It is great for Tablets, but not worth it for PCs. Yes, it is mainstream to say that, but just because it is mainstream, it doesn't mean that it is not correct.
it's both mainstream as well as incorrect. Windows 8 introduces touch-screen features to the OS. This is no different than how Windows 95 added Right-click capabilities to the core product; it's analogous to say that Windows 95 is "great if you have a two button mouse, but not worth it otherwise", but that's just plain silly, because Windows 95 added a myriad of other improvements in a variety of aspects going from the standard UX to the Document centric-model of computing.
This article pretty much states why Windows 8 is not a big deal. Even though the guy is beeing a bit harsh (comparing Windows 8 to the first Windowses (lol), it makes a lot of sense.
it's ironic that you would use this, as it has been rebutted about a billion times by other columnists. SJVN. One of the best rebuttals was actually on a site dedicated to exposing the dumber Linux advocates for the insane trolls that they are. Basically, SJVN is a Linux zealot who really has no idea what he is talking about regarding any Operating System. He is an excellent example of just how little integrity tech journalism can have. His articles about how great Linux is or reviewing how "awesome the latest Version of Ubuntu is even though it doesn't have drivers but they will totally have some soon so we'll pretend that is a non-issue" repeatedly appear there and their lack of logic is ripped apart for all to see.
They aren't really biassed, I argue they are mostly after the reality of things. There have been a few FUDs exposed about Microsoft and Apple, but if there is bias I think it's in favour of the former. Nonetheless it doesn't dissuade the logic of the arguments made; and the lack thereof in pretty much everything SJVN writes.
"Your argument is invalid, because I said so. I am super smart. I am the brain of the Internet. I am Power. Your statements are all incorrect. My superior grammar is going to show you how better I am in arguments."
"Your argument is invalid, because I said so. I am super smart. I am the brain of the Internet. I am Power. Your statements are all incorrect. My superior grammar is going to show you how better I am in arguments."
I never said any of that. Interesting that you now resort to direct personal attacks that have nothing to do with the points being discussed.
This is also meaningless. What is wrong with people? are you're arguments so ill-conceived and difficult to back-up with real-evidence you have to resort to pure ad hominem?
of course not. it was a question pointing out that your attempt to validate your argument using "Windows 8 fanboys, Windows 8 fanboys everywhere." was. If your arguments are not ill-conceived and, as a result, difficult to back-up, I imagine you would be able to validate them with something more than a pointless declaration as above, paired with my rebuttal of that information you did cite (which amounted mostly to declarations without much actual evidence like "but the problem is that doesn't actually improve from Windows 7.", which is both baseless and insubstantiated) , all it really needs is a well-reasoned response. The problem is, of course, there is no such thing as a well-reasoned response that makes claims like that, because they do not correspond with reality.
Windows 8 is, in fact, quite good and dose NOT have the kind of limits that developers feared. However there is no need to upgrade from Win 7 unless you find the small additions to be worth $40 (which I did, you might not). It is a solid OS, not any the lesser to Windows 7, just not that big of a step up. And there are plenty of third party Modern UI removers.
Aaaannnnd. . .
Were done. You are off topic. Please move you argument to other channels if you wish to continue it.
I am running Windows 8, and Minecraft works perfectly fine. I recommend that the OP install/reinstall Java 7.
You should NOT need to delete your .mincraft folder as another poster said, this will not help anything unless you messed up a mod.
Also be certain that your graphics drivers are up to date with Win 8 compatible drivers.
Re download the MC launcher (or get the latest version of the one you use).
If you continue to have problems contact customer support for your PC manufacturer.
quite good and dose NOT have the kind of limits that developers feared.
Indeed. One of the big worries from the .NET community was that there would be no way to use .NET languages to create Windows 8 UI-Style Applications. This fear was driven primarily from Microsoft spearheading the new UI Style primarily with Javascript as the underpinning language. However, you can create Windows 8 UI Applications with pretty much any language. (Latest version of Delphi even has a "metropolis" toolset which faciliates the creation of Windows 8 UI Style Apps. Most of the fallacies are perpetuated from 'tech journalists' that "Did not do the research" and are more or less regurgitating what they heard without actually looking much into it. For example I read an article some time ago that stated it would be impossible to developer Win8 Style Applications and release them as Open Source, but the TOS of the Windows Store even has specific exemptions for Free Software where the standard terms would conflict with the ideals of Open Source.
However there is no need to upgrade from Win 7 unless you find the small additions to be worth $40 (which I did, you might not).
Definitely agreed. I only upgraded my laptop, but only because I had to reinstall (HD failure) and because I get free licenses for it (Via the MSDN subscription I received through the MVP Program)- I figured WTF why not. I wasn't keen on it at first but figured I could always just Install Linux Mint again if I didn't like it, but it's turned out quite well. Even so, I have no intention of upgrading this desktop from Windows 7 in the foreseeable future.
Were done. You are off topic. Please move you argument to other channels if you wish to continue it.
Awfully authoritarian, aren't we? I'm sure if a moderator had a problem with it, they would have voiced it, issued infractions, deleted, edited, or split posts from the thread, rather then giving either of us rep points. If they had/has reasonable, logical arguments, I want to hear them, not have them- or responses to them- silenced because it's "off-topic". One could frankly make the argument that the resulting discussion probably would have fit better in the Windows 8 thread, but- you know what? So could the Original Post!
people (and ponies), please let us stop arguing and work together to find a common course if this problem, but also find a solution for this problem. Let us use our language to spark links and connections between us, and not use it against one another to cause perpetual conflicts.
So, if you are reading this, please stop using language as a act of conflicts, but let us use it as a gift that evolution gave us. So, please help the OP come to an answer.
Angrysalamence, over and out. (Love and Tolerate)
The solution is to install the Video Drivers; Either win8 Drivers if they are available, or Windows 7 Drivers- or even Windows Vista Drivers, all three Versions of the OS use the same Driver Model. The Default Drivers that come with Windows 8 are no different from the defaults that come with Windows 7, in that neither actually provides any OpenGL Support.
I have a windows 8 phone, and I really like the windows 8 tablets. But as for a pc? I would partition and have a dual boot, just use windows 8 for what it is meant for, and run everything else; including games, on windows 7.
This is also meaningless. What is wrong with people? are you're arguments so ill-conceived and difficult to back-up with real-evidence you have to resort to pure ad hominem?
To argue this, I will quote myself.
Basically, if for no other reason, it improves on Vista and 7 by focussing on that which usability studies confirmed to be used frequently- eg. the search- and removed things that are essentially only there for people that got used to them (eg All Programs menu). At the same time it removed the idea of it showing up as a menu- because there really is no good reason for it to be confined to a little corner of the screen, anyway. part of Windows 8's UI Focus I think was in eliminating screen noise, by making things more focussed. a Good example of this is Office 2013, which uses much of the same style; the menu is a screen of it's own, which let's you focus on the fact that you want to do something to the file.
it's both mainstream as well as incorrect. Windows 8 introduces touch-screen features to the OS. This is no different than how Windows 95 added Right-click capabilities to the core product; it's analogous to say that Windows 95 is "great if you have a two button mouse, but not worth it otherwise", but that's just plain silly, because Windows 95 added a myriad of other improvements in a variety of aspects going from the standard UX to the Document centric-model of computing.
it's ironic that you would use this, as it has been rebutted about a billion times by other columnists. SJVN. One of the best rebuttals was actually on a site dedicated to exposing the dumber Linux advocates for the insane trolls that they are. Basically, SJVN is a Linux zealot who really has no idea what he is talking about regarding any Operating System. He is an excellent example of just how little integrity tech journalism can have. His articles about how great Linux is or reviewing how "awesome the latest Version of Ubuntu is even though it doesn't have drivers but they will totally have some soon so we'll pretend that is a non-issue" repeatedly appear there and their lack of logic is ripped apart for all to see.
They aren't really biassed, I argue they are mostly after the reality of things. There have been a few FUDs exposed about Microsoft and Apple, but if there is bias I think it's in favour of the former. Nonetheless it doesn't dissuade the logic of the arguments made; and the lack thereof in pretty much everything SJVN writes.
"Your argument is invalid, because I said so. I am super smart. I am the brain of the Internet. I am Power. Your statements are all incorrect. My superior grammar is going to show you how better I am in arguments."
I never said any of that. Interesting that you now resort to direct personal attacks that have nothing to do with the points being discussed.
so, this is not a personal attack?
of course not. it was a question pointing out that your attempt to validate your argument using "Windows 8 fanboys, Windows 8 fanboys everywhere." was. If your arguments are not ill-conceived and, as a result, difficult to back-up, I imagine you would be able to validate them with something more than a pointless declaration as above, paired with my rebuttal of that information you did cite (which amounted mostly to declarations without much actual evidence like "but the problem is that doesn't actually improve from Windows 7.", which is both baseless and insubstantiated) , all it really needs is a well-reasoned response. The problem is, of course, there is no such thing as a well-reasoned response that makes claims like that, because they do not correspond with reality.
Windows 8 is, in fact, quite good and dose NOT have the kind of limits that developers feared. However there is no need to upgrade from Win 7 unless you find the small additions to be worth $40 (which I did, you might not). It is a solid OS, not any the lesser to Windows 7, just not that big of a step up. And there are plenty of third party Modern UI removers.
Aaaannnnd. . .
Were done. You are off topic. Please move you argument to other channels if you wish to continue it.
I am running Windows 8, and Minecraft works perfectly fine. I recommend that the OP install/reinstall Java 7.
You should NOT need to delete your .mincraft folder as another poster said, this will not help anything unless you messed up a mod.
Also be certain that your graphics drivers are up to date with Win 8 compatible drivers.
Re download the MC launcher (or get the latest version of the one you use).
If you continue to have problems contact customer support for your PC manufacturer.
Indeed. One of the big worries from the .NET community was that there would be no way to use .NET languages to create Windows 8 UI-Style Applications. This fear was driven primarily from Microsoft spearheading the new UI Style primarily with Javascript as the underpinning language. However, you can create Windows 8 UI Applications with pretty much any language. (Latest version of Delphi even has a "metropolis" toolset which faciliates the creation of Windows 8 UI Style Apps. Most of the fallacies are perpetuated from 'tech journalists' that "Did not do the research" and are more or less regurgitating what they heard without actually looking much into it. For example I read an article some time ago that stated it would be impossible to developer Win8 Style Applications and release them as Open Source, but the TOS of the Windows Store even has specific exemptions for Free Software where the standard terms would conflict with the ideals of Open Source.
Definitely agreed. I only upgraded my laptop, but only because I had to reinstall (HD failure) and because I get free licenses for it (Via the MSDN subscription I received through the MVP Program)- I figured WTF why not. I wasn't keen on it at first but figured I could always just Install Linux Mint again if I didn't like it, but it's turned out quite well. Even so, I have no intention of upgrading this desktop from Windows 7 in the foreseeable future.
Awfully authoritarian, aren't we? I'm sure if a moderator had a problem with it, they would have voiced it, issued infractions, deleted, edited, or split posts from the thread, rather then giving either of us rep points. If they had/has reasonable, logical arguments, I want to hear them, not have them- or responses to them- silenced because it's "off-topic". One could frankly make the argument that the resulting discussion probably would have fit better in the Windows 8 thread, but- you know what? So could the Original Post!
The solution is to install the Video Drivers; Either win8 Drivers if they are available, or Windows 7 Drivers- or even Windows Vista Drivers, all three Versions of the OS use the same Driver Model. The Default Drivers that come with Windows 8 are no different from the defaults that come with Windows 7, in that neither actually provides any OpenGL Support.