Windows 11 update screwed up checkbox and radiobox size on older dialogs

[Randy222]

I absolutely agree with this. I really do dislike the Windows 11 user interface (and the WinUI 3 UI paradigm for modern-day apps) on my dual-screen workstation.  And yet it works great on my Microsoft Surface convertible.

Microsoft absolutely should either offer a choice of UIs, or (probably more realistically) separate the OS into a Mobile Edition (with the current W11 UI) and a Workstation Edition (with the W7 UI). Apple (Sorry, @Randy222, "Crapple") did exactly that. So could Microsoft.

So just swap out the Win 11 UI. Ahhhhh, right, almost forgot.

[SteveThackery]

I absolutely agree with this. I really do dislike the Windows 11 user interface (and the WinUI 3 UI paradigm for modern-day apps) on my dual-screen workstation.  And yet it works great on my Microsoft Surface convertible.

Microsoft absolutely should either offer a choice of UIs, or (probably more realistically) separate the OS into a Mobile Edition (with the current W11 UI) and a Workstation Edition (with the W7 UI). Apple (Sorry, @Randy222, "Crapple") did exactly that. So could Microsoft.

So just swap out the Win 11 UI. Ahhhhh, right, almost forgot.

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible. That's why I wish they'd split it into two separate OSs, a bit like Apple has.

Of course this is just fantasy and wishful thinking: it's never going to happen.

[themadhippy]

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible

no its not,i can log out ,click a little box on the login screen re login  and Voila a completely different look and way of working

[Randy222]

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible

no its not,i can log out ,click a little box on the login screen re login  and Voila a completely different look and way of working

Whaaaaaaa? It's that simple, just a checkbox? That's crazy.
 

 

Steve will likely reply with "this is about Windows, I mean Windows is impossible and Win11 gui is crap",.... which is a true statement. 

[themadhippy]

Whaaaaaaa? It's that simple, just a checkbox? That's crazy.

To be 100% transparent you do have to enter a command in the terminal  to download and install your chosen alternative ui,but thats a 1 time thing

[tooki]

I absolutely agree with this. I really do dislike the Windows 11 user interface (and the WinUI 3 UI paradigm for modern-day apps) on my dual-screen workstation.  And yet it works great on my Microsoft Surface convertible.

Microsoft absolutely should either offer a choice of UIs, or (probably more realistically) separate the OS into a Mobile Edition (with the current W11 UI) and a Workstation Edition (with the W7 UI). Apple (Sorry, @Randy222, "Crapple") did exactly that. So could Microsoft.

So just swap out the Win 11 UI. Ahhhhh, right, almost forgot.

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible. That's why I wish they'd split it into two separate OSs, a bit like Apple has.

And meanwhile, Apple is little by little merging the two OSes replacing macOS with iOS, no matter how little fucking sense it makes. 

[SteveThackery]

And meanwhile, Apple is little by little merging the two OSes replacing macOS with iOS, no matter how little fucking sense it makes. 

Oh, FFS, I didn’t realise that's what they are up to.

[Randy222]

Whaaaaaaa? It's that simple, just a checkbox? That's crazy.

To be 100% transparent you do have to enter a command in the terminal  to download and install your chosen alternative ui,but thats a 1 time thing

That's even more crazy. So we can have 1-2-3-4-n number if UI's available as a checkbox during login. Hmmmm, seems mycrudsoft was never able to learn this trick. 

[Randy222]

And meanwhile, Apple is little by little merging the two OSes replacing macOS with iOS, no matter how little fucking sense it makes. 

No/low sales of MacOS, so maybe a new OS under the plastic bezel that says "Apple MAC" is a thing to try. Crapple has an unbelievable amount of cash on hand, blowing a B or two makes no difference. I mean look, apple is raising prices, and, the suckers buying it are ok with the higher prices.

[tom66]

I absolutely agree with this. I really do dislike the Windows 11 user interface (and the WinUI 3 UI paradigm for modern-day apps) on my dual-screen workstation.  And yet it works great on my Microsoft Surface convertible.

Microsoft absolutely should either offer a choice of UIs, or (probably more realistically) separate the OS into a Mobile Edition (with the current W11 UI) and a Workstation Edition (with the W7 UI). Apple (Sorry, @Randy222, "Crapple") did exactly that. So could Microsoft.

So just swap out the Win 11 UI. Ahhhhh, right, almost forgot.

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible. That's why I wish they'd split it into two separate OSs, a bit like Apple has.

Of course this is just fantasy and wishful thinking: it's never going to happen.

Microsoft did that.  They had Windows Phone.  It was based on the Windows NT kernel in later releases. 

It was a commercial disaster.  I doubt they'll repeat it.

I still remember my friend having bought one and two weeks later returned it because he realised basically no apps for it existed, and it could not run Android apps too (IIRC Blackberry could do that on some of their phones.)

[Randy222]

Windows on a phone? They can do it again given that vT and WSL is working well, so you could essentially have a VM, Android Emulator, and Windows all on phone at same time. Could I say, the micro-soft workers are not interested.

[SteveThackery]

Microsoft did that.  They had Windows Phone.  It was based on the Windows NT kernel in later releases. 

It was a commercial disaster.  I doubt they'll repeat it.

I owned a Windows phone - a Nokia 1520 - and I think the Windows Phone OS was fantastic. I loved it. The modern iOS and Android are remarkably similar, and both are strongly reminiscent of 1990s desktop paradigms. Windows Phone was astonishingly different - genuinely new and radical. The way text was used, not just as text, but as an artistic element, was a completely new and different take on user interface design. In my opinion, iOS and Android were both looking tired when Windows Phone came out, even though they were only a few years old. iOS and Android still feel old-fashioned to me.

I think Windows Phone collapsed for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was just too radically different: different enough to alienate many, probably most, people. Secondly, it entered the doom loop whereby developers didn't develop apps for it because of its unpopularity, and buyers didn't buy it because there werent enough apps.

Thirdly, and to me this is the most interesting: Microsoft claimed that the user interface design was fundamentally flawed because it could not scale sufficiently to handle the complex features of modern applications. Perhaps they were right, but I think they gave up too easily. I think that if they were genuinely committed to the OS, they could have taken it a lot further. But, they wanted out, and this was a convenient excuse.

The desktop version of Windows 8, and Windows Phone 7 and 8, were the first radically new UI paradigms since the emergence of the WIMP interface. I am happy to give that one to Microsoft. The backtracking they did since, where we've ended up with the messy, clunky, kludgy, half-baked UI of Windows 11.... well, I give that one to Microsoft, too. They have spoiled it, all in the name of making a single OS that scales without change from the smallest tablet screen to the multi-display workstation.

[themadhippy]

Totally of the wall thought but

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible

Is that not how windows started life? as an alternative user interface to DOS?

[SteveThackery]

Totally of the wall thought but

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible

Is that not how windows started life? as an alternative user interface to DOS?

Things were so much simpler in those days. But yes - it presented a new UI to the user, and a new API for programs to use.

[tszaboo]

Microsoft did that.  They had Windows Phone.  It was based on the Windows NT kernel in later releases. 

It was a commercial disaster.  I doubt they'll repeat it.

I owned a Windows phone - a Nokia 1520 - and I think the Windows Phone OS was fantastic. I loved it.

Agreed, everything just worked on it, animations were fast, and it worked a lot better than many Androi phones at the time. These phones were running faster than many 8 GB android phone now, and they did that with 512MB of RAM. A browser tab by google will take more than that. Only reason I switched when my banking app and skype ceased to work.

[NE666]

Also an ex-Nokia Windows Phone user.

Loved the tiled interface and the hardware was solid too, with good cameras/lenses, and removeable batteries and storage cards. Not happy when I was forced to return to the 'Fisher Price' styled offerings of either iOS or Android.

[tooki]

And meanwhile, Apple is little by little merging the two OSes replacing macOS with iOS, no matter how little fucking sense it makes. 

No/low sales of MacOS, so maybe a new OS under the plastic bezel that says "Apple MAC" is a thing to try. Crapple has an unbelievable amount of cash on hand, blowing a B or two makes no difference. I mean look, apple is raising prices, and, the suckers buying it are ok with the higher prices.

Macs continue to sell well.

The problem was that for several years, Apple had a head of design who didn't give two shits about usability, and just wanted shit to look cool. (And as I understand it, he was not highly respected by veteran designers within Apple.) So we got "Liquid Glass" with transparent text on transparent backgrounds and Duplo block-scale window corner radii... Mercifully, in the past year he's jumped ship to Meta, and the successor was a highly respected veteran designer promoted from within, and already he's undone some of the mess.

It's obvious to long-time Mac users that Apple's heads of design and UI for years have leaned too far from the graphic arts side, not from usability. (Jobs was always able to push back when the artists got too artsy. Without him, they kinda went too far, and it shows that they either did not understand usability, or simply did not care.)

And on the other hand, I can understand wanting to unify the underpinnings of the OSes and the APIs, but lots of the iOS->Mac ports have been shockingly sloppy.

[Randy222]

From what I can find, MAC sales are in decline for a few years now, possibly longer.
Granted, a yearly decline on just MAC is not the big picture of things, because during this same timeframe the overall "pc" sales is in decline.
However, the net diff is MAC decline is more than the other PC sellers that are not MAC machines.

https://www.tomshardware.com/software/macos/sales-of-macs-down-34-year-over-year-but-apple-is-optimistic

[themadhippy]

From what I can find, MAC sales are in decline for a few years now, possibly longer.

But how much of that is due to macs being able to run the latest os   longer than a windows pc?

[Randy222]

From what I can find, MAC sales are in decline for a few years now, possibly longer.

But how much of that is due to macs being able to run the latest os   longer than a windows pc?

Not sure. An automotive company would perhaps like to build stuff that dies sooner than the others, yet still have some weird grip on the consumer so they buy the brand again (crapple biz model). If the makers built stuff to last forever then it's a one-way dead-end street for sales. I think only some of the older folks who bought a Speed Queen washer long ago can say they bought the item just once.

[PlainName]

Totally of the wall thought but

I think having two UIs on the same OS would be almost impossible

Is that not how windows started life? as an alternative user interface to DOS?

No. Windows was a different OS and API. You couldn't run a DOS app under Windows (except in a DOS box, which wasn't Windows), and you couldn't run a Windows app under DOS. So basically it was dual-OS, dual-UI. Later it didn't need DOS to get going and wound up as we have it now.

[themadhippy]

and you couldn't run a Windows app under DOS.

im certain i ran paint in  dosbox,  but back then they were exe's as apps hadnt been invented

[Analog Kid]

and you couldn't run a Windows app under DOS.

im certain i ran paint in  dosbox,  but back then they were exe's as apps hadnt been invented

You're saying .exes aren't "apps"? What's your definition of an "app"?
Windoze still runs .exe programs.

DOS knew about two flavors of executable programs:

• .com programs, which had to fit into 64K of memory (they were loaded as straight images with everything in one segment) unless the programmer did some fancy footwork
• .exe programs which were relocatable, used multiple segments and weren't limited to 64K

I used to write tons of .com programs:

Code: [Select]

code       SEGMENT
           ASSUME CS:code, DS:code
           ORG   100H     ;.com programs always start execution at this offset
start:     [do something]


[PlainName]

and you couldn't run a Windows app under DOS.

im certain i ran paint in  dosbox,  but back then they were exe's as apps hadnt been invented

There were graphical DOS apps (where 'app' means application aka .exe or .com, not the current usage), and it's possible that there was a paint app that ran under DOS. But Windows Paint needed Windows to run. It wouldn't run under DOS either as the sole OS or as a DOS box - what would be the point of the latter since Windows would be running to enable the DOS box! However, you may have been able too start Paint from the DOS box, but it would be running under Windows.

[SteveThackery]

No. Windows was a different OS and API. You couldn't run a DOS app under Windows (except in a DOS box, which wasn't Windows), and you couldn't run a Windows app under DOS. So basically it was dual-OS, dual-UI. Later it didn't need DOS to get going and wound up as we have it now.

The first versions of Windows ran on top of DOS. Windows offered a UI to the user, and an API to programs designed as "Windows programs". Whether that counted as an OS in its own right is a semantic discussion. My instinct is to say that the combination of DOS+Windows was the OS.

Thank goodness that horrible kludge was terminated after Windows Me.