Windows 11: Why does Microsoft think they should change the START menu?

[Bicurico]

My laptop just updated to Windows 11. I did the upgrade for professional reasons, as a distributor of professional CAD/CAM/CAE software, I am required to use the latest versions of the operating system and applications we sell.

Anyway, after the computer booted into Windows 11 for the first time, I was greeted by this HORRIBLE new START menu. Yes, you can move it to the left, but you can no longer pin your favorite applications in groups for a quick access, like you do on Windows 10. Instead, they are pinned on a first START screen, where you cannot group them at all and only the first 15 are shown. If you want to see more, you need to scroll to the next page.

It gets worse: half of the START menu is used for recommendations: last accessed documents or applications. Why Microsoft? Why should I want to show my students and customers which were the last documents I accessed? Hello? Have you heard of privacy?

So next I searched how to get the old START menu back and found this Registry hack:

Open: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced
Then right-click on Advanced and select New → DWORD (32-bit) Value.
Name the new value Start_ShowClassicMode.

But, it does not work, because Microsoft disabled this key with heir latest November, 24th update.

WHY THE F*** DOES MICROSOFT INVEST SO MUCH TIME AND MONEY IN ANNOYING THEIR CUSTOMERS???
LEAVE THE F***ING START MENU ALONE!

It's not that I dislike Windows generically, like many do, and I am stuck on using it due to most professional software running on Windows only. But they make it really hard.

I dislike Linux even more than Windows and I think it is far away from real usability for the masses. Plus it lacks the professional software and drivers. Finally it is difficult to earn money developing software for Linux due to the GNU licenses and what not. Anyway, this is not a thread to discuss Windows vs Linux vs MacOSX (which I dislike, too, especially because once Apple considers your iMac/MacBook obsolete, you are excluded from getting most of the software, despite it being able to run perfectly well on your hardware - the proof being that you can hack MacOSX to install anyway).

This is just a runt on the stupid new START menu. I hope they get quickly a major shitstorm from users and revert back to the old one - or at least reactivate the Registry hack option.

Regards,
Vitor

[tszaboo]

L'art pour l'art.
It's like the change for Windows 8. Everyone hated it, and they went back on it eventually.
I don't think I will install Windows 11.

[PKTKS]

Just came across my attention recently how
they actually handle things...  like PERPETUAL and property

over what is now their property on GITHUB buz...


Contributor License Agreement (microsoft.com)

    Licenses.

    Copyright License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license in the Submission to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute the Submission and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third parties.
    Patent License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license under Your patent claims that are necessarily infringed by the Submission or the combination of the Submission with the Project to which it was Submitted to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell and import or otherwise dispose of the Submission alone or with the Project.



INSANITY or landlord fever ?

I will not write or support a single BIT of such terms...
Paul

[Marco]

What the hell does Microsoft want ... the Windows 10 start menu might not have been popular for users, but for corporations it was pretty useful. XML configuration, lock all the important stuff behind nice big tiles etc. This new start menu seems designed specifically for the dumbest subset of normal users and almost unusable for corporations.

When you customize the Start layout, you overwrite the entire full layout. A partial Start layout isn't available. Users can pin and unpin apps, and uninstall apps from Start. You can't prevent users from changing the layout.

What the hell is Microsoft doing? I don't want to get forced to buy Apple in the future, stop bloody failing Microsoft.

PS. as for why this happened, the new configuration is in JSON ... I assume they just have too much churn and there are no adults left to make decisions.

[kaz911]

Well all the "Windows 10" updates kept adding more and more "advertising" for me

I "cross graded" to MacOS 2-3 years ago - and now my very stubborn better half who absolutely HATES new things has "cross graded" to MacOS as well. It took her about a week to get used to but it is like a breath of fresh air vs Windows 10 / 11.

The final straw for my better half was the amount of crap they kept serving up in Solitaire. She likes her puzzles and card games - but MS Solitaire became "advertising from hell" product - and that was the straw that broke the camels back.

We both have a Win 11 "parallels" available. But we rarely use it apart from for a few engineering tools (and Visio)

I still have a few Win 10 machines running - but every time I turn them on it is "wait 20 minutes to install updates" before you can work. Then the updates force the Anti "virus" scanner to run - then the indexer runs - so if you are on battery - 25% of the battery have drained due to "updates" and related start up issues. Then after normal update - Microsoft "Store" then starts updating all the "little app's" - and reinstall ALL the crap utilities I have uninstalled before and neither want or need.

Microsoft are bonkers...

Btw I do not think Apple and MacOS is without issues. But the user experience is just so so much better. The HW might be crappily made - and expensive. But it is not full of the constant Microsoft nagging and advertising.

[MrMobodies]

L'art pour l'art.
It's like the change for Windows 8. Everyone hated it, and they went back on it eventually.
I don't think I will install Windows 11.

It looked too bloated for me so I just used Classicshell which also takes care of the breadcrumbs thing that interferes with my view of the path.

[Ranayna]

I coudn't care less about the start menu, to be honest.
Stuff where i regularly use the history of gets pinned to start, enabling me to right-click them to access said history.
Stuff without history requirements that i regularly use gets placed into a taskbar toolbar (Small Icons, no Text).
Everything else gets searched, and i am also one of the old farts that places desktop icons on installation :p So if i do not remember a name i hit Win+D to look for it on the desktop.

What i *hate* though, is that Microsoft has destroyed the Taskbar. For how I work, that is way more important issue.
I want the taskbar to never combine items, and to show the names of the programs. I want to know what is open, and i want to be able to quickly switch between application
That requires space, obviously, so i place the taskbar vertically left on my main monitor. Since 4:3 and 16:10 screens are almost not available anymore, vertical screenspace is at a premium nowadays anyway.

[Fred27]

I've been using Windows 11 extensively for a few months. I'm a professional software developer but currently use my own hardware working from home, so it's not just a bit of browsing. It did take a little bit of adjustment but I have to say I'm very happy with Windows 11. It was stable even when in beta and I had no compatability issues. There are obviously a few things where I'm more used to the Windows 10 way (like the explorer right click menu) but nothing serious.

[Doctorandus_P]

If the'd make something that would work properly, then everyone wants to stick to it.

If Windoze users are happy with what they have, they do not want to "upgrade".

Therefore they constantly change silly things for no particular reason at all, and of course you are forced to use the garbage that they shove down your throat. If they gave you the choice to make your own choices (such as the start menu) then you would stick to those things that you like, and therefore stop wanting to upgrade.

[tszaboo]

L'art pour l'art.
It's like the change for Windows 8. Everyone hated it, and they went back on it eventually.
I don't think I will install Windows 11.

It looked too bloated for me so I just used Classicshell which also takes care of the breadcrumbs thing that interferes with my view of the path.

Ok, then an other, bigger reason: I have a crypto wallet on my PC, and not going to update until it is prooven to be 100% safe and functional.

[Algoma]

Its like somone at Microsoft needs to justify their job by making changes that nobody asked for.

Microsoft has consistently made every second product release / revision an epic failure of functional design. Often by trying new interface design ideas, usually copied from other products, but having them differnt enough to ultimately be far less useful.

[SiliconWizard]

Its like somone at Microsoft needs to justify their job by making changes that nobody asked for.

To be honest, this scheme has become the de facto standard in the software industry.

Microsoft has consistently made every second product release / revision an epic failure of functional design. Often by trying new interface design ideas, usually copied from other products, but having them differnt enough to ultimately be far less useful.

Yeah. Sort of. But ever since Windows 8, MS has taken such a drastic turn that every Windows version from this point on is going to be pretty annoying for any kind of "power" user. MS is only responding to the needs of IT departments and "newbie" users, and then their "cloud" agenda. The rest can f*ck off, they don't care. Apparently they stated that MS loved Linux ( https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/windowsserver/2015/05/06/microsoft-loves-linux/ ), so I guess their message is somehow that power users should switch to Linux and stop bothering MS, because they have better fish to fry at MS. (Read: a lot more money to make elsewhere.)

[neil555]

Have you seen StartAllBack?

https://www.startallback.com/

This fixes a LOT of issues with Windows 11 (Win 7/10 style start menu, click on the taskbar for Task manager, remove the annoying right click menu issue etc)

[coromonadalix]

Msoft think they are smart enough to think  you will adapt to their view / look and feel      lolll

"they" think you will love their way of doing ... be the most "productive" user around by clicking "useless" times for a function  ....

[Bicurico]

Arghhh... They changed the right button context menu, too.
All your custom actions are now in a sub-menu.
I use Notepad++ a lot to open config files. This now takes longer as I have an extra layer of menus. What a stupid decision.
An why does Microsoft insist in supporting ZIP archives in a lousy way. It only confus s users. With the current change, the context menu shows Microsoft's ZIP Menü. To get to 7Zip, one needs to select Other Options... first.

[Zero999]

At one stage I remember there was talk of porting a Linux desktop, KDE I think, to Windows, but I don't believe it was ever done. Now the Windows desktop seems to be upsetting more power users with every version/update, it might actually happen.

[cliffyk]

At one stage I remember there was talk of porting a Linux desktop, KDE I think, to Windows, but I don't believe it was ever done. Now the Windows desktop seems to be upsetting more power users with every version/update, it might actually happen.

Windows has been change just for the sake of change since XP, it's as though it has been "updated" by a group of children playing in a technological sandbox--I stopped using it (and most MS products) personally about 15 years ago, and professionally  (and all MS products) 5 years ago when I retired.

6 months ago my wife bought an HP laptop that cam with W10, after using it for a couple months she told me she "wanted her old computer back", so overwrote the W10 with a backup image of her old W7 system--instant joy...

[Bicurico]

Not all is bad.

Windows 11 will actually run our CAD/CAM applications faster, reducing calculation time noticeably, compared to Windows 10.

Also, Windows 10/11 is pretty robust, too. We handle CAM applications where the CAD model alone is over 1GB in size! The resulting CAM project can be a 10GB folder. The computer has 32-64GB RAM, SSD, multiple cores running in parallel, etc.

Windows allows a huge number of periferals, drivers, etc. to be installed and you actually don't see that many BSOF (Blue Screen of Death), considering the amount of options.

I don't have complaints in this area.

What really annoys me, are the little things: why change the stupid START menu to something which is obviously WORSE? Why not give the options to revert to the old START menu?

Why create a new instance of context menu?

Why include doubious and incomplete functionality like the ZIP options? You guy's won't imagine the support I have to give to students who don't understand that running an executable or opening a CAD/CAM project within a folder that is actually a ZIP archive won't work, because Windows only decompresses the file one double-clicked onto.

Or why hide the file extension? You can program a stupid executable that whipes your harddisk and give it the same icon as any PDF file...

So, yes, I agree with the contribution that says: Microsoft is trying to get the last idiot to use a computer, ignoring they upset the whole existing user base.

[Zucca]

My current PC HW is not compatible with Win11.
I will then SW upgrade to Linux since my HW is okay and it working properly.

Microsoft will bleed...

[Messtechniker]

Hint: Use "StartAllBack" and things are back to normal.
In my case WIN7 handling.

[SiliconWizard]

At one stage I remember there was talk of porting a Linux desktop, KDE I think, to Windows, but I don't believe it was ever done. Now the Windows desktop seems to be upsetting more power users with every version/update, it might actually happen.

I dunno about Windows 10 and 11, but there were indeed alternative "shells" (I think that's Windows lingo for desktop environment) for earlier versions of Windows. A few tens of them, even. Looks like most of them are now abandonware, though.

Edit: one of the very few (and open source) still alive is Cairo Desktop: https://cairodesktop.com/
Haven't tried it myself, but it does support Win 7 to 10. They do not mention 11 as of yet. If anyone feels adventurous...

[SilverSolder]

[...] Microsoft is trying to get the last idiot to use a computer, ignoring they upset the whole existing user base.

The problem is that today, the "last idiot" doesn't need to use a computer at all - they didn't need a computer in the first place...  Most of this category of consumer is perfectly happy with tablets and phones, and likely only use computers at work.

[geggi1]

IF IT WORKS DONT FIX IT!
That is the thing MS have not understood.
I beleve MS have an agenda to become more tablet friendly and because of this is FU**NG up the GUI.

[AntiProtonBoy]

Unpopular opinion time: I think the start menu sucks and it has always sucked. It's just a clutter of shortcuts to application executables, uninstall executables, nested folders, shortcuts to text files, help files, and whole lot of garbage, 90% of which the user never *ever* cares about. A really good model that Microsoft should emulate is Application pop-up panel in the dock under macOS, or if they really want to keep the start menu, then have a look at what Kubuntu does.

[rsjsouza]

If that is an unpopular opinion, call me unpopular as well. I always despised the start menu since its inception in Windows 95. At the time I loved OS/2 and its quick launch bar, together with the workspace arrangement of icons, which was to me a better evolution of the icon arrangements of Windows 3.x versions - which I also liked better than '95.

The Start menu was so inefficient that most people I know (including myself) have gobs of icons plastered all over the desktop area for the most common applications and documents.

[SilverSolder]

[...]
The Start menu was so inefficient that most people I know (including myself) have gobs of icons plastered all over the desktop area for the most common applications and documents.

I've got the most common stuff pinned to the task bar, and somewhat less common as icons on the desktop, the rest is in the Start menu (some things are pinned in there as well).   It works for me, as long as Microsoft doesn't mess with it.

My main complaint about Microsoft is that they mess with it with every single release, so I have to waste time figuring out what's broken and how to make it work again.   I can't be bothered to do that, frankly, so I've stopped upgrading Windows since W7, and feel completely vindicated by what I've seen since...

I might upgrade to Windows 10, now that Microsoft has stopped messing with it -  it could be a good and stable platform for 5 or 10 years, with a bit of luck!

[AntiProtonBoy]

I've got the most common stuff pinned to the task bar,

It's pretty much what i do. Everything else, i use the search functionality, but even that is pretty badly implemented, as it comes up with null search results for obvious keywords.

[rsjsouza]

[...]
The Start menu was so inefficient that most people I know (including myself) have gobs of icons plastered all over the desktop area for the most common applications and documents.

I've got the most common stuff pinned to the task bar, and somewhat less common as icons on the desktop, the rest is in the Start menu (some things are pinned in there as well).   It works for me, as long as Microsoft doesn't mess with it.

I started pinning just a handful of very used applications such as browsers and Freecommander to the task bar back in Windows 7 (yay! Just like 1995's OS/2 and even earlier Solaris/Xorg) and the less commonly used things to the Start menu - a reasonable compromise IMO. They improved this in Windows 10 and I now can add more things to the side of the Start Menu. However, if they changed this in 11, its usefulness will be again relegated to 95-era (I haven't tried 11 and don't plan to)

The large amount of other application software that I use throughout the day (dev IDEs, CAD/CAE, documentation tools, etc) are on icons in the desktop as they are numerous.

[Bassman59]

Unpopular opinion time: I think the start menu sucks and it has always sucked. It's just a clutter of shortcuts to application executables, uninstall executables, nested folders, shortcuts to text files, help files, and whole lot of garbage, 90% of which the user never *ever* cares about. A really good model that Microsoft should emulate is Application pop-up panel in the dock under macOS, or if they really want to keep the start menu, then have a look at what Kubuntu does.

I agree with this unpopular opinion. The macOS Applications folder (actually folders, as each user can have one) works well and is obvious, and it can be docked as a shortcut. The notion of an application bundle is pretty great, too, as it hides all of necessary but messy support stuff. And you can create folders in the Applications folder if you want to keep some applications together, like Utilities and in my case Editors.

[Bassman59]

I've got the most common stuff pinned to the task bar,

It's pretty much what i do. Everything else, i use the search functionality, but even that is pretty badly implemented, as it comes up with null search results for obvious keywords.

On the Mac, <command-Space> brings up the Spotlight search, so do that and just start typing the name of the application, and there it is.

[AntiProtonBoy]

The notion of an application bundle is pretty great, too, as it hides all of necessary but messy support stuff.

Yeah 100 %. Bundles also make installation and uninstallation simple. Just copy and delete respectively, done. You don't need to use a special installer to fire hose random files all over the drive like in Windows, nor do you need a special uninstaller to pick up the random pieces - which never really works, because there is always garbage left behind. Windows is a complete shit show in that respect, still entrenched in  DOS legacy way of deploying applications.

[Zero999]

The notion of an application bundle is pretty great, too, as it hides all of necessary but messy support stuff.

Yeah 100 %. Bundles also make installation and uninstallation simple. Just copy and delete respectively, done. You don't need to use a special installer to fire hose random files all over the drive like in Windows, nor do you need a special uninstaller to pick up the random pieces - which never really works, because there is always garbage left behind. Windows is a complete shit show in that respect, still entrenched in  DOS legacy way of deploying applications.

I haven't installed anything under Windows for awhile, but the last time I did, it was an .msi file, which I think stands for Microsoft Installer, a proprietary packaging system, which comes with Windows.

[rsjsouza]

Lately several utilities I use have been provided using simple .zip files, which I prefer. 

[HighVoltage]

I have just started to upgrade some PCs to Win10, since it is stable now.
Most of my PCs are still on Win7 and run perfectly.

It will probably be a few years, until I will have a look at Win11

[AntiProtonBoy]

I haven't installed anything under Windows for awhile, but the last time I did, it was an .msi file, which I think stands for Microsoft Installer, a proprietary packaging system, which comes with Windows.

MSI is basically the same as any other installer in terms of functionality, except it's endorsed by Microsoft, as you have hinted. It's the same backward concept of firehosing files all over the place, which uses a deployment tool.  And then you have to go through the control panel, or app options to uninstall the thing which uses a clean-up tool.

A macOS bundle, on the other hand, literally involves coping and pasting the bundle into the Application directory. Want to remove the bundle? Drag to Trash, done.

[Watth]

Yes, it's getting worse. Windows got so much better when they decided to make NT the base for Windows 2000 and next, after the "millenium" debacle.
But Windows 10 started to show disguised ads in the login menu, and kept obnoxiously pushing for users to switch to Edge.

[SilverSolder]

I haven't installed anything under Windows for awhile, but the last time I did, it was an .msi file, which I think stands for Microsoft Installer, a proprietary packaging system, which comes with Windows.

MSI is basically the same as any other installer in terms of functionality, except it's endorsed by Microsoft, as you have hinted. It's the same backward concept of firehosing files all over the place, which uses a deployment tool.  And then you have to go through the control panel, or app options to uninstall the thing which uses a clean-up tool.

A macOS bundle, on the other hand, literally involves coping and pasting the bundle into the Application directory. Want to remove the bundle? Drag to Trash, done.

Does macOS use a Registry in a similar way to Windows, or does it manage settings some other way?
 

[rsjsouza]

I haven't installed anything under Windows for awhile, but the last time I did, it was an .msi file, which I think stands for Microsoft Installer, a proprietary packaging system, which comes with Windows.

MSI is basically the same as any other installer in terms of functionality, except it's endorsed by Microsoft, as you have hinted. It's the same backward concept of firehosing files all over the place, which uses a deployment tool.  And then you have to go through the control panel, or app options to uninstall the thing which uses a clean-up tool.

A macOS bundle, on the other hand, literally involves coping and pasting the bundle into the Application directory. Want to remove the bundle? Drag to Trash, done.

One interesting criticism that we used to have with the Linux version of our software package was that it was the equivalent of a simple .zip file - apart from a specific udev rule, everything else was put in an arbitrary directory in the system. The more *nix savvy folks hated it, claiming heresy to the standard unix way of organizing files (/usr/bin, /etc, and so on), but we in support and several other customers loved it. Want to "uninstall"? rm -Rf to the directory and you are done.

[Bicurico]

It is a balance between required disk space, security permissions and comfort.

If each application is fully contained in its folder, it means that all relevant libraries need to be in that folder. If other applications use the same libraries, those will be repeatedly copied over.

Also, having all files in the same folder of the application means that temporary files have to be created there and as such these files need to have the permissions of the different users that access them. Also, imagine that two users share the same application folder: what if they setup different preferences?

This is one of the reasons you have "Current User" in the Registry, as well as, C:\Users\xxx\...

At the end it is a balance of how efficient you want to be in terms of not replicating the same files/folders over versus the commodity of uninstalling files.

With that said, don't think I am happy with Windows: install one Autodesk application and you will clutter the disk and the registry with thousands of files and entries. The only way to fully clean up your computer is actually to reinstall the whole operating system!

I own an iMac and a Macbook Air (both purchased second hand for little money, just to get familiar with OSX and the Apple way). It is true that you remove a software by basically dragging it into the trashcan. But boy, there are many other things that freak me out on this operating system. To start with, it is really a closed environment. If you get an older iMac like I did, an "early 2009" one, you will find that there are many applications you can no longer install! Most software needs to be purchased (even if it is for free) from the App Store. Here you find only the lastest version which more than often is not suitable for your OSX version (for no particular technical reason, btw.). But you won't be able to download an older version, either! Unless you have purchased it, which you can't, because the new version is not compatible. This is to me a borderline scam... And yes, I hacked a newer FW onto my iMac, despite it being "officially" not supported. I even hacked Bootcamp to install Windows 10 and the relevant drivers, despite it being listed as not compatible. So much for the Mac...

Back on topic, I am now more familiar with Windows 11. The rounded borders look nice and more modern. It really seems more responsive and faster. But I don't understand why Microsoft has still not managed to migrate the Control Panel to the new Settings Menu. That is totally inconsistent.

Also, I totally dislike that Windows tries to hide stuff from the user. Why are folders localized (C:\Users is shown in Portugese Windows as C:\Utilizadores when using Windows Explorer, but on the DOS shell it is C:\Users?

Why are some folders hidden (like ProgramData or AppData?

Why are some .Net apps installed in some strange remote folder within AppData?

Why do folders generate some hidden config files?

Why does Windows constantly change my folder containing my music library (just mp3 files in folders) as "Music Folder" instead of "General Folder", hence changing the way the files are listed?

The list goes on...

When I support my students on their laptops, most don't have a clue on how the most basic things work on their Windows installation. File extensions of known file types are hidden, ZIP archives are treated by Windows directly as if they were folders (as a result software won't open projects, because they have not been extracted - only the single file where the user double clicked on it).

If I am able to list a ton of annoyances for every day use of Windows, how come that Microsoft is not able to list them? They surely have smarter people than myself working there!

So my guess is that i am just dumb and all these "annoyances" are required to somehow maximise their profit.

Regards,
Vitor

[SilverSolder]

[...]
 If other applications use the same libraries, those will be repeatedly copied over.
[...]

The idea of sharing libraries (other than basic OS libraries) comes from the bad old days when disk space was scarce and expensive.  It can cause a lot of problems...   and definitely causes a management issue.  Not worth the hassle now that disk space is cheap and plentiful.

So much simpler to keep multiple versions of the libraries in each app folder (so it is even clear which version they need/use).

Makes it easier to copy software from one computer to another too.  (I know, it's not what "they" want....  but who knows, maybe once they have everyone subscribing to cloud services "they" will release their greedy claws at the local OS level...    we live in hope! )

[rsjsouza]

Indeed it is a tradeoff, Bicurico. Unfortunately applications step on each other's toes all the time. Throw other runtime environments such as Java (still widely used by Eclipse and Netbeans) and you have a recipe for disaster to support and maintain.  I still recall years ago some IDEs could be installed on top of existing Eclipse installs - the amount of variables that went wrong were massive, causing frustration all around.

Also, I totally dislike that Windows tries to hide stuff from the user. Why are folders localized (C:\Users is shown in Portugese Windows as C:\Utilizadores when using Windows Explorer, but on the DOS shell it is C:\Users?

Hah, tell me about it. Throw in the Brazilian Portuguese version that calls C:\Usuários and C:\Usuários\Público (with the Unicode characters á and ú) and you got into real fun with traditional applications such as gmake and others.

[rsjsouza]

I own an iMac and a Macbook Air (both purchased second hand for little money, just to get familiar with OSX and the Apple way). It is true that you remove a software by basically dragging it into the trashcan. But boy, there are many other things that freak me out on this operating system. To start with, it is really a closed environment. If you get an older iMac like I did, an "early 2009" one, you will find that there are many applications you can no longer install! Most software needs to be purchased (even if it is for free) from the App Store. Here you find only the lastest version which more than often is not suitable for your OSX version (for no particular technical reason, btw.). But you won't be able to download an older version, either! Unless you have purchased it, which you can't, because the new version is not compatible. This is to me a borderline scam... And yes, I hacked a newer FW onto my iMac, despite it being "officially" not supported. I even hacked Bootcamp to install Windows 10 and the relevant drivers, despite it being listed as not compatible. So much for the Mac...

Ah, I forgot about this. At first glance, it is quite an interesting operating system, but pretty darn far from the epitome of perfection that is advertised - when I used it for the first time, the amount of stupid keystroke combinations to do simple things such as Printscreen or scroll up/down and Home/end on a laptop keyboard were appalling. Regarding keeping compatibility over the long run, Apple pales in comparison to Windows/Linux. Their s***show of locking application software out of modern versions of their operating system with minimum warning (one year, tops) was shameful (the folks that had 32-bit Adobe suite purchased for top dollar were quite "happy"). Not to mention the signature certification enforced to all applications starting at a given version, which locked out everything prior. Ah, and the massive inconsistencies with their USB-CDC naming scheme that broke compatibility with our stuff - twice in a specific year...

[AntiProtonBoy]

Does macOS use a Registry in a similar way to Windows, or does it manage settings some other way?

macOS has an Application Support folder located somewhere in the user's home. Each app creates its own subfolder under Application Support and store their custom state, config, etc in there.

[gmb42]

[...]
 If other applications use the same libraries, those will be repeatedly copied over.
[...]

The idea of sharing libraries (other than basic OS libraries) comes from the bad old days when disk space was scarce and expensive.  It can cause a lot of problems...   and definitely causes a management issue.  Not worth the hassle now that disk space is cheap and plentiful.

So much simpler to keep multiple versions of the libraries in each app folder (so it is even clear which version they need/use).

Makes it easier to copy software from one computer to another too.  (I know, it's not what "they" want....  but who knows, maybe once they have everyone subscribing to cloud services "they" will release their greedy claws at the local OS level...    we live in hope! )

The downside of each app having their own copy of libraries is management of issues in those libraries, instead of patching\updating a single shared "system" copy, now each app needs to be updated.

In addition, in a multi-tasking OS having app specific versions means each (running) one has it's own image loaded consuming more RAM.

There's no simple answer to this issue, but to me ease of uninstall by simply deleting a directory comes somewhat nearer the bottom of the list.

[SilverSolder]

[...]
 If other applications use the same libraries, those will be repeatedly copied over.
[...]

The idea of sharing libraries (other than basic OS libraries) comes from the bad old days when disk space was scarce and expensive.  It can cause a lot of problems...   and definitely causes a management issue.  Not worth the hassle now that disk space is cheap and plentiful.

So much simpler to keep multiple versions of the libraries in each app folder (so it is even clear which version they need/use).

Makes it easier to copy software from one computer to another too.  (I know, it's not what "they" want....  but who knows, maybe once they have everyone subscribing to cloud services "they" will release their greedy claws at the local OS level...    we live in hope! )

The downside of each app having their own copy of libraries is management of issues in those libraries, instead of patching\updating a single shared "system" copy, now each app needs to be updated.

In addition, in a multi-tasking OS having app specific versions means each (running) one has it's own image loaded consuming more RAM.

There's no simple answer to this issue, but to me ease of uninstall by simply deleting a directory comes somewhat nearer the bottom of the list.

Libraries that belong to the OS should be shared (and updated in one place).   Libraries that do not belong to the OS, should not be shared!

If an OS library update breaks an application,
(1) Somebody has goofed!  This should not happen, in principle...
(2) the workaround is to place the old library in the application directory for its private consumption

I guess this is pretty much how Windows has always worked...   not sure about other OS.

[gmb42]

Windows has somewhat oscillated from shared to local copies then back to shared, mainly because of the issues of how to update the defective local copies of libs.

Windows doesn't have the concept of a separate location of non-OS but common libraries that Linux has such as /usr/local/lib, instead such things seem to get dumped into %WINDIR%\System32 along with the OS libs.

I was thinking more about ubiquitous but non-system libraries such as log4j.  I'm not a fan of anything in the Java ecosystem but they seem to want each app to have it's own copies of such things, even extending to their own copy of the jvm in extreme cases.

[SiliconWizard]

The shared libraries model is inherently hard to deal with. At the OS level, the development is centralized, so compatibility can be enforced and ensured (so any library update shoud not break neither existing software, nor future software if written for an earlier version of the OS, something that, TBH, Windows has been rather good at.)

Now for any third-party library, the version and compatibility problem becomes almost intractable, so you need to fall back to "local" libraries to ensure compatibility.

This could be avoided for the most part if all library maintainers enforced the same policy of never breaking backward compatibility. Of course, that requires a lot of discipline, and will usually lead to inflated libraries over time. This is definitely not an easy problem. Unfortunately, it looks like the opposite stance is often taken, and that nobody cares much about compatibility between versions. So in the end, it's a huge mess.

But yeah, even though wasting resources is always bad per se, these days, sharing libraries just for the sake of saving storage space (and in some cases, RAM space, when libraries can be shared in memory, which is sometimes, but rarely the case) doesn't make a lot of sense. The real rationale should be compatibility: ensuring every application uses the same libraries at any given time, but as we can see, reality is almost the opposite of that, so shared libraries most often are useless pain. Except again for very "core" libraries, for the reason exposed above, and for which it's actually possible to control and enforce compatibility over time.

[Zero999]

[...]
 If other applications use the same libraries, those will be repeatedly copied over.
[...]

The idea of sharing libraries (other than basic OS libraries) comes from the bad old days when disk space was scarce and expensive.  It can cause a lot of problems...   and definitely causes a management issue.  Not worth the hassle now that disk space is cheap and plentiful.

So much simpler to keep multiple versions of the libraries in each app folder (so it is even clear which version they need/use).

Makes it easier to copy software from one computer to another too.  (I know, it's not what "they" want....  but who knows, maybe once they have everyone subscribing to cloud services "they" will release their greedy claws at the local OS level...    we live in hope! )

The downside of each app having their own copy of libraries is management of issues in those libraries, instead of patching\updating a single shared "system" copy, now each app needs to be updated.

In addition, in a multi-tasking OS having app specific versions means each (running) one has it's own image loaded consuming more RAM.

There's no simple answer to this issue, but to me ease of uninstall by simply deleting a directory comes somewhat nearer the bottom of the list.

Libraries that belong to the OS should be shared (and updated in one place).   Libraries that do not belong to the OS, should not be shared!

If an OS library update breaks an application,
(1) Somebody has goofed!  This should not happen, in principle...
(2) the workaround is to place the old library in the application directory for its private consumption

I guess this is pretty much how Windows has always worked...   not sure about other OS.

Who decides what's OS library and program library? One could say GTK 3 isn't an OS library, since it's possible to run Linux without it, but a good proportion of programs which most people need depend on it.

There are plenty of libraries on GNU/Linux, which were originally created for one program, yet now are used by many and are an essential part of most distributions.

[SilverSolder]

[...]
Who decides what's OS library and program library?
[...]

I would say if it's part of the distribution, it is an OS library...    so if e.g. Microsoft includes it and supports it, we are talking about an OS library.

No?

[JohanH]

I couldn't care less. Feels like I haven't used a start menu in years. Both in Linux and Windows I press the "Win" button and type the few first letters of the name of the application. It is found in a millisecond and started. Most used applications are pinned in the task bar (launcher/whatever), if I forgot their name. The desktop isn't visible ever, except for after startup. If your computer work consists of clicking the start menu all day long, you are doing something wrong. A good OS/desktop/window manager is almost invisible and stays out of the way while you work with the applications (unless you are the system administrator).

[Bicurico]

I couldn't care less. Feels like I haven't used a start menu in years. Both in Linux and Windows I press the "Win" button and type the few first letters of the name of the application. It is found in a millisecond and started. Most used applications are pinned in the task bar (launcher/whatever), if I forgot their name. The desktop isn't visible ever, except for after startup. If your computer work consists of clicking the start menu all day long, you are doing something wrong. A good OS/desktop/window manager is almost invisible and stays out of the way while you work with the applications (unless you are the system administrator).

While I do that sometimes, too, it happens with less used applications, since the main ones are in the START menu.

However, this has a nig drawback: often I don't remember the name of the application I want to run! Then the search begins...

[Bassman59]

Does macOS use a Registry in a similar way to Windows, or does it manage settings some other way?

macOS has an Application Support folder located somewhere in the user's home. Each app creates its own subfolder under Application Support and store their custom state, config, etc in there.

~/Library/Application Support/

[Bassman59]

I own an iMac and a Macbook Air (both purchased second hand for little money, just to get familiar with OSX and the Apple way). It is true that you remove a software by basically dragging it into the trashcan. But boy, there are many other things that freak me out on this operating system. To start with, it is really a closed environment. If you get an older iMac like I did, an "early 2009" one, you will find that there are many applications you can no longer install!

That's because those "many applications" are written for a newer version of the OS with newer features that don't exist in the older OS. And, to be fair, an early 2009 Mac is going to be dogshit-slow Core 2 Duo.

Most software needs to be purchased (even if it is for free) from the App Store.

Completely untrue. Many software vendors find it convenient to put their software in the App Store, but I have a whole host of software installed on my Macs that I got directly from the vendors. Apple does not force user to get macOS apps from the App Store.

And yes, unsigned software will trip a complaint, but the work-around is well known.

Here you find only the lastest version which more than often is not suitable for your OSX version (for no particular technical reason, btw.). But you won't be able to download an older version, either! Unless you have purchased it, which you can't, because the new version is not compatible.

This is a long-standing complaint, but again, you don't have to get programs from the App Store. Many vendors choose not to, simply because they don't want to pay Apple to host the programs.

[staticresident]

If the'd make something that would work properly, then everyone wants to stick to it.

If Windoze users are happy with what they have, they do not want to "upgrade".

Therefore they constantly change silly things for no particular reason at all, and of course you are forced to use the garbage that they shove down your throat. If they gave you the choice to make your own choices (such as the start menu) then you would stick to those things that you like, and therefore stop wanting to upgrade.

It's like being stuck between a rock and a hard place.  They change things in updates and annoy users, but the new version of windows is even worse.  So people don't want to use what they have or upgrade to the newest ugliest version.

I agree with an earlier post that combining windows is the worst.  I have enough screen space to spread them all out, even when I have 12 things open in taskbar.

[coromonadalix]

Still playing with w11

frustrating to say the least

as we know:  start menu, context menus, zip management, had to install startallback(for win11, not startisback)
battle win11 to install other web browsers,  this sucker  doesnt like you to change it,  and searching to install other browsers thru edge  give you a nice message  lolll

Icons and files icons, text size,  and the list goes on an ooooooonnn      wow   totally discouraged

Had to install an kbxxxxx package for the TPM / SSD   slugginess ....   just frustrated to use it nomally ??


On the ''edge'' to permanently switch to Zorin 16,  i'm running it thru an usb3 key,  impressive, i'm not at war with this Os to make it work the way i want it to be ...

Found out an ntvdm64 bit  software package,    i did manage to get old win95-98 era  16 bits applications to work under a 64bit machine, yessss  love you  win 10.

Win11 is a new vista  loll    can't wait for a win12  loll

[50ShadesOfDirt]

+1 to the use of ClassicShell (now OpenShell), which puts back the old win7 start menu (or a few other choices). Articles indicate it works for win11 ...

It doesn't really matter which OS version they release ... I usually mod it to do what I want out of it (same for linux) ... takes a bit of 'net research and implementation, but I end up with a stripped down version of Win, built and operated the way I require.

Install the OS once, stripped of bloatware, to the SSD drive. All user/home stuff to an HDD (so it doesn't pollute the SSD drive). Turn off updates (until I want to run them), install my preferred app set (java, browsers, utilities, apps). Image the SSD once, update every once in a while. Backup only the hdd drive with user/home stuff (very small data backups from here on out).

Easy to patch, recover, etc.

If wanting a really pristine build, install DeepFreeze or similar to it, and protect it from unwanted changes being pushed at you, or inadvertent munges from software being tested. And of course, utilize VM software as much as possible ...

Hope this helps ...

[Watth]

start menu, context menus, zip management

the start menu change is a shame, since I liked making little groups of shortcuts
And for the contextual menus and zip things, I'm used to peazip, so that now I have to roighjt-click, ask for all options, then I can do what I want.
Terrible decision, as usual, to not let the user choose.

[SilverSolder]

The most important benefit of Windows 11 is that MS will now stop messing with Windows 10, making it (possibly) a stable, well sorted, and attractive option for a lot of people...

[coromonadalix]

oh and the stupid volume control,  you have to hover the mouse on it to make it slide ?   maybe   futures upgrades will correct this behaviour ?

seriously  Msoft ?    

[rsjsouza]

Interesting video I found today...