I can't even remove 'Recommended' from the start menu, not even on a Pro for Workstations.
Every time I search on the start menu there is a web search, impossible to turn off. How is that acceptable?
I install Edge Beta to test something, and the I uninstall it. All of the sudden my search provider in my normal Edge is reset.
And the nagging everywhere. No I don't want 'back-up' my files (OneDrive is not backup, it's sync). And I don't want to be reminded later. I don't want to be reminded ever. All this fuzzy language makes me feel like I'm dealing with a kindergarden teacher addressing his/her pupils.
It's not my computer any more.
Oh, I update a driver. And 2 days later Windows installs an older version. Since when is 6.6.1.40 better than 6.6.1.72? Why would you do that?
I would also recommend starship (https://starship.rs/) for your Powershell, which is cross platform and therefore usable for all popular shells. Scoop can also install and manage nerd fonts:
I'm also running a number of additional software on mac to make the experience more liveable (Alfred, scroll inverter, ice, rectangle, iterm,...). I think the big companies got to the point where they do the bare minimum for Gene Public to accept the useability, and leave the rest of us with our ### dangling to fill in the gap.
Probably something to do with maximizing profit and minimizing expense?
I want to use natural scrolling on the trackpad and the normal mouse wheel direction. There's no way to do that out of the box, you need scroll reverser.
Absolutely. In my company I'm forced to use Windows, because we develop Windows software (WPF). I'm not totally happy with Windows (especially 11), but I tend to look for jobs that have nothing to do with what I'm too familiar with to gain new knowledge. However, I'm trying to make the windows experience as good as possible for my personal taste :-) Additionally I hope I can help to migrate to a web based solution in the future.
As already stated: At home I use Fedora (and others). Company restricts me to use Windows - well technically, the project does, but company IT would not be happy, if I'd use Linux there.
And no, this is not a reason to leave an otherwise perfectly fine job behind.
same boat, fedora at home, windows at work. and that's fine -- keeps me plugged into the windows infra that runs the world to some degree.
older jobs let us put whatever on the laptops, and even had hardening scripts if we wanted to use linux. only approved linux was ubuntu, but you could slap mint or other derivatives in there and get away with it / not have concerns.
Basically, starship is a config generator for your shell. It transforms a cross platform config file (starship.toml) into a platform specific configuration shell script, e.g.:
starship init zsh
will output something like
zmodload zsh/parameter # Needed to access jobstates variable for STARSHIP_JOBS_COUNT
# Defines a function `__starship_get_time` that sets the time since epoch in millis in STARSHIP_CAPTURED_TIME.
if [[ $ZSH_VERSION == ([1-4]*) ]]; then
# ZSH <= 5; Does not have a built-in variable so we will rely on Starship's inbuilt time function.
__starship_get_time() {
STARSHIP_CAPTURED_TIME=$(/home/andreas/bin/starship time)
}
else
zmodload zsh/datetime
zmodload zsh/mathfunc
__starship_get_time() {
(( STARSHIP_CAPTURED_TIME = int(rint(EPOCHREALTIME * 1000)) ))
}
fi
# ...
# ...
For PowerShell the output will look accordingly - the config stays the same. I've had a bunch of custom zsh / powershell config dotfiles for years now, starship just eases it out :-)
Starship is just a fancy prompt that just happens to be crazy cross-platform (works on Linux, MacOS, and Windows shells), but it's super-informative, and easy to install/configure. Beyond that, you'll still need to choose a shell you prefer for when you want/need to use a terminal/console window for things. Contrary to popular belief, the shell is not obsolete by a longshot, even on Windows. On Windows, PowerShell is probably gonna be your best bet, as it's the current standard going forward. I use Starship on Fish shell on Linux and love it.
powershell is light years easier than bash. like, im fluent in bash enough to get stuff done, but i only got there over years, while i picked up powershell fairly quickly. also wayyyyy more readable.
i'll admit the object vs text thing is annoying, i feel like bash is more straightforward there, but PS will let you do the same thing eventually.
I would have thought Microsoft on is dotnet multi-platform journey would find a way to make PowerShell just POSIX compatible, supporting at least standard all day commands like `grep`, `wc`, `find` and others. All it would have taken is to create aliases or replacements for the top 50 shell commands.
Instead they re-invented the wheel. It's not a bad wheel, but the wheel is completely different than most people would expected to be and for POSIX enthusiast it just does not feel right.
With wsl or git bash you can do this but it feels slow and clunky most of the time.
That's not the exclusive problem to Microsoft - it happens all around us within the IT world. The corporations stopped acknowledging the permanent "No" anymore and the actual user choice. It's a plain harassment up until you give up and agree to what you get shoveled with.
Whenever I read comments regarding last two Windows versions and issues people had or have with these, or news about newest Microsoft "ideas" - I ask myself, where the hell are regulators?
We have killed them. If a government tries to do anything against a company that isn't a perfect 1:1 mapping to an explicit thing in the law that they are breaking, the company will sue back and win. And if they try to pass such a law, the biggest companies are powerful enough to get rid of them next term, so they don't even try.
Reading through this thread as an user of Windows from the EU most of the issues I see mentioned here are just non-existent, like OneDrive nagging that has never happened to me
I have been lucky on multiple installs on multiple computers? I'm not saying what people are complaining about are lies, I'm saying the issues don't seem to exist in EU installs on Windows. For example the only ads I've seen were during the initial setup screen and pre-installed apps/shortcuts that are gone in a minute of work, and OneDrive can be uninstalled in two clicks.
The only issue that is still here would be bing in start search but that's trivial to disable compared to the configurations I had to do on my linux desktops, so while it is bad and shouldn't be a thing I don't see it as a big issue when comparing to linux.
Author says what I'm repeating since day one when GDPR and these so-called banner with "preferences" were introduced: this should be handled by the browsers.
The idea was good but the interpretation and implementation of this law failed - the banners, cookies aren't as permanent and universal as browser sending the header.
Only problem with GDPR is that while the spirit/intention of the law is great (and it even prohibits malicious compliance such as consent prompts that make it more difficult to decline than accept), enforcement is significantly lacking which means it's still more profitable to breach it than respect it.
I would say the problem is rather that companies are becoming too big to cares. Meta has been fined several times, in total for more than 2 billions. Amazon ? 746 millions. Tik tok? 345 millions. And yet it's a small price to pay for them
did cookie banners exist without the law? largely not, which is why people perceive it to be a "cookie banner law" no matter what is technically written in it.
Happens to me all the time with Google because I'm choosing not to pay for their backup. They constantly bother me about almost running out of space, even with a modal that requires you to use a toggle to dismiss it without accepting. It's gross.
> "I only use Windows as a game launcher (and I’m still on Windows 10), I don’t understand why anyone would need it anymore except games."
Thanks to Valve/Steam and Heroic (Epic Store client), and a few other handy tools including Valve's Proton (WINE fork) I haven't even needed Windows for games for ages now. I can live without the small handful of Linux-hostile Windows-only games that still won't run due to draconian DRM/AntiCheat, as the vast majority of my Steam library is "Click 'Play' and they just work", for Windows games and the many native Linux games I also have. Same for more'n half of the games I have on Epic (all from their freebie giveaways). The ones that don't work I can live without. Every other thing I want to do on my PC I've found native Linux software for that more than handles the task.
Would love to know more, maybe some pointers to tools/utils for getting these more difficult games going. I haven’t had the time to go further than using Steam and Lutris, which covers most of what I play, but would be good to have more options.
#1: Apple locks you into their ecosystem, and feels even creepier than MS.
#2: The Linux distros I've used are designed in a way so you shouldn't have to use the CLI and sudo for normal tasks, but you end up having to anyway in practice. It's a combination of annoying, and I, sooner-or-later, end up in a state where the system is "totaled"; easier to do a clean install than get it working again after the wrong CLI C+P broke something important.
e.g. I used to install qlplugins on every new macos device as our company bought them. Then one day Apple refused to run any 32-bit library despite the fact that 32 bit code still runs natively on x86-64 chips (this when everything still ran on x86-64 btw).
Designers still ask me: "Hey, how do I see the dimensions of this picture when pressing spacebar to preview it?" And I have to say: "Sorry, Apple said you can't do that anymore".
> Because maintaining 32 bit libraries when most of the world is 64 bit doesn’t make sense.
64bit code is the extension, not the base case.
32bit (x86) code just straight up runs on an x86-64 (64-bit) processor.
It's an artificial limitation that just doesn't make sense, and it can also be worse for performance too.
> This is not the same as apple actively forcing you into their ecosystem.
No?
Apple prevents 32bit libraries from running. This effected almost all the common cross-platform layers from running on MacOS.
In a single action, Apple eliminated the libraries that Steam games on MacOS used. Games would now have to be recompiled and were pushed to be downloadable through the Mac App Store, giving Apple their 30% cut.
> This is apple not supporting old technology.
If it's old then apple shouldn't support it? By that logic, we shouldn't be using ints in our code, we should only use 64-bit quaternions.
There is a difference between old and outdated. 32bit code is old. 32bit code is not outdated.
I didn’t read but the first sentence because you clearly don’t know that an OS must have both 32 bit libraries and 64 bit libraries to run both. Apple chose to leave 32 bit behind to stop maintaining it.
In every company I worked for (Germany, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland) it was all Windows laptops, that for the Linux component either used a VM, WSL or straight up servers.
I just don't want to work under such incapable management / IT department, that forces developers to use Windows. I have worked with Linux for 17 years and the last time I was forced to have a Windows VM was 14 years ago.
Yes, it limits available jobs and probably doesn't pay any top salaries. But better than selling myself to people I don't respect.
Although I probably have my price, I too otherwise refuse to work for companies that'd force me to use windows. I've been lucky to be able to use macs since 2008 and some of those companies had linux users. Most top tech companies will happily give you a choice between a mac or windows. For me it has generally mean I don't work for banks, the government, or very large organizations that aren't recent tech companies.
That being said, at a certain scale or type of company centralized management, software support, and security risks mean "allowing" random people to run their own OS becomes difficult and risky. Lots of large older companies probably have proprietary software, too (thankfully more of this is becoming web based).
Yes, in theory linux is more secure and anybody who would want to use it is probably capable of taking care of themselves, but it is probably (at large companies) corporate lawyers and CISOs ruining the fun. And linux can have its own risks and dedicating a team to support (from a security perspective) them isn't economical for the what would be very small user base. Ye old big bank can't and arguably shouldn't allow it without an otherwise good reason.
The good reason is to get your job done, which is what the computer is for. The tools many developers use today (e.g. containers) are Linux only and their target environment (i.e. the servers where their code will run) is Linux. The typical workaround is to use VMs. This results in terrible filesystem performance on both Mac and Windows, and on Windows I've also had to deal with things like time, DNS, and routing breaking in the VM, so now I need to know how to be a Linux and Windows sysadmin (i.e. not what you want to be paying me for) to fix it instead of just using e.g. Fedora which I've never had any issue with; it just works.
Another user commented about how it's unreasonable to ask them to run CAD software in a VM, but this is exactly what (some? many?) companies ask programmers to do. It's especially goofy if it's a software company where that development is their core business.
I admire this spirit, probably because I am still unable to put it in practice -- and those are typically moments where I dream of my own business. IT at my current employer is capable enough ( though there are rumblings of moving everything, but hardware offshore again.. I am starting to think it all moves in waves ), but our executives, well, lets just say over the past few weeks I was questioning what I am doing here.
Figma's valuation is a fragment of that of Adobe. Saying most designers use Figma is as distorted as saying most designers use macOS, even if both things may be true in a specific niche (e.g. tech companies in the US).
In my experience of the rise of macOS among developers, the biggest driving force was mobile app development and mobile web development because Apple refused to provide first party developer tools or emulators usable on other operating systems and made it intentionally difficult to run macOS on non-Apple hardware or in a VM. Previously macOS was largely associated with designers, not developers. This move also started blurring the lines more with designers making the move to development and (to a smaller degree) vice versa.
No, developers flocked to macOS because it runs unix and has a complete and nice looking UI with sensible design patterns designed by an actual designer instead of an engineer.
Development across the board is better on a mac for some / many people.
I think that's a fair take, it really does depend on which platform(s) you're developing for too.
And you're probably correct that Adobe has a larger share overall, but I would highly doubt that Illustrator or XD are being used more than Figma for UI design these days. Even less so, Photoshop, since it's a raster tool. Adobe was about ready to phase out XD when they were getting ready to purchase Figma.
Figma is free starting off, and their basic plans are extremely affordable compared to anything Adobe offers.
I've used a SP (7) with Linux. It works as a PC, but is not the move. Notes:
- Needed a custom kernel to get the pen (or was it touch) working?
- No good note taking applications (eg OneNote competitor)
- Notably latency on the pen.
- The first distro I attempted to install didn't work. (Manjaro?)
I've been using a Linux desktop workstation for like a decade. Never got on the laptop revolution, don't really understand it, seems like you're just setting yourself up for some savage RSI.
Apple Silicon means no discrete graphics card and no CUDA, no DirectX. It seems fine for machine learning, it falls short for other intensive applications.
Apple Silicon has the power envelope advantage, Intel and AMD chips remain faster for those who can deal with the power consumption (under lock when longer battery is really needed, and either be plugged or have a backup battery when going full throttle)
I use Blender3D for everything I (as a total non-professional novice) would need 3D graphics-wise, but as I understand it, there are a few CAD options available on Linux, and several more that run fine in WINE for those who need more professional or proprietary options.
On Linux there's FreeCAD, SolveSpace, Dune3d and OpenSCAD in (subjective) decending order of capability. FreeCAD still suffers from the "topological naming problem", though there's a fork that helps with that and merging it upstream is an ongoing process.
I purchased Alibre Atom3d because it was the only non-subscription affordable package I could find, but it's quite disappointing and won't run in wine anyway due to the licensing rootkit it uses. So I end up using one of the above linux capable tools, depending on the needs of the model. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses and none is satisfying overall. I reach for OnShape for any design that is going to be open source, because it is a pleasure to use (even though it is web-based), but I don't make enough money from CAD to pay for a $1500 annual subscription.
FreeCAD is ok, I use it for simple 3d printing designs, but you have to be very careful how you build the model as it likes to ruin dependencies if you change something in earlier sketch.
1.0 dev builds seem more user friendly.
Like some other good-bones free software, the UI is terrible. I challenge anyone who has prior CAD experience, but no FreeCAD experience, to install the software and design a simple bracket in under an hour.
I tried Fusion under Wine and it didn't really work. I haven't tried NX or Solidworks in the last few years.
I know that a few years back before WSL was even a thing someone at Microsoft "leaked" that some departments were using macOS almost exclusively. I would be surprised if the decision makers who force all that crap into Edge actually dogfood the product. WSL, Azure and Windows Terminal are a different story though, which might explain why they hold up and aren't overloaded with bullshit.
every software that ever updates has options that are subject to change; a user needs to be proactive in knowing whats running. i do agree we shouldnt need the privacy treadmill, but until we have better consumer laws the treadmill will continue...
as far as powershell scripts; i cant say i am a fan (i do like the potential targeting of offline machines with something like the mentioned website) - but my favorite to date is still: https://github.com/hellzerg/optimizer/
edit: if you end up trying out hellzerg's optimizer: do know that reboot button, once clicked, reboots right meow
I love fighting my libinput drivers every time I update. And lately the driver for my laptop keyboard is suddenly crashing without warning prompting a hard reboot every time. This was not an issue prior to a few months ago.
Linux software is not immune to frustrating changes
This illustrates just how ridiculously screwed up Windows is now.
No one should have to resort to registry hacking or the many scripts or hacks available to regain control over basic UX, privacy, or usability selections. It is absolutely absurd.
To be fair, Linux configuration is not exactly straightforward in comparison to Windows. Dozens of obscure config files (each with a different syntax), stored in various random places in the filesystem, with the general expectation that every user should be able to run a terminal command once in a while to fix something.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Linux lover and user, but from an outside perspective Windows registry (a central, structured database of configuration for everything) looks easier.
A sane program knows were to find the "random" configs: first, in cwd, then $XDG_CONFIG_HOME, then $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS. This is not exactly "obscure", you learn it soon and it's documented in every program.
The big advantage of this is that you can take your local config files and take it to other system. Can you do that with the Windows registry? Ironically, the only way to port settings in Windows is to have a .reg script and execute it, the thing you critisize.
And the Windows registry might be a single centralized config file, but config values are scattered through all the tree, and usually undocumented. E.g. this is a commonly recomended tweak:
I've been wondering if these magical registry things are documented anywhere... Searching, for example, "site:microsoft.com DisableSearchBoxSuggestions", only leads me to tons of forum posts.
I would love a configuration system with centralized database and centralized documentation, but no OS currently seems to be able to achieve that, and Windows' missing documentation appears even worse than obscure but documented config files.
With Linux you can configure it further to your taste. Which is not even necessary on most distributions for basic usage.
With Windows you have to patch it through the registry (which is not bsckupable config files) to remove ads and other annoying "features".
So the out-of-the-box experience is better with Linux. My mom even understands Linux GUIs better these days than Windows, it's just less bloat and distraction. And for basic apps you don't have to configure anything on the CLI. I recently got a Raspberry PI for my parents to use as a HTPC, installed some basic apps on it, and they can just use it like that.
While those configs are different in syntax, each is meant to be read, edited and backed up by a human. All of the system config files are in /etc
Registry hacking, with all it's resets and duplicate keys is hard to backup, constantly reverts ( because m$ doesn't believe it to be user editable) and is a pain in the ass to back up and restore.
Oh yes, and is your registry value supposed to be a dword, or something else? No way to tell.
That is the paradox of the registry. It sounds like a great idea. "all your config in on place" "structured data" but in practice, I have found it sort of sucks.
I am not sure why this is. My best guess is it unpleasant to use because now you have two trees. only one has all the nice tooling and the other is sort of second class and can only be accessed via special mechanisms.
Honestly, I think it would have been better if the following was true:
1. it was portable
2. it was well documented ( I absolutely hated that I was finding out about some magical way of enabling something by putting magic string somewhere from a magazine ) -- all those options should be available for me to peruse. I am not even suggesting third party software, just Windows.
But I agree, somehow this idea seems better on paper than in practice.
> Dozens of obscure config files (each with a different syntax), stored in various random places in the filesystem, with the general expectation that every user should be able to run a terminal command once in a while to fix something.
The good thing is that explanations is often a `man` command away, and the location of these files is often listed in the same place. Also general computing is an expert subject. You may as well have a kiosk if you start hiding away capabilities. The expectation to drop to a terminal is often because the terminal is the fastest way to get things done.
But with the terminal you still have to learn commands, it's not as discoverable as the windows 95 environment. There you could do things as a noob by just looking around and after a while you could do things without even thinking. Every windows version after that has broken that flow in some way. In Linux I keep forgetting what file to edit to get what I want. I need to look up location and syntax for most things every time I want to do something.
I like to describe the shell and commands as a big dashboard with many levers and indicators compared to a much simpler one with just a small bunch of ON-OFF switches. They're indeed complicated, until the day you need to change something that isn't on the simple panel, or isn't a simple ON-OFF choice, because every operating system is complicated; you can hide some of its complexity behind a graphical interface, but you always lose something in the process because you can easily have a command with 100 options but you can't put 100 buttons on a screen. It simply doesn't scale.
So the next question is "how do we put a complicated system under control of a simpler graphical interface?" We make assumptions of course (read: we write code that makes assumptions), and there is where bugs arise or more complexity is created, because machines (still) aren't good as humans at doing some things. As an example, very complex string operations can be performed using sed, awk and the usual shell command with regular expessions, where on Windows for years (I have no experience with its new shells) many people would have to load Office, import the text, write a macro, and export back the text. The difference being that Office would likely need two orders of magnitude more computing power, memory and storage.
> but you can't put 100 buttons on a screen. It simply doesn't scale.
You can scroll, use pages, tabs, nested menus, guided wizards, Chrome or VS code style searchable settings lists, buttons which appear or disappear dynamically when necessary.
> where on Windows for years (I have no experience with its new shells) many people would have to load Office, import the text, write a macro, and export back the text.
If you can assume office, why can’t you assume gvim or any other text editor with a gui? And why is text editing your yardstick? At least you can do that with a gui somehow, image processing you can’t do with a cli - yes you can write the code for ffmpeg or graphviz but you can’t see the result without a graphic interface.
I agree with you that an application needs discoverability. Like a text processor for a writer or a photo editing software for a photographer. It should make sense for a particular domain, requiring only minimal training for the medium. But we can't abstract away the notion of computers. An analogy is car. Driving a car only require a minimal interface. Racing with one, however, requires a lot more knowledge. Repairing a car is where knowing the internals is the minimum. Different needs, different levels of knowledge. Most people would be happy with the iPad if only the applications were a tad more useful (File sharing is aweful). But some people do "general computing" and graphical interfaces usually fail in some way or another (especially with automation).
The basics I'd say are still pretty much configurable via GUI so a newcomer wouldn't have hard times with either KDE, Gnome or Xfce. For majority it probably would be enough if GPU, sound and network drivers are working and it's possible to easily install apps they used to use on Windows or OSX/
Back around 2003 I read in local "Linux Magazine" about some project that tried bringing kind of a registry equivalent to Linux world. Sadly these were Internet caffee times so it was hard to track projects, so I really don't know what happen to it. The closest thing that resembles that idea is dconf.
With Windows nowadays you do all this tweaking or juggling within registry/group policy editor to protect yourself (and of course you do that if you care - majority of people don't) while with Linux I'd say it's more a matter of fine-tuning your distro of choice to your needs.
Ones that come with third party software installed in places like /opt[1], ones that go with website folders like .htaccess, MySQL looks in $MYSQL_HOME/my.cnf and
[datadir]/my.cnf
Every time I read one to figure something out I just end up searching it online. Maybe I’m just dumb but they all read like they were written as self reminders for the author of the software, not for someone who doesn’t already know how to use it.
I beg to differ, Linux is way more straightforward. Within each new Windows version they keep switching things around, adding layers upon layers and options within options within option that point back toward the initial options page, where you end up in a loop. The search function rarely finds the settings I want. Edge search results by default, including digital cancer such as Instagram, TikTok, et cetera, on the start menu by default.
Now too, for normal computer users who don't want to tweak their operating system and only need basic utilities, and are able to read and follow simple instructions, Linux has long become way more accessible than Windows.
I think there's always a pressure in balancing the ability for anyone to contribute to the software ecosystem with the convenience of a unified interface. Many people who like Apple's ecosystem seem to really want one extreme of this spectrum (A tightly-integrated ecosystem with design choices that standardize throughout - though this has not quite exactly been my experience with that ecosystem in practice), but there are grades of it everywhere. Mainstream linux distros increasingly favor centralized system services, like systemd or upstart, to manage several processes under a quasi-common hierarchy. Config files often get unified in /etc when a project becomes mature and integrated into a lot of distros, and there are conventions in how people write config files that are pretty straightforward in commonly used applications, but much less so in niche projects. Windows seems to be growing less customizable over time in an attempt to tighten its grip on its users, but of course even windows and macos seem to allow a bit more user control than mobile or game console operating systems. It's all degrees.
To be frank, I think the only battle-tested reliable ways to make a config language or a set of command line flags easier to use is good, complete documentation, though little things like integration with tab-completion or syntax highlighting can often go a long way too. These exist in almost any commonly used software found on a linux distro and are more than enough for someone willing to actually try stuff, which describes most of the people who can navigate doing anything that's not a default behavior of any OS anyway. Most people seem to have what I can only describe as learned helplessness about computers doing things they don't expect, but to be honest if you put people in an environment where they are motivated and don't feel afraid to mess up (which most educational contexts fail miserably at, both in terms of social norms and systemic incentives), most will actually start to figure stuff out a lot quicker than they expect themselves to. A small portion won't, and unfortunately most social environments are either too rushed or too high-pressure to facilitate this kind of exploration. But if we just accept that people are "non-technical" in the sense of "can't try anything remotely new in order to fix their computer", the only real way to satisfy those users is going to be keeping a system they already know how to use the same, which companies are simply not willing to do
To me, the main difference between open (like linux distros, but there are others) and closed computer operating systems is that the former tends not to tell you "Sit tight and we'll send a company-certified adult to help you" (or sometimes "This is not allowed", or "You need to pay extra for that now"), and the latter, increasingly, wherever possible, makes these the only options available
Yeah I actually miss the days of .ini files. They typically lived in the same directory as the program, so you didn't wind up with gigabytes of leftover tidbits from software you uninstalled or just ran once.
The problem isn't the registry per se, but rather how so many settings are either undocumented totally unavailable on the most common versions of Windows.
It's just config settings. It's not hard to understand. The registry is like Linux config files, and group policy is like a settings GUI menu. It's not absurd at all.
There’s official documentation for all Linux config files. Package managers are aware of config files and handle user changes during updates, if required. Config files are designed to be edited by humans and nearly all support some sort of comment syntax. None of these properties apply to editing registry settings.
Yes we had the time of total customisations with Firefox years ago. And now we can happy if they don't drop the about:config settings keys for some behavior.
This wouldn't even be sooooo bad if we could still google how to disable and fix everything... but complete google search collapse is exacerbating microsofts shit to an unbelievable unfixable level.
Like if some drastic new search doesn't appear within a couple years we are talking IT not being able to fix problems anymore
You can use Windows Firewall to block outbound connections from the Start bar. It would be nice if some basic features like calculator would still work, but no luck.
I think they mean calculation from the start menu search (on a default installation, it will Bing the calculation and show the search result, which I find absurd since it requires an internet connection to solve x+y). The calculator program still works fine offline, but is often overkill when you just want to quickly solve something
I'll note that Microsoft's PowerToys run solves this properly, just like MacOS's Spotlight and the built in search on most Linux desktops
If you mean "PowerToys Run", you can reconfigure pretty much any if the PowerToys shortcut key combinations.
Though for now I've just turned that one off as I don't have obvious need for it and haven't looked at what else it might offer. I use PowerToys mainly for FancyZones and plain text paste.
I built my GNU/Linux config years ago. The amount of time I spend changing things per year is asymptotically approaching zero.
My other comment was not actually about that though. It was about my computer not actually fighting me over random things, such that I have to circumvent normal means like using the Windows Registry to get what I want done. If you get to the point where you're twiddling with Registry values, you have sunken a lot of time into that problem.
> You just use Mac or Linux without changing anything?
Mac, no. It's almost as bad as windows in terms of having to chase perpetual change for no reason.
Linux though? Absolutely. Nothing changes unless I want it to change. Here's an admittedly extreme, but very real example: I build my parents a simplified Linux desktop setup ca.1996 (neither had any computer experience so wanted to keep it very simple).
Today ~28 years later, my remaining parent is using the exact same setup. The last thing you want to impose on a 95 year old with fading vision is an interface change. So it is exactly what it was in 1996. Through several hardware replacements, countless updates and even distro changes, it is still exactly the same.
This is what user-friendly means. I, the user, own the experience. Neither microsoft nor apple are able to respect that.
> Today ~28 years later, my remaining parent is using the exact same setup. The last thing you want to impose on a 95 year old with fading vision is an interface change. So it is exactly what it was in 1996. Through several hardware replacements, countless updates and even distro changes, it is still exactly the same.
Thats impressive and something I wouldn't expect to work. Are they running CDE or is there some other desktop environment that was around back then? What distribution are they using now? Do you have to do much configuration to keep the kernel up to date with an old DE?
fvwm, customized to be basically a kiosk-like desktop with a few large buttons for different use cases (each one a virtual screen).
Currently on debian, don't remember which distros I used initially. Probably started on slackware.
For email, mutt & emacs. Although both are heavily customized to have simple and minimal commands available, so a regular mutt or emacs user would be a bit lost.
I can't stress enough the power of customizable software! The ones on list list (fvwm, mutt, emacs) are prime examples of excellence on this front.
There is nothing worse than "opinionated" software that doesn't allow extensive customization. Even worse, when they change interfaces every time a new PM joins the company. For older people, any change in interface is a huge setback. There is unappreciated value in software than can be fully customized and then left alone.
The one and only change I made to the setup over the years was to remove the connect/disconnect icons for the (dialup) modem when I upgraded them to DSL and even that small change took a months before they stopped asking about it.
The most problematic part of this stack has been the browser, which I can't keep static and has changed a bunch of times in the last ~28 years. To the extent possible I configure the toolbar to be minimal. But the basic functionality of clicking on home button and back button hasn't really changed in the last three decades and that's basically all they need, so it's been manageable.
more or less, yeah. i have an apt install one-liner, a big one, saved in a .txt file saved in my email.
install basic ubanto and then run that bad boy. walk away for 15 min while it does its thing, and then generally good to go. at that point it's just changing the desktop background and ps1 colors
What do you mean when you say it doesn't "work"? You click the windows icon and nothing comes up? It displays but nothing is clickable? On 2 different machines? Really? This seems like hyperbole. It sounds like there's a specific feature that doesn't work for you as it used to, but instead of describing the issue you've thrown up your hands and declared it to not work. If it truly does not open or respond to clicks I'd love to know about it and retract this comment!
- the start menu opens but displays only an empty box.
- the start menu opens fine, but application search produces zero results, not even if I type the complete name of the program I ran yesterday.
Yes, when something like this happens I throw my hands up and declare it not-working today. At least Winkey+R works and my most-used programs are pinned to the taskbar anyway.
Most of the time it's fixed after a good night's sleep, other times Windows manages to pull itself together after a few hours. It's usually not a blocker for me, so I don't care enough to keep rebooting my machine in the vain hope that some user action might fix it. It's my employer's machine, so my employer's problem, not mine.
Virus? I’ve used window for over 2 decades, along with Linux and I’ve never seen the start menu do anything like that. I’ve seen it hang of course, but I don’t even remember the last time.
> You click the windows icon and nothing comes up?
Not the GP, but, yup. Got fixed about 6 months later in a routine update.
Wasn't just the start menu, none of the icons are responsive in the taskbar either, so I couldn't change the volume, or switch networks, etc.[1]
Luckily, for me, Windows is used almost exclusively for unimportant stuff, like games, netflix/disneyplus/prime, surfing, etc.
[1] Not a major issue: all my game (and firefox) shortcuts are on the desktop, my headset has a volume knob and the wifi can be turned off/then on again using the laptop Fn-key (which I only did when it lost a connection once).
For me it truly does not open or respond to clicks, many times per day. Routinely the start menu opens on the wrong monitor, in a remote corner somewhere. And it does nothing when I click on it or press Enter. It's not a permanent condition, but a frequent one.
> All this fuzzy language makes me feel like I'm dealing with a kindergarden teacher addressing his/her pupils.
Very fitting… both the kindergarten teacher addressing her pupils vs Windows abusing its users have the one thing in common - people who have zero chance of escaping their control and little influence to chamge their situation. In the business world, it’s called a captive market
> Since when is 6.6.1.40 better than 6.6.1.72? Why would you do that?
well, recently, there was a compromised update to a software package and the recommendation was to roll back to a previous version. there are definite times when removing the latest not-so-greatest for a previous version is the best solution. there's no reason to lose the plot in your ranting. you just lose credibility in your arguments at that point
"The US federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has issued a security advisory recommending that the affected devices should roll back to a previous uncompromised version."[0]
For some consolation: Windows Autoupdates can be disabled and likewise driver installs in general via Group Policy, which is available if you use Pro or above.
Windows updates can be disabled on any edition with my "I wasn't asking" approach of moving C:/Windows/system32/wua*.dll somewhere else. You can put these dlls back when and if you want to install updates.
But shouldn’t they inform you and let you opt out of the downgrade even if they know something?
Ubuntu at least asks if you want to proceed with a package update, you can look at the changelog to see what the update is about, and you can mark packages to be on hold and skipped for updates.
Not exclusively a Microsoft/Windows problem. It reminds me the nagging "Update iOS" messages in iphone, that take you to a new screen to dismiss them. Also in iOS, you can't use their wallet app for tickets and other cards if you don't add a payment card there, because they have this huge banner that says "Get started with Apple Pay" and that can't be dismissed. Disgusting.
This is false. I don’t use Apple Pay and I have lots of tickets and such. You don’t add them from within the Wallet app. The Apple Pay prompt is shown whenever you don’t have any passes or whatever in the wallet.
I've added some passes, thing is there. Last time at the AWS summit I had to hold the blasted banner on the edge of the iphone with a finger while they scanned the pass.
I literally just opened the wallet app and clicked the little dismiss X in the top right of the Apple Card ad. It disappeared with a little analog TV powering off animation, collapsing down to a scanline then sliding in horizontally to a little dot and disappearing.
Both before and after I could pull up my other passes easily.
1) WSL2 is fantastic to work. Having various Linux images on my system is nice, this is huge for me alone
2) plenty of things work just better on windows like Docker
3) stuff like power tools is insanely useful
4) monitor, windows and desktop management is very well done in comparison to the mess of MacOS
5) I don't have all these issues the article describes. An automatic update has never broken my computer let alone ruined my flow
6) I don't see these ads, maybe in the start menu there are but I just never use it I have shortcuts
7) MacOS is way more annoying
for me. I really dislike the filesystem, the window management, the fact that it will be always a third class citizen to Linux for software development (still have nightmares about installing Haskell and other languages on MacOS), the fact that it keeps resetting the output of my monitors at every sleep
I could provide other reasons but essentially it is way better for me and my use case than alternatives.
Unless I'm using a laptop, there I prefer MacOS for hardware.
I find it curious that you say things like "Docker runs better on Windows" but also "MacOS is worse than Linux for development". It reads like you think you have two choices Windows or MacOS, and that it's very unfortunate that they're both worse than Linux. Why isn't Linux one of the options?
And yes, Docker and most other development works better on Linux than any other OS.
Because WSL 2 satisfies all my Linux needs, and yes, it runs Docker perfectly and Windows is a better desktop OS, with more tools and software.
I used to run mint, ubuntu and some others up to Windows 10 I never considered a productive machine on my desktop but this has changed during the last years and Windows is an incredibly productive machine for software development.
Anyway I'm not trying to sell anybody Windows, was just answering a pointless comment like "I don't understand why would anybody use Windows", and I answered that there's plenty of reasons and tools for me, but I ain't gonna die if you force me on other OSs too.
> Windows is a better desktop OS, with more tools and software.
What tools are you using on Windows specifically? Visual Studio, maybe?
I only ask because, other than workflow-specific tooling (Photoshop, etc), no one is creating non-Electron GUIs anymore, and with non-GUIs Windows used to be far behind for Windows-specific software.
1) I'll agree that WSL2 is excellent, but the native "unix" environment of macos has meant that I haven't had very many issues doing work that ultimately runs on linux natively from a mac.
2) This makes no sense to me. I've run docker on my mac with zero issues, except that the move to apple silicon has caused some disruption for cases where I build and push images locally (99% is done via CI/CD, but there are always exceptions) and I have to specify linux/amd64, which with some tooling is actually quite painful.
3) Yeah, powertools is nice.
4) This is absolutely true. The most recent macos announcement does add some better native window management, but all I really want is to be able to plug in my external monitors and have macos not switch them around half the time. It's frustrating as this used to work until around 2012 or so, and then just broke and was never fixed.
5) I've run into windows updates reverting settings or replacing defaults that point to third parties. To be fair, macos has sometimes done this, too. In particular it used to re-enable siri after every OS point release.
6) The ads are there and (with effort) can be removed. But it's the principle. Some product manager thought that this is a good idea - the good idea being something that's good for microsoft and not the user. This way of thinking can and does lead to rot by a thousand cuts. What's next enabling location tracking for the advertisers, thus making my laptops battery slightly worse? - google did this with android. This way of thinking has been killing google.
7) Most of this is repeating point 4 which I agree with, but its filesystem is just a posix filesystem. Mind you the finder has it's strengths and weaknesses - it took awhile to get used to, but it's never really gotten in my way. Calling macos third class for linux development is just plain incorrect. One of the main reasons MacOS took off when it did is because so many developers moved to it because they could use the same "unix/linux" tools more natively than windows, but didn't have to deal with linux on the desktop. Web developers in particular could easily run apache/php/etc as well as various design tools from Adobe or whoever. I've not seen too many complaints with most languages on it, but I could see more niche ones like Haskell being painful.
> I could provide other reasons but essentially it is way better for me and my use case than alternatives.
This is what ultimately matters. :-)
> Unless I'm using a laptop, there I prefer MacOS for hardware.
Hilariously for me, the one thing that's more painful than anything else when using windows is the poor quality of the bloody trackpads, even on more expensive/premium hardware (I haven't bought a windows laptop since before covid, so maybe this is better now?). Though a close second is having to deal with various pop-ups (from both windows and other software/utilities) that seem to vie for my attention.
On Pro it would be better to use the group policy editor. As a bonus this also ensures the setting survives updates, which is not always a given for raw registry edits.
If gpedit.msc gives you unexpected results (I.e. policies just don’t seem to work) then do two things:
1. gpupdate /force
2. Download the latest ADMX templates; newer versions of Windows often introduce similarly-named - but still distinct - policy templates, for unwanted “features” in older versions, just like Start Menu web-search and forced-restarts for updates.
Lastly, while Windows LTSC is really what Microsoft should make available for everyone, don’t forget that Windows Server is still Windows LTSC too - so if you’re outside the MSDN Subscription Garden-of-Eden, you can still get Windows Server tricked-out as a real LTSC Workstation OS.
It's frankly offensive that this utterly pointless "feature" can't just be disabled. Starting Photoshop used to be windowskey, "ph", enter. Now, by default, it will give you an Edge Bing search for "ph"...
But even if you wait a few seconds before confirming, you'll get some garbage like Windows Photos, even though that's literally never been used.
At least the start menu got a lot faster with the net search disabled, but dropping usage based ordering is just another sign that Windows is NOT aimed at power users anymore.
I have absolutely none of these problems on my Windows 11 pro for workstations desktop. My computer is very much my computer and I seem to have full total control over everything. I'm not sure what I do differently than everyone else but that's just how it is.
Try completely removing one drive to understand the rest of our pain. Even if you manage to get the program gone, somehow the default file save location for many applications is still a (now deleted) one drive folder. If you forget and click save.. well now you have one drive again.
Leave it alone, that's why Windows is breaking for you. You keep fucking with core components. It's not Linux. You can't do that and not suffer consequences.
Leave it alone? It's unnecessary bloatware, that performs absolutely zero required functionality. It's continuous prominent presence in the _always_ visible part of the file tree on the left of _every_ explorer window is a constant reminder that what used to be my favorite OS is now user hostile.
At least in Europe it did get a proper uninstall a while ago, which proves that it really was just there for promotion.
I'd gladly pay for a version of Windows that just leaves me alone. No I don't want Edge, Bing, a weather snippet, start search, Cortana, forced updates and a regular black pattern maze promising a somehow "improved experience" while trying to force metrics participation down my throat.
But I also don't want Linux, because many tools I rely on (plus games) won't run on it and I don't want a Mac because it's too opinionated. It feels exactly like being stuck in an abusive relationship at this point.
Unnecessary bloatware? Bloatware really? What does it bloat? You can make all of these things disappear without removing them from Windows itself. You also have to remember that an inaction is an action. Ignoring a pop-up or not reading something and then just clicking x doesn't equal this thing will not bother me anymore. You can make the weather snippet widget thing just not be there anymore and it's not hard. I have more than just edge installed for my browser and I could switch between them even though I favor edge and use edge as my default browser. Cortana hasn't showed itself on my computer for... I have no idea how long and that's just because I went through every setting and read everything... No group policy changes, no registry hacks, just using Windows. If you are on professional or higher of windows then you could just pause updates over and over and over. If an update is waiting then go into Windows update in the settings and click pause and then it doesn't install it. I've postponed updating since January because I'm on an insider build that has a known blocker where it can't be updated from.
Yes. I don't want it, I don't need it, my OS does not need it to function, I never asked for it and (until the EU forced them to change this) I could not remove it.
> Bloatware really?
Yes, really. "Unwanted software included on a new computer or mobile device by the manufacturer". What in this definition does not apply, according to you?
> What does it bloat?
My OS, duh. It probably does not waste too many resources, as long as I don't engage with it, but the fact that it's there and it was shoved into my face on every explorer window is something worse than spam. It's basically the modern day equivalent of those shitty browser toolbars that some programs used to try to sneak install.
> You can make all of these things disappear
False. I was only able to fully disable OneDrive with registry hacks, before EU forced them to take it out.
So you are telling me, a Windows power user since 3.11, that I should just rtfm?
It's not about being able to turn certain things off, it's about the playbook that Microsoft is following these days, displaying malignant, almost petty behavior, like restoring the Edge shortcut on the desktop after updates.
It's about all the black patterns, like how you need to first go back a page in the post-update maze before you even get the option to continue without attaching a Microsoft account to your OS. Yes, I know that you can turn the maze off, but that option is hidden so far in the settings most users have no idea it even exists.
It's about the fact that they even dared to suggest putting ads in Explorer windows. It's about the clear sensation that my OS is no longer on my side. It's selling out, stabbing me in the back, turning rotten. It's a crying shame, but I may need to take it out to the back of the shed one of these days.
Now you can, in Europe. It used to involve registry hacks, which, as others keep pointing out, could break stuff because it's not the way you are supposed to modify your OS.
Onedrive is not a core windows component. It’s not a dependency of other applications. It’s just a Dropbox replacement.
Windows works, and has always worked, just fine without onedrive. Microsoft just doesn’t want you to know that, because they are obsessed with the idea of upselling you on subscription based cloud services.
There’s actually a few different glibc replacements available for Linux.
And if you think OneDrive is essential for Windows then I’d suggest you do a little reading on the history of Microsoft and how they falsely claim dependencies on their own software stacks. Especially the court cases around debundling IE4 with Win98, and DR-DOS vs Windows 95.
Well, "technically" - it wasn't a false claim. It WAS dependent on IE and other things. It didn't have to be dependent - MS made it that way on purpose, so things would stop working without (even though the dependency didn't need to be baked in).
It's akin to adding webview to your application to display a text file, even though you never would display an HTML file. It could have been done another way, but it wasn't.
Except that it was demonstrated that IE could be removed from Windows 98. So Microsoft then claimed that Windows ran slower without IE. A judge (because this whole saga went to court) argued that Microsofts video evidence proving that point was falsified and so Microsoft later also dropped their slowness claim too.
No, it wasn't. There was w98lite and such where you could replace WIndows 98's (i)explore.exe/shell32.dll with a Windows 95 one and yet the rest of the software just ran like nothing, while being able to run IE in a standalone way.
Ignoring the fact that you're comparing a cloud storage client to what is essentially a kernel wrapper that all software depends on, you actually can remove glibc without breaking things. You just also have to install another libc (say, musl) and replace your software that targets glibc with software that targets musl, or install a glibc -> musl compatibility layer (gcompat).
So, yeah. If you actually know enough about libcs to want to get rid of glibc for a real reason, you can do it without breaking things. If you just want to go around and start deleting core system dependencies (which I think is very silly to put a cloud storage client in that bucket, regardless of the brand of cloud storage) without replacing them, then chaos seems to be the goal, and maybe order is the "broken" state for that machine :P
It’s software running on your own computer. If you’re not supposed to turn off ads and OneDrive, change the default search engine, etc then that’s a pretty sad state of affairs.
Though as an ex-Windows developer and hacker, I can tell you that NT is pretty modular and is designed to be “fucked” with in various different ways. Microsoft just like to ship defaults that are more favourable for their own business than your typical power user.
I wouldn’t mind the defaults if they weren’t horrible. No, I don’t want Microsoft selling my data to 3rd parties. I don’t want an AI “assistant” watching everything I do. I don’t want crazy right wing conspiracy theory news stories in my start menu, or popping up next to the clock or wherever that junk lives. I don’t want my start menu to do an internet search. Or to try and get me to play candy crush. If I want a dropbox like service I’ll research my options. Don’t auto install onedrive and make it start automatically at boot.
None of that stuff is a core component. The only reason any of that stuff is part of windows is because windows is a mature product. And all their desperate product managers need to add stupid features to windows to justify getting promoted.
Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but I don’t use windows because I want to be part of Microsoft’s software empire. I just want an OS that boots fast and lets me play video games. I don’t buy ram from the computer store so some tasteless bozo at Microsoft can justify their 6 figure salary.
You're getting downvoted, as will I, because presenting an alternative anecdotal experience isn't acceptable in Windows threads. I've learned this the hard way.
Unfortunately just like the original post is anecdotal (I haven't had a machine fail to startup after an update since XP) not all anecdotes are born equal.
Interestingly, I don't see adverts myself, and I've never seen any at work. I -suspect- that's heavily regionalized.
Are there features I don't care for? Sure - I don't use OneDrive, I don't internet search from the Start bar, and I use Edge only occasionally. But it's not like somehow you -have- to use everything they ship.
I get it. An OS is personal. If you don't like Windows, use MacOS or Linux. All 3 have different approaches and one of them will fit you better than the others. Arguing over which is better or worse is like fighting over ice-cream flavors.
Yes you have to use what they ship. Because they force you to. You cannot turn off one drive nagging. You cannot turn off the start menu search. When installing windows these days you have to use a Microsoft account and so on.
Yes there are work arounds, but that’s not for the average user. If I need to start tinkering and hack around in registries I might as well use Linux.
I confess I don't have a Microsoft account, and installed without one. I'm not sure how I did that, I guess I just passed on it. Every month or so it after a reboot it prompts me to "finish setting up my computer" and I just "remind me later".
I haven't touched the registry, so that's not in play.
OneDrive doesn't nag me.
As I said earlier this is all anecdotal, clearly your experience is different to mine. This post is just anecdotes, not data, and I'm not suggesting my experience is your experience.
I had to install a temporary windows 10 (not 11) install so that I can unlock the bootloader of a xiaomi phone and install a better rom. I managed to avoid the microsoft account use by not connecting to the internet before the setup was finished. It asked me like 2 or 3 times it looped 2 or 3 times in the select wifi / use MS account screens before giving up and sending me to the local account creation.
Unless you keep modifying the registry to disable it, you do, every time you do a search. You're just not using those results. But you're still getting the crappy experience of delayed actions when you just want the local results.
I just looked and I don't get them but I see them on others computers. I can't remember doing any registry hacks on this so not sure why I don't get them... Maybe because I upgraded from windows 7 and never had a windows account, running as local user only?
It's normally active for local users as well. It is for me and I never logged in. You're (accidentally?) running with an unusual config for some reason. The way to turn it off also changed a couple of times already, so you're really lucky you've avoided it.
It's because people fuck with the registry, run those decrapifier scripts etc. They completely mess with the guts doing nonstandard things and eventually it turns into a mess. Ask me how I know.
After I started administering fleets of Windows machines, I learned that if you don't fuck with it, it's fine!
If you need to make changes, use group policy. Don't like OneDrive? Don't use it! Uninstalling it is going to fuck things up.
Install updates as they come. "But it breaks things!" No it doesn't. It only does if you've fucked your registry to hell.
Just leave things alone and stop trying to customize it like a Linux box is my advice. It is what it is and will work fine if you use it the way it's intended.
> Don't like OneDrive? Don't use it! Uninstalling it is going to fuck things up.
OneDrive in the end is a component designed to exfiltrate documents. Wanting to remove a security vulnerability should not brick a device. Asking people to not use it is not a solution because you are prompted to send your documents over the internet to a third party every single time you save a new file.
No, I absolutely want it off my computer. But then I'm not going to bother with weird registry scripts. Windows won't let me easily remove things, so I removed windows.
<< It is what it is and will work fine if you use it the way it's intended.
That may be true for work PCs, where my access is already restricted and heavily monitored, but I don't accept that for my personal machine.
<< It's because people fuck with the registry,
Hey, if MS wants to put configs somewhere else that is cool too. I don't understand how it is somehow expected that I don't touch the magic box ( because it is all held by rubber band and glue ). It is not some rinky-dink shop that made its first release. It is a global company. I simply expect more.
<< Install updates as they come.
This is for the user to decide. I am personally livid that windows machines update bios these days without any user interaction. If I ever saw retarded setting just waiting to cause a major issue, this is it.
<< Just leave things alone and stop trying to customize it like a Linux box
I use my Windows instance in a VM so I suppose I technically am leaving it mostly alone, but even then I chose to make some changes to registry to make the access easier for myself.
If I may get a little personal for a moment. I think your professional experience may be clouding your judgment in this case. I see it fairly often across a wide variety of professions, where various representatives consider client/user/buyer a hindrance of sorts that should make their lives easier 'by just doing X'. The thing is, the relationship is really not about making the representative's life easier.
Every time I search on the start menu there is a web search, impossible to turn off. How is that acceptable?
I install Edge Beta to test something, and the I uninstall it. All of the sudden my search provider in my normal Edge is reset.
And the nagging everywhere. No I don't want 'back-up' my files (OneDrive is not backup, it's sync). And I don't want to be reminded later. I don't want to be reminded ever. All this fuzzy language makes me feel like I'm dealing with a kindergarden teacher addressing his/her pupils.
It's not my computer any more.
Oh, I update a driver. And 2 days later Windows installs an older version. Since when is 6.6.1.40 better than 6.6.1.72? Why would you do that?
reply