I cannot believe how slow and laggy even the most basic of Microsoft applications are on Windows 11. Launching something as simple as the calculator takes a second or two to load in. What could it possibly be doing to warrant such a long load time? The 'classic' calculator on previous versions would appear near instantly once clicked.
I am also baffled as to how something like the new right click context menu can have items loading in and then changing the order of icons once they do finish loading on every single click. For example, why does Skype need to have its menu item load every time the context menu is opened? Why not pre-load this on boot? The classic context menu had no such issues.
Rather than go on and on, I sense Product Owners at Microsoft no longer care about fast and performant code.
The Windows app development situation has become such a mess even Microsoft devs want to use Electron style containment for everything. That is the result.
Edit to add: I'm sure other people can chip in with more, but what I was told was the .net teams and Windows teams pulled in completely different directions. WPF/XAML was really widely liked by many developers for quite a while, then they put it on ice for no apparent reason (supposedly because the core Windows team had better ideas), and their on/off stance on this ever since has just driven everyone away.
The straw that broke the camel's back for me was with Outlook. They replaced the regular desktop Outlook app with "New Outlook", which is just a wrapper around Outlook.com, which is horrible and slow and buggy and even shows ads to the user. I guess they think it's a waste of money to develop a proper mail client app.
I also copied over the 'old' windows photo viewer. The delay in loading simple screenshots was such an annoyance that I couldn't stand it. Folks on forums suggested turning off any analysis plugins, such as those meant to identify faces in photographs to speed things up. It barely made a difference.
I've noticed this as well since our company laptops updated to Windows 11. Launching everything is slower but especially the built-in Microsoft apps like calc, notepad and mspaint. It's incredibly frustrating.
> Launching something as simple as the calculator takes a second or two to load in.
You can get this feature on Linux if you use flatpaks or snaps on an older computer. I got used to bearing with it because it allows me to have a stable core OS combined with modern applications that have been released today. It's a price I'm willing to pay. Nevertheless, I don't know how slow it is on a more modern machine, I guess it is probably quite fast.
Also, gnome-calculator is not an application I would install through a flatpak or snap.
When my laptop is on energy saving mode, the calculator crashes when opening. The snippet tool breaks the drag in the middle and delivers a partial screenshot. The system generally feels like slideshow.
These didn't happen under Windows 10.
Few weeks ago I also had my share of problems under Debian and I'm really thinking about getting the cheapest Mac Mini M4 and re-learning every possible computer habit I have including shortcuts because I hate the current status in any non-mac os/hardware so much.
>"You put in text, you get out an image, no more need for discernment or skill or labor."
This sentiment is reminiscent to the attitudes around photography when it first became practical. People wondered how photography could be considered a form of art when all one had to do was point and press a button. The amount of effort is minuscule compared to what it takes to depict the same subject using traditional media. That being said, there is a lot of skill necessary to capture a photograph properly; lighting, composition, shutter speed, exposure, and so on. I agree that generative AI images will disrupt the market segment for stock photos and "clip art" used for articles, presentations, et cetera.
There will be a need to study and acquire skills related to the use of generative AI image creation. While technology will make simple prompts "good enough" for most outputs, just as our smartphone cameras make taking a picture "good enough", people will still need to study and practice in order to make high quality output.
Describing those who have lost trust in journalists as "postliterate" is not going to engender any reconciliation between the two. I for one, roll my eyes whenever journalists elevate themselves as the keepers of truth and democracy. Despite all of their self-aggrandizement they're just writers and citizens like the rest of us.
You are likely not a professional writer, unless that happens to be your job, but then you are not “like the rest of us”. Also, journalists are held to the standards of their organization, unlike “the rest of us” who have no standard.
I always assume something a random citizen says is 99% false because yes, most people know very little.
> I always assume something a random citizen says is 99% false because yes, most people know very little.
That's one way to look at it. Another is, a random citizen has no reason to lie to you. A journalist working for an "organization with standards" does.
It has nothing to do with someone lying to me, rather that the average person is very uneducated on any given topic and these days largely consumes propaganda from people who DO have a reason to lie to me. Thus, random people are not to be listened to.
My hierarchy of trust is random people 10, government 40, journalists 60, science papers 80, scientists talking about their own area 88. Everything else 0.
