Eight changes I'd like to see in Windows 8.1 (but probably won't)
Summary: When Microsoft releases Windows 8.1 later this year, it will include a slew of usability changes designed to address user complaints. I've put together my own list of small changes that would make Windows 8.1 more usable. Maybe they'll make it into Windows 8.2 next year.
Image 1 of 8
Make it possible to pin the charms menu so it's always visible
One of the most common objections I hear to the charms menu is that it’s too hard to find.
You summon the five charms with a swipe of the mouse to the upper or lower right corner, or with the keyboard shortcut Windows key + C.
The trouble with that is that the hidden charms menu is hard to reach, requiring a gesture all the way to the upper right corner, followed by a swipe down to the Search charm.
But what if you could pin the charms menu so it were always present? That menu is a mere 86 pixels in width, which still allows plenty of room for your apps and even the desktop, as this mockup shows. And with the charms visible, it would be much easier to search or share, or do anything else that would otherwise require multiple gestures.
See also:
- Windows 8.1 unveiled: will it change your mind about Windows 8?
- A closer look at what's new in Windows 8.1
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Common sense stuff
or
Agreed.
How
Not to mention
Bringing back the Start button would put it all in one place. DOH
What?!
So your new car hasn't seen any improvements over 20 years?
The name is rather dumb sounding, but when has microsoft ever been good a branding.
Yeah they go....
But the fundamentals haven't changed
Microsoft decided we should all be using touch interfaces, but they forgot to ask us if we wanted them or were even ready for them. I have a tablet and it works well for what I use it for. Mainly consumption. But there are other things that require a desktop or a laptop.
If Microsoft had done it correctly, Win8 would have determined during installation whether a touchscreen was present and OFFERED to install Metro/Modern. Otherwise, it should have just installed a standard desktop. It could have offered the option when a touch device was added, too. Or even just offered Metro/Modern during installation.
But they had to force a major interface change down users' throats, with little guidance on how to actually use it. Or consideration as to whether it would make us more productive. Certainly, most people can adjust to it. But for many, it's change for the sake of change, to benefit Microsoft for their vision of the future. Customers be damned.
I'm not saying it's automatically a bad interface, in principle, but it's implementation was handled very poorly.
car hasnt any improvements in 20 years?
There are cars that drive themselves now
There have been plenty of changes that have affected how people drive, even if the most basic level of features are still there.
Yet cars are not computers and talking about how cars are doesn't accurately depict how computers change.
Manuel the car ...
;-)
No stupid changes
I would have thought that after Bill Gates' dumb crack at the car industry many years ago and I think it was GM's CEO who made the witty response, people would be smart enough not to draw parallels between cars and Windows.
the car analogy, what did you think it was indicating?
Mass produced cars today -- each and every single one legal to drive on the streets of America today -- have the EXACT same basic control layout (interface) as cars from 30, 40, 50, 60, even 70 or more years ago. Steering wheel. Accelerator pedal. Brake pedal.
Have people *tried* to introduce new control mechanisms/styles/layouts? Yes. Since the introduction of the afore-mentioned standard layout, have any alternative layouts/structures *ever* been successful? No. Changes to the underlying mechanical systems? Yes. Additional features? Yes. But absolutely NO changes to the core basic control interface design. Why? Because the wheel-and-two-pedals interface design is at *peak utility*. It simply *works better* than any alternative design ever created.
So ... that's my take-away from Kostaghus' post ... yes, we want/like to have improvements *under the hood* ... improvements that make the machine *work better* ... but the INTERFACE that we use to CONTROL the machine is already at peak utility.
Win8 introduced a lot of improvements under the hood, and I am pleased for that. But the *interface* -- the first (and now second) go round of the "Metro" ui -- is utter and complete user-unfriendly garbage. It's the joystick to the steering wheel. It's a hand-clutch to a pedal. It's different, not better. It's an abject failure of sensible UI design. Changes to the INTERFACE that don't create clear and obvious improvements -- e.g., ease or simplify the process of CONTROL -- provide no net benefit, hence are contra-indicated. It's bad UI design to change things just to be different, and that's exactly what happened with Win8 Metro.
So, what were YOU talkin about? :-)
Cars nor computers
There seem to be 2 different issues being brought together into one point.
1) Some people don't like the changes made to Windows8 interface.
2) The changes were made for no reason.
The first is primarily an issue of preference and compounded by the typical mishandling of anything Microsoft touches. The second isn't true at all.
Did Siri tell you to say that?
The charms bar = the start-menu.
Re: Many people fail to realise this
The charms bar = the start-menu
If you are a Win 8 hater, don't let your ineptitude to learn something new hinder progress for the rest of us. Learn the new thing and let go of the past.
How is Windows 8 "progress"?