Change is Rarely Good
 

Is it really just me?

Or am I correct in observing that all software now is NOT an improvement.

Not needed.

Just a grab for money.

Windows 7 worked just fine. My IT friend insists it had to change for security reasons, but that does not explain why the interface had to change.

People invest sometimes YEARS of their lives obtaining Muscle Memory dealing with interfaces. Change is not only unnecessary and unwanted, it does huge harm.

Some of us were not born with a cell phone embedded in our palm
Some of us do not have the attention span of a gnat.

No one ever contact me and said, "hey we see you are using XXX. What type of changes would you be in favor of?"

When/How did "new" become automatically "better"?

Remakes of old movies are GARBAGE, remakes of old songs are GARBAGE.

Get an original idea, or go kill yourself.

But seriously, how do you really feel?

Lostone I think you have a point, possibly some is good and an improvement but much is just change for the sake of change, the latest upgrade to Windows 10 is a prime example, desktop takes ages to start, has an out of focus splash screen and has lost some functionality.

the changes would not be made unless it was an improvement for someone.

What! Even if that someone is just a set of programmers and their bosses at Microsoft who get to keep a pay packet coming in. Fair crack of the whip.

The latest 'upgrade' to Windows 10 is an abomination. But I guess it will keep those same people in a job over the next 12 months as they incrementally fix the introduced problems.

No. You are NOT correct. You made a blanket statement about "all" software. And like all blanket statements (including this one), there are exceptions that make such absolute statements wrong.

A lot, if not most new versions of software today are indeed improvements over the last.

Whether we like the improvements or not is often just a subjective opinion.

Under the hood, W10 is a vastly superior OS in many ways over all previous versions. This is especially true if you base that on the criteria that the purpose of the OS is to establish communication and integration between all the various hardware components of a computer into a stable and secure system designed to run today's software. W10 does that very well.

Your IT friend is right. Because of the actions of the bad guys (some even state sponsored :eek: :() for which Microsoft has been falsely and relentlessly blamed for nearly 2 decades, Windows had to change to meet the challenges of today's security landscape.

But it MUST be noted the hardware industry has made HUGE changes too - not just in the state-of-the-art for which operating systems must support too, but also many security features being built into said hardware.

And it must be noted (and accepted by consumers) that Microsoft is not to blame when hardware makers refuse to develop W10 drivers for their legacy hardware. After all, there's no profit in that for those hardware makers. In fact, supporting legacy hardware is a total loss of profits. So they would much rather we buy new hardware designed for W10.

But you are right too - those changes to Windows do not explain why the UI had to change.

And to that, if you still prefer the desktop and start menu of W7, check out Start10 - arguably the best $5 I ever spent!

***

As a semi-side note, if you want to know why Windows changed, it is because of the Windows Phone back when W8 came out. The Microsoft marketing weenies wanted Windows 8 users who were looking for a new smart phone to pick up a Windows Phone and immediately be familiar with it, fall in love with it, and buy it.

The problem there was they just assumed they could shove the Windows 8 "metro" desktop down on Windows 7 (and XP and Vista) users and that we would automatically fall in love with W8. Of course that never happened and Windows 8 was a fiasco and grand failure - as was the Windows Phone.