The first is coercion. Installing without a Microsoft (Outlook) account is more and more difficult. An attentive steward of Windows would allow older gui themes (xp, Win7 Aero, etc.) to be applied for the nostalgic. And there would be an easy control to disable all Copilot integration. Microsoft is coercive towards their customers with these and other actions.
The second is incompetence. The Windows update process is intrusive, lengthy, and prone to repeatedly bricking unlucky PCs. Linux updates are far more pleasant.
These are big problems, and I agree, it will take great institutional change to curb these abusive tendencies. I don't know if they can.
Put a clippy skin on copilot and people would probably install it voluntarily.
Man..., its 2026 and just yesterday I did "Update and Shutdown" only for it to "Update and Restart" instead. It would be funny if it wasnt that sad..
Now, don't get me wrong, what the hell is so special about Windows that it needs to reboot for every little update operation?
AFAICT it's only updates to things that run at startup time that require a reboot, probably because NTFS doesn't allow you to write to a file that's currently opened (as opposed to nearly every Linux filesystem, which handles that just fine: the process that has the file opened continues to see the "old" file, while any that open it after the write will see the "new" file — but NTFS, probably due to internal architecture, can't handle that and so you have to reboot to change files that background services are using).
The reason that they want a reboot is that they do not want to support a system using two versions of the same library at the same time, let's say ntdll. So they would have to close any program using that library before programs that use the new version can be started. That is equivalent to a reboot.
And I completely understand the reason. For a long time when Firefox would update on Linux, the browser windows still open were broken; it opened resources meant for the updated Firefox with the processes runnung the non-updated Firefox. The Chrome developers mentioned [2] that the "proper" solution would be to open every file at start and pass that file descriptor to the subprocesses so all of them are using the same version of the file. Needless to say, resource usage would go up.
[2]: https://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2011/08/zygote...
Or to install into versioned prefixes, so the old keeps using the old files.
I don't think Microsoft sees client machine reboots as an issue, and it used to be much worse when they used to be released weekly. On the server side, Microsoft expects that you'd implement some form of high availability.
NTFS on non-Windows follows the locking semantics of the underlying driver model/kernel, e.g. you can replace an in-use file on Linux. Likewise, using FAT on Windows you cannot replace an in-use file. This is just to demonstrate it isn't a file system-specific "issue" (if you feel it is one). It was a design decision by the original NT OS/2 development group.
Ultimately, the NT byte-range locking is a holdover from NT OS/2, where in OS/2 byte-range locking was mandatory.
There a enough apps that keep old files open, but also (re)open updated files that do not fit to the old, open ones, thus have all kind of issues. (Subjectively Thunderbird has major issues with not restarting if libs it depends on get upgraded.)
I stopped answering support mails and tickets from users with long uptime with anything else than: reboot first. And it was >>80% the cause of problems. And yes, most times a logout would suffice, but with our users having >100d uptime with desktops and laptops, the occasional kernel update is done /en passant/ this way. (The impatient could kexec and have the advantage of both. Or look at the output of "need restart" or "checkrestart". But I couldn't care less in case of end user devices)
I install Gimp one time. I like to casual draw on autopilot, usually while doing something else, talking, watching a movie, listening to a podcast etc. For some reason half the icons were missing and the existing set was replaced with the hipster horrifying flat single color monstrosities. This would have been a waste of their time if it was only an option for no one who wants this some place buried deep in the settings where it would only clutter the nesaserily complex options.
With MS it feels more like intentionally trolling the user
The best spot for the applications sub menu is to not make it a sub menu. The second best is to leave it wherever the fuck it was before. I want to struggle remembering what an application was called and wonder why they are organized so poorly. (Not by file Association) In stead they have me wonder where they even are???
BUT
I don't actually understand your sentences for the most part. I really had to work to glean what you were talking about.
I'm not trying to be insulting here; sometimes I write in inscrutable ways too. But - could you reword a few things so I know what you're trying to say?
The general point was that "Improvement" that ruin muscle memory usually aren't. It should be the most basic UI design principle.
One should be able to instinctively click on the Gmail icon while focused on the task at hand. If the icon isn't where one expects it to be you are no longer doing email things. Same goes for having the user search for the inbox inside the application. If they can't find it they are unproductive and feel dumb but they aren't to blame. Some bad designer came up with the brilliant idea to call it "all mail". The inbox is expected to live at the top of the menu. You can't improve it.
It's such basic stuff. It's like someone used your tools or your kitchen and put everything in a new spot. Eh, I mean the wrong spot.
I could give 1000 example inside windows but it seems everyone is trolling their users. They all want to create the new and improved slashdot, now without threaded discussions! - Hurray!
I wonder what would be a good way to visualize settings the user changed (and changed back) and some way to see the defaults. Perhaps save custom settings? Useful but it adds even more cans of worms.
Say, after I change the minimum font size on my browser, is it still usable for webdesign?
What if I want to configure Audacity for podcasts and for music?
I wondered if one could ask the user when they started using an application but it seems unworkable.
Then had a silly idea to do a slider that moves the ui in time with animations so that you can see buttons fly in and out of sub menus. Slide it a few decades to the left and you are back in windows NT. Not a realistic thing for MS to make but depending on the project it might be cool.
Then had an idea for a tree shaped slider with all the ui branches in it.
For websites I often keep the old designs on the server and append a date to the file name. Never had a reason to expose the user to those but it could be fun. I did lots of crazy experiments that didn't live up to expectation.
Can in stead throw designs in there that appeal to single digit % users. And then they won't be able to find it.
Maybe some day AI can save us.
It doesn't have to use different window layouts, just differently themed decorations. Changing the default wallpaper is a simple way to do it.
I'm not sure what this sentence means. Perhaps you already knew that Gimp's monochrome icons can be replaced by colorful ones by going to the Gimp settings under Theme -> Icon Theme, and unchecking the "Use symbolic icons if available" checkbox. That may be what you meant by "some place buried deep in the settings". But if you didn't, at least now you know how to get the colorful icons back.
The reason I'm making this comment, though, is to contrast it with Windows. A comment by chasil, left shortly after your own comment, said that "[a]n attentive steward of Windows would allow older gui themes (xp, Win7 Aero, etc.) to be applied for the nostalgic." Gimp has done just that: in Icon Theme, you can choose the "Default" or "Legacy" icon theme, so if you got used to the older icons, you can get them back. And you can still use the newer icon set if you like, but get the icons' colors back by unchecking a (confusingly-named, the name definitely needs improvement) checkbox. Windows doesn't have any built-in way to get the older themes back; if you want Windows 11, or even 10, to look like Windows 7 or XP or whatever version you trained your visual memory on for years, then it takes third-party software to make that possible. (And it may not even be possible, I haven't checked).
When even one of the most infamous-for-confusing-UI pieces of open-source software (I mean Gimp, of course) is doing a better job of providing good UI than Microsoft is, Microsoft has a problem.
Non tech people don't care about control panel etc. they just go through the pain of entering the WiFi password. Done.
- gamers. Double click install - go on. I know very few gamers that have moved to Linux.
And corporate. Most normies that I know DON'T have own computers. Everything can be done via smartphone these days.
It's doomsday if Linux starts outperforming Windows. If SteamOS for PC still required me to dual boot - which I already do - but guaranteed is get 100% windows performance or better, then that would be the official end.
It's not clear to me this couldn't happen either: I am very willing to hand over the entire PC configuration if the promise I get in return is "your games will run as fast as it is possible to run them".
When you think about it, it is kind of insane that Linux can match or outperform windows when it has an extra layer translating the system calls though. And for many of us, who don't play competitive twitchy shooters on a high level, the performance of gaming on Linux is perfectly adequate currently. I played Baldur's Gate 3 on Linux earlier this year for example, and it maxed out the frame rate of my monitor.
Usually about a 10-20% fps improvement for my usual fare in those days: League, Overwatch, Civ5, Minecraft, Crusader Kings, Factorio, etc. Try it for yourself and see what you get.
Greatest strength. Greatest papercut.