Train wreck
-
@gu3st said:
Sorry, should I ... spend the next 3 years figuring out how to compile a Linux distro from Scratch?
Why would you compile a Linux distro from Scratch? Most of the (few) Linux users who actually compile their distro do it from bash, csh, or zsh.
-
@Scarlet Manuka said:
Not quite. 2007 has this weird setup where the main application isn't ribbonified, but the message window is. So you can open a message, then customise the ribbon there to add the "Message Options..." command (which, by the way, is a really intuitive place to find the message headers, don't you think?), but you only get it in the message ribbon. So you still have to open the message to access your new shortcut, which makes it hardly worthwhile.
No, you wouldn't. You cannot customize the ribbon in Office 2007. You can, however, customize the old-style toolbars in the applications that still have them. Hence why I said, "I don't have Outlook 2007 but I imagine you can do much the same thing but without needing to add the group, but I doubt you'd get the keyboard shortcut."
-
@pjt33 said:
@gu3st said:
Sorry, should I ... spend the next 3 years figuring out how to compile a Linux distro from Scratch?
Why would you compile a Linux distro from Scratch? Most of the (few) Linux users who actually compile their distro do it from bash, csh, or zsh.LOL, cheaters!
-
I wrote my own Linux kernel. Without the original source.
-
@ender said:
It's fine on a laptop or tablet, but it really doesn't work well on a multimonitor desktop (or even on a single monitor desktop when that monitor is large enough).
But this is demonstrating the EXACT PROBLEM!
"Really doesn't work well" isn't a reason. It's just "they changed it, now it sucks" in a slightly different language. (Although I am pleased you didn't use the term "dumbed down".)
If you have a reason why Metro doesn't work well, then by all means give that feedback to Microsoft. But don't come here and post shit like, "it really doesn't work well", because that's not useful feedback to anybody, anywhere. What does that complaint mean? How would someone go about fixing it? Or reproducing it, assuming it's an actual complaint that can be reproduced and not just an emotional knee-jerk?
-
@blakeyrat said:
"Really doesn't work well" isn't a reason. It's just "they changed it, now it sucks" in a slightly different language. (Although I am pleased you didn't use the term "dumbed down".)
OK, if you want specific list of reasons:- Metro apps scaled to 2560x1600 aren't very usable - at least not on a 30" monitor: Weather, Calendar
- there's a lot of wasted space: Store (speaking of wasted space, a lot of applications are intended to be scrolled - why can't I grab with the mouse in the empty space and just move the thing? Instead, I have to either use the scrollbar, which moves in the opposite direction than the content is scrolling [understandable, since it's the way scrollbars work, but nevertheless it's a much smaller area, and additionally I have to find the thumb first, which is harder to do than normally, since the scrollbar is hidden by default], or use the wheel, which is slower), Store settings - isn't that a nice use of the screen real estate?
- hot corners: impossible to target when you have two monitors side-by-side, and they're aligned - cue huge mouse sweeps
- this is probably a bug, but the metro screen doesn't always open on the monitor where I clicked the hot corner - it'll often open on the monitor where it opened the last time
-
@ender said:
OK, if you want specific list of reasons:
I'm not working on the Metro team. I don't want your list of reasons.
What I want is you to have actual concrete reasons that aren't based on emotion. Unlike, say:
@ender said:
Metro apps scaled to 2560x1600 aren't very usable - at least not on a 30" monitor: Weather, Calendar
That one.
The rest of the things you list are pretty good, you could write bug reports with those and Microsoft would be able to act on them.
-
@blakeyrat said:
What I want is you to have actual concrete reasons that aren't based on emotion. Unlike, say:
@ender said:
Metro apps scaled to 2560x1600 aren't very usable - at least not on a 30" monitor: Weather, Calendar
That one.
The rest of the things you list are pretty good, you could write bug reports with those and Microsoft would be able to act on them.
Isn't the bug report for that one, "Cannot use an application in a non-fullscreen configuration?" Which is, err, kinda the whole point of Metro? OK, so maybe the bug is, "Metro."
-
@boomzilla said:
Isn't the bug report for that one, "Cannot use an application in a non-fullscreen configuration?" Which is, err, kinda the whole point of Metro? OK, so maybe the bug is, "Metro."
Do you have any idea what sort of semantic gibberish you just wrote?
-
@boomzilla said:
Isn't the bug report for that one, "Cannot use an application in a non-fullscreen configuration?"
No, because what does "cannot use" mean exactly? Obviously it doesn't literally mean the application can't be used, because as far as I can figure it works fine-- I could see a criticism like, "when scaled to full-screen, calendar fonts do not scale in proportion to calendar and become hard to read and click". But even then, the font looks big enough to me and I honestly don't know why ender thinks that calendar "isn't very usable". I'm just guessing on the font thing.
@boomzilla said:
Which is, err, kinda the whole point of Metro? OK, so maybe the bug is, "Metro."
Wut? The point of Metro is being unable to use apps in a non-fullscreen configuration? Unraveling the mess of negatives... still lost. What the fuck are you talking about?
-
@dhromed said:
@boomzilla said:
Isn't the bug report for that one, "Cannot use an application in a non-fullscreen configuration?" Which is, err, kinda the whole point of Metro? OK, so maybe the bug is, "Metro."
Do you have any idea what sort of semantic gibberish you just wrote?Seems OK to me....see my response to blakeyrat for more explanation:
@blakeyrat said:
@boomzilla said:
Isn't the bug report for that one, "Cannot use an application in a non-fullscreen configuration?"
No, because what does "cannot use" mean exactly? Obviously it doesn't literally mean the application can't be used, because as far as I can figure it works fine-- I could see a criticism like, "when scaled to full-screen, calendar fonts do not scale in proportion to calendar and become hard to read and click". But even then, the font looks big enough to me and I honestly don't know why ender thinks that calendar "isn't very usable". I'm just guessing on the font thing.
You're over thinking this. I would say that in order to use an application in a certain state, it is first required to put the application in said state. Is there a way to do this? All of your nonsense has nothing to do with what I wrote, or with what I guessed ender would want to do with such applications as he talked about. It's true that he used somewhat vague language in his forum post. It's possible that you're closer to the mark, but you didn't really pay attention to what I wrote.
@blakeyrat said:
@boomzilla said:
Which is, err, kinda the whole point of Metro? OK, so maybe the bug is, "Metro."
Wut? The point of Metro is being unable to use apps in a non-fullscreen configuration? Unraveling the mess of negatives... still lost. What the fuck are you talking about?I haven't used Metro, hence the question...but isn't Metro all about using applications in full screen mode? That was my understanding. If that's wrong, then I welcome the correction, but that's the assumption I was using. Since the alleged bug is basically saying that one of the main design features of Metro is the bug, it's kind of like saying, Metro is the bug. In a slightly snarky way, of course.
In other news, the change in avatar has not noticeably changed the quality of your posts.
-
@Douglasac said:
@Scarlet Manuka said:
I mis-spoke; I should have said that you can add it to the quick access bar in the message window, rather than the ribbon. The rest of my comment still stands, because that's the procedure I actually did in Outlook 2007 before writing the comment.Not quite. 2007 has this weird setup where the main application isn't ribbonified, but the message window is. So you can open a message, then customise the ribbon there to add the "Message Options..." command (which, by the way, is a really intuitive place to find the message headers, don't you think?), but you only get it in the message ribbon. So you still have to open the message to access your new shortcut, which makes it hardly worthwhile.
No, you wouldn't. You cannot customize the ribbon in Office 2007. You can, however, customize the old-style toolbars in the applications that still have them. Hence why I said, "I don't have Outlook 2007 but I imagine you can do much the same thing but without needing to add the group, but I doubt you'd get the keyboard shortcut."
-
@boomzilla said:
saying that one of the main design features of Metro is the bug, it's kind of like saying, Metro is the bug. In a slightly snarky way, of course.
I had this thought after I posted my snarkback, but on third thought I think the bug is "Metro applications spread across multiple monitors when they should probably limit themselves to a single monitor."
However, it's hard to conceive of a developer testing the Metro platform and not having multiple monitors— which would obviously instantly expose the bug, so I don't understand how this could be.
Also, the tag below was not manually added by me.
-
@dhromed said:
@boomzilla said:
saying that one of the main design features of Metro is the bug, it's kind of like saying, Metro is the bug. In a slightly snarky way, of course.
I had this thought after I posted my snarkback, but on third thought I think the bug is "Metro applications spread across multiple monitors when they should probably limit themselves to a single monitor."
However, it's hard to conceive of a developer testing the Metro platform and not having multiple monitors— which would obviously instantly expose the bug, so I don't understand how this could be.
I understand blakey's pedantic dickweedery with respect to bug reports. We've all gotten retarded reports that are not actionable. There are obviously some tasks suited to full screen usage, but there are a lot that are not. And a lot of people who do not run most things maximized in order to have multiple things visible (there have been enough threads around here...I'm not trying to start a discussion on that topic, but to point out that it's not uncommon or useless or whatever).
The real answer appears to be: avoid metro on a typical desktop (and probably laptop, too). I suppose users are somewhat at the mercy of their vendors, though it doesn't seem likely that non-metro apps will go away. More likely that metro will be yet another thing that MS ends up providing backwards compatibility for when it fails to catch on, though that's obviously just speculation on my part.
-
@boomzilla said:
The real answer appears to be: avoid metro on a typical desktop
Since it's a change of the UI, I am factually incapable of judging it to any reasonable degree until I've used it to achieve some actual practical goal.
All I know is that it's colourful blocks and kind of LSD-tron-ish.
-
@dhromed said:
@boomzilla said:
The real answer appears to be: avoid metro on a typical desktop
Since it's a change of the UI, I am factually incapable of judging it to any reasonable degree until I've used it to achieve some actual practical goal.
I typically run KDE, which has different modes of operation. One of them is "netbook," which does full screen stuff, again, as appropriate for that sort of thing. I did not like it under normal desktop conditions. That's a lot of where my opinion comes from on this topic.
