Windows 8 woes: *expletive deleted* full-screen aps

[-Sentinel-]

So Windows 8.1 has been inflicted upon me and my new laptop, and I have very few kind things to say about it. I fixed the most irritating novelty that nobody was asking for (the lack of the traditional Start menu) by downloading Classic Shell, but I have another major pet peeve: the aps that open full-screen and have no option to resize the window, like my default PDF reader and media player.

Surely there are solutions out there... I gather I am not the only one who thinks Windows 8 should die in a fire.

[Alent]

Installing Adobe Acrobat will take care of the PDF reader in short order.

As for media player, I personally use Foobar2000. From what I gather Winamp is still around, as are a number of others.

In a few weeks the Windows 10 update will offer a slightly more permanent fix.

[factotum]

Yeah, as stated, the solution is to have traditional desktop apps that handle those media types rather than using the default Windows 8 ones. I have Adobe Reader and VLC Media Player installed on my 8.1 machine so I can run both in windows on the desktop. (For the same reason I also have the desktop Skype app installed rather than using the 8.1 app version).

[Emperor Ing]

Windows 8 is bad and its designers should feel bad. No computer operating system should require so many downloads just to be usable.

[Alent]

Windows 8 is bad and its designers should feel bad. No computer operating system should require so many downloads just to be usable.

I disagree. Computing was better when you had no pack-in file handlers and had to download or install CDs for thirty some odd programs to be able to work with all the files on your computer after a fresh windows install, and it took a day or two to get everything set up. No sarcasm, I actually think that was a better way because I dislike having built in crapware like Internet Explorer that I can't uninstall.

Since you should be downloading PDF viewers, media players, webbrowsers, and other software from your preferred vendor anyway... I can't see getting bent out of shape over a single extra download that takes less than five minutes with even a bad internet connection.

[Douglas]

I disagree. Computing was better when you had no pack-in file handlers and had to download or install CDs for thirty some odd programs to be able to work with all the files on your computer after a fresh windows install, and it took a day or two to get everything set up. No sarcasm, I actually think that was a better way because I dislike having built in crapware like Internet Explorer that I can't uninstall.
While I understand your point about personal choice and the ability to avoid crapware, that approach leaves rather a lot to be desired in user friendliness. A typical IT professional may find that sort of setup easy to do, but many typical computer users in general would have no idea how to even start. As for IE, there has to be some non-downloaded way to access the Internet to bootstrap the whole thing regardless.

[Alent]

While I understand your point about personal choice and the ability to avoid crapware, that approach leaves rather a lot to be desired in user friendliness. A typical IT professional may find that sort of setup easy to do, but many typical computer users in general would have no idea how to even start. As for IE, there has to be some non-downloaded way to access the Internet to bootstrap the whole thing regardless.

The browser bootstrapping issue has known solutions that are user friendly in nature. The EU legislated solution of having the run-once internet icon that gave you the ability to download your browser of choice was one (Although it had the problem of still allowing IE to exist on the system), app stores are another, as is the Linux tool that's basically the GUI version of apt-get.

The "end user friendliness" issue is one that really doesn't have a good solution. Speaking as an IT person who supports end users in homes and small businesses, part of my frustration on this subject actually comes with how many people get into trouble because they never had any training on how to look for official software and end up downloading things like Adobe Acrobat from the top sponsored link without checking to see who sponsored it. Requiring end users to get some education and hands on experience with downloading and installing necessary tools would go a long way towards improving the quality of their own user experiences with the computer as a whole.

Unfortunately, I think we both know how poor the average computer use training course is at achieving user competency. That's an issue I don't think anyone has a good solution for presently, but the "diminished need" generated by built in apps is just avoiding the problem. Eventually they'll need to go download something and they'll be easy pickings for some scam download site or click the "download now" button in an advertizement not realizing it has nothing to do with the website.

[factotum]

Windows 8 is bad and its designers should feel bad. No computer operating system should require so many downloads just to be usable.

Since when are Skype or Adobe Reader part of the operating system? In point of fact, there were no built-in apps to handle those in Windows 7 at all, so having to do this download in Windows 8 is *exactly the same thing you'd have had to do in W7*. The media player side you maybe have a bit more of a point, at least until you find a piece of streaming media that Windows Media Player doesn't support (and there are plenty of them, believe me) and have to go and download something like VLC anyway.

Speaking personally, I'm with Norren--the less garbage that's built into the OS for dealing with file types, the better. The OS should be a framework for running the applications you want to run, not a whole shedload of applications in itself.

[Bulldog Psion]

Got Classic Shell.

Downloaded all the secondary stuff needed (Adobe, file managers, media players, blah blah).

Still loathe Windows 8 with a passion. The grotesque full-screen "apps" still pop up anyway periodically, because it's buggy as all heck, and then banishing them again sometimes proves to be very difficult. It's also purposely designed to be hard to change, and the search function is utter garbage.

I've experimentally used the search function within a folder. For example, I'll have a file named "Bulldog Psion.docx" in a folder, and I'll search in the folder for "Bulldog Psion," and get zero results. I can't imagine a worse Search function; having no Search function at all would be roughly equivalent, since 90%+ of the time I can't find things using it.

Whoever designed it ... well, I wouldn't like to say what I think should be done with them.

[Telok]

I've experimentally used the search function within a folder. For example, I'll have a file named "Bulldog Psion.docx" in a folder, and I'll search in the folder for "Bulldog Psion," and get zero results. I can't imagine a worse Search function; having no Search function at all would be roughly equivalent, since 90%+ of the time I can't find things using it.

Whoever designed it ... well, I wouldn't like to say what I think should be done with them.

In setting up my in-laws newest computer I once searched the Windows app store for "solitare". No hits, no matches, nothing. Which was sad because I had the app store open to the card games and was looking at a couple of solitare variations right there.

I can't even imagine how to screw up something like that.

[BannedInSchool]

I can't even imagine how to screw up something like that.
Maybe they spelled "solitaire" incorrectly?

[Madcrafter]

As much as I disliked it at first (before classic shell) I find it's actually pretty good now. You never have to see any of those fullscreen apps if you don't want.

I have noticed my search being crap though. Which is funny because it used to work just fine. Then one day, bam, no results anywhere.

[Bulldog Psion]

As much as I disliked it at first (before classic shell) I find it's actually pretty good now. You never have to see any of those fullscreen apps if you don't want.

I have noticed my search being crap though. Which is funny because it used to work just fine. Then one day, bam, no results anywhere.

Yes, the Search seems to be going downhill steadily. The search in XP was really flexible; 7's search was pretty bad; 8's search is atrocious. Since I have to do a lot of cross-referencing of documents for work, it is a real burden dealing with this.

[Alent]

Yes, the Search seems to be going downhill steadily. The search in XP was really flexible; 7's search was pretty bad; 8's search is atrocious. Since I have to do a lot of cross-referencing of documents for work, it is a real burden dealing with this.

Yeah, The "Microsoft Search" update for Windows XP was the end of reliable searching. It was optional, so most people clicked back to the regular search engine. Vista inflicted it on people as the default and only windows search engine, but had so many other problems nobody really noticed it.

Kind of makes me wonder whatever happened to Google Desktop search.

[-Sentinel-]

Anyway, thanks, everyone. I will endeavor to make my Windows 8 slightly less crappy.

[Flickerdart]

So Windows 8.1 has been inflicted upon me and my new laptop, and I have very few kind things to say about it. I fixed the most irritating novelty that nobody was asking for (the lack of the traditional Start menu) by downloading Classic Shell, but I have another major pet peeve: the aps that open full-screen and have no option to resize the window, like my default PDF reader and media player.

Surely there are solutions out there... I gather I am not the only one who thinks Windows 8 should die in a fire.
a) Download a normal PDF reader and media player. Who uses the default apps for those, anyway?
b) Install Windows 10 technical preview. You have the option of running Modern apps in windows.
c) Install Modern Mix (http://www.stardock.com/products/modernmix/) which ports in that functionality to Windows 8

[hajo]

Windows 8.1 has been inflicted upon me .. Classic Shell ..
Surely there are solutions out there
For Windows, I'd like to recommand PortableApps (http://portableapps.com/apps).
"Portable" here means, those apps can be installed on an usb-stick, along with their data, taken with you, and plugged in and run on any pc (needs windows, usbport and at least guestaccount).
Installing them like regular software on the hd works just as well.

A lot of popular software is available in portable version, e.g. firefox, thunderbird, vlc, libre-office, pdf-readers, mediaplayers, games, etc.

Each such app is completely independant from each other, and can be run directly.
But there is also a "platform" that acts as a menu and manager, with builtin backup etc.

You only need to download the platform (http://portableapps.com/download), and during installation, it will present a list of the available apps (with checkboxes), and download and install all apps you select.

[Jurai]

Resizing Windows 8.1 'Metro' apps is limited but still capable. Click the top of your screen, once the title bar comes down, then hit split left/split right, depending on where you want it. It's not a perfect solution, but it works.

[Jermz]

I'm currently in the market for a new top-end Ultrabook, and they all seem to come with Windows 8. As a very happy and satisfied Windows 7 user, I'm slightly apprehensive about buying a new computer after all that I've read and heard about Windows 8. I'm hoping that I'll be able to purchase it within the next month or so, and then I'll still have enough time to sign up for the Windows 10 upgrade. But I digress...

My main question is whether or not to opt for an Ultrabook with a capacitive touchscreen or one without? As someone whose livelihood is wholly dependent on my computer, I always plump for the cutting edge of technology when it comes to a new laptop. I've had my current computer for about three years, and while I'm happy with it, it's showing signs of slowing down.

Part of my job involves intense mouse usage and selecting specific items on the screen, so I was thinking that with a touchscreen it might cut down the amount of time I use the mouse and even speed up on-screen interactions. Is this the case, for those who have used this technology? Is Windows 8 better on a capacitive screen or non-capacitive? What things should I take into consideration when buying an Ultrabook with a capacitive screen?

Thanks for any and all replies!

[Sean Mirrsen]

I'm currently in the market for a new top-end Ultrabook, and they all seem to come with Windows 8. As a very happy and satisfied Windows 7 user, I'm slightly apprehensive about buying a new computer after all that I've read and heard about Windows 8. I'm hoping that I'll be able to purchase it within the next month or so, and then I'll still have enough time to sign up for the Windows 10 upgrade. But I digress...

My main question is whether or not to opt for an Ultrabook with a capacitive touchscreen or one without? As someone whose livelihood is wholly dependent on my computer, I always plump for the cutting edge of technology when it comes to a new laptop. I've had my current computer for about three years, and while I'm happy with it, it's showing signs of slowing down.

Part of my job involves intense mouse usage and selecting specific items on the screen, so I was thinking that with a touchscreen it might cut down the amount of time I use the mouse and even speed up on-screen interactions. Is this the case, for those who have used this technology? Is Windows 8 better on a capacitive screen or non-capacitive? What things should I take into consideration when buying an Ultrabook with a capacitive screen?

Thanks for any and all replies!

I have surprised myself just now with the revelation that I don't know what that means. "Capacitive touchscreen" as opposed to no touchscreen, or some other kind of touchscreen?

Either way, if you want an ultrabook, from personal experience I'd recommend a tablet-transformer, or hybrid. Especially since they all come with Windows 8 now. Windows 8 shines on this particular setup, when you have both a tablet and a laptop in one unit, and can interchangeably need to use the mouse and the touchscreen for manipulating things.

If I were to endeavor a further recommendation, I'd suggest going for something with a built-in stylus, preferably a Wacom stylus. Even if you're never going to use it for drawing, it's usually superior to other solutions, and having a stylus in principle is extra-useful if you need to precisely select things in tablet mode.

(I use a Samsung ATIV Smart PC Pro, aka "ATIV Tab 7", with an Intel i5 processor and other typical UMPC hardware. It's quite outdated by now, but so far continues to serve me well.)

[Jermz]

To the best of my knowledge, a capacitive touchscreen means that it can only be interacted with via electromagnetic transfer - skin, finger, etc. It won't work with a stylus or with a glove, for example. I assumed that most computers nowadays which come with touchscreens are like that.

I looked into the Microsoft Surface Pro 3, but it's not cheap - especially compared to something like the Dell XPS 13 2015 edition, which weighs almost the same and packs a little bit more power, mainly in graphics. As for the stylus, that's not really necessary. I'm not a graphic artist and I don't do anything that requires a semblance of artistic skill. I basically do online media and social analysis based on pre-determined criteria, which I select from several on-screen menus.

[137beth]

I also use classic shell, and the full-size (or half-size) adobe reader is also my number one complaint. I switched to Foxit Reader for my PDFs. That works perfectly for my needs (since it is a 'legacy desktop program':smalltongue:) There weren't any other programs I used regularly that were turned into full-screen apps, so I currently have no complaints with Windows 8+classic shell.

From reading this thread, it sounds like there is a way to keep using adobe for PDFs while still being able to use it as a desktop application. However, figuring out how to do that took me longer than installing a different PDF application.

[factotum]

From reading this thread, it sounds like there is a way to keep using adobe for PDFs while still being able to use it as a desktop application. However, figuring out how to do that took me longer than installing a different PDF application.

It's not complicated--you just download and install Adobe Reader in exactly the same way as you presumably downloaded and installed Foxit Reader. The downloaded desktop application will take over the job of opening PDF files from the thing bundled with the OS and job's done.

[snowblizz]

To the best of my knowledge, a capacitive touchscreen means that it can only be interacted with via electromagnetic transfer - skin, finger, etc. It won't work with a stylus or with a glove, for example. I assumed that most computers nowadays which come with touchscreens are like that.

I looked into the Microsoft Surface Pro 3, but it's not cheap - especially compared to something like the Dell XPS 13 2015 edition, which weighs almost the same and packs a little bit more power, mainly in graphics. As for the stylus, that's not really necessary. I'm not a graphic artist and I don't do anything that requires a semblance of artistic skill. I basically do online media and social analysis based on pre-determined criteria, which I select from several on-screen menus.

I've got a mid-range (128gb) Surface 3 Pro. The Surface3 stylus is quite nifty for selecting stuff. It's literally hell to try and select text (especially in the middle of words) and a number of other tiny objects on screen, like Firefox's scrollbar. That said the stylus always ends up "somewhere", and not so much in use.
Also, keyboard is a total must for the Suraface (I can't even fathom why its considered extra, it's essential, unlike the stylus), not only screen cover but for stuff like typing this and for access to a lot of the control buttons.

Haven't used any other mankers tablets or smarthpones so I don't really know how they compare to the Win environment though. I do know that I've caught myself trying to press my finger at every flat screen of a computer for about 6 months now...:smalltongue:

[Jermz]

Also, keyboard is a total must for the Suraface (I can't even fathom why its considered extra, it's essential, unlike the stylus), not only screen cover but for stuff like typing this and for access to a lot of the control buttons.

Micro$oft....why include a basic part when you can simply charge more for it as an extra?

The thing is with these Ultrabooks is that they're so light, they're nearly like tablets, and I don't really need a tablet. I need a workhorse computer that is light enough to carry to nearly anywhere I need to take it. Thus, it's hard to justify a near $700 difference in price (I might be way off here, can't be bothered to Google price differentials), when I can get a fly Ultrabook for much less.

Anyway, it's probably not cool to hijack a thread, so I'll just start a new one a bit later with my original post.

[Flickerdart]

I'm currently in the market for a new top-end Ultrabook, and they all seem to come with Windows 8. As a very happy and satisfied Windows 7 user, I'm slightly apprehensive about buying a new computer after all that I've read and heard about Windows 8. I'm hoping that I'll be able to purchase it within the next month or so, and then I'll still have enough time to sign up for the Windows 10 upgrade. But I digress...

My main question is whether or not to opt for an Ultrabook with a capacitive touchscreen or one without? As someone whose livelihood is wholly dependent on my computer, I always plump for the cutting edge of technology when it comes to a new laptop. I've had my current computer for about three years, and while I'm happy with it, it's showing signs of slowing down.

Part of my job involves intense mouse usage and selecting specific items on the screen, so I was thinking that with a touchscreen it might cut down the amount of time I use the mouse and even speed up on-screen interactions. Is this the case, for those who have used this technology? Is Windows 8 better on a capacitive screen or non-capacitive? What things should I take into consideration when buying an Ultrabook with a capacitive screen?

Thanks for any and all replies!
The touch screen is super useful in two cases: when you need to switch from keyboard to clicking on something largeish quickly, and when the computer is on your lap. I always accidentally prod the screen whenever borrowing a computer now, just because it's so useful to quickly press something and then get back to typing. Cutting out "move hand to mouse" and "move hand from mouse back to keyboard" steps is great, but the benefits are lost when your sausage finger misses the tiny hyperlink you wanted.

If your computer is table-bound when you're using it and you can have a real mouse, the benefits of a touch screen diminish but do not disappear. It's definitely not a $700 add-on, but you might expect to pay around $100 to $150 more if the manufacturer offers the option as an extra on otherwise identical machines.

[Sharoth]

Dotted for later reading. Thanks for all the advice everyone.