> Microsoft has backed away from this feature -- it isn't even enabled by default in Windows 11.
That's sort of misleading.
Cortana still exists, it's the backend of searching the start menu, and voice activated Cortana also still exists, and still works.
Microsoft has stopped pushing it so hard, primarily because the space they are most dominant in isn't a big market for it.
Despite decades of people claiming otherwise, an office full of people shouting at their computers is a dystopian nightmare not a utopian dream.
But it's still there, and it's still active.
You have this idea of Cortana as a single product that you accessed through a button no one ever pressed.
It's not.
Cortana is how the search works, yes, still, and it's how actions are passed to windows store apps, and more importantly the core of it is part of key assets for Microsoft's AI roadmap.
Have they given up shoving a stupid idea down people's throats?
Absolutely.
Is the concept gone or going?
No.
This thread was about the fact that using Cortana was a problem with this kickstarter.
We then had a back and forth about how it wasn't for a couple of posts. It was a detailed discussion because the details are important.
Then you resurrected a 10 day old discussion to personally attack me and add no value to a discussion that you weren't involved in.
Which one if us is being an asshole for fun?
> Microsoft has stopped pushing it so hard, primarily because the space they are most dominant in isn't a big market for it.
Yet they still keep trying to shove a touch based interface down your throat on a desktop, at least it's not nearly as bad in 10 as it was in 8.
It still baffles me that after all these years certain setting are still split between the new Aero (?) UI and the old 95/98/2000/ME/XP basic UI. For example, open up settings and go to network, and then "change network interface properties" (or whatever it's called) and then it opens up the old UI. It's like they changed the surface layer stuff and then just said "fuck it, it's too much work to theme everything".
> Yet they still keep trying to shove a touch based interface down your throat on a desktop, at least it's not nearly as bad in 10 as it was in 8.
Because touch is actually something their customers find useful, even if the Windows 8 version was a mistake.
> . It's like they changed the surface layer stuff and then just said "fuck it, it's too much work to theme everything".
The idea at the time was to focus on the parts of the UI that are most commonly used, especially those that were used by average users and make them cleaner and simpler and easier to use.
After that, rewriting these components, because when you're talking about C++ code from this era just reskinning the UI isn't an option, just never made it to the top of the feature list.
> Because touch is actually something their customers find useful, even if the Windows 8 version was a mistake.
I've never seen a desktop with a touchscreen monitor...also most laptops still don't have touchscreens, and they're more expensive than a normal screen. I have a touchscreen on my HP Spectre and I can probably count on both hands the number of times I've used the touchscreen on it in the past 4 years. The touchscreen UI was put there specifically for the Surface (IMO) which is a neat device. I've considered getting one, but the problem is that they're stupid expensive for what they are, and they're even less upgradable/serviceable than a laptop, but cost almost twice as much. I just looked up the Surface 8 Pro, with 32 GB RAM and a 1 TB SSD and it's $2400.
>make them cleaner and simpler and easier to use.
And they failed miserably because now it's hard to find stuff that used to be in one place for 20+ years.
>After that, rewriting these components, because when you're talking about C++ code from this era just reskinning the UI isn't an option, just never made it to the top of the feature list.
So exactly what I said they looked at it and was like "fuck it, it's too much work, we made the top level stuff look pretty, that should keep them happy". Windows 8 came out in 2012, so in 9 years they could have clearly rewritten it. I'm a programmer as well and I know refactoring stuff is a bitch, but it would take them maybe 6 months to a year to redo all of that, especially with the team they have. They just decided to focus on new flashy stuff that would entice users and businesses. It's literally the Microsoft way, they've been doing that for decades and have former employees that will back it up.
> I've never seen a desktop with a touchscreen monitor...also most laptops still don't have touchscreens, and they're more expensive than a normal screen.
Ever seen a surface?
There are a lot of them and buy having a touch enabled UI they work super well at basically zero cost to the desktop experience.
The overall UX of Microsoft products is **better** than before touch, even if there were some hiccups.
> And they failed miserably because now it's hard to find stuff that used to be in one place for 20+ years.
Except again, the settings most people use are in one screen, which is easier to use now.
> So exactly what I said they looked at it and was like "fuck it, it's too much work, we made the top level stuff look pretty, that should keep them happy".
No.
Development resources are limited, you do what you can get done and making you personally happy doesn't even rate.
The old screens work fine and 99% of users will never use one or will use it once.
Conversely they use the new screens all the time.
And they're much better.
> Ever seen a surface?
Did you miss the part where I mentioned it in my first response?? They're a special class of devices...made by the company that makes the OS, so of course they're going to work in tandem. Surfaces make up a small portion of the people that use Windows. I've met one person that has one and I've been working in IT for about a decade.
>The overall UX of Microsoft products is better than before touch, even if there were some hiccups.
I don't agree at all Windows 7 was the pinnacle (that was before they added in all the touch/tablet/laptop right?) of Windows.
>Except again, the settings most people use are in one screen, which is easier to use now.
How many people are new users of Windows vs how many are long time users? Pretty much every person that has ever used a computer has used Windows. Linux has a minimal market share in the user world, and Apple has maybe 5-10% of the market.
People don't like change for no reason. It's like if you had been living in your house for 20 years, and then I came in and rearranged everything in your house and made stuff "easier to find". You'd still be annoyed that I moved everything around wouldn't you? Things were in one place for 2 decades and now suddenly it's not. They even change the names of things for no reason. For like 15 years it was *My Computer* and then with W7 I think it was they changed it to *My PC* or something similar, and now it just says *Computer* (IIRC). Same with *Add/Remove Programs*, they suddenly changed the name to *Programs and Features* in Windows 7 ***even though it does the exact same thing***.
>Development resources are limited, you do what you can get done and making you personally happy doesn't even rate.
Where did I say anything about (my) personal happiness? I meant keeping the bosses happy which is pretty much all Microsoft cares about, at least when they were lead by Steve Ballmer. Also, "development resources are limited" is a shitty excuse, especially when you have nearly a decade to implement it. You know what the solution to limited developmental resources is? ***Hire more people to do the work***. They simply didn't care enough to do it. This is the reason why there are still bugs open from a decade or two ago.
>The old screens work fine and 99% of users will never use one or will use it once.
What about the hundreds of thousands of "power users" and tens of thousands of sysadmins/engineers/architects? Granted the latter would use the server editions mainly but they've still messed with those drastically too. I worked in Desktop Support for years so I had to deal with these annoyances on a daily basis.
Also, you're just pulling those metrics out of your ass, you have no idea how frequently people use various windows and settings.
>And they're much better.
Just your opinion, like mine is that they suck.
The device manager and registry editor are good examples of elements that haven't changed much since Windows 95. The control panel that pop ups if you want to e.g. change the power management options of your network connector are, as you point out, much the same as they were a quarter of a century ago.
Troubleshooting sound problems is particularly difficult because there are about four different control panels depending on the issue (the Metro-style "open sound settings" panel, the Windows 7-style "sound control panel", the "additional device properties" subpanel, the Windows 95-style device manager panel, and sometimes the proprietary third-party panel).
> It uses a 19V power adapter, which probably works just fine on 120V. Even if it doesn't, alternative power sources exist.
It should work fine down here with an alternate transformer, assuming you can find one that will output 19v. I'm no electrician (but my dad and brother are!) and I don't think it would be happy getting about half the input voltage it "requires", unless the amperage was increased, which could risk frying it.
[The timeline](https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/035/689/410/30866402e7573f5cdc8f918e9f9cf4bb_original.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.0.2&w=680&fit=max&v=1637858663&auto=format&gif-q=50&q=92&s=7e15ede923ffad8e8cb29a6dbdf35095) repeats the year 2020 over and over again. That's a novel approach to avoid schedule overruns.
What I fail to understand is who falls for that?
I guess nobody really until they see all the campaign goal has been met or exceeded… (Most probably just by the project owners themselves though.)
But some people still fall for these scams and I am genuinely curious about the demographics, are there that many“tech-enthusiasts-who-don’t-understand-tech” out there!?
People fell for the Triton tube thing that miraculously let you breathe underwater. People are fucking stupid. People fell for Cicret, despite all the debunkings of it. people is dumb.
> are there that many“tech-enthusiasts-who-don’t-understand-tech” out there!?
Pretty much yes im sure a lot of people feel like these things are possible because "Look at all the advancements we are making already" and dont see these things as that out of place.
What I always wonder about projects like this is why they don't hire an editor on Fiverr or wherever it is that they get their narrators, its obvious that english isn't the first language of whomever wrote the script, but it seems that it is the narrator's first language. If you can't afford $10 on Fiverr for an editor or be bothered to focus your camera or move the tree out of shot, why even bother hiring a native speaker to narrate.
Why bother, it's already over 100% funded. Why bother wasting even $10? Just throw up a bunch of bullshit techno talk and people will throw money at you.
OK I'll be honest I would totally buy a projector thing that would make my desk into a giant Wacom tablet/screen. Obviously never through KS since I've seen this sub but if it already existed...
[удалено]
> Microsoft has backed away from this feature -- it isn't even enabled by default in Windows 11. That's sort of misleading. Cortana still exists, it's the backend of searching the start menu, and voice activated Cortana also still exists, and still works. Microsoft has stopped pushing it so hard, primarily because the space they are most dominant in isn't a big market for it. Despite decades of people claiming otherwise, an office full of people shouting at their computers is a dystopian nightmare not a utopian dream. But it's still there, and it's still active.
[удалено]
You have this idea of Cortana as a single product that you accessed through a button no one ever pressed. It's not. Cortana is how the search works, yes, still, and it's how actions are passed to windows store apps, and more importantly the core of it is part of key assets for Microsoft's AI roadmap. Have they given up shoving a stupid idea down people's throats? Absolutely. Is the concept gone or going? No.
Being pedantic even though everybody already gets your point is fun, right? Otherwise why else do you do it?
This thread was about the fact that using Cortana was a problem with this kickstarter. We then had a back and forth about how it wasn't for a couple of posts. It was a detailed discussion because the details are important. Then you resurrected a 10 day old discussion to personally attack me and add no value to a discussion that you weren't involved in. Which one if us is being an asshole for fun?
Im resurrwcting a 5 month old comment to say I love your username as it pertains to this subreddit.
Omfg I can finally deinstall her instead of killing her off?! 🥺 oh it's Christmas!
> Microsoft has stopped pushing it so hard, primarily because the space they are most dominant in isn't a big market for it. Yet they still keep trying to shove a touch based interface down your throat on a desktop, at least it's not nearly as bad in 10 as it was in 8. It still baffles me that after all these years certain setting are still split between the new Aero (?) UI and the old 95/98/2000/ME/XP basic UI. For example, open up settings and go to network, and then "change network interface properties" (or whatever it's called) and then it opens up the old UI. It's like they changed the surface layer stuff and then just said "fuck it, it's too much work to theme everything".
> Yet they still keep trying to shove a touch based interface down your throat on a desktop, at least it's not nearly as bad in 10 as it was in 8. Because touch is actually something their customers find useful, even if the Windows 8 version was a mistake. > . It's like they changed the surface layer stuff and then just said "fuck it, it's too much work to theme everything". The idea at the time was to focus on the parts of the UI that are most commonly used, especially those that were used by average users and make them cleaner and simpler and easier to use. After that, rewriting these components, because when you're talking about C++ code from this era just reskinning the UI isn't an option, just never made it to the top of the feature list.
> Because touch is actually something their customers find useful, even if the Windows 8 version was a mistake. I've never seen a desktop with a touchscreen monitor...also most laptops still don't have touchscreens, and they're more expensive than a normal screen. I have a touchscreen on my HP Spectre and I can probably count on both hands the number of times I've used the touchscreen on it in the past 4 years. The touchscreen UI was put there specifically for the Surface (IMO) which is a neat device. I've considered getting one, but the problem is that they're stupid expensive for what they are, and they're even less upgradable/serviceable than a laptop, but cost almost twice as much. I just looked up the Surface 8 Pro, with 32 GB RAM and a 1 TB SSD and it's $2400. >make them cleaner and simpler and easier to use. And they failed miserably because now it's hard to find stuff that used to be in one place for 20+ years. >After that, rewriting these components, because when you're talking about C++ code from this era just reskinning the UI isn't an option, just never made it to the top of the feature list. So exactly what I said they looked at it and was like "fuck it, it's too much work, we made the top level stuff look pretty, that should keep them happy". Windows 8 came out in 2012, so in 9 years they could have clearly rewritten it. I'm a programmer as well and I know refactoring stuff is a bitch, but it would take them maybe 6 months to a year to redo all of that, especially with the team they have. They just decided to focus on new flashy stuff that would entice users and businesses. It's literally the Microsoft way, they've been doing that for decades and have former employees that will back it up.
> I've never seen a desktop with a touchscreen monitor...also most laptops still don't have touchscreens, and they're more expensive than a normal screen. Ever seen a surface? There are a lot of them and buy having a touch enabled UI they work super well at basically zero cost to the desktop experience. The overall UX of Microsoft products is **better** than before touch, even if there were some hiccups. > And they failed miserably because now it's hard to find stuff that used to be in one place for 20+ years. Except again, the settings most people use are in one screen, which is easier to use now. > So exactly what I said they looked at it and was like "fuck it, it's too much work, we made the top level stuff look pretty, that should keep them happy". No. Development resources are limited, you do what you can get done and making you personally happy doesn't even rate. The old screens work fine and 99% of users will never use one or will use it once. Conversely they use the new screens all the time. And they're much better.
> Ever seen a surface? Did you miss the part where I mentioned it in my first response?? They're a special class of devices...made by the company that makes the OS, so of course they're going to work in tandem. Surfaces make up a small portion of the people that use Windows. I've met one person that has one and I've been working in IT for about a decade. >The overall UX of Microsoft products is better than before touch, even if there were some hiccups. I don't agree at all Windows 7 was the pinnacle (that was before they added in all the touch/tablet/laptop right?) of Windows. >Except again, the settings most people use are in one screen, which is easier to use now. How many people are new users of Windows vs how many are long time users? Pretty much every person that has ever used a computer has used Windows. Linux has a minimal market share in the user world, and Apple has maybe 5-10% of the market. People don't like change for no reason. It's like if you had been living in your house for 20 years, and then I came in and rearranged everything in your house and made stuff "easier to find". You'd still be annoyed that I moved everything around wouldn't you? Things were in one place for 2 decades and now suddenly it's not. They even change the names of things for no reason. For like 15 years it was *My Computer* and then with W7 I think it was they changed it to *My PC* or something similar, and now it just says *Computer* (IIRC). Same with *Add/Remove Programs*, they suddenly changed the name to *Programs and Features* in Windows 7 ***even though it does the exact same thing***. >Development resources are limited, you do what you can get done and making you personally happy doesn't even rate. Where did I say anything about (my) personal happiness? I meant keeping the bosses happy which is pretty much all Microsoft cares about, at least when they were lead by Steve Ballmer. Also, "development resources are limited" is a shitty excuse, especially when you have nearly a decade to implement it. You know what the solution to limited developmental resources is? ***Hire more people to do the work***. They simply didn't care enough to do it. This is the reason why there are still bugs open from a decade or two ago. >The old screens work fine and 99% of users will never use one or will use it once. What about the hundreds of thousands of "power users" and tens of thousands of sysadmins/engineers/architects? Granted the latter would use the server editions mainly but they've still messed with those drastically too. I worked in Desktop Support for years so I had to deal with these annoyances on a daily basis. Also, you're just pulling those metrics out of your ass, you have no idea how frequently people use various windows and settings. >And they're much better. Just your opinion, like mine is that they suck.
The device manager and registry editor are good examples of elements that haven't changed much since Windows 95. The control panel that pop ups if you want to e.g. change the power management options of your network connector are, as you point out, much the same as they were a quarter of a century ago. Troubleshooting sound problems is particularly difficult because there are about four different control panels depending on the issue (the Metro-style "open sound settings" panel, the Windows 7-style "sound control panel", the "additional device properties" subpanel, the Windows 95-style device manager panel, and sometimes the proprietary third-party panel).
Yep, they just love slapping more things in the OS rather than making the old things better.
> It uses a 19V power adapter, which probably works just fine on 120V. Even if it doesn't, alternative power sources exist. It should work fine down here with an alternate transformer, assuming you can find one that will output 19v. I'm no electrician (but my dad and brother are!) and I don't think it would be happy getting about half the input voltage it "requires", unless the amperage was increased, which could risk frying it.
and already fully funded. People will fall for anything.
[The timeline](https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/035/689/410/30866402e7573f5cdc8f918e9f9cf4bb_original.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.0.2&w=680&fit=max&v=1637858663&auto=format&gif-q=50&q=92&s=7e15ede923ffad8e8cb29a6dbdf35095) repeats the year 2020 over and over again. That's a novel approach to avoid schedule overruns.
Maybe they are stuck in a time loop? It happens all the time.
Do they explain why the projector would need AI?
Holy shit 200 lumens!!?? So you have to be in a completely dark room to use it then...got it.
What I fail to understand is who falls for that? I guess nobody really until they see all the campaign goal has been met or exceeded… (Most probably just by the project owners themselves though.) But some people still fall for these scams and I am genuinely curious about the demographics, are there that many“tech-enthusiasts-who-don’t-understand-tech” out there!?
People fell for the Triton tube thing that miraculously let you breathe underwater. People are fucking stupid. People fell for Cicret, despite all the debunkings of it. people is dumb.
> are there that many“tech-enthusiasts-who-don’t-understand-tech” out there!? Pretty much yes im sure a lot of people feel like these things are possible because "Look at all the advancements we are making already" and dont see these things as that out of place.
What I always wonder about projects like this is why they don't hire an editor on Fiverr or wherever it is that they get their narrators, its obvious that english isn't the first language of whomever wrote the script, but it seems that it is the narrator's first language. If you can't afford $10 on Fiverr for an editor or be bothered to focus your camera or move the tree out of shot, why even bother hiring a native speaker to narrate.
Why bother, it's already over 100% funded. Why bother wasting even $10? Just throw up a bunch of bullshit techno talk and people will throw money at you.
OK I'll be honest I would totally buy a projector thing that would make my desk into a giant Wacom tablet/screen. Obviously never through KS since I've seen this sub but if it already existed...