In regards to rudolphd's post... (not going to quote, holy image spam batman!)

Not sure what you're getting at there. Yes, the styling changed. You're allowed to not like it, that's fine Some people like the flat style, some people like the glassy Aero style, some people liked the candy XP style. None of them were right or wrong.

Things are bigger because MS is trying to make the OS more touch-friendly, so hit targets are larger. They could have potentially dynamically resized things based on when you go into tablet mode - but not only would that screw with most win32 apps that wouldn't handle it right, but several people (including myself) use a hybrid or laptop with a touch screen. And I honestly prefer to poke at the screen to do some things, because a trackpad kind of sucks in comparison, in most situations.

If anything, 10 is better than 8 simply because it's more stylistically consistent. You don't have a slightly flattened Aero theme for the desktop and win32 apps and the new flat 'modern' style for the touch-friendly programs. Granted, it's still not as consistent as 7 was.

Please keep in mind - I'm not saying you aren't allowed to dislike the look of the UI. Or even point out the flaws in UI layout (clipped controls for example). But they do have reasons for changing it - and a lot of those reasons are to try to make it more friendly on smaller devices with touch interfaces, without alienating the mouse and keyboard users with massive high DPI screens.

And what's even better is it's still Windows. You can still find various programs to customize how the OS looks - like from the folks at Stardock (not all work on 10 yet, but I imagine they will now that 10 is out)

Funny how people call someone's opinion bullshit as soon as they disagree.

I don't see why the discussed components couldn't be optional. There's no reason they couldn't be.

I don't see why the discussed components couldn't be optional. There's no reason they couldn't be.

Sure. Mouse support could be optional too (as it was in the Windows 3.1 era).

Cortana, like Siri on desktop Mac, is pretty much just another input device. XBox integration is pretty much just another output device.

A bunch of programs that have Cortana or XBox integrations would need to optionally disable and enable components of themselves based on whether or not the user had uninstalled Cortana or XBox integration... And that way lies a lot of market fragmentation, and a lot of pain for developers (much like Kinect being an optional component of XBox).

Wow, the new handwriting recognizer IME is way, WAY better than the previous ones. It's about time they improved it; it's been roughly the same since XP.

I'm not much of a fan of these recent "make everything white" shift. For example my note 3(maybe its just the note3 that had this, idk), back when it had 4.2.2(or 4.4.2?) it had colorful icons in the notification bar. Then 4.4.4 got released and suddenly it all shifted to white. While not a critical feature, it was probably the most annoying thing i felt about the updates, still is all white on lollipop.

Yea - Microsoft Office did that too a few years back (and supposedly Visual Studio, but I've no experience with that). Took awhile getting used to it, but I eventually did.

Office 2010 vs Office 2013

Maybe the idea is to reduce contrast in the peripheral of an application, so you aren't distracted from the main content or something. Personally, I like contrast between the main content area and the peripheral, which the new version has much less of, and I like the ability to visually find what toolbar buttons I want quickly by icon colors, instead of having to read the text - I can still do that with Office 2013, though I wonder if I'm slower because of less colors.

The lack of a border on the first image is because of a trend to make the titlebar more functional by button buttons on it and making any tabs or file menus a (visually) seamless part of the titlebar. Personally, I like that trend because it wastes less space with the titlebar by using some of the empty titlebar space for other purposes. It's just inconsistently applied across Windows - most of the core Window OS windows are inconsistent with it. I think the trend is more on the application-development side, rather than the Window OS department. Microsoft Office does it, Google Chrome and other browsers do it (including Internet Explorer).

Some applications halfway do it by putting buttons in the titlebar but still have a border dividing the titlebar and the filemen/tabs/whatever (Win8's MS Paint, Windows Live).

Personally (this is Win8.1), I'd rather have a border beneath the toolbar separating the content from the tools, then a border between the toolbar and the titlebar:

And then I'd probably use the extra space to add tabs ABOVE the titlebar, with OS-level support for multiple instances of the same application automatically being tabbed (unless the application explicitly overrides it). Tabs ofcourse would be able to be dragged out into their own window, just like Google Chromes. And perhaps easy OS-level ways to automatically split a large window into two views at once (i.e. "View tab A and B side-by-side").

As for border thickness, I'd like it larger than 1px, but I don't need Win8's eight pixel borders. 2px or 4px would seem fine to me.

However, I just realized that Microsoft Word 2013 (when not maximized) also has one pixel borders (and I'm running it on Windows 8.1). Since I've never noticed it, and it's never caused me a problem, then that means 1px borders are fine for me. My biggest potential problem with 1px borders would be trying to hit the borders properly for resizing the window... but I can resize Microsoft Word 2013's one-pixel borders just fine - even though it's only drawing 1 pixel, you still have between 7 and 9 pixels of potential grab-space (starting from the border and moving outward, so as to not impede on the application's client-area functionality).

Personally, I hate the flat look of 8.x and 10. Subjective, I know, but it is just pure ugly. And I don't use a touch screen on my desktop PC, nor do I ever have plans to do so. Why should I be forced to use a GUI that is designed for a hardware feature that I do not have or ever intend to use? This "tile" idea SUCKS in a typical PC experience.

And no, I am not free to use any OS. I cannot afford a Mac, so OS X is out and Linux still is too reliant on the terminal for OS access. Once Linux ditches the mandatory terminal access and operates like Windows in this regard, I'll switch. Until then, I'm stuck with Windows. :/

Pretty good review here, without all the hyperbole and screaming the internet loves.

Personally, I will be upgrading, but I'll give it a month or so to iron out the kinks. Can't say I'm a huge fan of the flat look (I'm one of those weirdos that actually likes the Aero transparency), but that is really a secondary consideration against the functionality of the OS.

I saw a video by Andrew Price, constructively critisizing the user interface of Blender 3D. His points were valid, and many in the community agreed that the user interface and the logic behind the design of that interface were major factors that make new users and pro users alike not want to go through the hassle of figuring it out.

Design is a language, and it should effectively communicate with the end user.

To excuse a company for their lack of consideration for the end user should not be acceptable. I understand this view.

But, some people care more about efficiency. Does it work well? If so, it is good. Perhaps we are spoiled by pretty interfaces. Just adapt and be happy...

But, why not make them customizable? Why restrict the user? Give me freedom.

I understand all views, but my view is, why not be considerate of it all? Good interface design, efficient, customizable. In one way or another all of the main operating systems lack in one of these areas.

Right now, to me, the best versions of Windows have been Windows XP and Windows 7. I tried 8 and didn't like it. I haven't upgraded to 8.1. I want to upgrade to Windows 10. If I don't like it, I still have my Macbook, or I can dual boot a linux distribution on my PC.

But, why not make them customizable? Why restrict the user? Give me freedom.

Because lots of customization is hard and costly. Not just hard to make in the first place, but also costly in support. What happens when someone contacts your tech support when they have a problem with your product, and they have a radically different set of customized interface options? Tech support is enough of a nightmare as it is. Think of how hard it can be to get a computer illiterate to find the Run command and open a tool. Now imagine if there are a few dozen ways that run command can be configured for how you access it...

Choice is good. Too much choice is asking for trouble.

But, why not make them customizable? Why restrict the user? Give me freedom.

I often reference an Eskil Steenberg quote on this topic:

Once I meet Mac programmer that said: "Every option that a Application has is a failure, because the programmer was unable to make up his/her mind." I don't claim this to be true, but he had a point. People doesn't spend to much time configuring their software, it is tedious and boring. Making a user interface configurable is great, but it doesn't substitute a good interface, never assure that people will configure anything, "you can configure it to do that" is a bad answer to your users requests, not as bad as "you cant do that", but a lot closer then most people think.

Configuration is often not very convenient, you switch computers, take work home, run multiple user interfaces, read manuals and tutorials that assumes that the software hasn't been heavily modified, you bring un new users form other companies or schools who are not used to the configs and so on.

I don't necessarily consider that advice to be an absolute, but I do find it to be true more often than not. Configuration is generally a painful exercise that I never really want to repeat, and it's almost always only necessary because the product designers left too many paths to accomplish any particular given task.

On the other hand, I realise that tastes vary, and there's a reason I'm a Mac user :)