ILNews

Technology Untangled: Windows 8.1’s good points bundled with annoyances

Stephen Bour
February 26, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

technology-bourI have heard a fair number of complaints about Windows 8, and now the revised Windows 8.1 PC operating systems since they were released. There was enough anecdotal evidence to cause me to delay my purchase of a new computer for as long as possible. Even my casual attempts to examine and work with this new interface proved off-putting. As more of the court reporters in our office switched over, it became harder for me to assist them with problems without having a similar computer of my own. So, I finally bought a Windows 8.1 laptop. It is different, and it is annoying in many ways, but it does have its good points. Today’s article will cover some of my impressions of Windows 8.1.

If you read no further than this paragraph, here is the most important advice I have to offer. Be sure to choose a laptop that has a touch-enabled screen. Windows 8.1 is clearly designed to work best with a 10-point multi-touch screen. Part of the frustration that I had during my initial attempts with 8.1 was the result of working via mouse touchpad on computers with conventional screens. Yes, you can navigate by swiping and tapping on the touchpad alone, but it really is a sub-optimal experience. Spend the extra money and avoid the frustration.

Windows 8.1 doesn’t really strike me as “designed for business.” It seems a lot more like it is designed for amusement, distraction and fun ... and, oh yeah, it will also run your business software. The Windows 8.1 “look” and operating interface is different to say the least, and it definitely does take some getting used to. There are, however, plenty of useful tutorials available online, but that doesn’t make it any less annoying to use and learn. Here are some things I have noticed.

The opening Start screen is very cluttered with little windows, known as tiles, designed to launch each app. This interface, officially dubbed the Metro UI, seems custom-designed for people with ADD. For example, the News tile is constantly distracting me with updates. Many of these dynamic tiles continuously scroll with changing pictures and information. There is so much clutter, it cannot fit on one screen. You literally have to swipe up and down, left and right to see it all.

Another small annoyance, the Bing Weather tile obviously knows my location and dutifully scrolls the temperature and the name of the Indiana city where I am, but the default readout is in degrees Celsius! What? Does it think I’m Canadian?

After many years of bowing to Microsoft’s odd convention of clicking the “Start” button at the bottom left to shut down the computer, now there is an “improved” method. Their new preferred convention is to sweep in from the right edge to open a number of iconic choices, none of which say “Shut Down.” You have to choose Settings, Power, and then Shut Down. Hardly straightforward. By the way, the given name for these icons is “Charms.” How cute. That hardly sounds business-like to me.

Thankfully, if you click the proper tile you can still find a vaguely familiar Desktop, similar to older versions of Windows. And after much persuading (due to customer complaints), Microsoft brought back the conventional Start button as part of the retooling from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1.

Annoyingly, you must use a password each time you turn on the computer. There is no option to turn it off. I assume this is intended to improve security, but all it really does is give the illusion of security. I feel no safer with this password that is forced upon me, because much like a smartphone, virtually every app you use on the computer includes permissions to violate your privacy at every turn, not to mention the cajoling to back up your data to the cloud (also known as Microsoft SkyDrive). Some data is automatically sent to SkyDrive by default! I don’t really trust the security of any of it.

Unfortunately, whenever the computer is on the main Start screen, my full name is unsecurely emblazoned in the upper right-hand corner. I can’t remove it, and I can’t change it. It is the name I entered when registering the computer. Do I really want any passerby knowing my name when I am using my computer at Starbucks? Curiously, you cannot even use a new Windows 8.1 computer if you do not already have an email address. You need one to receive the registration code info necessary to initialize the unit.

Successfully navigating this computer requires an orchestrated mix of screen touches and swipes, touchpad clicks, and standard keyboard strokes. No one input method does it best for all needs. It takes a little bit of each, and it takes some time to figure it all out. Funny thing now, after several weeks of reaching out and touching the screen of this newest computer, I find myself trying to control all my older computers by screen touches. At least it shows that I am getting more “in touch” with this new system.

I know that many of the annoying features can be custom-configured more to my liking, but the point is why should I have to spend the time and go through the trouble?

The arrival of the touch-screen-enabled Windows 8.1 system now further blurs the lines between PC and tablet. Some of these touch screen PCs allow you to fold over the screen or remove the keyboard completely to convert to a tablet-shaped form factor. But from my experience, a true tablet such as an iPad offers a better tablet computing experience than a touch screen PC. While the PC and the tablet continue to converge, I think there will remain a distinct and separate niche for each.•

__________

Stephen Bour (bourtech@iquest.net) is an engineer and legal technology consultant in Indianapolis. His company, the Alliance for Litigation Support Inc., includes Bour Technical Services and Alliance Court Reporting. Areas of service include legal videography, tape analysis, document scanning to CD and courtroom presentation support. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  2. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  3. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  4. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  5. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

ADVERTISEMENT