Quote:
Originally Posted by K. Molen
In other words, it's different and you don't like it. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make it harder to use any more than Windows 95 is harder to use than Windows 3.1.
|
In the Start-screen, I can't call up a jump list of an application by hitting Arrow-Right. That jump-list often includes useful stuff, such as launching a private browsing window for Firefox. The Start-screen shows me everything, instead of only only the 10 most used programs. It blots out my entire desktop. It doesn't show me a Documents or Pictures or Downloads link that's guaranteed to be always in the same spot. When you install programs that have many parts, each with their own launch icon, your screen gets cluttered and needs to be cleaned up, where in the Start-menu, all those icons sat in their own folder. And so on.
It does make it harder (a better word would be, less comfortable) to use, for me.
Of course I don't like that. I'll show you a change that's also different, not really more difficult to use (it takes about 2 minutes to figure out), but it's much, much less comfortable.
As I said, in another thread, I play the Hammond organ. A modern incarnation looks like this. Meet the XK3 (there is also a newer XK3C with some more MIDI-functions, but it looks the same):
Look closely and note the THREE sets of drawbars in the midde and the twelve inverted preset keys to the left of the two manuals for a total of 24.
Most other controls needed for playing have their own dedicated buttons. as did the old Hammonds.
Everybody who has played a Hammond at some time since 1936 can turn this thing on, sit down, and play, without noting anything strange, as all of the playing controls are in roughly the same spot as where you would expect them to be on a vintage Hammond. (Except they're a bit smaller.)
So, even if you're 85 years old, your vintage 1957 Hammond catches fire and burns down, you can get this baby here as a replacement. You can use about 90% of this instrument within 5 minutes after turning it on. And if you want to, you can ignore the rest of it and just use it as if the thing was 60 years old. To do so, you'll just have to ignore the display and its associated settings in the upper left corner. It changes the sound and setup of the instrument, if you wanted to.
(On the XK3C's big brother, the New B3, they actually stuck the display and it's buttons into a slide-out drawer under the lower manual, but this instrument is out of the financial range of many people.)
Now meet one of its successors: The Hammond SK2. It can do the same stuff as the XK3C; it can even do more.
See what I mean? No 2x 12 preset keys right on the left, with the same size as the normal keys. It now has 10 small preset keys just under its LCD display. No large Vibrato/Chorus rotating knob. It now has a few small buttons on the left. But even more important: only one set of drawbars. So you select Upper, and set your upper manual. Then you select Lower, and set your lower manual. And then select Pedal, and set your pedal. In the end, the physical drawbars will be set to the setting of the part you set last, and you've lost the setting for the other two parts, making it impossible to change them without hassle while playing.
On the XK3C, I just set my pedals with the two drawbars in the middle, and then set upper and lower at the same time, using both hands, while someone using the SK2 is still pushing buttons and shoving drawbars. In addition, the XK3C preserves all three settings.
On top of that, I can have 24 presets instead of only 10, and reach them easier while playing because the keys are much larger, and positioned closer to the left hand. Last but not least, ALL of the controls are in different spots (and sometimes, even in the menu) as compared to the XK3C.
Yes, the SK2 can do *more* than the XK3C, and you can use it, after getting used to it, but if you want to "just play a Hammond organ", in the same way a Hammond organ has been played for nearly 80 years, the XK3C is the MUCH better choise.
Not surprisingly, the XK3C is still in production (release in 2007) and selling like never before. IMHO, they can keep selling this instrument as it is, changing only things like the MIDI-implementation, if they need to should it change in the future. (And that's even more true for the New B3, being a perfect digital replica of the vintage 1955-1975 Hammond B3 organ.)
The SK2 has turned out to be a cheaper alternative for people who want more functions (like a Rhodes-piano, and Clavinet sound), while the XK33C is preferred by anyone who wants a Hammond Organ. Do I like the SK2? With regard to its organ sound and functionality? Yes. With regard to usability as a Hammond organ? No, absolutely friggin' not.
To many Hammond Organ players, the SK2 is like Windows 8 is to veteran Windows users: usable, but frustrating, because it just does not work the way people want or expect it to work, and while it has some new functions, it looses functions people have come to expect. Many people just want to use a "better Windows", not a "different Windows". Change for the sake of change is BAD.
===
I wouldn't have had a problem with Windows 8, if Microsoft had decided to leave the desktop as it is, and tack Metro on top of it, with its own programs, for use on Touch-devices, but with the option to disable it. And of course, keep the Start-menu. How difficult could it have been?
Which interface do you want to use?
[ ] The new Windows 8 interface with Metro UI and modern, flat colors.
[ ] The old Windows 7 interface with Start-menu and Aero. Disable Metro UI.
I would have probably upgraded already, because there's bound to be some internal improvements that I can appreciate in the same way as there were improvements between Vista and 7.