Related
Hi,
My previous phone was a SonyEricsson and I had this app for Windows named MyPhoneExplorer. I could connect to my phone with this app and do all sorts of things. One of those things was typing a message on the computer and send it through the network on the phone.
That was pretty nice for some long text messages, where is faster to type on the computer than on the phone. Specially when I'm not yet used to the touch keyboards.
Is there any app I could do this with the Hero?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=574677
Well, I suppose that app gets the job done and does what I'm looking for but I was hoping for a more specific Windows app like MyPhoneExplorer and not an apk/java based app.
Thanks anyway
I don't quite understand what's wrong with Java and/or apk in this context. Isn't MyPhoneExplorer also a Java app?
DesktopSMS for Android also is a Java app for the desktop, and an apk for the phone.
http://de.codeplex.com/
this looks a damn lot interesting, just was too lazy too boot my laptop over to windows to try it.
edit: lol, and as i look at it it doesn't even send sms... sorry, might be interesting nevertheless, so i'll leave the link there.
elmicha said:
I don't quite understand what's wrong with Java and/or apk in this context. Isn't MyPhoneExplorer also a Java app?
DesktopSMS for Android also is a Java app for the desktop, and an apk for the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For starters, Java applications look horrible in Windows and most of the time the developers don't even care about using controls that have native look and feel which conforms to Windows Guidelines. That bugs the hell out of me.
Unless an application looks and feels like it belongs and fits in Windows, I don't care the language it's developed in, even if it's Java, I just won't use it unless I really have to. But that's not the case most of the time.
kendong2 said:
http://de.codeplex.com/
this looks a damn lot interesting, just was too lazy too boot my laptop over to windows to try it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't seem to send SMS as you said already, but it looks a damn nice application for Windows users (it seems that it also runs under Mono, or it's something the developer is interested in).
I have to take a look at that and maybe make a feature suggestion for that...
Hi there people,
I've started a petition in Change.org hopping that Microsoft listen to it.
Let me be clear about it:
I am not asking to neutralize Metro, as I understand it is the only way to have a proper Windows, fully funtional, into a Touch device, such tablets or laptops.
I am only asking to let us decide if we want Metro activated or not in Desktop PCs. Today's world is made of decisions. Let us decide on our own what we want.
We will all have the same Kernel, same core and same quality and performance, and being able to choose interface, will add the best experience for each one of us: the one we trully want.
Please sign the petition, and make it reach Microsoft.
Thank u very much.
http://www.change.org/petitions/microsoft-company-allow-to-disable-or-decide-whether-we-want-metro-interface-or-not
PS: I couldn' find Microsoft e-mail from Redmond or similar, if anyone has it, please PM me, and I'll add it to the petition.
Thanks. I've tried the Consumer Preview and couldn't agree more. Signed.
nodjack said:
Thanks. I've tried the Consumer Preview and couldn't agree more. Signed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Little by Little, lets change it and improve Windows! thanks!
If you can't accept Metro then stay with Windows 7, simple as that. Support for Win7 has been extended till 2020 so there is no need to move on to Windows 8 if you don't like its interface.
I am not against Metro, I like it, but against HOW they implemented it for desktop PCs. For tablets and netbooks or smaller notebooks with touchscreen it's actually realy great.
The point is the missing harmony between the old styled windows desktop you are using the most time if you are at home or at work and the new Metro UI, espacily the switching between the two modes and the implemantation of elemental functions like the system settings.
It's like an interuption if you "click" start. I am not against a new type of "start menu/screen" but it should fit the design and "feeling". It should support the (desktop)user in his work. In the current way this is not possible. The Metro surface allows to pin this realy nice live tiles (I realy like them!)... but if I push the start button I want to start a new application to do some work.
Ok, I can pin my favourite applications on the screen like I did with Windows 7 by pinning my mostly used programs to the start screen. But some applications I am using are changing by time so i enjoy the feature of the dynamical menu entries of frequently used programs like in vista and 7. If I want the same quick program launch on Metro I have to pin a lot of tiles to the screen and the live tiles become obsolete because they are somewhere right out of the screen.
They could have done it so much better...
the best way (in my oppinion) for desktops would have been to
a) chose between metro on - metro off
or
b)go much further:
1. consistent design (colors, icons, fonts,...)
2. pin live tiles on the desktop (like on metro start screen, maybe with a smaller size) or the taskbar (only with the notification, no messages, like it's done on MacOS or the IE9)
3. run Metro styled apps in a new kind of window including the buttons from the charmbar (share, search, settings). so all this "swiping" (with a mouse!) is not necesary but you get some kind of consistence between the usability of tablets, deskopts, and phone but keep the simple task management from windows.
4. a start menu mix between the old one and the search dialog from Metro.
Hm... just noticed my english sucks to express my rage about win 8 xD
Maybe I should run Photoshop and make some concepts how it should look
morpheuszg said:
If you can't accept Metro then stay with Windows 7, simple as that. Support for Win7 has been extended till 2020 so there is no need to move on to Windows 8 if you don't like its interface.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it so hard to add an option to get both interfaces ? Just to keep everybody happy and updated.
I don't think so.
I like the new kernel, about a 25% smaller, very fast and better working. I don't wanna miss that, but I am totally against buying a new Touch Monitor only for using Win 8.
That's too much for me. And if u take a look over some forums, we are many who think the same.
plus there are some nice new features in windows 8
Plus, I'd love to be able to sync between Win 8 without Metro on my desktop and Win 8 on my future tablet with Metro.
So yeah, staying on Windows 7 is a poor solution.
lol...trust me, this won't make any difference. Half of the internet doesn't like Metro (myself included).
Microsoft know this...they are aware of what people are saying, but they won't change it.
the_scotsman said:
Microsoft know this...they are aware of what people are saying, but they won't change it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I (and others) will vote with my wallet. Hopefully Microsoft will change it for win9. I don't see how win8 is better than win7. Anything new is metro related, which is useless for desktop.
P. S.
I switched to Kubuntu on one of my computers already. It has all I need.
I find Windows 8 is boooting up and running faster than Windows 7.
There is a lot more than just Metro that's changed. The kernel has been improved for one thing.
Yeah.. Voting with my wallet sounds about right. Not digging the demo builds right now.
Microsoft has this knack for screwing the pooch on revolutionary software. Lets face it, 2002 was basically updated NT4 and XP took that and stuff that ACTUALLY work from WinME.. Not there was. Vista was the first "new" Windows in a while. And Win7 is still version 6 [dot something]. Any OS that has been successful also had decent hardware to back it up.
That being said... This is a preview build. MS have heavily inferred they are giving someyhing that is nothing like the RTM. Well for PCs at least.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
What I cannot understand is why Microsoft, in the past, launched about 10 or so versions of windows 7 ( Enterprise, Home Premium, Starter, Profesional, Ultimate, Enterprise N, Home Premium N, Profesional N, Ultimate N... etc ) and now, when they really need to add One more version with Normal Desktop added in kernel, they decide not to do it.
It's a pity, but there's going to be a lot of people staying in Win 7 or migrating to Linux or Mac.
You know Metro isnt your only option right, you can go to desktop mode as well?
I haven't tried the consumer preview, but I used the developer preview extensively, and I remember that there was a registry key you could modify and get the win7 interface back...
krapplejaxx said:
I haven't tried the consumer preview, but I used the developer preview extensively, and I remember that there was a registry key you could modify and get the win7 interface back...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't work on the Consumer Preview. All the Windows 7 Start Menu bits have been removed from this build.
andrew2163 said:
You know Metro isnt your only option right, you can go to desktop mode as well?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a white lie. When you pick desktop mode you dont get same desktop as always. You get a reduced version without stat button.
And in new desktop you get instead 4 motion-reactive corners that, for instance in some FPS games just sucks and bothers all the time.
Thats the desktop you get: a reduced, corner-active,weird version of what real desktop was.
Lie to yourself not to us.
i dont get it,
the desktop is still there , right? so why this petition.
dont like metro, dont use metro apps!
---------- Post added at 06:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:54 PM ----------
xatornet said:
That's a white lie. When you pick desktop mode you dont get same desktop as always. You get a reduced version without stat button.
And in new desktop you get instead 4 motion-reactive corners that, for instance in some FPS games just sucks and bothers all the time.
Thats the desktop you get: a reduced, corner-active,weird version of what real desktop was.
Lie to yourself not to us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
, desktop is there, window app function like it always has , start menu is there, just lil a bit hidden and replace with metro theme. OMG you sound like whining for nothing.
dialupboy said:
desktop is there, window app function like it always has , start menu is there, just lil a bit hidden and replace with metro theme. OMG you sound like whining for nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Start menu? No. Metro is not start menu. And the petition is to ADD a selection of kind of interface, not to erase Metro. Read it first, and then start spitting your thoughts.
I do not want to have a "bit hidden and replaced" start menu. I like it as it was before, because it defined Windows as Operative System. What we are having now is a weird mixture of Windows Phone and Xbox Dashboard, which is wonderfull for Tablets, but a complete sh*t for Desktops with keyboard and mouse.
If you like metro, allright, keep it, but why not having an option to get traditional start menu? Would it be so hard to get questioned at installation whether I want it or not?
I am asking to add something more to the OS, not to erase something from it.
And if my whining bothers you, feel free to get out of this thread and visit different ones. Thanks.
have you tried using the hot key short cuts? or navigating metro by typing the app name you are looking for? I take it both are likely no. I'm telling you Metro isn't just for touch screens, a power user can navigate it quickly with no trouble, and it's a lot easier than searching through an endless list of programs in the start menu. If you want 8 and the start menu just add http://www.vistastartmenu.com/ MS shouldn't stop trying to revolutionize the way we use computers over people who want to hold on to the old way. Touch screens are becoming increasingly more common, smart phones and tablets are changing the way people learn to interact with software, and Microsoft is headed in the direction it should be.
Before we get caught up in the debate about whether Trident or WebKit is a better layout engine, I want to note that this is irrelevant in this discussion.
The majority of mobile operating systems (eg. iOS, Android, BlackBerry OS, whatever) uses WebKit. This means that there will be some mobile sites that render poorly on Trident regardless of how modern or standard compliant (or not) Trident is.
Of cause up until now, Windows Phone users have been limited to using Trident, but since Microsoft has recently announced that it added native code for development to Windows Phone 8, does this open the ability of porting WebKit browsers and other WebKit components to Windows Phone?
It depends on which libraries WebKit uses for actual graphics output. But given that GDI and DirectX would be where it's at for Windows on the Desktop and that there are differnt UI toolkits on Mac, Linux and Android I guess a lot of the code should be portable to Windows RT and by extension to WP8.
The same should be true for Mozilla's Gecko Engine.
So from my understandig of how things work it should be possible to actually port the existing code instead of having to reimplement it in Managed Code like it would have been necessary for WP7.
We'll have to wait and see until the WP8 SDK is released because currently there is too little known to give definitive answers. Also we don't know if in WP8 you will be able to select a default browser (like in Windows RT) or if it will be IE10 whenever you click a link in an App (like in WP7).
Even though native code can run under winRT, it is not possible to port a browser due to missing APIs. There are numerous articles on this.
Example:http://www.neowin.net/news/mozilla-firefox-would-be-crippled-on-windows-rt
You can't do a Desktop Browser as you are not allowed to run any Desktop-Code in Windows RT. This does not mean that you can't do a Metro only Browser. Although they would have limitations in the JavaScript area as they can't dynamically create code.
WebKit itself should be able to run without too many problems?
illegaloperation said:
This means that there will be some mobile sites that render poorly on Trident regardless of how modern or standard compliant (or not) Trident is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the long run, this is doubtful. First of all, WP grabs market share, slowly but steadily. Then, there's Opera Mobile which is still being used a lot. Lastly, WebKit features only specific -webkit prefixed features that Trident can't deliver. The more stable HTML5 and all its related standards become, the more unlikely such problems will become. Where actual standards based markup is used (which is what you need to use for either engine as long as you're using something that isn't still prefixed), both engines will render the same pages the same (in the long run, excluding specific bugs).
phailyoor said:
Even though native code can run under winRT, it is not possible to port a browser due to missing APIs. There are numerous articles on this.
Example:http://www.neowin.net/news/mozilla-firefox-would-be-crippled-on-windows-rt
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
a) WinRT isn't exactly what WP8 will use.
b) Windows 8 features a specific Metro web browser application model which permits this after all. (Although I doubt we'll see this being available in WP8)
illegaloperation said:
Of cause up until now, Windows Phone users have been limited to using Trident, but since Microsoft has recently announced that it added native code for development to Windows Phone 8, does this open the ability of porting WebKit browsers and other WebKit components to Windows Phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The question is rather, will Microsoft permit alternative browsers? If you look at the situation now, a few Trident based ones are available - but something like Firefox or Chrome is a different thing. After all, Apple doesn't permit Firefox to use Gecko either.
Looking at phailyoor's Link it becomes obvious that you don't have certain possibilities in the WinRT Framework. You can't launch child processes (threads yes, but not processes), which is often used to decouple separate Tabs so a crash of one Tab doesn't crash the whole browser.
The second problem is that in WinRT you can't mark memory as Executable. Therefore you can't do dynamic compilation of JavaScript to machine code which would further on prevent a fast implementation of JavaScript. This would make many modern HTML5 pages likely to be really slow.
Microsoft won't ban alternative browsers but currently it seems like browsers based upon WinRT (e.g. as a Metro App) don't make a lot of sense.
So now that the SDK has leaked, can anyone provide update information on this?
Don't think we'll see one (or at least a good one) any time soon. Here's all the C++ project templates. So basically they would have to use Direct3d which I can't see happening without a lot of effort. Also, like mentioned above, I believe Windows 8/RT has a specific cutout to allow for browsers. WP8 definitely does not.
Windows Phone Direct3D App
A project for creating a Windows Phone app that uses Direct3D.
Windows Phone Runtime Component
A project for creating a Windows Phone Runtime component for a Windows Phone app.
Empty Dynamic Link Library
A project for creating a native dynamic-link library for a Windows Phone app.
Empty Static Library
A project for creating a native static library for a Windows Phone app.
They could always build it as a run time component and wrap it in .net/xaml. I think Chrome or Firefox for Windows 8 does the same.
Can anyone tell me when / why I want to use desktop mode (I've got a Surface for Windows RT)?
I know the Office apps force you there. Otherwise, is it only when I want to hit up the control panel or Explorer?
Is there anything else to do in Desktop mode?
Also, stupid question, but is there any way to launch an app (other than the 5 pinned to the taskbar) directly in desktop mode?
When you don't have a tablet?
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
JihadSquad said:
When you don't have a tablet?
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I should have specified, I'm asking about the Surface for Windows RT
I think when Microsoft releases the next visual studio it will be compatible with rt in desktop mode. Also you have calculator, paint etc. on the desktop.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
I believe Desktop mode is short term legacy support. Should disappear in the next version of RT.
junialum said:
I believe Desktop mode is short term legacy support. Should disappear in the next version of RT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And quite possibly in a couple iterations of Windows itself...
Thanks.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Windows explorer? IE with addons? Control Panel?
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
junialum said:
I believe Desktop mode is short term legacy support. Should disappear in the next version of RT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
JihadSquad said:
And quite possibly in a couple iterations of Windows itself...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Desktop mode is never going to be phased out, "legacy" is just a marketing ploy to accentuate that the new UI is "modernUI".
Desktop mode is for desktop things. Like when you plug a keyboard and mouse into your Surface, and you browse the internet with IE desktop and manage your files with explorer or use office. The full functions of office could never and will never be crammed into an app: it would violate the simplicity/stylistic/touchfriendly guidelines.
Desktop will never be phased out of RT or Windows, I don't know why people think this.
Other things to use Desktop Mode for:
Scripting (CMD, Powershell, etc.).
Proper multitasking (more than two windows at once).
Task Manager.
Advanced management tools (Management console and all its snap-ins, diskpart and netsh and other command-line tools, etc.).
IE developer tools.
Setting up file and folder sharing.
anything else that apps can't do...
Oh, and (especially once we get this working better), running existing apps that have ben recompiled for ARM.
link68759 said:
Desktop mode is for desktop things. Like when you plug a keyboard and mouse into your Surface, and you browse the internet with IE desktop and manage your files with explorer or use office. The full functions of office could never and will never be crammed into an app: it would violate the simplicity/stylistic/touchfriendly guidelines.
Desktop will never be phased out of RT or Windows, I don't know why people think this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that's how I've been using it. I picked up a bluetooth mouse that works nicely without a dongle. I used desktop mode to copy some files around - it was nice. I plan to use Remote Apps and some other stuff that will only work well in desktop mode.
Its nice. I can switch back and forth with ease. Some things (content consumption with ass parked on a couch) are easier with the don't-call-it-metro mode and some things (content creation/manipulation while sitting at a desk) are easier to do in desktop mode. I can't do that with any of my iOS or Android tablets. Because of this, I see desktop mode as an advantage WinRT has over iOS and Android. Neither of those have anything similar and probably never will have.
But hey - don't like desktop mode? Don't use it.
I see the don't-call-it-metro mode and desktop mode as similar to the way DOS and Windows used to be. Win95/NT/2000 was nice, but sometimes you just needed to drop into DOS to do some things easier. I still use ipconfig /all quite a bit now that I am thinking about it.
I sincerely hope desktop mode is never phased out. I can't imagine why it would be - DOS Command Prompt is still around after all these years and it still has its uses.
Just to clarify, because this is a pet peeve of mine: THAT IS NOT DOS! It is a command-line shell which emulates certain portions of the DOS user interface and, on 32-bit machines, also the DOS API... but it's not DOS. CMD can do all kinds of things that DOS can't, ranging from UI features like path or command completion to system capabilities like running apps in the background (DOS had no multitasking capability). 32-bit builds of Windows NT (including 2000, XP, Vista, Win7, and Win8, plus corresponding server builds, which all use NT) include NTVDM - the NT Virtual DOS Machine - for running 16-bit DOS apps with emulated hardware (DOS granted full access to the hardware for any app; NT doesn't, so it had to provide virtual hardware for compatibility). NTVDM will *claim* to be a version of DOS, for compatibility's sake, but that's no more true than Wine on Linux claiming to be a version of Windows.
However, I absolutely agree that some things are best done in the command line. I actually rather dislike CMD; its command completion sucks, its scripting language is lame, its quotation parsing rules are bizarre and archaic, and it's missing some capabilities such as what you get from `command-goes-here` on POSIX shells. On versions of Windows which can run it, I prefer to use bash via SUA; on versions which can't, Cygwin is an almost-acceptable alternative. I'm slowly learning Powershell (accelerated somewhat by the fact that the Surface RT has both CMD and Powershell, but neither SUA nor Cygwin) as well; it's very powerful but its scripting syntax feels weird to me and the software itself is very heavyweight and tends to run slowly at times (such as when loading new modules).
GoodDayToDie said:
Just to clarify, because this is a pet peeve of mine: THAT IS NOT DOS! .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah... I know... But its much easier to type DOS than it is to type "a command-line shell which emulates certain portions of the DOS user interface and, on 32-bit machines, also the DOS API..." Don't you agree?
or "CMD", "CLI", "command line", "command-line interface", "terminal", "command prompt", "TUI", "text user interface", "text shell", "cmd.exe", "powershell", even "NTVDM", ...
Sorry, totally off-topic, I know. It's just frustrating when people claim that 'Windows is just a graphical interface over DOS" (hasn't been true since the early 90s) or 'Windows is still built on a DOS core" (hasn't been true since ME), or "Windows still includes a copy of DOS" (not true at all for 64-bit or ARM or Itanium or anything other than x86, and arguable even there). To people who actually heavily used (or, haven forbid, still use) DOS, or have old DOS apps they need to run, that just results in problems which, annoyingly often, I end up needing to solve. It would help a lot of people who knew better didn't perpetuate the untruths.
Oh, and back on-topic: if you use desktop IE, you can add Tracking Protection lists (and edit the automatic one) and also enable ActiveX filtering (which might not be needed on RT due to its limited Flash list and lack of many other plug-ins, but I still prefer it).
I am trying to learn the windows 8 registry on how it works and ways to modify it for future programming. Are their any books or references that can help me?
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Modify the registry for programming? I dunno if I've misunderstood you but you do not program your computer via the registry
The windows registry is simply a giant file for storing settings at the end of the day, including quite a few under the hood ones you wouldnt normally touch.
The Windows Registry is a hierarchical database that stores configuration settings and options on Microsoft Windows operating systems. It contains settings for low-level operating system components and for applications running on the platform that have opted to use the registry. The kernel, device drivers, services, SAM, user interface and third party applications can all make use of the registry. The registry also provides a means to access counters for profiling system performance.
When first introduced with Windows 3.1, the Windows registry's primary purpose was to store configuration information for COM-based components. With the introduction of Windows 95 and Windows NT, its use was extended to tidy up the profusion of per-program INI files that had previously been used to store configuration settings for Windows programs.[1][2] It is not a requirement for a Windows application to use the Windows Registry—for example, the .NET Framework applications use XML files for configuration, while portable applications usually keep their configuration data within files in the directory/folder where the application executable resides.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^First 2 paragraphs of wikipedia.
Actually that is a good starting point for some light reading.
Microsoft also have this article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986 Links in that article will also take you through to further information.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Modify the registry for programming? I dunno if I've misunderstood you but you do not program your computer via the registry
The windows registry is simply a giant file for storing settings at the end of the day, including quite a few under the hood ones you wouldnt normally touch.
^First 2 paragraphs of wikipedia.
Actually that is a good starting point for some light reading.
Microsoft also have this article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986 Links in that article will also take you through to further information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't mean programming from the registry lol but thank you ill look up into it
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
The thought of somebody who knows so little about Windows as to not even know about MSDN writing anything that touches the registry is a bit scary, but whatever, it's your machine. All the APIs to access the registry are well-documented. If you meant from a Windows Store app, though, that's forbidden (not totally impossible, but very forbidden; your app will get rejected).
GoodDayToDie said:
The thought of somebody who knows so little about Windows as to not even know about MSDN writing anything that touches the registry is a bit scary, but whatever, it's your machine. All the APIs to access the registry are well-documented. If you meant from a Windows Store app, though, that's forbidden (not totally impossible, but very forbidden; your app will get rejected).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its actually on a virtual machine so no physical damage
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app