Paint is getting an update!

[bradwiggo]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

To be fair, they are replacing it with a newer version to match the aesthetic of Windows 10. I'm okay with that, as long as it has all the original functionality and usefulness.

 

On top of that, they said they're looking for feedback on keeping the old tool, and aren't getting rid of it anytime soon.

Still don't see the point though. everyone who uses Windows has third party applications, which don't follow the metro theme, so it doesn't look out of place (also, subjectively, I don't care at all about the aesthetic of my OS) and there is nothing wrong with the snipping tool app. In my experience, Windows 10 default apps are very laggy on low end devices, and subjectively, I hate the metro design, it's too flat and boring compared to windows 7's aero. 

 

At worst the new app will be horrible to use, and at best it will work just as well as snipping tool, so even at best it seems like a waste of time. All this on an OS that still has major flaws, like the fact that I can't just restart my computer quickly if Microsoft decides I want to update it. 

[JustWantTech]

14 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

Are Microsoft just bored? As they seem to be killing things off for the sake of it, for example how they are killing snipping tool off. 

Probably Microsoft intended to replace it with window apps rather than renew it, but it doesn't take off, so, Microsoft do this instead

[PlayStation 2]

Paint goes basically un-updated for a decade... and then it gets an update to add keyboard shortcuts.

Better update timeline than Team Fortress 2, at least.

[Arika]

13 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

so even at best it seems like a waste of time. All this on an OS that still has major flaws

you realise that the people that work on stuff like this aren't the same people that work on OS level updates and bug fixes? So are they bored? no, but they have departments that handle other projects that can't just sit around doing nothing

[Dredgy]

On 5/16/2019 at 11:40 PM, Bravo1cc said:

Same here, quick screen shot edits are a god send in Paint. I would be lost without it.

 

See that’s what I used to use paint for, but the snipping tool is so much more effective, and I haven’t opened paint in ages.

[mrthuvi]

I want better text support in paint. That's all I want really.

[DrMacintosh]

It needs a redesign to bring it up to the same visual standards of the other built in Windows app. Microsoft needs to learn about consistency.

[mr moose]

On 5/18/2019 at 1:41 AM, bradwiggo said:

 Windows 10 default apps are very laggy on low end devices,

 

Everything is laggy on low end devices.

 

On 5/18/2019 at 1:41 AM, bradwiggo said:

At worst the new app will be horrible to use, and at best it will work just as well as snipping tool, so even at best it seems like a waste of time.

Have you used it already?

On 5/18/2019 at 1:41 AM, bradwiggo said:

All this on an OS that still has major flaws, like the fact that I can't just restart my computer quickly if Microsoft decides I want to update it. 

 

It sounds more like you have an issue with MS than paint.

[bradwiggo]

16 hours ago, mr moose said:

Everything is laggy on low end devices.

 

Have you used it already?

 

It sounds more like you have an issue with MS than paint.

Not everything is laggy. Opera browser opens perfectly fine, Word works fine and Steam opens perfectly. It's just Windows Metro apps that lag. 

 

I haven't used it already no, that why I said at best and at worst. I just don;t see the point in it. Either it crap and everyone hates it, or it will be decent but then what's the point? 

 

I do have an issue with Microsoft, I don't see why they spend there time developing useless crap no one needs. 

 

Update: Just tried it, and it seems functionally the same as Snipping Tool, expect a bit slower, as in there is a bigger pause between highlighting the area and the image appearing, and this is on an i5-8600k. So it's the same but a bit slower. Again I ask, what's the point? 

[bradwiggo]

On 5/18/2019 at 6:10 AM, Arika S said:

you realise that the people that work on stuff like this aren't the same people that work on OS level updates and bug fixes? So are they bored? no, but they have departments that handle other projects that can't just sit around doing nothing

I know, I was making a general statement, but my point still stands, surely there is something better for them to be doing? Or maybe they just have too many app development guys and not enough OS level development guys. 

[ASDChillGaming]

On 5/16/2019 at 12:34 PM, LukeSavenije said:

Sources: @AluminiumTech, Windowscentral

 

Microsoft Paint was about to be killed not that long ago, to fade away in future Windows 10 Updates. However, after a healthy amount of support from fans, it received a new lease on life, and now Microsoft is preparing to bring some fresh new features to it.

 

 

Thoughts? PAINT IS BACK

I love Paint! Used to use it all the time.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

Not everything is laggy. Opera browser opens perfectly fine, Word works fine and Steam opens perfectly. It's just Windows Metro apps that lag. 

What?  you seriously want me to believe that only metro apps that are laggy on slow hardware?  Sure.  Having worked on slow hardware I can guarantee you a lot of apps run slow and laggy on low end hardware,  if they didn't no one would buy better hardware.

 

7 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I haven't used it already no, that why I said at best and at worst. I just don;t see the point in it. Either it crap and everyone hates it, or it will be decent but then what's the point? 

So you can't actually say either of those if you haven't used it because you have no idea.  You speculating at best and projecting at worst.

7 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I do have an issue with Microsoft, I don't see why they spend there time developing useless crap no one needs. 

 

Update: Just tried it, and it seems functionally the same as Snipping Tool, expect a bit slower, as in there is a bigger pause between highlighting the area and the image appearing, and this is on an i5-8600k. So it's the same but a bit slower. Again I ask, what's the point? 

 

So clearly you just want to make shit posts about MS.  If you don't like it don't use it, you aren't the only user in the world.

 

 

[williamcll]

Kind of makes Paint 3D redundant though.

[bradwiggo]

12 hours ago, mr moose said:

What?  you seriously want me to believe that only metro apps that are laggy on slow hardware?  Sure.  Having worked on slow hardware I can guarantee you a lot of apps run slow and laggy on low end hardware,  if they didn't no one would buy better hardware.

 

So you can't actually say either of those if you haven't used it because you have no idea.  You speculating at best and projecting at worst.

 

So clearly you just want to make shit posts about MS.  If you don't like it don't use it, you aren't the only user in the world.

 

 

I have an Asus Laptop that cost £200, it has an AMD E2. If I use my browser on it (Opera), it runs fine. It doesn't open as fast as on my main PC, obviously, but it does work and doesn't lag. Steam open fine and doesn't lag at all, unless you are downloading loads of stuff or have a game open, and things like XN View image viewer and Widnows Media Player all work fine. I haven't tried all of the metro apps, but Edge is really laggy and browser tab are always reopening when I am typing in them, The mail app will often stick on the bootup screen where it just shows the icon, the Microsoft store is quite laggy to use (not unusable, but annoying), and the Metro photos app is always very laggy when it opens. I don;t really see why you seem to think everything has to lag on a low end device? Your last statement just doesn't make sense, of course people would still buy better hardware, do you think people only buy better hardware so windows apps aren't as laggy? Of course there will be a lot of non Windows Apps that lag on slower hardware, but they will be higher end things, like photoshop, premier and intensive games. I am talking about the kind of program the everyday user will use, and in my experience, the Windows metro ones run much worse than the non Windows Metro ones. You mentioned all apps run worse on low end devices, which probably just means your "low end" device is more low end than my "low end" device, but I know for a fact that on my device, Windows Metro apps run worse. What reason do I have to lie about this? 

 

I did actually edit my comment after having used the app, but I guess you chose to ignore that. And my statement before was a general statement covering what I see as the two possibilities for it: It could either be just as good as the snipping tool app, or it could be worse, I don't see where you take issue with that, surely that covers literally every state the app could be in. I wasn't saying what the app would be like, I was listing the possibilities that it could be like. And having used it, it seems to fall into the "just as good but no better therefore a waste of time" category. Explain to me again what you problem was with my original statement? I literally said it can EITHER be as good as snipping tool, or it can be worse, I don't see how I needed to have used it to make that statement. By your logic people aren't allowed to make predictions until they have used the thing, in which case it would no longer be a prediction. 

 

"So clearly you just want to make shit posts about MS." TIL putting my opinion forward on certain flaws with there OS is "making shit posts". I apologise that your opinion is better than mine? I'm not "hating" on Microsoft just because I think there are some flaws with there Operating System, there is such a thing as criticism. 

 

"If you don't like it don't use it, you aren't the only user in the world." You seem to be getting annoyed at me for complaining about a minor thing Microsoft did on a thread about a minor thing Microsoft did. I'm ridiculously angry because paint and snipping tool changed, I just thought it was a relevant point to bring up on this thread. 

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I have an Asus Laptop that cost £200, it has an AMD E2. If I use my browser on it (Opera), it runs fine. It doesn't open as fast as on my main PC, obviously, but it does work and doesn't lag. Steam open fine and doesn't lag at all, unless you are downloading loads of stuff or have a game open, and things like XN View image viewer and Widnows Media Player all work fine. I haven't tried all of the metro apps, but Edge is really laggy and browser tab are always reopening when I am typing in them, The mail app will often stick on the bootup screen where it just shows the icon, the Microsoft store is quite laggy to use (not unusable, but annoying), and the Metro photos app is always very laggy when it opens. I don;t really see why you seem to think everything has to lag on a low end device?

So you have shit laptop,   As I said before I have used shit hardware too, and lots of apps run slow and laggy on shit hardware. stop trying to pretend it's only MS stuff that has problems.

 

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

Your last statement just doesn't make sense, of course people would still buy better hardware, do you think people only buy better hardware so windows apps aren't as laggy?

No, I think people buy better hardware because all apps are laggy.   The bit you are ignoring is that it's not solely MS apps that are shit on shit hardware.

 

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

Of course there will be a lot of non Windows Apps that lag on slower hardware, but they will be higher end things, like photoshop, premier and intensive games.

BS, There is an endless list of apps of all sizes that run shit on shit hardware. 

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I am talking about the kind of program the everyday user will use, and in my experience, the Windows metro ones run much worse than the non Windows Metro ones. You mentioned all apps run worse on low end devices, which probably just means your "low end" device is more low end than my "low end" device, but I know for a fact that on my device, Windows Metro apps run worse. What reason do I have to lie about this? 

That's nice, you have an experience.   You seem very insistent to dismiss other peoples experiences simply because you have one.   Or as it seems you'd rather just get more technically and try to push the definition of shit hardware further to maintain your point.

 

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I did actually edit my comment after having used the app, but I guess you chose to ignore that. And my statement before was a general statement covering what I see as the two possibilities for it: It could either be just as good as the snipping tool app, or it could be worse, I don't see where you take issue with that, surely that covers literally every state the app could be in. I wasn't saying what the app would be like, I was listing the possibilities that it could be like. And having used it, it seems to fall into the "just as good but no better therefore a waste of time" category. Explain to me again what you problem was with my original statement? I literally said it can EITHER be as good as snipping tool, or it can be worse, I don't see how I needed to have used it to make that statement. By your logic people aren't allowed to make predictions until they have used the thing, in which case it would no longer be a prediction. 

Not sure what you are trying to say.  The conversation as I read it seems to be fairly logical.   you tried to insinuate only MS apps are shit on low end hardware (as you are still doing) to justify calling this one a piece of shit.

 

10 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

"So clearly you just want to make shit posts about MS." TIL putting my opinion forward on certain flaws with there OS is "making shit posts". I apologise that your opinion is better than mine? I'm not "hating" on Microsoft just because I think there are some flaws with there Operating System, there is such a thing as criticism. 

 

"If you don't like it don't use it, you aren't the only user in the world." You seem to be getting annoyed at me for complaining about a minor thing Microsoft did on a thread about a minor thing Microsoft did. I'm ridiculously angry because paint and snipping tool changed, I just thought it was a relevant point to bring up on this thread. 

Or maybe instead of arguing about it,   you could just accept that your single experience is not reflective of everyone or hard enough evidence to continue arguing all metro apps are shit. 

 

 

But if you need me to penis compare hardware so you can understand that one experience is not reflective of everyone's I have a pre core series celeron laptop that runs Vista Areo just fine, I have a N4000 that can't run FF without waiting literally minutes to load pages, I have an AMD  A4 laptop that does the same on every browser and forget loading steam.  I even have an i3 yoga that takes forever to load and save any thing on any program regardless of it's brand.

 

Shit hardware is shit and different configurations will have different results.   But to try and claim only MS apps are shit then defend it is silly.

[DeScruff]

On 5/16/2019 at 8:18 AM, RejZoR said:

Paint.NET has been in my toolbox for years. I do all my image work in it and it's great. GIMP may be more powerful but god it's clumsy to use where Paint.NET is compact, straightforward and still very powerful.

Same.
It is by far my favorite image editor. If it ever got proper GIF support it be absolutely perfect. (Till then I'll have to use Aseprite despite being more pixel art oriented)
And even though Ive been using the software for like... 13 years, I still learn about features it has hidden away like Shift+Ctrl+Z to be able to rotate an image in 3D.

[bradwiggo]

14 hours ago, mr moose said:

So you have shit laptop,   As I said before I have used shit hardware too, and lots of apps run slow and laggy on shit hardware. stop trying to pretend it's only MS stuff that has problems.

 

No, I think people buy better hardware because all apps are laggy.   The bit you are ignoring is that it's not solely MS apps that are shit on shit hardware.

 

BS, There is an endless list of apps of all sizes that run shit on shit hardware. 

That's nice, you have an experience.   You seem very insistent to dismiss other peoples experiences simply because you have one.   Or as it seems you'd rather just get more technically and try to push the definition of shit hardware further to maintain your point.

 

Not sure what you are trying to say.  The conversation as I read it seems to be fairly logical.   you tried to insinuate only MS apps are shit on low end hardware (as you are still doing) to justify calling this one a piece of shit.

 

Or maybe instead of arguing about it,   you could just accept that your single experience is not reflective of everyone or hard enough evidence to continue arguing all metro apps are shit. 

 

 

But if you need me to penis compare hardware so you can understand that one experience is not reflective of everyone's I have a pre core series celeron laptop that runs Vista Areo just fine, I have a N4000 that can't run FF without waiting literally minutes to load pages, I have an AMD  A4 laptop that does the same on every browser and forget loading steam.  I even have an i3 yoga that takes forever to load and save any thing on any program regardless of it's brand.

 

Shit hardware is shit and different configurations will have different results.   But to try and claim only MS apps are shit then defend it is silly.

I'm not pretending anything. Microsoft apps run worse on my laptop than non-microsoft apps. Why would I lie about this? 

 

You can repeat the same point over and over again, doesn't change what I am saying. On MY laptop, microsoft apps DO run slower. Again, why would I lie about this?? 

 

"BS, There is an endless list of apps of all sizes that run shit on shit hardware. " So my statement is bullshit, yet your statement is just an expansion of mine? You literally said exactly what I said, there are many apps that don't run well on bad hardware, and IN MY EXPERIENCE, Microsoft Apps are part of that list. 

 

"That's nice, you have an experience.   You seem very insistent to dismiss other peoples experiences simply because you have one.   Or as it seems you'd rather just get more technically and try to push the definition of shit hardware further to maintain your point." - I'm not dismissing anyone';s experience, you are dismissing mine. I have explicitly stated numerous times that this is IN MY EXPERIENCE. 

 

The next bit you just read wrong. I was talking about my statement "it can be decent at best and bad at worst", which you dismissed as apparently I need to have used it to make a prediction? That's not how predictions work but alight I guess. 

 

I would like you to point out the exact in context quote where I said everyone's experience is the same as mine. I didn't say that. I am talking from my experience, as everyone else on every does on forums. On MY laptop, and to an extent MY desktop, the windows metro apps run noticeably slower than non-metro apps. I'm not "hating" on Microsoft, as Windows Media Player and the older windows apps "e.g. paint and snipping tool" run fine as well. 

 

You keep saying "shit computer run everything slowly", well, my desktop has a 6 core i5, I think we can agree that isn't shit? And on my desktop, the apps aren't as laggy as on my laptop, but there is still a noticeable difference between the speed of Metro Apps and non-Metro apps. It's only about half a second more time, but that is significant considering they load in about a second. 

 

Another important thing to note is when I say laggy, I mean lag that affects the usability. I am not simply referring to the loading times for them. Obviously my Opera browser does open faster on my i5 desktop than my laptop, maybe that is where the confusion occurred, apologies for not clarifying that better. By "lag" I mean a pause between clicking something and it registering, or the click sometimes not registering, or the app crashing or freezing often, things like that. 

 

Based on the anecdotal evidence from both of us so far, Metro apps either run worse than normal apps, or about the same, so they still aren't great. 

 

(Also as a sidenote it's not just one single experience I am basing my opinion off, my current desktop, current laptop and old laptop all have the same problem with Metro apps, and I have had complaints from numerous friends about them running slower as well. They also run slower on the computers in my workplace, I know that doesn't really count for anything, I just thought I'd add it in so it's clear that there isn't a problem with my laptop or something, this (from my perspective) is a universal problem.) 

 

Things like opening the start menu as well, it isn't instant like it used to be on Windows 7 and before. It has a bit of a delay to it, as does the notification centre thing (the thing that opens on the right, not sure what it's called, you open it by pressing Windows and A). 

 

I do understand your point, my evidence is just from me, not from anywhere else, but is your not the same? Maybe it is just me and my friends got unlucky and nobody else has this problem, I'm not sure. I'm not just taking shots at Microsoft because I don't like them. I wouldn't call myself a huge fan of there's, but I do like Windows, and non of this stuff really bothers me, as I can just ignore the Metro Apps, I don;t like there design anyway, I just thought this was an interesting observation considering the topic of the thread. 

 

[mr moose]

9 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I'm not pretending anything. Microsoft apps run worse on my laptop than non-microsoft apps. Why would I lie about this? 

 

You can repeat the same point over and over again, doesn't change what I am saying. On MY laptop, microsoft apps DO run slower. Again, why would I lie about this?? 

 

"BS, There is an endless list of apps of all sizes that run shit on shit hardware. " So my statement is bullshit, yet your statement is just an expansion of mine? You literally said exactly what I said, there are many apps that don't run well on bad hardware, and IN MY EXPERIENCE, Microsoft Apps are part of that list. 

 

"That's nice, you have an experience.   You seem very insistent to dismiss other peoples experiences simply because you have one.   Or as it seems you'd rather just get more technically and try to push the definition of shit hardware further to maintain your point." - I'm not dismissing anyone';s experience, you are dismissing mine. I have explicitly stated numerous times that this is IN MY EXPERIENCE. 

 

The next bit you just read wrong. I was talking about my statement "it can be decent at best and bad at worst", which you dismissed as apparently I need to have used it to make a prediction? That's not how predictions work but alight I guess. 

 

I would like you to point out the exact in context quote where I said everyone's experience is the same as mine. I didn't say that. I am talking from my experience, as everyone else on every does on forums. On MY laptop, and to an extent MY desktop, the windows metro apps run noticeably slower than non-metro apps. I'm not "hating" on Microsoft, as Windows Media Player and the older windows apps "e.g. paint and snipping tool" run fine as well. 

 

You keep saying "shit computer run everything slowly", well, my desktop has a 6 core i5, I think we can agree that isn't shit? And on my desktop, the apps aren't as laggy as on my laptop, but there is still a noticeable difference between the speed of Metro Apps and non-Metro apps. It's only about half a second more time, but that is significant considering they load in about a second. 

 

Another important thing to note is when I say laggy, I mean lag that affects the usability. I am not simply referring to the loading times for them. Obviously my Opera browser does open faster on my i5 desktop than my laptop, maybe that is where the confusion occurred, apologies for not clarifying that better. By "lag" I mean a pause between clicking something and it registering, or the click sometimes not registering, or the app crashing or freezing often, things like that. 

 

Based on the anecdotal evidence from both of us so far, Metro apps either run worse than normal apps, or about the same, so they still aren't great. 

 

(Also as a sidenote it's not just one single experience I am basing my opinion off, my current desktop, current laptop and old laptop all have the same problem with Metro apps, and I have had complaints from numerous friends about them running slower as well. They also run slower on the computers in my workplace, I know that doesn't really count for anything, I just thought I'd add it in so it's clear that there isn't a problem with my laptop or something, this (from my perspective) is a universal problem.) 

 

Things like opening the start menu as well, it isn't instant like it used to be on Windows 7 and before. It has a bit of a delay to it, as does the notification centre thing (the thing that opens on the right, not sure what it's called, you open it by pressing Windows and A). 

It's not that complicated.

 

9 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I do understand your point, my evidence is just from me, not from anywhere else, but is your not the same? Maybe it is just me and my friends got unlucky and nobody else has this problem, I'm not sure. I'm not just taking shots at Microsoft because I don't like them. I wouldn't call myself a huge fan of there's, but I do like Windows, and non of this stuff really bothers me, as I can just ignore the Metro Apps, I don;t like there design anyway, I just thought this was an interesting observation considering the topic of the thread. 

 

It just boils down to trying to find a cause and what the general symptoms are.   All I said was all app run slow on slow hardware, obviously the slower the hardware the more apps that are effected.  My point was that it is not intrinsic the MS apps, just because in your case the line between laggy and workable was obvious that only means in your case that was the situation.

 

 

[bradwiggo]

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It's not that complicated.

 

It just boils down to trying to find a cause and what the general symptoms are.   All I said was all app run slow on slow hardware, obviously the slower the hardware the more apps that are effected.  My point was that it is not intrinsic the MS apps, just because in your case the line between laggy and workable was obvious that only means in your case that was the situation.

 

 

Surely if I have a laptop which is on the line of "Microsoft apps are laggy and others aren't" that proves my point? As overall they are more laggy, because when other apps stop being laggy, they still are? 

 

You say that Microsoft apps aren't overall slower, but surely that is your first hand evidence. I don't see why your first hand evidence is more valid than mine. 

 

Also you say it's not that  complicated, but you did reply with loads of points from what was basically only 1 original simple point that I made. I don't mind that, I'm just saying that saying "it's not that complicated" isn't a counterpoint to anything I said. 

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Surely if I have a laptop which is on the line of "Microsoft apps are laggy and others aren't" that proves my point? As overall they are more laggy, because when other apps stop being laggy, they still are? 

If your point is only metro apps are laggy then no, if your point is I only experience laggy metro aps on low end hardware then yes.

 

6 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

You say that Microsoft apps aren't overall slower, but surely that is your first hand evidence. I don't see why your first hand evidence is more valid than mine. 

As far as anecdotal evidence goes they carry equal weight, however if all we have is anecdotal evidence and we can rule out hardware differences (because we have mentioned what we have been using), then we have to assume different cause for the experiences.

6 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Also you say it's not that  complicated, but you did reply with loads of points from what was basically only 1 original simple point that I made. I don't mind that, I'm just saying that saying "it's not that complicated" isn't a counterpoint to anything I said. 

Because, it's really not that complicated,  the complicated part in this is trying to articulate what we mean using only text. That and not being able to interject into a thought process the same way you can interject when you hear something that is inconsistent with what you are trying to say.

[bradwiggo]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If your point is only metro apps are laggy then no, if your point is I only experience laggy metro aps on low end hardware then yes.

 

As far as anecdotal evidence goes they carry equal weight, however if all we have is anecdotal evidence and we can rule out hardware differences (because we have mentioned what we have been using), then we have to assume different cause for the experiences.

Because, it's really not that complicated,  the complicated part in this is trying to articulate what we mean using only text. That and not being able to interject into a thought process the same way you can interject when you hear something that is inconsistent with what you are trying to say.

You said that my computer must lie on the point where normal apps are no longer laggy, but metro apps still are. So surely that does prove my point? Regardless of what I originally said, which was closer to the second one (i.e. On my computer) than the first. 

 

How I worded it (which I admit, was poorly) doesn't change the fact that you didn't actually give any response to most of my post. 

 

Edit: just looked back at the thread, you actually took my original quote out of context at the start of this discussion. My actual quote was: "In my experience, Windows 10 default apps are very laggy on low end devices," 

 

You removed the "in my experience" bit. 

 

The point I made that you choose to ignore was about how you said I couldn't make a prediction about the app before using the app. Surely the point of a prediction though is to make it before you test the thing out? 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

You said that my computer must lie on the point where normal apps are no longer laggy, but metro apps still are. So surely that does prove my point? Regardless of what I originally said, which was closer to the second one (i.e. On my computer) than the first. 

 

How I worded it (which I admit, was poorly) doesn't change the fact that you didn't actually give any response to most of my post. 

 

Edit: just looked back at the thread, you actually took my original quote out of context at the start of this discussion. My actual quote was: "In my experience, Windows 10 default apps are very laggy on low end devices," 

 

You removed the "in my experience" bit. 

 

The point I made that you choose to ignore was about how you said I couldn't make a prediction about the app before using the app. Surely the point of a prediction though is to make it before you test the thing out? 

I simply was pointing out that all apps are laggy on low end hardware, it's not something intrinsic to MS, It being your personal experience is moot,  In fact it doesn't matter how you came to that conclusion, all I was saying was that it's not an intrinsic issue with MS.  I at no point said your experience was wrong or flawed,  Just that your claims make it sound like you have issues with MS because not only did you say that but you also made claims about the whole OS being flawed and that MS should be working on that instead of paint.

[AlTech]

On 5/18/2019 at 6:56 PM, DrMacintosh said:

It needs a redesign to bring it up to the same visual standards of the other built in Windows app. Microsoft needs to learn about consistency.

Have you seen Paint 3D? That's essentially what Paint 3D is but I and many others prefer using the older paint or just straight up anything other than Paint 3D lol.

[Arika]

18 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Have you seen Paint 3D? That's essentially what Paint 3D is but I and many others prefer using the older paint or just straight up anything other than Paint 3D lol.

i would rather a setting that allowed you to change the style. give me 

 

 

back

[bradwiggo]

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

I simply was pointing out that all apps are laggy on low end hardware, it's not something intrinsic to MS, It being your personal experience is moot,  In fact it doesn't matter how you came to that conclusion, all I was saying was that it's not an intrinsic issue with MS.  I at no point said your experience was wrong or flawed,  Just that your claims make it sound like you have issues with MS because not only did you say that but you also made claims about the whole OS being flawed and that MS should be working on that instead of paint.

Yes and I stand by those claims? Are you going to pretend windows is a perfect OS? 

 

You responded to something that I didn't actually say. I never said MS apps are worse for everyone, you took my quote out of context. And now you say my experience is moot just because you don't agree with it? 

 

Your point "all apps are laggy on low end hardware" is just plain wrong as well. There are many lightweight small apps that run fine on low end hardware. Sadly Microsoft apps aren't included in that, obviously there are non Microsoft apps that lag on low end hardware as well, but the ones I use don't (at least most of them don't, there are one or two more intensive ones that do). 

 

Note: Don't really see the point of continuing this argument any longer, you are right in what you are saying, as am I, mainly because we are saying two different things, apologies for not wording my earlier posts better.