|
Most are pinned in the Start Menu (Windows 7) and one or two (utilities) in the taskbar.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: I mainly open the start menu and type the name of the app in the search field, this is the quickest I have found.
Same here, except that with Windows 10 I don't even have to open the start menu.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows:
Really commonly used go on the taskbar.
Ones used a few times a week get pinned to the start menu.
Others that I use end up in the "recently used apps list".
For everything else, either type the name or select them from their menu.
OSX:
Launchpad for almost everything
Type the name when I can't be bothered clicking the icon.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
In Windows 7 and higher, mostly Taskbar after application has been pinned.
If not already pinned then via third-party application, Launchy, which is more efficient than using Charms or Start. Launchy might start either the application or invoke it via a document shortcut I've pre-mapped.
If not already mapped via the above, then Charms or Start.
Since Windows 7 I've hardly bothered with desktop shortcuts and in fact I typically hide them all.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I found it best not to have an icon or anything at all that a user may somehow find. Experience has shown that if they can't find it they can't screw things up nearly as badly.
Try it - you'll like it.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pinned somewhere, start menu or task bar, I hate a cluttered desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
(Win 7)
Quick launch bar or start menu depending on how frequently I expect to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
I navigate to the target directory, and double click on the executable.
Sometimes, I will execute the application from a command prompt, to shake things up a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: Other ? Trebuchet.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
For those I use regularly: make a folder of shortcuts to them and link that folder to a toolbar on the taskbar.
Works well since at least XP and works just as well on windows 10 and anything in between. Order them alphabetically and off you go.
Very practical, no desktop clutter.
|
|
|
|
|
I still use the Quick Launch toolbar. There is n faster way to launch an app than a single click
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
I got a new computer yesterday that came with Windows 7. As soon as I activated it I downloaded the media creation tool and upgraded to Windows 10. Very easy, no problems. Windows 10 looks great so far.
Windows 7 comes with IE8 and the page to download the upgrade tool does not load in IE8 so I actually had to install chrome first. That does seem weird.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't obtaining Chrome what IE8 was designed for?
|
|
|
|
|
Wastedtalent wrote: Isn't obtaining Chrome what IE8 was designed for? Could be. Because it was successful at that job.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Using WIN 10 from past 2 weeks, Good experience so far. But not using Edge , it is consuming more memory than Chrome and mozilla...
|
|
|
|
|
I agree,
Been using it since early august and it does a lot better than the windows 8.1 my PC was delivered with. It resembles windows 7, which I have been used too since 2010, quite well so yes: for now it looks like a job well done.
Mind you: for now it is probably just a question of time until disaster hits.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had Win10 on a laptop for about 3 weeks now, but have used it very little, still preferring to work in the familiar environment of Win7 with a full-sized keyboard. Eventually though, I plan on retiring or re-purposing my 6 y/o main development machine and using the laptop full time.
I really only have one issue with IE/Edge where it wants to change the file extension for a file I'm downloading (for instance, a .bacpac file) to .zip because there is no file association. As for a .bacpac file at least, changing the file extension back after download corrupts the file. I switched to Chrome a few months ago and haven't really missed IE.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all, Thanks in advance..
Has anyone tried Visual Studio's new feature "Intellitest".
I was trying it out, and it dose not look mature enough.
Please let me know if anyone of you guys have any better insight.
|
|
|
|
|
If your tests can be automated then they have no value.
|
|
|
|
|
That is a bold statement.
One can easily test all DBConnection classes over their interface; input, behaviour and result can be verified, doesn't require a human. The corrected statement here is that you do not see the value yet.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Two issues with that
1) If your database access is done through the likes of EF then all you're doing is testing Microsoft's code, not your own.
2) Testing database activities has no place in unit tests so the whole argument is moot.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: 1) If your database access is done through the likes of EF then all you're doing is testing Microsoft's code, not your own. Then you are doing it wrong. You don't test whether Microsofts code works, you test whether you get the result you expected.
F-ES Sitecore wrote: 2) Testing database activities has no place in unit tests so the whole argument is moot. Automated testing should be all in the same place; and yes, one can test the database-activities by code.
You rather test by hand?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You clearly don't understand unit testing. Making statements like "you do not see the value" and "you are doing it wrong" should really be reserved for when you understand the subject matter. Saying those things doesn't make you right.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: You clearly don't understand unit testing. Ah, that must be it. Well, that was a short discussion
For what it is worth; any code can be tested in an automated way. You can choose to, or not to
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Don't feed the @+O== !
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|