I am one of the unfortunates forced to use Windows at work. My main frustration centers around the interface forcing me to mouse and click rather than use the keyboard. I know some of this is just poor programming of the software I use and incomplete OO API implementation by MS, but I have to believe that *somehow* I can use the keyboard to move the cursor one character at a time in a text field. What *is* it ?? The left and right arrows are not the solution. Have I inadvertently changed their behavior somehow, perhaps by having some toggle key activated ?
Windows is the main workstation operating systems for a reason. Only those that do not know, still bash the OS based on the experiences pre-NT. Windows is just as stable as Linux and OSX. As to your problem, the default behaviour of the arrow keys is exactly what you want. I am willing to bet you inadvertently turned on "Sticky Keys". This is made for I can only assume keyboard peckers, really old people, or pirates with hook arms that can't press 2 keys at a time. Once turned on, it keeps the last function key you pressed, down. If you hold the control key and use the arrows, you get the word-by-word movement you are experiencing. I am assuming you are not holding the control key down, so something is probably doing it for you. The easiest way to inadvertantly enable it is to press the Shift key 5 times and then perform a normal PEBKAC error of not reading the popup window and closing it right away. You should be able to tap the shift key 5 times, get the popup, and turn off sticky keys. Then your arrow keys should work as they are supposed to.
Thanks 2k1, I'll try your advice. IIRC though, the current behavior of the left and right arrow keys in text is to not do anything rather than jump a word at a time. If your suggestion does not work I'll see whether the (lack of) keyboard behavior is program specific. No doubt more than one reason, but in my opinion #1 is simply inertia, while #2 is a broad based semi-incompetent Windows centric IT staff. #3 was a smart MS marketing move -- giving corporate IT extensive bureaucratic control over user computers. #2 and #3 are inter-related: IT was under pressure to solve the problem of a malware infested platform but lack competency. MS partially solves the problem for them through ham-fisted control, which has the (from the standpoint of IT) very attractive side-effect of increasing IT leverage and importance within the enterprise. Completely off-topic -- could not resist.
The keyboard arrow keys do nothing? That's not normal at all. Open up Notepad, type stuff in and try to navigate with the keyboard. I use keyboard shortcuts extensively and do my work exclusively on laptops with keyboards and touchpads and am just as proficient as those with full external HIDs. You got all the points correct. But Windows has many advantages that Linux does not and OSX can never imagine having. It is all about choosing the right tool for the job, and for the majority of work machines, Windows is the right tool. For the computer illiterate, you can choose a dumbed down BSD OS i.e. OSX. For unmanned machines, Linux is almost always a great choice with Windows a distant second. I use Windows as my main OS because it is the best for what I do. Hardware design, software design, firmware design, web design, and gaming. I have 2 full time Linux rackmount boxes running a firewall and router at my house, and lots of distributed boxes running Linux. Also have servers with Windows and Linux and Linux shells for simulations. You just have to choose the best tool for what you want to do, there is no blanket statement that 1 OS fits all.
Good choice. Harder to understand why you would choose Windows for a corporation comprised of computer illiterate users and IT 'administrators', except for the reasons I mentioned. OSX is actually quite versatile. I remember a picture a few years ago from a well known unix conference showing a large (? majority) of attendees with Apple notebooks. They were running OSX, not Linux. I don't know what the situation is today; and of course that group are programming centric. My son amuses me when he sings the praises of vi. He uses it to write mostly python code for physics simulation.
Because the workforce is supposed to be literate. If they are illiterate, then the company needs to train the employees on the software. For things like surfing the web and playing solitaire, an OS where you can't do much and can't really get into trouble is a superior choice for those that can get themselves into trouble. Lots of people have Apple hardware because they are just PCs with a shiny logo on the back. If you are a blogger, you can do that on any device. If you are a serious programmer, you are running *nix or Windows. However the Apple hardware is sexy, the only other big name coming close is Samsung with their 9-series. We have lots of engineers that have Apple laptops and desktops. A grand total of 0 of them run OSX. They all natively boot into Windows or Linux. However when we go out to Silicon valley to train our sales engineers, those with mac hardware, generally run mac OSX natively and virtualize Windows. But they aren't doing any real engineering, just emails and powerpoint. The Apple hardware is just like the high end Samsung models (similar in price too) or Asus models and that sort of thing. Intel puts out a reference design motherboard on the best components to use and even a fully published layout for all sometimes 60+ layers of copper on the single PCB. This is then distributed to all the companies like Dell, Toshiba, Samsung, Apple, HP, etc. The Intel spec is very very conservative. Great parts, great reliability, super high cost not only in component raw cost but in assembly cost because the parts are so dense. Why use 10 individual 0.1uF caps when you could just use 1 1.0uF cap (electrically equivalent)? Well there are many reasons, but that is 20 pads instead of 2, much faster to pick-n-place, less chance for full board rejects because the individual counts are lower, etc. Those that follow the reference design have great final designs. Apple follows it. Samsung follows it. Asus follows it. And their products show that in quality. They really are all the same "under the hood", so buy the best hardware you want choosing the right tool, then buy the best OS you want again choosing the right tool and you will be happy. I am not sure people realize you can even do that. And I know that the majority of people buying macs don't know they are PCs inside as of the PowerPC switch many many many years ago now. They base their claims off of the fact that their new macbook is faster than their old PC. Wel.... sure. But my new PC is faster than my old PC. And a $2000 PC will be much better than a $300 PC. My new phone is faster than my old phone. Technology is going forwards, so of course it will be faster. Anyways this is way off topic now. But I will say that since Jobs' death, Apple is going way downhill. I can say this in a quantitative way. The company I am employed for sells lots of parts to Apple and we see almost all of their schematics since we are a very low level and integral part of the system. Jobs had no problems spending the money for the best, which our company is. We are the priciest, but for a reason. We are now starting to lose sockets in Apple products going with cheaper and inferior products on pure cost basis. These parts don't work as well, but are cheaper, so lets stick them in there. The overall quality of all the parts on the schematics we see are sloppier. The switch for crap has been thrown and they are going to be riding on their past successes until they fix it. Surprisingly Microsoft's tablet uses our stuff and they have essentially made an awesome product their first try out of the gate. The old adage of you get what you pay for is tainted by marketing, but overall true. Apple's hardware is still pretty good compared to the crap out there.
