I originally thought the virtual desktops would hold some great potential and be usable for many purposes. But now I am getting the impression that they only act as if you had multiple monitors, you just can't see the other monitors until you switch to them.
I suppose the virtual description really does not give you protection from a virus if you happen to run into one while surfing from a virtual desktop, as a virtual machine might do. Calling them virtual may even give some folks the wrong impression and a false sense of security.
You can move windows to and from the other desktops which is good, but the implementation of the virtual desktops seems to be problematic. If I see a need to use them, I may adjust, however.
Edit: I am just starting to realize there is a difference between a Virtual Monitor and Virtual Desktop. I was trying to turn them into virtual Desktops so I am starting to understand the limitation and see they will not be as useful as I had hoped....and should really be called Virtual Monitors .
Last edited by Saltgrass; 03 Oct 2014 at 11:03.
I love virtual desktops but the way it's currently implemented is a bit of a pain, as many have mentioned...
If you have Chrome open on VD1 Then go to VD2 and click the Chrome icon it just takes you back to VD1.
I think this behaviour is wrong, i feel it should open a new instance of Chrome on VD2 without the need of manually right clicking the icon to open a new instance.
Beats me! It's just a glorified version of Ctrl+Alt+Tab!
I think this is basically a more "noob" version of Virtual Desktopping because if someone is completely new to this function, they're going to end up working and multitasking as they always have because they can't "see" the other windows that are already open or have no indication that they are.
It's kind of like instead of having 15 open windows all over the place, the way VDs are implemented in 10 take those windows and allow you to split them down into 3 VDs with 5 windows open in each but allows you to easily hop around different environments and lets the user be aware of what they have open and running but still able to operate effectively.
Nice concept, poor execution I think. If I wanted to be running a lot of file transfers in Explorer, I'd rather keep that in one VD and work on some other things like cleaning up my OneDrive or Documents folders to pass the time when those operations complete. I don't want to have all sorts of windows open for other things, basically just run the other Explorer window in it's own SEPERATE instance while keeping me aware I have other windows open elsewhere.
Instead, they could give you the option (as 10 is ALL about options now) of how your Virtual Desktops will function. Default will be the "noob" style (Run all open applications in Virtual Desktops as the same instance) while every other power user can change it to a "pro" mode (Run all open applications in Virtual Desktops as separate instances of each other).
I'd like to see in a hypothetical "pro" mode where the Taskbar UI will still show that little minimized looking tab on the program icon, but instead you can move your mouse pointer down over that little lip so to say, click, and move you over to that Virtual Desktop where that other separate instance of that program is running. A touch mode I'd think would have you swipe up from the bottom of the Taskbar on that icon to switch you around.
IMO the best way would be to have a Virtual desktop available for each monitor separately - however the name does say a virtual DESKTOP - so if you are being pedantic and take the meaning of the word DESKTOP literally then you should only expect to see on say VD1 what a single REAL desktop would show - and by switching to VD2 that would be a separate environment -- almost (but not identical of course) to having a second instance of Windows running.
I don't actually think the implementation is TOO horrible though it could be a lot better .
I can definitely see a use for it.
Would get kind of complex though if say you are running a 4 monitor Trading Screen setup and then want to say have the equivalent of 12 screens by using 3 VD's. However a Trading platform requires if you are to have any success in Market Trading to be able to watch everything in REAL TIME so having some running not visibly in the background won't help you. But for some other stuff VD's could be great.
Last edited by jimbo45; 05 Oct 2014 at 03:44.
I understand it's only the Technical Preview but Considering Virtual Desktops are not actually new i was surprised to see it implemented the way it is...
I mean, if i have Chrome open on VD1 (browsing) and then attempt to open it on VD2 (big download), why would i want it to take me back to VD1 when i click Chrome on VD2? may as well not have the Virtual Desktops (almost, i understand there will be uses for it the way it is implemented).
There are a lot of Linux Distros out there that have Virtual Desktops which i believe do a much better job.
On the other hand, maybe this style of implementation was by design, MS may be very well aware of how Virtual Desktops normally behave but decided to try something different in the technical preview and see what the feedback is.
Only time will tell what the end product will be.
I personally will be a little annoyed if stayed with the current behaviour.