You don't have any fix options. You can always re-install or wait for MS to release future updates and hope they overwrite the components that caused the problems in this one.
Unless you let her access that info in her 'notebook', that's the beauty of Cortana, you decide what she does and doesn't know.
Also faster than w7? DOS6.22 boots faster on SSD than w9 ever will. No honestly, it depends primarily on the SSD how fast it will. Besides of that how important are 3 seconds more or less of boot time if w9 comes also with an ugly tile design, useless sysapps, cloud store and WITHOUT real performance improvements and bad workflow? Boot time is the last I'd care.
I Know boot time depend on many things. but what i asking is in same config is boot time faster compare to w8.1?
Sure, one gets comparable values only on the same hardware. Anything that is related to data I/O, drivers also. But compared to SSD r/w speed other hardware specs. play a minor role only. Also boot time of current build is different than future builds depending on contents.
Beside that, how many times a day / week etc. do you really re-boot your computer as an average user ...
They could easily improve the style. A bit of 3D and to add some texture, gradient, transparence and the ability to let user customize the look. Perhaps some animations also... But I guess M$ is forced to make it look plain, because sloppy legacy code steals all the potential hw performance already. From the pure aspect of design it is a horror what they did in w8. And the workflow also. What they removed was appreciated by the user (start menu) what they introduced wasn't (charms bar, metro)... I don't know what is up with M$, but recently they screw it all...they have rested on their laurels and have to pay now the bill. Their unlucky life-time marriage with Intel's x86 architecture, their DOS heritage, their inability to evaluate the future of markets. Apple jumped in at the deep end at OS 9-->OS10 and Google could start based on a crippled Linux, but open source with a young OS in a young market on high tech low power consumption ARM SoC's. (Who is still speaking of CPUs?) Only the pseudo king M$ meant anything they do is great enough to defend their monopoly. Actually windows is nothing but an old piece of IT history, no matter when issued and what.
Once people actually realize that you can do all your work and entertainment on Linux, Windows will be in serious trouble. Steam has been pushing devs to compile their games for Linux and if enough of them do, the 100$+ pricetag of Windows will really screw MS. Unless MS makes free editions, like it seems like they might; they would be in serious trouble. If they're going to compete with things like the 200$ Chromebook, they'll really need to simplify things and stop trying to support all this legacy stuff. The registry is antiquated and overused. The servicing is too customized and convoluted. They include both Metro and non-Metro versions of programs. Srsly, who needs 2 different calculators and Internet Explorers? My biggest complaint, though, is that they run mostly 32-bit programs on 64-bit OS. Almost none of the programs you run on your 64-bit OS are 64-bit. They really should be pushing all the developers to use 64-bit executables and just use some sort of Virtualization for 32-bit programs. Sadly, their own customer base are what holds them back. None of the businesses would buy an OS that didn't support 32-bit programs. Even if they started removing antiquated things like the registry, almost nobody's older programs would run, so you'd have to create some sort of installer-registry-sandbox thing for each program, which would get even more bad publicity. Their own customers won't let them create a fast new operating system because they won't move on.
LOL! I needed a good laugh when I got up this morning thanks Murphy. That would never happen. Besides they had the last 10-15 years to catch up to windows and still haven't.
It's always faster to catch up than to make new things. Copying functionality is much easier than inventing it. Yes it would be a good amount of work for people to make all of the programs that businesses use. The reason they haven't is that not enough people use Linux yet.
We really need to consider the end user mindset at these businesses. I mean come on Murph, we got people right here on this board who cannot use Windows 8.x because of a button and a menu!, how on earth would we get people to use linux in a business environment? Change doesn't happen overnight, and for a large majority will refuse change outright. I would LOVE it to happen, but my users would need fired for people who have never used a computer. The longer one uses windows, the further away the Linux strawberry fields are
Linux has had more than enough time to compete. Steam isn't doing anything to help them. SteamOS is junk and will be for a while and it's really not even an OS. More like a frontend. I laugh every time I see a Linux user boot into that dreaded Windows they hate soo much just to play a game they way it should be played and not have to mess with a bunch of crap. "Oh I hate Windows. It's garbage" "Dude, wanna play a game of CoD? "Hold on *boots Windows*. Be right with ya"