Parmar: A fix for the bug(s) in Win10 1909 File Explorer is on the way

[woodyDa Boss]

While there have been bugs and complaints about the latest version of Win10, version 1909, the one that keeps coming back revolves around Search in Fi
[See the full post at: Parmar: A fix for the bug(s) in Win10 1909 File Explorer is on the way]

[anonymous]

With Win 10 1909, Microsoft made search in explorer.exe an utterly useless tool for admins and power users. Any sensitive data typed into the search box is sent to Big Brother Microsoft and if that’s not enough, the Enter key to fire up a search does not work anymore if http://www.bing.com is blocked in the local DNS. But yes, Microsoft is shipping nothing but spyware/demoware these days.

[abbodi86AskWoody_MVP]

Providing a choice to revert this new search is more worthy than fixing it

4 users thanked author for this post.

Perturbance, Alex5723, woody, PKCano

[woodyDa Boss]

How does the 1909 bug differ from the 1903 bug? (Or does it?)

[abbodi86AskWoody_MVP]

I’m not aware of the bug in 1903

basically, in 1909, the upper bar of File Explorer (address + seach box) no longer belong to Win32 platform, it’s hybird WinRT (UWP) feature divered from Settings app or Cortana

it’s half-baked, ugly, slow, and require some prerequisites to even semi-function (clipboard and other services, MsCtfMonitor task schedule)

by the way, there is a way to turn this feature off and restore old design, using 3rd part tool mach2.exe
but even with that, the system will restore the new bad feature shortly or after reboot

2 users thanked author for this post.

PKCano, woody

[joep517AskWoody MVP]

Sorry for the late response – out-of-town family in for the holidays. Anyway, if Microsoft has made a design decision to change File Explorer or any other component it is incumbent on them to make it performant. It is incumbent on us users to let them know in no uncertain terms when something is not performant. IMO, carrying old code forward and giving the users too much backward compatibility has caused quite a bit of the instability and performance issues we see. The Windows codebase continues to grow. As a developer, I can say with great assurance that the old code does not get tested and verified the longer it is around. It may not work well (or art all) with newer code and design concepts. I know that much of the backward compatibility is to avoid angering business users. In today’s environment of pervasive connectivity and security threats, I think it is unreasonable to expect hardware and/or software designed work with a ten year old operating system to be compatible and performant with a new operating system.

--Joe

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

IE item missing from Optional Features list.  Still missing after OS reinstallation today
using .iso file dated Dec 5.
Missing from anyone else’s Optional Features?

 

[jabeattyauditorAskWoody Lounger]

carpintero wrote:

IE item missing from Optional Features list.  Still missing after OS reinstallation today
using .iso file dated Dec 5.
Missing from anyone else’s Optional Features?

 

By “IE item” do you mean “Internet Explorer” as an Optional Feature?

If so, my 1909 install has it:

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

Thanks for the screenshot, because it gives me to clarify that I was referring to
the Optional Features list of Control Panel.

It also presents the opportunity to ask you whether your Settings does what it
purports to do for a given selected item (in this case IE),  namely to
– Uninstall (when applicable)
– Install (using button “Add a feature”).
I ask because my attempts to “Install” IE do not result in its installation,
which is corroborated by entry “Installation failed” in optional feature history.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.
• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[jabeattyauditorAskWoody Lounger]

I’ve not tried to uninstall IE using either approach, but I have installed other optional features using the Settings menu. I’ve also activated older versions of .NET using the Control Panel utility.

Accessing the relevant area from Control Panel shows me the same IE option:

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[KirstyDa Boss]

Your replies got caught in by the automatic spam filter, after you made a rapid edit, and then reposted. They have now been dealt with.
Please have a little patience to allow our moderators to do their magic 🙂

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

“Add a feature” in Settings fails every one, not just IE.
And thank you for the feedback about Control Panel.
We find that Optional Features in mine is mucked up in both dialogues.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.
• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[joep517AskWoody MVP]

Have you checked the log file at “C:\Windows\Logs\CBS\CBS.log” to see what the install error was?

--Joe

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

I hit the Install button at zero seconds on the clock:
We see that the installation operation wants to use Windows Update.

———————–
Absence of the item from Control Panel list remains mysterious.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.
• This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by  carpintero.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[carpinteroAskWoody Lounger]

Absence of the item from Control Panel list remains mysterious

A strong bet that it came about in this way :

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[Author]

Posts