Slashdot Mirror
20 Features Windows 7 Should Include
Damian Francis writes "Australian computer expert Vito Cassisi has come up with a list of 20 features that Windows 7 should have. The article includes features like modularized OS, new UAC, program caching, standards compliant browser and a whole lot more with explanations as to why these features should be included. With Windows Vista only receiving a luke-warm reception, Microsoft needs to make sure Windows 7 is a winner from the get go." What other features would you suggest to Microsoft if they are to have a hope for recovery?
Sadly what will happen is they will be slated for the final product and fail to make it in. I was really looking forward to Winfs. It design specs and features looked like a big benefit to Windows Vista. I'm still kinda bummed it was never included. :-/
If Vista is any measure, Windows 7 should not include marketing driven development.
How about multiple desktops?! Native...that don't suck!
While I'll go along with the one-version-to-rule-them-all idea, the most important thing?
Easy external backup, for everybody.
Apple has it right with time machine. No muss, no fuss, and I had only the tiniest of glitches when I restored onto a newer hard drive.
And if they don't do this, well, this needs to be a feature of Ubuntu. That'll gain them market share.
stored on computers from birth to the grave
Perhaps we should look at the reason why we switched to Macs or to Linux. Lack of innovation and high prices. If MS can make a secure product, that is innovative, and affordable, I might buy it, or at least not wipe my OEM install of it. The fact though is, I don't think that MS can innovate, which is really sad.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
A "Gaming Mode" to disable some services? When is the last time you said "Ah, crap, my error reporting service is making me lag?"
And Program Caching notice? The average user doesn't even know that Vista uses RAM. His suggestion would just confuse them more. We need fewer popup notifications, not more. Instead of cluttering the user's view, get stuff out of the way. Interfere less.
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
It's mind boggling that third party apps (Ultramon, Oscar) or drivers (Matrox, Nvidia) have had better dual monitor support for Windows since NT, yet Microsoft hasn't implemented any of their features. As far as I can see, nothing changed in regards to dual monitor features since Windows 2000.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
...a hope for recovery?
Isn't this a bit gloomy? I know it's cool 'round these parts to bash M$, but seriously, do we HONESTLY believe that Vista, even the flop that it is, is marking some sort of very likely demise for Windows? Isn't it much more likely, that, as with 98 ME for example, users will suffer through the pains of Vista and M$ will continue to be the majority OS by a large margin for several years?
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
A proper Windows Classic GUI, and MUCH lower system requirements than Vista. Dual-booting XP works fine for running games, and that's all I need Windows for. Make me want to upgrade, don't force me. They tried that with Vista but I got Halo 2 to run on XP anyways. Also try to make UAC less of a PITA.
The Colin Chapman theory of design applies here: "To add speed, add lightness."
Vista is a fatass riced-out American SUV with flat tires and the brakes stuck halfway on. Dump that POS and try again.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
... ...
They need to start thinking Windows needs not be a one size fits all approach. Why can I not install the most basic framework of the OS and DX in order to utilize all available resources of my rig?
What you are reffering to is called an Xbox 360. I'm not saying that it's right, but it seems like that is the direction MS is taking games in.
Do not read this
I read that article earlier today, and it is complete drivel.
One of the points is they want to do away with UAC and instead educate the users.
But otoh they complain that there is no status bar telling people that Vista is using their RAM for caching. So what do you want the users to be: Expert or novice?
And I'm all for educating users, but
a) it doesn't work if they don't care and
b) Microsoft got bashed for not protecting the users. UAC enforces the design guidelines that were not enforced up until now.
And it has to be 'productive' Fine. You tell them what 'productive' constitutes and they'll be happy enough to implement it. As it is, usability experts find it difficult enough.
Is 'the gimp' so much better?
And it has to be rewritten from scratch.
You can complain about the Shell all you want, but the Vista kernel is an engineering masterpiece, and there are some real design innovations in there. Read 'Windows Systems Internals, 4th edition' if you don't believe me.
Yes, windows has its problems, but the list in TFA is complete bollocks as far as I am concerned. It is just a bunch of easy catchphrases for getting support from the windows bashers and for getting hits on their page.
1. I want to be able to install an application without having to give it complete and unfettered access to every single aspect of my machine. As a long list of "reputable" companies (Sony, Intuit, Apple, every game engine, etc) have proven, I can't trust any of them. They all want to install rootkits, spyware, adware, whatever they can when I choose to install their app. I can't find out beforehand what they're going to install, I can't easily find out afterwards what they did install.
Give me a way to sandbox every single app. I don't care if that means that I can't install an app that hooks the keyboard, or the filesystem. I want my machine to continue to run!
2. Implement a "Snitch" mode for performance. Tell me why my computer takes 3 minutes to boot, and name names. Tell me why my computer takes 2 minutes to shut down, and name names.
These are OS-level improvements (not eye candy implemented in the windows manager) that would make my life easier. /frank
And the worms ate into his brain.
- NO drm shit to slow down the computer
...
- No bloating of the system with embedded browsers, players or other shit
- Modular structure that only installs or loads stuff that is absolutely necessary
- No 2342532523 different versions that only came to being due to shit from the marketing department
- No 'we could do it, but we wont give some features to old oses to force you to go up to 7' thing, like the dx10 flop in vista
- NO 'win 7 certified' logo on computers that cant run win 7.
- Less chair throwing
that should get you going
Read radical news here
Really though, the killer app of Linux is. Customization. For MS to get more marketshare, you need to be able to customize everything on it. From the kernel to the GUI.
I'm pretty sure they're willing to let the 0.01% of people who care about this sort of thing, slide.
2) UAC
3) DRM
4) excessive bloating
5) DRM
Innovation is messy... you invent a design idea and hope the masses like it. Sometimes the innovation is great and everyone loves it. Sometimes the innovation is awesome but it's not released soon enough so it never takes off and is eclipsed by a different technology. Sometimes the innovation is released too early and everyone hates it.
You don't want innovation from Microsoft. What you really want is a Windows 7 that is enough like XP that you know how to use it and most of your existing application still work, but includes the few features you've come to enjoy on Mac/Linux/BSD/etc. Please stop using the "innovation" buzzword.
Seriously, this is the root of many of Microsoft's problems. They need to stop bolting on poorly-designed "features" and work on reliability and functionality.
Honestly, if Microsoft made a solid, secure OS without all the "value-added enhancements" and profit-driven lock-in tactics, then public opinion of them would be much higher. I would be very happy to see them shift all OS business to their server-level products, because they really are significantly better than their consumer-level OSs. If they spun off their end-consumer products into another business, fine. Those people who like their bells and whistles can buy them, and those who just want a stable and secure platform would have it also.
Yes, I know, use and love Linux. But I also worked at Microsoft (Windows 2000 team,) and am proud of having worked on that OS. There are alot of good developers there, but they have no say in the management direction. While I was there, I saw ME in development, and couldn't believe that I was working at the same company. I was embarrassed for the team.
So, we'll see how Windows 7 turns out. MinWin is a great idea, and I hope (but don't at all believe) that the mentality behind it will influence the rest of Windows 7. But with Ballmer now completely unrestrained, I'm sure it will be trash. Things really went to crap there after he took the helm in 2000.
Features? It doesn't need new features, most people don't use the features it already has. What it needs is not to suck!
I think you nailed it. The article should be "20 features Windows 7 Should Remove."
20. Modularised OS
This example is silly. You can use different user interfaces by changing the desktop shell. Hell, there's a posix subsystem floating around there somewhere if you want to use it.
19. XP Virtual Machine
'Virtual Machine' is a big buzzword, but the truth is you're going to hit issues with drivers and this situation, and with software that does a lot of heinouss stuff on XP, and with games that hate running on VM, and no matter how much you'd like it to be the case, someone would be whining about how hard it is to sync files to and from the XP VM.
18. New UAC
The author's premise is wrong here; UAC is clearly about making sure new apps are authored for the standard user, old apps function the same for protected administrator as for standard user, and making the standard user a more viable option for people. Changing UAC significantly is a bad move for MSFT.
17. Gaming Mode
So you should reboot to play games? That's absurd. Services spend most of their time sleeping, and memory pages that aren't in use get paged out when the system is under pressure. I doubt you would see much room for an increase in perf with this 'gaming mode'.
16. Customised Install
This is probably fair. The 'advanced install' type options could give you choices like with XP. However, then you would need the DVD in order to add Windows features later. Currently, it does a full install, and just doesn't 'install' certain features that are sitting on the system waiting to be enabled. So, in a sense, you do already have that customizability - but it comes at the cost of disk space in order to be convenient. I'll stick with the option that doesn't force me to dig around for a Vista DVD to enable a webserver, though, thanks.
15. Productive GUI
GUI programming and fit and finish are TREMENDOUSLY hard. The author might as well ask for the moon in a picnic basket. He also fails to notice that Vista goes to great lengths to make the UI more accessible for the visually impaired, appease the people who like the XP feel (see the control panel options), and yes, for efficiency - see the 'search' widget at the bottom of the start menu. Explorer views are TREMENDOUSLY more featureful now than in XP, as are the search tools if you don't disable the search indexer.
14. All for One and One for All
Author says there should just be one SKU. I agree. Won't happen.
13. WinFS
The author blindly asserts the relational database would speed things up. There's a reason WinFS was canceled; to the math. Windows does need a new filesystem, but there's no need to throw out 40 years of filesystem traditions.
12. Home User Licensing
I agree, Microsoft should explore alternative licensing and pricing models. But it won't happen for Win7, I don't think.
11. Driver Availability
32-bit drivers mostly continue to work. Many services that had UI components are broken by session 0 isolation for services in Vista, requiring a rewrite - and that's a good thing. See 'Shatter attack'. As for 64-bit? Complain to vendors. 64-bit OS isn't that hard to write for. This is not MS's fault.
10. Standards Compliant Browser
Nobody has a standards compliant browser. Yes, there's the ACID test, but the test changes with time, raising the bar on browsers. More importantly, Javascript is a mess of a language. So long as it's around, the web is going to be a graveyard of usability and standardization. And the same goes for browser plugins.
9. Program Caching
Superfetch. It pre-loads stuff during the start of your process to improve start times. Most people don't even know this is occuring. Why bother them with a popup that would occur at LITERALLY, every process start, and offers no options?
8. Microsoft Toolbox
Sort of like a package management system for 3rd party software. Sounds grand. Maybe someday.
7. OS Restoration via imaging
System restore is QUICK and CHEAP, but it's not a backup. If you want to back up your system, BACK UP YOUR SYSTEM. Unless reimaging would wipe the
I think that Microsoft would do better to simply drop the DRM altogether, it is creating large amounts of customer confusion and frustration (even Joe Sixpack is starting to realize that DRM == BAD) and more than a little bad PR. Microsoft is in the Software business and their customer is the user and NOT the MAFIAA (the sooner they realize this the better). As for the bundling of software, Microsoft has been busted before for this behavior (although only the Europeans made the consequences stick, the Justice Department let them off the hook) and as long as they can continue to get away with it I don't see that changing and especially not with Ballmer firmly in charge going forward.
The problem with these recommendations is that they are formulated from the perspective of "What would make Windows a better operating system?" It's being thought of in terms of, what improvements are in the best interest of Windows users?
That's not how it works. Vista is a shining example of the fact that new features in Windows are designed to be in the best interest of Microsoft. Sometimes the interests of Microsoft and its users overlap (for example, an OS that doesn't crash quite as much will provide a better user experience, but it also saves Microsoft tech support dollars) but more often their interests are conflicting (end users were not asking for more DRM).
The bottom line is that operating systems are not killer apps. The job of an operating system is to provide a platform for the launching of applications. Do that and then get out of the way.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
They need to start thinking Windows needs not be a one size fits all approach.
Funny, I have more of a problem with the way in which Microsoft refuses to use a one-size-fits-all approach. How many different versions of Vista are there? How many of Windows 2003 Server? And it all feels like a scam to me, like they're hoping you'll buy the cheap version, realize that it's lacking some minor but important feature, and then be forced to upgrade to the Super-Ultimate version that's expensive because it has tons of features, most of which you'll never use.
How about the capability to lock my damn task tray and desktop? I really get annoyed with every little program loading some shit in to my task tray or dropping useless icons all over my desktop. It would be nice to have some way to say only these programs can be in task tray or these icons on the desktop only.
Maybe better program control is the answer. I really hate having to go into Program Files and disable the permissions on NMindex and the other shit nero installs and runs as a service with out my permission. Maybe in the task manager have an option to kill a program and add it to a list that will never be allowed to run again.
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
People laugh at this, but it was OS X moving to a Unix kernel that helped it really take off.
No, it was OSX moving to something that _wasn't_ MacOS Classic (there was even a while when building OS on top of Windows NT was considered by Apple).
Anyone remember the older versions of Apple's OSes? The inability to multitask? The complete lack of memory protection, causing every segfault to be a fatal error? Yeah.
Yes, and Windows suffers none of these problems.
And once they perfect this "safe mode for games" throw out everything that's turned off and release it as "Windows 7". I guarantee it will be the best selling OS in history.
The idea that you need a mode in Windows where it relinquishes enough resources to allow you to do what you want is completely insane. Windows is a means, not an end, and it needs to stop acting like it is the sole reason you have and use the computer. Microsoft needs to stop believing they own your computer, and that they can and should micromanage your use of that, but that will never happen. Unless they radically change their entire code base, their endevelopment process, their flagrantly deceptive marketing and arrogant and intolerant style of management, plus their all-consuming contempt for customers, Windows 7 or any other product Microsoft dares to foist upon an unwelcoming world is doomed to fail.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
I'd settle for being able to stretch/shrink a wallpaper image to the size of the desktop without messing up the aspect ratio. They had a team working 5 years on the Windows Vista shutdown menu, and couldn't find an intern to spend 1 afternoon making it so you can just slap an image on the desktop without it looking like crap.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.