Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Brings 36 New Features To Windows 7
Barence writes "Microsoft has unveiled a slew of new features that will appear in the Release Candidate of Windows 7 that didn't make an appearance in the beta. 'We've been quite busy for the past two months or so working through all the feedback we've received on Windows 7,' explains Steven Sinofsky, lead engineer for Windows 7 in his blog. A majority of these features are user interface tweaks, but they should add up to a much smoother Windows 7 experience." In separate news, Technologizer reports on Microsoft's contingency plan, should things not go well in EU antitrust, to slip Win7 to January.
.. how many of them are actually useful?
Do you D?
Let me know when security is one of those features.
Anyone who uses VPN knows the pain of accessing network shares. You go to the server you want, wait while Windows loads all the contents of the folder, click on a folder, wait until Windows loads all the contents of that folder, and so on.
It would be nice if it could let you select an item as it appears in the list, instead of having to wait for the whole folder to be enumerated. It would also be nice if it didn't lock up Explorer when the network is slow.
Beta is a test phase before rolling your RC and then retail. You don't add features that late in the game, you fix bugs. You fork features into the next release, service pack etc.
Oh, in OS X (at least Tiger), I hate this "needy" state of constantly jumping up and down like a student wanting to give an answer. It's usually an app wanting just to be clicked on like it needs attention with absolutely no reason for it. I know way too much of Vista also tends to be needy out of the box pestering you with bullshit. After a few flashes, why don't they just silently invert the colors on the icon or rectangle (or give it a halo or something) on the task bar so that it sits there quietly, STFU, stays still, and lets you get to it in your own time?
This is the daily Microsoft article on Slash Dot... But there's no negative spin! I'm dissapointed, all they had to do was stick in an 'only' and you've changed a positive story into a negative.
This is most troubling!
I'd vote for another "feature" to be removed even before DRM: activation. Granted, Activation is DRM but it's specific to Windows registration.
Why?
Activation has not deterred "piracy" (arrr!) in the least; if you visit any torrent site you will see many torrents of "activation cracked" Windows XP and Vista. When I reinstall Windows XP or Vista and need to install updates for testing client projects, I need to activate Windows; This requires a 20-minute call to the Activation hotline each time. This is even with the MSDN version, which allows for 10 concurrent installs on separate workstations (PER subscription - I have three subscriptions, which allows me 30 seats). I should never, ever have to call in to activate Windows for a distribution which is intended to be frequently reinstalled.
Every time I have to call Microsoft about anything, or any time they ever call me, I rip the rep a new one about the activation scheme. I refer them to the torrent sites and pointedly ask them why I should be penalized with this activation scheme when I paid literally THOUSANDS for Microsoft Windows while non-paying ("pirate") users don't encounter any inconvenience at all. I ask them why I should buy genuine Windows when the counterfeit is actually SUPERIOR to the "genuine" product.
I also drop the L-word every time they call me; it is a five-letter word which has Microsoft shaking in their boots. I inform them that Windows only hangs around for Quickbooks, Adobe's creative suite, and for Windows development projects, and that our servers and the workstations for day-to-day productivity run Linux. It's a better solution which requires less downtime (er, "scheduled maintenance windows" in Microsoft-speak - redefining "downtime" is how they boast less downtime in their marketing drivel), requires less resources, and maintenance can be fully automated - and administered remotely via a command line shell. In fact, I have scripts running in nagios to automatically correct many minor faults and warning conditions should they occur.
The reps are usually apologetic but does upper management have ANY clue?
We sell systems with Windows preinstalled - many to the DoD however I flatly refuse to become a Windows OEM. I'd rather pay $10 to $15 more to continue buying from the distributors I'm buying from because the OEM agreement is 100% one-sided. Why should I give Microsoft permission to enter my office at-will? They won't find license violations - they'd probably claim 'patent infringement' however since I run the F/OSS distros I don't have RedHat or Novell covering my back.
My mail server is currently scalix (probably going to switch to Openxchange soon since Scalix has stagnated with Xandros' buying them out - I needed a single support incident but they sell them only in blocks of five - forget Scalix! I dug in and fixed the problem myself, although it probably cost me more time than it was worth).
Microsoft really needs to consider long-term impact of how "anti-piracy" features devalue their products compared to the counterfeit options. and how IT personnel recommendations are going to affect adaptation of their future offerings. Hell, as it is Vista was as close to stillborn as a monopoly OS can get. People buy it only because Worst Buy, Circuit City, etc. did not offer a choice. I've had quite a few customers call me and ask if I can still get Windows XP (Yup! Sure can, and because I didn't ever sign the OEM agreement I can legally purchase OEM Windows and resell it without hardware, per first sale doctrine) and I've UP-graded (not downgraded) them from Vista to XP.
Having said that, I'm ordering a new notebook - either a Dell E6500 or M4400 (the Precision is tempting because of the workstation chipset and I'll still get decent runtime with the power slice!) and it's going to come with Vista Ultimate + Windows XP down^H^H^H^Hupgrade rights. It's more than enough to run Vista well (It should run even better than my desktop workstation runs Vista) but 300GB of the drive will be L
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
You are seriously trying to tell me that out of the many thousands of people who tested the Beta, these were the only real problems that they encountered that MS has bothered to fix for the RC?
I'm not a big fan of MS...but no. What they're seriously trying to get you to believe is that on top of the fixes that are going into the RC, they added a lot of simple fixes and posted about them to attempt to maintain buzz about their new OS.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
Nuff said.
Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
2. Windows Logo + keyboard shortcut
OK, I really don't understan this one. hasn't [alt]+ the shortcut worked before? Seems they had this way back in win95, didn't they?
No, this has NEVER worked right. I have so many shortcuts assigned hotkeys, like Ctrl+Alt+P for a command prompt, Ctrl+Alt+T for a terminal, Ctrl+Alt+N for notepad, etc. Only like 20% of the time does the key work, even in XP and Vista. The rest of the time, the entire Explorer freezes for 20-30 seconds. You can't click on the start menu, the task bar doesn't update, you can't get to Task Manager, etc. Alt-Tab works to go between already-open windows, but the taskbar doesn't redraw. Sit there and press Ctrl+Alt+N over and over, and wait and wait. Suddenly, 10 notepads will all open at once 20 seconds later and the system returns to normal.
I have ALWAYS had this problem, on Windows 98, SE, 2000, XP, and Vista. Lots of different computers, different hardware, and different fresh installs of the OS where everything else really works as expected.
Morphing Software
Wow, a mindless bitching fest. These aren't new features as in "hey look! New features!" These are direct responses to customer feedback.
Only if iTunes and friends is content with that. I have little doubt that installing any Apple apps for Win will still require an obnoxiously loud QuickTime install. At best, that installer might get a little smaller. It sounds to me like MS just rolled their own QuickTime Alternative.
There is also nothing on that list that a single person with access to the source code couldn't do in a handful of days, except possibly the last one.
Are you kidding me? Have you ever developed software? /incredulous
I have never seen Windows 7 source code, but we are talking about an *enormous* application...millions of lines of code. Even smaller applications can be very difficult to fix depending on the underlying implementation.
Your post reminds me of a quote by Abraham Lincoln: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
These aren't new "features", they're tweaks to existing features.
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
I was going to form a rebuttal along the lines of "no, surely not, say it isn't so" ... then I saw it was a "kdawson".
Amazing how a proper noun can become a derogatory adjective, I just love our language.
I'd really like to add him to my blocked editors list, but if I did that, there'd be nothing whatsoever to read on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.
"And you don't even address the issue of someone NOT having any of those programs that depend upon the insecure configuration."
If you're not having any of the programs that depend on the insecure configurations then you're probably not using windows, get back on your linux/mac box already. The market for windows is almost exclusively people that depend on those programs.
You do realize you're slightly compounding the problem by hitting your shortcut over and over again?
Seriously, this is the #1 annoyance for me when roaming in stupid user land... if you click something, and your computer slows down or freezes up... don't click it again until the first request resolves.
Really, it's common sense.
Maybe it's just because I've been playing/working with computers for so long, but if your system is temporarily resource-starved or road-blocked (for whatever reason, including a stupid OS), you shouldn't increase the demands on it.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
The activation only takes a few minutes over the phone. The rest of the time is spent complaining to the MS rep...
Seriously, this is the #1 annoyance for me when roaming in stupid user land... if you click something, and your computer slows down or freezes up... don't click it again until the first request resolves.
It doesn't help that Windows doesn't really give the user any feedback that they successfully double-clicked the icon. Mac OS X gives that feedback with an animation of the icon enlarging.
Seriously, this is the #1 annoyance for me when roaming in stupid user land... if you click something, and your computer slows down or freezes up... don't click it again until the first request resolves.
Your reaction is indicative for what is wrong in IT: when in the real world something does not work, you try it again and again, maybe even in different ways. That is normal behaviour for most people and most animals as well. It is in fact indicative of problem solving behaviour, also known as intelligence. Software should adjust to this normality, people should not have to adjust to the abnormality of computer software.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
Disclaimer: I have been using Vista for over a year. Despite it's flaws I do like like it. I would love to move to linux full time, but frankly the UI is still just not ready for primetime and I have to many needed apps that only run on Windows (and yes I know about and use wine, but there are still too many gaps).
For all it's faults, I have only one real killer complaint about windows - I want an operating system that defaults to not running as root WITHOUT having to jump through an enormous number of hoops and constant tweaking to get transparent usability!
Granted this is also partly the fault of lazy programmers who consistently refuse to use the file structure and permissions policies that MS has actually put in place. The problem is that it isn't the default config, MS enables these bad practices by not forcing the issue, and I should not have to be the one to tweak things around to get things properly secured.
Linux has always done this well. Apple finally managed to do it pretty well. All the right elements are in place somewhere in Windows, but they've left far too many loopholes available in the interest of "compatibility" for developers to simply be lazy.
Programs should not place user or config files in the Program Files directory... there is no good need.
ALL user and user config files should be in their proper user directory. The kludge of sticking them into a "virtualized" clone directory that is ridiculously buried in hidden folders is asinine.
The default should not be to an administrator account for new users... nor should you ever need such privileges just to run your software.
It's all there. Come on MS... get it together this time around.
Yeah, that is a good idea. But save it for when somebody comes with a way to differentiate "reading" from "idle".
Rethinking email
"What's more, in large open betas you often want people to test specific elements, so to force people to focus on those parts you make those features more prominent by not releasing other features."
wha? OK so Beta is the new alpha, got it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Insightful? You just repeated the list and added snide comments like "meh", and "bleh". You didn't even comment on some of the things you brought up.
"Meh... it doesn't sound like a killer feature to me."
Why does every feature have to be a killer feature? No one is claiming it is, it's just additional functionality to something already useful.
"OK, maybe I need more coffee, but I see apps, not documents, in the taskbar."
You can pin folders, applications, and files to the taskbar. Folders will be pinned in the explorer jump list, and files will be pinned in their respective application jump list. However, if you want to open that file in a program other than its default, you can now do that the same way you can when it's on the desktop or anywhere else.
"As the MegaTouch games you see in bars all run Linux, it looks like Windows may be catching up here as well."
And I've seen touch screen terminals running windows 98. Specialized touch screen applications have been around for ages. What Microsoft is doing is making it easy to integrate touch into general purpose computing. I use the new touch features on my Dell XT, and while there are no 7 multitouch drivers yet (out of beta) I can use the OS all day using my fingers, as long as I don't have to type a report or anything. I'm typing this with the on screen keyboard, and I don't feel hindered in any way. The multi touch shift will be great, and the right click gesture looks even better. I'd love to see Linux match this kind of usability.
It is not human nature, to repeat a failed action in the hopes that the results change...
As a matter of fact, it is. Maybe not for you and me, but we both read /., so we are not exactly the norm. Have you not seen people talking to or screaming at their computer? Things like "work, bloody @#%#$@#%!!!"? Repeatedly pressing the same button in anger?
And you speak of a different approach: most people do not know how to do a task on a computer any other way than what was shown to them. A computer is a big black box for them, and they now that if they do A, then B, then C normally X happens. You and me might try B' instead of B or even B'', but most people just have not got the faintest idea. We know what goes on inside a computer, most people don't; they simply copy behaviour.
This by the way, is what sets us apart from smart simians: we both mimic actions done by others if we see a desired effect, but we humans surprisingly enough are less criticizing when it comes to copying other's actions.
There is no reason that people can't learn to try a different approach with computers than they do when speaking with people.
Yes, there enough reason: computers do not understand us. Period. My mother can perfectly explain to me, even in different ways, what she wants her computer to do. But while working with her computer, she is simply at a loss because she should speak the computer's language insteaad of the computer understanding her language.
You say my view is what's wrong with IT...
I did no such thing. Reaction != view; indicative != is. I was merely reflecting on the fact that most of IT is (still) not intuitive enough. I cannot explain to my mother that on one occasion she should retry an action, while on other occasions she should simply wait.
I say catering to the LCD of users/people is what's wrong with society.
That is a broad statement, you may be right there, may be wrong as well. More intuitive software would certainly harm no one. Even very smart people are more happy when something is intuitive.
We're more and more a lazy stupid people, and I think it's attitudes like yours that enable it to continue.
Attitudes like mine? Aren't you being just a tad too generalizing here? Or drawing conclusions prematurely? And 500 years ago we were burning women because they had sex with the devil. 150 years ago scientists were determining people's character by reading lumps on their skulls. 50 years ago one could not be openly gay in western Europe. I think general stupidity is actually getting less, at least where I live (The Netherlands). And lazyness is part of the human psyche. If not for being lazy, we would not have invented all these things to do work for us.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
UAC isn't there to stop viruses. It's there to provide a disincentive to honest devs to stop assuming their software is being run by the administrator. Specifically, the software will either (a) not work or (b) prompt the user enough times to escalate privilege that they stop using it anyway.