Windows 7: The Missing Manual

r3lody writes "It took me a little while after Windows 7 became available before I gave up my Windows XP desktop and purchased a new laptop with Windows 7 Home Premium pre-loaded. Like those who endured the change to Windows Vista, I found myself floundering around a little trying to figure out all of the new bells and whistles Microsoft had added to its operating system. Windows 7: The Missing Manual by David Pogue is meant to address the needs of people like me. The book, while readable by beginners, is written for users with some acquaintance with Windows. Advanced users will find the book too simplistic, but users up to the intermediate level will find it a handy reference to the new features in all of the flavors of Windows 7." Keep reading for the rest of r3lody's review. Windows 7: The Missing Manual author David pogue pages 904 publisher Pogue Press rating 8/10 reviewer r3lody ISBN 0596806396 summary This book illuminates its subject with reader-friendly insight, plenty of wit, and hardnosed objectivity for beginners as well as veteran PC users. Writing for the multiple levels of Windows 7 is handled by including a little sub-heading "cheat sheet" after each major heading. Most will have "All Versions", but you may see a subset like "Home Premium ? Professional ? Enterprise ? Ultimate". Handling multiple levels of users is a little more difficult. The book is written for advanced beginners to intermediate users, but beginners to Windows have "Up to Speed" sidebars added to help them understand concepts regular Windows users already know. More advanced users have "Power User's Clinic" sidebars to provide additional information.

Windows 7: the missing manual is organized into 8 parts, comprising 27 chapters and 4 appendices.

After an introductory section describing the book's layout, Part One deals with the Windows 7 desktop. Comprised of 5 chapters, Part One gives the basics of manipulating windows, programs, and files. Chapter 1 describes the Start menu, jump lists (frequently used documents) and the Run command. Next comes Explorer, the Taskbar, and general window controls. Most of chapter 2 is devoted to the eye candy provided by Aero. The third chapter discussing searching and organizing files follows that, with a good discussion of the much-improved Windows Search. Chapter 4 covers personalization (wallpaper, color and sound themes, screensavers and desktop icons), and the last chapter of part 1 explains the ways you can get help (Microsoft's Help system, Remote Assistance, and getting help from Microsoft).

Part Two uses 3 chapters to cover Windows 7 Software. After talking about opening and closing programs, opening and closing documents, and dialog boxes, David Pogue explains how to install and uninstall software, as well as handling compatibility issues. Speech recognition and gadgets got thrown into this chapter, but seem a little out of place. The next chapter discusses various freebie applications supplied with Windows 7, and those available as part of Windows Live Essentials. Most of those are explained in sufficient detail to use, but a few are deferred to later chapters. This part is closed out with rather brief coverage of Control Panel.

The next 5 chapters comprise Part Three, which is devoted to Windows 7 Online. After chapter 9 explains how to get hooked up to the Internet, chapter 10 is dedicated to Internet security. Microsoft Security Essentials, the Action Center, as well as Windows Firewall and Windows Defender are all covered, along with methods of protecting your privacy while you surf. This all leads into the grand tour of Internet Explorer 8, which is talked about in detail in chapter 11. The last two chapters go over Windows Live Mail and Windows Live Services.

Part Four is the media-centric portion of the book. David broke the discussion into three broad chapters: Windows Live Photo Gallery, Windows Media Player, and Windows Media Center. Windows Live Photo Gallery is Microsoft's challenger to Google's Picasa. While Picasa is more mature, Photo Gallery is not shabby by any means, and chapter 14 gives excellent explanations on how to get the most from the program. The next chapter goes over Windows Media Player, which has been around for a long time. There have been some minor changes to it, including streaming media to other computers and handling of more types of audio and video files. Windows Media Center was originally designed for the Media Center Edition PC, but is now available for any version of Windows 7 from Home Premium on up. You get a lot of information on how to set it up and use it for all sorts of media. You'll also find out how to use your PC as a DVR (assuming you have a TV tuner card or USB tuner).

The next part is all about hardware and peripherals. First printing, then Windows Fax and Scan, and finally general device handling are each given their due. The third and final chapter of Part Five covers laptops, tablets, and touchscreen computers, and their special capabilities and limitations.

One thing all computer users need to handle are the inevitable problems. Part Six covers various maintenance and trouble-shooting topics across three chapters. First, general maintenance and speed tweaks, followed by an in-depth discussion of disks, compression and encryption, and finally a chapter on backup, restore and trouble-shooting. All have just enough information to be useful, and not too much to absorb.

The last main part covers networking and homegroups. Windows is the most useful when it's part of a network, and Part Seven explains how to connect it and use it. After discussing setting up accounts, workgroups and domains have their own chapters, so home and office users can focus on what they need. This part ends with chapters on sharing files and remote control (including VPNs and Remote Desktop).

There is a set of 4 appendices that comprise Part Eight. Included are how to install and upgrade to Windows 7, how to use Regedit, and my favorite two chapters – Where'd It Go?, and the Master Keyboard Shortcut List.

Overall, the book does assume you've at least seen a previous version of Windows, as a lot of text explains how Windows 7 is different. I personally would have preferred the author keep the focus on Windows 7 and less on the differences from prior versions. There are a lot of attempts at humor. On the plus side, it keeps the tone of this fairly large book accessible to the novice to intermediate user. On the minus side, the occasional joke usually seems out of place.

I found Windows 7: the missing manual a valuable reference to the many offerings in Microsoft's latest incarnation of Windows. While the writing style varies from simple reference to the occasional attempt at light-hearted guidance, it is a comprehensive, informative and (most importantly) useful manual of the ins and outs of using Windows 7 in all its flavors.

You can purchase Windows 7: The Missing Manual from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Comments

This is just what I need.

[soybean]

It will accompany my copy of "Windows 7, the missing operating system" nicely.

Re:This is just what I need.

[mcgrew]

Or my netbook's copy of "Windows 7 starter edition, most of which is missing" operating system.

It's a damned shame that books like this are needed. Too bad "help" is so fuXXored.

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it tell you how to solve the "700MB per 6 hours" speed limit win7 suffers when trying to copy files across a wireless network?

You're either making this up or you're an idiot who can't configure their wireless card right.

Re:This is just what I need.

[0123456]

Does it tell you how to solve the "700MB per 6 hours" speed limit win7 suffers when trying to copy files across a wireless network?

Probably because there isn't one. While the first thing I did after buying a Windows-7 laptop was to configure it to dual-boot into Linux for anything other than games, I've had no problems with wireless performance, including downloading tens of gigabytes of games from Steam.

That's not to say that you couldn't have a crappy driver or some misconfiguration, but there's no such fundamental limit in the OS.

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

It will accompany my copy of "Windows 7, the missing operating system" nicely.

Yes, in my waste basket

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

I convinced her to ditch windows for Linux

Now her wireless card doesn't work at all. Problem solved!


Strangely enough, I transfer large amounts of files wirelessly all the time at work on several Windows 7 machines. never seen the problem you are referring to. maybe it is your setup, and not Windows.

Re:This is just what I need.

[oakgrove]

Now her wireless card doesn't work at all. Problem solved!

I've seen plenty of hardware stop working after upgrading from one version of Windows to another. In the recent past, I've had a scanner and a graphics card that didn't have Windows 7 drivers and the lady just had me put XP back on the box.

Linux may not work with everything but, when it does, it tends to work very well and continue to work. The only real problems are with hardware that just flat has to be reverse engineered to even work at all. If the manufacturer won't make a driver and won't release the specs, what are you going to do? Imagine the reverse, what if hardware just wasn't released with a Windows driver? Is that Windows' or Microsoft's fault?

I'll sum this up with a couple of anecdotes. I have some hardware on my desktop that work much better under Linux. The USB720 wireless data card that I got from Verizon, for example, was a mess under Windows. 30 or more seconds to connect, shutting itself down after 2 hours or so requiring me to pull it out and reinsert it. Hideous and clunky software that came with it. On Ubuntu 10.04, it works flawlessly. Connects in less than 5 seconds, integrated perfectly with the network manager, never randomly shuts itself off. Also, my PVR350 USB TV tuner. Runs like crap in Windows, in Linux, it works perfectly. Very little CPU usage, no tearing, easy to record, etc. So, there really are 2 sides to the hardware Windows/Linux coin. than Windows.

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Linux help is so much better! I know!

Re:This is just what I need.

[jollyreaper]

It's a damned shame that books like this are needed. Too bad "help" is so fuXXored.

Video games build the tutorial into the game with speech, motion, graphics, the works. I never understood why this sort of thing isn't baked into productivity software or operating systems. I'm guessing it's not worth the effort when that sort of thing would just be another cost for the developers and customers who want that sort of thing are already paying money for someone else to write dead tree manuals.

Re:This is just what I need.

[ColdWetDog]

Clippy. We're still traumatized by it. No one will try anything remotely like that until the current generation of computer users dies off.

Re:This is just what I need.

[AndGodSed]

Coming from an avid Linux advocate I agree, Linux "help files" are sorely lacking. I submit though that "Linux Help" is much more available than what you might think.

There are also tons of free publications out there of high quality i.e.: Full Circle Mag (Ubuntu Centric) http://fullcirclemagazine.org/ ; PCLinuxOS has their own magazine http://pclosmag.com/ ; there is the Ubuntu Pocket Guide if you are so inclined www.ubuntupocketguide.com/

If you dig a bit you will get the Ubuntu user guide and a google search returns any of a number of hits for Linux user guides.

Here is a wiki based Ubuntu user guide as well: http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Lucid

The problem was historically that these guides were written by geeks, hence not very end user friendly in language use and approach. Only recently did people with a talent for writing understandable and idiot proof documents and books get enough exposure and interest in Linux to produce handy and well written guides.

Linux help is doing a lot better than only a few years ago.

Re:This is just what I need.

[mcgrew]

What I'm referring to is how its help is little to no help at all; basics are covered, and nothing else. Although MS is by no means the only offender, there's an old joke:

A helicopter's lost in a heavy fog, and they spot a building. The passenger writes in the copter's window "where are we?"

The building occupants write "in a helicopter."

"Oh, that's Microsoft HQ" says the pilot and uses instruments to head to the airport. The passenger says "how could you tell?"

The pilot said "the information was technically correct, but useless."

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

People are scared to even call that accursed paperclip by its proper name, for fear that it may return.

Re:This is just what I need.

[jabelli]

It "just works" with Win 7 for me. You're doing something wrong. It's not Windows' fault. Acer AO751h, Windows 7 Pro. This is an Atom Z520 with 2 Gib of RAM and the WLAN adapter is an Atheros AR5007EG. I routinely copy multiple GiB to my desktop system when backing up the data partition, and it does not take 24 hours to copy two and a half gigs across the aether.

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a much better version:

A guy is lost, floating in a hot air balloon. He sees someone on the ground and yells out, "hey, do you know where I am?"

The man on the ground responds, "yes, you're about 40 feet off the ground, riding a hot air balloon."

The ballooner responds, "you must be in IT."

"Why yes, I am. How did you know?"

"Well, the information you gave me is technically correct, but useless, and now I'm lost in a hot air balloon."

The man on the ground says, "oh, that's too bad. You must be in management."

"I am, but what makes you say that?"

"You're lost and floating aimlessly in a hot air balloon. You came to me looking for help and I gave you what information I could. You're now in the same position you were before, but now it's my fault."

Re:This is just what I need.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have also encountered similar driver results. I think the key is that in Linux, most drivers (except nvidia's blob) include the source code. Even if the company goes under, the driver can be maintained. A few years back, a common problem with Vista 64 bit was that there weren't enough 64 bit drivers. It wasn't possible to fix and recompile WDM drivers because they didn't come with source code. Microsoft has done a good job pushing driver developers towards 64 bit but it has to be done by the hardware company and they often don't care.

Even though I know nothing of Linux driver development, I was able to modify the driver for my video capture device. I included a patch from another developer and increased some buffer sizes and it made a big difference. Regardless of the operating system, open-source (and preferably free software) drivers are a must.

Re:This is just what I need.

[CronoCloud]

Clippit...there I said he name....now his fellow Help Assistant Death Eaters will find me: "I see you are composing a Slashdot post, do you need some help with that."

Noooooo.

Re:This is just what I need.

[the_womble]

maybe it is your setup, and not Windows.

Very likely it is, but most people would much rather use an OS that "just works" rather than spend hours or days configuring one that does not.

It's not...

[Das Auge]

Windows 7's slogan: It's not Vista!

Jokes aside, I'm pleased with Windows 7. Granted, I only use it for games (I dual-boot Ubuntu and Windows 7).

not to be an asshole...

[Skarecrow77]

but windows just isn't that hard to use.

Maybe if you're from a 3rd world country and this is your first exposure to a microsoft product, I'd understand... or maybe if it was 1996 and you're finally purchasing your first PC, but I don't think there are too many people left in developed countries who've reached adulthood who have escaped using some version of windows at least occasionally.

And if there is anybody who has somehow managed to do the task of never having worked with windows... I doubt it going looking for a book to learn it.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Em Emalb]

Agreed, it isn't hard to use at all for anyone with any real exposure to the OS.

But...if you really want to UNDERSTAND why things are the way they are, then manuals like these are very good for the noob to intermediate level person.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[hairyfeet]

I have to agree, if anything Windows 7 is easier than any MSFT OS that came before it. My dad is 67 and completely clueless about PCs, but after giving him the Win7 Beta to try out he had me go and get him the family pack on release date, because according to him it was the first time he had seen Windows "make sense" to him. With the built in tutorials, the easy to use search, it didn't take him anytime at all to find his way around the OS and now he uses more features than he ever did on XP.

While Vista was crap, and XP took until SP2 to get really usable, I think MSFT may have actually gotten one right with W7. It is easy enough for my dad to use, and for me it just gets out of my way and lets me do what I want. So I don't really see who would need this book, as power users will have no problem figuring w7 out and those like my dad can just follow the handy help tutorials.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[amicusNYCL]

Not only that, but books like this are good for pointing out useful things that otherwise would be hard to find out about just from using it. The Windows-key shortcuts are a good example, I don't know how many years I was using XP before I found out about various shortcuts that could save me several seconds of using the mouse.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[dingen]

Even in 1996 I saw books such as these and wondered who would buy them. I understand why people buy books about operating systems or applications that lack a GUI, or books about development or other non-obvious things you can't figure out by simply trying. But this is so extremely basic and obvious, I really can't imagine the intended audience. They talk about people having a "intermediate skill level", but I also can't really figure out what that means. What sort of stuff can't these people figure out and how does a book like this help them?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[dingen]

But you don't need a book to learn the keyboard shortcuts of your operating system. Not only are they probably explained in the user interface, they're also listed in the manual that came with the OS and placed in the support section on the developer's website. Who doesn't check out these sort of sources before they go out and purchase a book?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[CAIMLAS]

I've heard this several times from tech friends who 'support' clueless users in one way or another: the common user is actually getting significantly more use out of W7 than they did with 8 years of XP. They're frequently saying "ah, I always wondered how to do that!"

Ironically, from what I've heard, one of the biggest boons allowing this to happen is the contextual run/search bar. People find out what it can do and they use it - for everything. Sure, it's similar to Spotlight and Beagle and a dozen other things that came before it - so what? It works, and the way it's built into the system, it works well. (The irony comes from the fact that the 'click-it-it's-easy-to-use Windows GUI' gets actual functionality from a CLI interface that invariably leads to increased productivity.)

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Skarecrow77]

That's not even to mention that there are a thousand and one "windows tips and tricks!" websites out there to tell you things.

Now, I had a "dos for dummies" book, and I found certain things highly helpful... but that was also 1992. Things were a bit different then.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not an asshole. (Well not for this.) What you're missing is W7 is used by a lot of people who aren't much interested in learning about the OS, and /. is populated by people who are the friend/relative who gets asked the computer questions.

I've just been one of each for two who've got nice new machines with W7. And you know what? I don't know shit about where things are in Windows menus these days, and don't much care to find out. So I insisted both buy Chris Fehily's Windows 7 Visual QuickStart Guide .

Maybe The Missing Manual is just as good. I simply went to the book store and browsed the titles and liked Fehily's book. It's well written, thorough, and has just the right sort of depth to be the desk reference for these folks. Thank you /. for including a review of Missing Manual to spotlight another.

----
Obligatory reply to Why Not Ubuntu?: Did that. Both got fed up with dual booting to XP to do things like run apps that aren't available on Ubuntu, and do basics like clean the printer heads and find out how much ink is left. Or print duplex. At least they listened to me insisting that Vista must be avoided, and waited for W7 before getting a new computer that does everything they want again.

And yeah, they miss some things about Ubuntu. They didn't hate it at all. Just on the balance the compromises were in favour of Win in their own situations. When W7 corks up with malware like their XPs did, they'll be quicker to switch to Ubuntu again. They definitely respect it now as 'pretty good'.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[noncaptusest]

I mostly agree to this. Assuming the target group for this title, I think the most useful part will be the security chapter. At least make users of this level a bit more conscious about safeguards that need to be in place to run a healthy system.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Delusion_]

I haven't switched to Win7 yet, but the computer I've barely started buying parts for will have it. The context menu impressed me from the standpoint of lowering the barrier to accomplishing frequently used tasks. The fact that the taskbar defaults to unlabeled icons, however, I find bizarre, and I'm sure I'll change that the first day. I find it as bizarre as XP's default of hiding the status bar from the user in Windows Explorer. The Win7 Windows Explorer I find utterly godawful, but that won't affect me, as I'm a total DirectoryOpus fanboy.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[amicusNYCL]

But you don't need a book to learn the keyboard shortcuts of your operating system.

Like I pointed out, it was just an example. I'm sure that Windows 7 includes several new tools and utilities that one wouldn't run across with normal usage, but would still be helpful to know about.

Not only are they probably explained in the user interface

Not that I'm aware of, I don't know where I would see a tooltip to indicate that I can press Windows-E to open Explorer, or Windows-R to open the Run dialog, or Windows-M to minimize/restore all applications.

they're also listed in the manual that came with the OS and placed in the support section on the developer's website

Like most other users, I assume, I only check the manual or support website when I'm having a problem. I don't normally peruse those to look for useful tips I don't already know about if I'm not having any other problems using the software.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[dingen]

I totally understand you don't look in manuals or support documents when you're not having problems. I guess that's true for most people. But what I don't understand, is that you would spend your money on a book such as this, instead of just looking for exactly the same information available from botht the supplier or your software, or various other sources on the web.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Medieval]

People who have shit to do.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, from what I've heard, one of the biggest boons allowing this to happen is the contextual run/search bar. People find out what it can do and they use it - for everything.

Problem is, even those of us who know what we're doing have to use it, since half the stuff that used to be in the Control Panel is now hidden under submenus that can only be accessed from within Control Panel applets.

Fucking annoying.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[dingen]

In what sort of world do you live if buying a book from a store is less of a hassle than finding out about this stuff online?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[pongo000]

I have to agree, if anything Windows 7 is easier than any MSFT OS that came before it.

Not networking. That high-level "helper" interface they've interposed between the user and the network details? It's meaningless...I still haven't figured out why I would want to make an interface "public" or "private." Not to mention it now takes 3 or 4 properly placed mouse clicks to get to the network setup dialog. I'm sure there's a direct route, but if there is, I've yet to find it.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[DudemanX]

While Vista was crap, and XP took until SP2 to get really usable

The "Vista is crap" mentality that still pervades is rather baffling to me. Especially in the context of interface and ease of use. Vista is just as easy to use as Win7. The only real interface difference is the updated taskbar to be more like the dock. The "start" menu, control panel, and keyboard shortcuts are all basically the same as Vista. To say one is crap while another is near perfection seems rather silly and ignorant.

As for XP, other than the security center, firewall, and wireless interfaces there were no major interface changes between release and SP2. I fail to see how the release version was so hard to use compared to SP2.

If you want to talk speed, stability, and security then your observations become more valid though not to the degree to which you imply. In the context of ease of use(as being discussed here) I think that you are way off base.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[bakawolf]

I'd wondered if that bothered anyone else but me.
As far as setting interfaces? you basically get 2 options that mean "Do not work properly", and one proper option.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[ashridah]

You get used to the text-less icons pretty quickly. Particularly since most of the modern apps use high-resolution icons and are quite visible at the default icon size. Visually the Word, Explorer, IE/Chrome/Firefox buttons are all immediately identifiable, in a way that text just isn't.

Also, since you can order the buttons, and pin them, you essentially get Win-1 through Win-9 or so to launch/access them. Adding shift to make it Shift-Win-1 will launch a new copy. Alt-Win-1 launches the context menu. It becomes far more quick to use, and can become muscle memory reasonably quickly.
Beats the pants off the quick-launch bar that any app could poison with its own icons during install for. That kind of stuff used to piss me off.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[ashridah]

They're firewall rules.
At home, i use "Home", and my homegroup stuff is immediately visible. At work, it gets automatically assigned "Work/Domain" by group policy. At a wifi hotspot, i use "Public" and none of my filesharing stuff is visible. Works great on a laptop. Less useful on a desktop, of course, but then you only have to click "Home" once and things tend to just work.

Out of Curiosity, what kind of "Network Setup" are we talking? IP/DNS assignment? Or something else? I could see you needing to select wireless settings if you're on the go, and that can get a little annoying, but any other scenario is pretty automagic if you have a NATing router/gateway in your home (which is by far the easiest to use scenario)
Setting IPs manually is definitely more of a pain, but who wants to regularly use a network where they have to actually do that kind of thing? I certainly don't. I deliberately run bind/dhcpd on a gateway to specifically avoid it, and anyone who's just turned on their consumer-grade router has the exact same thing. This isn't Win9x we're talking about here :)

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

Not only that, but books like this are good for pointing out useful things that otherwise would be hard to find out about just from using it.

Hence the "Missing Manual" part of the title. Pogue has made a career off of this technique. I, for one, am a fan.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

You say that because you are experienced in setting up a network in WinOS. For somebody who has never configured their cable modem and wireless router, this sort of interface is better. It's still not as good as the OSX network setup "wizard" (shudder...I hate that term, based on how bad MS wizards have been in the past), but it is far better than anything they've tried in the past with new users and networking.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[rueger]

At least with OSX it tells you exactly which keys are used for the shortcut right in the menu

Hate to break it to you, but MS products have done the same thing for ages. Except the menuless "ribbon" in Office, which uses tooltips instead.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[amliebsch]

Your complaints are invalid and stem entirely from your unwillingness to make the slightest effort to understand how the system works.

In most Windows programs with a menu bar, there are two ways to use keyboard commands. One way uses CTRL as a modifier and does not involve the menus at all, though they are discoverable through the menu by using the tooltips. E.g., CTRL+S to save, CTRL+O to open. If you don't know or can't be bothered to remember these keyboard commands, you can alternately navigate the menu system by pressing the ALT key. Pressing ALT underlines the letters in the menu options to press to activate that menu option, so if you can't remember CTRL+O to open a file, you can press ALT, then F to activate the file menu, then O to select the open option. And incidentally, the CTRL keys are unchanged in Office 2007, the tool tips still tell you the CTRL keys, and pressing ALT still causes key commands to appear on the ribbon options, so if you've ever used keyboard shortcuts in office ever, they still work basically the same way.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[idontgno]

I wouldn't mind the UI element if it wouldn't (A) interfere with network function in the first 30 or so seconds after bootup, and (B) reliably detect the wired network the machine is connected to. As in, detect the LAN as something besides "Unidentified Network". The damn network was identified once, but now it's Terra Incognita and therefore must be a public untrusted evil network.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

No, you aren't "breaking" anything to me. The inconsistency in the Windows environment is well-known. One app will have "Ctrl + S" in the menu, yet another will use an underlined letter in a word under a menu list without listing the modifier key.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[drsmithy]

Wait, what? I didn't get a manual with Win7 (came bundled with my computer).

Start ->Help.

Windows keyboard shortcuts are an abomination, mostly because they are not defined anywhere, or they aren't very logical. Alt+F4? Huh? What's wrong with something like Alt+Q for quit?

Alt+F4 is a hangover from Windows _3.1_ (more accurately, OS/2). It still works in modern Windows, for legacy reasons, but it's not the "standard".

At least that way a user can GUESS what a shortcut might be. But then you run into the problem of which modifier key? How do I know? How do I get to the underlined O under the File menu to "Open" something. How is CTRL+F + CTRL+O better than a simple and consistent modifier key + O to open a file?

All of this is explained in the help. Or, quite reasonably, assumed knowledge given that it's been consistent for 15+ years now.

At least with OSX it tells you exactly which keys are used for the shortcut right in the menu, and you don't have to do four keystrokes to get to one nested option.

Not all OSX shortcuts are in the menus, and having to do four nested keystrokes to get to an arbitrary menu item is still leagues ahead of not having a keyboard shortcut at all (since OSX's keyboard accessibility is so primitive).

Also, the new Microsoft Office software doesn't even have menus, so looking in the menu for the shortcut key doesn't work anymore either. I have NO idea how to find the shortcuts now.

They're in the tooltips.

In short, pretty much your whole rant can be boiled down to "I have made no attempt to learn or understand the system, and therefore it sucks".

Re:not to be an asshole...

[drsmithy]

The "Vista is crap" mentality that still pervades is rather baffling to me.

What's more entertaining is the people who rail on Vista being crap, praise Windows 7 for being "best evar", then turn around and call Windows 7 "Vista SP1".

There's some pretty serious mental gymnastics going on there. :)

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

Your complaints are invalid and stem entirely from your unwillingness to make the slightest effort to understand how the system works.

No they are not. I'm a tech writer and the Microsoft tech writing manual is my lifeline. I know how the stuff is SUPPOSED to work. It is not for lack of effort on my part that the WinOS keyshortcuts are horribly documented and not intuitive.

One way uses CTRL as a modifier and does not involve the menus at all, though they are discoverable through the menu by using the tooltips.

I no longer have old Office versions so I can't verify, but I don't remember a tooltip for Office 2003. Keyboard shortcuts are defined nicely in 2007, but unless you KNOW to hover and wait, you might never discover this feature.

E.g., CTRL+S to save, CTRL+O to open. If you don't know or can't be bothered to remember these keyboard commands, you can alternately navigate the menu system by pressing the ALT key.

And therein lies the problem..multiple ways to do the same thing using two different modifier keys, neither of which are clearly marked. Making it worse is the ALT method exists only to keep dragging along legacy code.

And incidentally, the CTRL keys are unchanged in Office 2007, the tool tips still tell you the CTRL keys, and pressing ALT still causes key commands to appear on the ribbon options, so if you've ever used keyboard shortcuts in office ever, they still work basically the same way.

And that is still WAAAAY to many ways to do the same thing.

Caveat: I didn't know about the alt key in 2007. Very helpful indeed. It works better with a ribbon than a menu hiearchy. Works more like Photoshop key shortcuts (pick a letter for the tool you want, for example).

So how was I supposed to know about the ALT function? Certainly there is no "unwillingness" on my part, nor have a not spent any effort trying to learn these things, yet I still didn't know. And I do this stuff for a living. How does my clueless mother-in-law supposed to know?

As helpful as your post turned out to be, it still nicely demonstrates how cumbersome the Microsoft keyshortcuts really are.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

I certainly don't. I deliberately run bind/dhcpd on a gateway to specifically avoid it, and anyone who's just turned on their consumer-grade router has the exact same thing.

and when dhcpd gets it's knickers in a twist and fails to start up after a reboot of the head-less server that's doing your routing...?

then you have to scratch your head for ten minutes trying to find where to type a temporary static ip in so you can get a connection to your ssh server.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be an idiot.

Any professional who consults, or travels (academics, for example), will visit forgeign networks very regularly. I see a new one nearly each week, and they rarely use DHCP. I rock up with my laptop and we always start our day with, find the IT guy, get him to assign me an IP, get patched into the network, and then change the damn network settings in windows.

So yes, this affects people and has been perpetually difficult to change on Windows. The good question is, why?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

I would assume (having never read a Windows-related book) that it has to do with density of information.

For instance, I can search the web for a particular programming design pattern. If I want to learn about C++ templates, I can search for individual techniques like CRTP.

But then I am liable to miss a lot of important information. It requires me to know exactly what I am looking for. I might not ever learn about FSMs, Pimpls, or static polymorphism.

A lot of these 'tip' based websites suffer the same problem. They address a single topic, and miss everything else. i.e., you won't ever find the amount of programming material online in one place as you will find in a single decent book.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. Anyone confused about public/home(private)/work(domain?) should run wf.msc. This is how Windows figures out which of the several hundred default inbound&outbound rules to apply on connections.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't exaggerate here. While locating the connection settings may be a little harder than it should be, it still isn't hard. Go to Network Sharing Center -> Change Adapter Settings.

In fact, the only reason you find this difficult is precisely because you were used to Windows XP.

As for how it affects people. It doesn't. Regular people couldn't change an IP in XP either. And those who could, won't find it hard in Windows 7.

Btw, if you do this so often, and you find it such a big issue, you'd think you would have created a desktop shortcut to the network interface device.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you come up with a real-world problem that affects people not basement-nerds and that warrants an interface redesign?

If you already relearned how to do it once, then what's the big deal? It won't happen again, so why complain about it?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Chris Mattern]

Setting IPs manually is definitely more of a pain, but who wants to regularly use a network where they have to actually do that kind of thing?

I do. And so does anybody else who needs their Windows box to accept outside connections.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[dave420]

If a letter is underlined, you can press that letter without any modifier to select it. That is making applications keyboard-friendly, something completely different to actual hot-keys.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[QuietObserver]

Agreed. I also hate how Windows Vista and Windows 7 renamed things for no apparent reason; there should be a direct link to "Network Connections"/"Change Adapter Settings" in the control panel window, not buried in the "Network and Sharing Center", and I can't for the life of me figure out why they changed the name in the first place; "Network Connections" makes so much more sense, in my opinion. Needless to say, I love the way Apple's Network settings are presented in the GUI; a few clicks (with a sudo prompt), and I can literally adjust to any common situation, including setting a Static IP.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

So I've discovered....15 years late evidently.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is twice as hard as configuring both wireless and wired network connections using wicd on a Linux machine. I can configure network connections on a Linux machine in less than half the time it takes to configure a Windows machine.

It's one mouse click to open the client, one to select a visible network, wired or wireless, and one mouse click to reach all configuration options for any available network. If the chosen wireless network uses dhcp it's only one checkbox for encryption, if used, a dropdown list to choose 1 of 10 options for type of encryption scheme, and then entering the key. That's done all on one screen. If it's a static ip address it involves one more checkbox and entering the required data.

This has been available in Linux for about a couple of years and it's dead simple. Even a Windows user could figure it out.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[perryizgr8]

multiple ways to do the same thing is not bad. its good. it lets the user choose. its the basic philosophy behind linux (it seems to me). only apple retards like you can turn this feature into a demonstration of microsoft's failing. when on the contrary this is one of the few things ms has done correctly. one more thing that ms has done correctly is to ward of fanbois like you.
just read your posts again. your mind simply cannot fathom that something can be done in more than one way.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[perryizgr8]

i haven't been using win7 regularly but i used it for about half an hour on my friend's laptop. the taskbar is simply horrid. i download a file in firefox, and the downloads windows opens. i click on the firefox main window and keep surfing. after a while a notification tells me that all files have been downloaded. so now i move the cursor to the firefox icon, wait. wait some more. now i get two identical sized windows above the taskbar. i squint, trying to see which one is the downloads and not the main. finally, i hover over what seems to be the downloads window. wait. wait. wait. oh yes, its in the front now. happy and delighted i move my cursor quickly back from the taskbar. but guess what, its gone!!!
this sort of utter crap can be sold only by ms.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure you're right about KDE/Gnome being much simpler. XP was simpler, without a doubt. And 95/98 simpler still (if I recall right).

But I know for a fact that nearly all the populace, after having been told to enter a static IP or toggle DHCP, would look at you like you just asked them to repeat a magic incantation.

It's futile trying to get these people to learn about networking concepts. Thus the responsible action is to simplify the interface as much as humanly possible, while keeping it functional for those still more capable.

And I would posit that Windows 7 failed a bit in that last regard. There should be a link in Control Panel to navigate to Network&Sharing Center, thereby avoiding Network&Internet entirely (it's almost useless).

But it can be done, with some manual work. You can create a shortcut to Network&Sharing by right-clicking on it. You can type it into the menu search. You can right-click on the adapter notification icon to go there.

So, ultimately, I guess it comes down to being a mild annoyance.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[ashridah]

Uh. Not me? Static assignment via DHCP. Not all routers support that kind of thing, but many certainly do.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[ashridah]

Maybe you should have tried clicking on the icon and the popup instead? Why did you wait? :P

Re:not to be an asshole...

[adamdoyle]

if you really want to UNDERSTAND why things are the way they are, then manuals like these are very good...

That's what Windows Internals, by Mark Russinovich, is for...

Re:not to be an asshole...

[hairyfeet]

Want to know why I hated Vista? Okay here goes: Oh Vista how I hated thee, let me count the ways: Networking-My network shares would "disappear" several times a day, and the only fix? A reboot, yeah because I missed rebooting often like Win9X, thanks Vista. Networking- try listening to music or watching vids while a file downloaded? Watch as the file slooooows down. I had that with SP1 as well. Thanks Vista!

Performance-Sloooow, god damn that thing could suck the life right out of a PC! Now my PC at the time wasn't a monster, but it was no slouch for 07, P4 3.6Ghz with HT, 2Gb of RAM, 7600GS, but with Vista it felt like running Win9x on a 486, thanks Vista! Performance-WTF is with the thrashing? Damned thing thrashed a new 200Gb drive to death! I tried every damned tweak on the Internet, never could get Vista to quit pounding the drive like a pimp pounding his whore. Thanks Vista!

I could go on all damned day with Vista crap. I also saw more BSODs from Vista than I EVER saw from XP. Now I don't know what they did to Windows 7, I frankly don't care. Folks can call it "Vista Sp3" all they want, but those of us who suffered through Vista know better. Windows 7 works and Vista...well let's just say I gave away my Vista disc and last I heard its still being passed around like a bad fruitcake. With Windows 7 there is NO thrashing, NO BSODs, NO networking trouble or problems with shares, NO dragging ass and feeling like my PC is running backwards, it all "just works". And in the end it is all I care about, it "just works".

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Gadget_Guy]

No they are not. I'm a tech writer and the Microsoft tech writing manual is my lifeline. I know how the stuff is SUPPOSED to work. It is not for lack of effort on my part that the WinOS keyshortcuts are horribly documented and not intuitive.

It is true that in the old days we used to get manuals with our software. I recall we got multiple volumes of manuals for old versions of Office. However, it doesn't take too much effort to find this information. I managed to quickly find many articles on keyboard shortcuts using google, and there is a good introduction in the Help of Windows 7.

To find what you need to know in the Windows help, just open the Start menu, and choose "Help and Support" (it should be the last option on the right hand side). On the first page of the help, there is an link to "Learn about Windows Basics". It is probably worth your while to read through these articles, but the most interesting one for now is called "Using your keyboard" which tells you all about the various keyboard shortcuts, how to discover them in each program, what the keyboard modifiers are (Ctrl, Alt and Windows keys).

Unlike the Mac, when Windows first came out the mouse was optional. This means it has a tradition of providing keyboard access to every single function so there are a variety of ways of using the keyboard. You complaint of two different systems of keyboard shortcuts is not strictly correct, because the Alt key is more about keyboard access to something that would require a mouse. So it is an accessibility method rather than a shortcut.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Visually the Word, Explorer, IE/Chrome/Firefox buttons are all immediately identifiable, in a way that text just isn't."

W, E, I, C, F.
I wonder what those 1 letter commands could do.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[ajlisows]

It wasn't so much that there was anything wrong with Vista's interface, it was just hard to keep Vista on the machine long enough to get used to it. I myself tried using Vista on two computers and had to deal with it crashing several times a day at times. It had some stability issues. It is hard to embrace an OS that is just going to shut down randomly.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Nyxeh]

"Caveat: I didn't know about the alt key in 2007." What sort of moron are you that you claim to be a tech writer yet never once, even accidentally, pressed the 'alt' key in Windows. It takes a whole special sort of stupid to be that ignorant for that long on even the most basic features of Windows. I suppose all this irritation is because you never saw the mouse sitting beside the keyboard until 2005 so you were using the keyboard only until this point, yes? *facepalm*

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

Well I'll dismiss your inaccurate insults and address the issue. You need to read a book--the Design of Everyday Things, for starters--and then you'll understand my interest in UI design. It has nothing to do with Mac vs. PC or Linux.

Multiple ways to do things are great, except when one of those ways is there just to drag along legacy code and the other is not easy to figure out (look at the other posts...you guys post entire paragraphs defending how easy it is to navigate with windows...you prove my point for me).

My perceived fanboiism does not stem from preferring one OS over another (for the recored, I like Win7 the best right now). It stems from my interest in making UIs that people can figure out without having to press F1 for help (because I'm a tech writer and write help documents, I despise the notion of having to read a document for help for something that should be obvious or easy to figure out with trial and error).

And thankfully, I haven't been warded off by Microsoft, since I make a very nice salary because of Microsoft.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

Thank you for your valid points.

With Win7, my entire rant against Microsoft becomes invalid, since they've addressed nearly every thing I've mentioned. I figure in a few years weird keyboard shortcuts and navigation will be a thing of the past in most third party software as well.

I now have Win7 and Office 2007, and frankly don't get the outrage against these products. I think it is because they DID address the issues I was talking about and so many of the die hard windows guys don't like change.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[stewbacca]

Uh, reading comprehension? I didn't realize the ALT key brought up key shortcuts in Office 2007. It takes a "special sort of stupid" to think I wouldn't know where the alt key resides on the keyboard. Keep facepalming yourself...maybe you won't stop long enough to post reactionary posts.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

While locating the connection settings may be a little harder than it should be, it still isn't hard. Go to Network Sharing Center -> Change Adapter Settings. In fact, the only reason you find this difficult is precisely because you were used to Windows XP.

Huh?

What if I have no interest in "sharing"? What if I just want to configure, you know, a network adapter? Filesharing (whether it be P2P or SAMBA or just running an FTP server) is an application-layer problem, not a network-layer problem. If I can't get an IP address, I'm not even thinking about what data I want to send/to from it!

The only UI design principle I've been able to figure out from my first few months of Win7 is "If it's useful for getting started, bury it behind something frivolous."

Don't even get me started on Homegroups. (At configuration time, the only thing I want to know about any new feature that permits filesharing over TCP/IP is "how do I turn it off, and how do I make sure it's all turned off, before I plug this box into an untrusted network?")

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Spatial]

You don't even have to get used to them. You can just turn them back on again. In fact, I made it look exactly like Windows 2000.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[perryizgr8]

It stems from my interest in making UIs that people can figure out without having to press F1 for help (because I'm a tech writer and write help documents, I despise the notion of having to read a document for help for something that should be obvious or easy to figure out with trial and error).

i don't think people need f1 to do something in word or excel. you just point and click. otoh, if you want to use key shortcuts, you HAVE to rtfm. there's simply no other way. not that i can think of. tooltips are cumbersome but they are implemented in office. please tell me how i communicate to my user all the important key shortcuts without him reading something.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[hairyfeet]

I don't know if I'd compare it those, as I haven't had a Mac but I've used Beagle and IMHO W7 search is waaaay better, especially for those that don't know what they are looking for. for example my dad is now trying out voice recognition, simply because he typed "mi" looking for mike settings and not only was given microphone settings but it pointed out voice recognition as well.

I don't know if it is different now, but with Ubuntu 9.04 it seemed like you had to basically know what you were looking for to get to it with Beagle. with windows 7 search it tries to guess not only what you are after, but other related concepts as well. even for someone like me that has been using windows since Win3.x I found features I didn't know about, such as the windows 7 performance logs which I tripped over looking for good old perfmon. Thanks to being pointed towards the performance logs by windows 7 I found my ATI driver was causing a slowdown on shutdown and sleep and was able to fix it by updating the driver.

But I would say it is about as far from a CLI as one could get. If you were to sit my dad in front of a Bash CLI the best you could hope for is he wouldn't break the PC too badly, whereas since I've switched him over to windows 7 I went from having to help him once a week at least with XP to only needing to come over when he has some new "idea" like next week I have to wire his desktop into his widescreen so he can enjoy that 10 foot interface in WMC. I swear he has gotten more utility out of his PCs since switching to W7 than he has ever had before. Money well spent I'd say.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[hairyfeet]

Uhhh...you DO know it is trivial to make shortcuts in Windows 7, yes? Just go to Network Sharing Center -> Change Adapter Settings, right click on the network device and make shortcut. if you would prefer to have Network right there on the Start menu it is trivial to add with Ultimate Windows Tweaker which works quite well. simply go to Personalization -> Start Menu Items -> Network. This way you can simply click start -> Network and there you go.

Remember with windows there is ALWAYS more than one way to skin a cat, and if the default doesn't cut it there is nearly always a free tool that will let you tweak it to your liking. Enjoy!

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry I was going to mod you as insightful but ended up clicking in redundant. I hope this comment will discard the incorrect moderation.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Archimonde]

I understand your point but the new 1 icon only system does take something away.

Try opening 3 to n Windows Explorer windows and you'll have a big problem indentifying the right one. It just takes more time looking at those tiny preview windows.

I would give anything to have an option to disable 1-icon only in taskbar just for some programs (eg. Windows Explorer) so you can actually see by title in the taskbar which window do you need.

I know that you can turn on the classic view and some hybrid view but that is beside the point.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[quickOnTheUptake]

In the future, I don't think i would mention that it took you 15 years to figure out.

Re:not to be an asshole...

[hairyfeet]

Awww...did I piss off a Lunix Luser? Awww...I'm sorry, please enjoy your God RMS having a snack on stage! Yummy Toe Cheese, nom nom nom!

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Thing 1]

Not that I'm aware of, I don't know where I would see a tooltip to indicate that I can press Windows-E to open Explorer, or Windows-R to open the Run dialog, or Windows-M to minimize/restore all applications.

FYI, Windows-M only minimizes all visible applications; it won't restore them. The shortcut for toggling minimize/restore is Windows-D (d for desktop; it means "show/hide desktop").

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

stewbacca is mistaken. I've been dealing with MSOffice on a daily basis since '97. The shortcuts have been largely unchanged. No changes between 2003 and 2007 despite the changes to the toolbar (e.g. ribbon). Most Windows programs period have the same exact CTRL modifiers. This has been the case since Win95 (or earlier for some shortcuts, such as saving, printing, and opening).

And in actuality I've found that in most linux distros a lot of the keyboard shortcuts are the same. At least for the apps that I've run into. CTRL S tends to save in Open Office (or rather it did when I last used it 18 months ago) for example.

By the way, what do you mean the Microsoft tech writing manual is your life line? IIRC it hasn't been updated since 2003-2004 so its a bit out of date... Or do you mean something other than the MS Manual of Style for technical publications?

Re:not to be an asshole...

[Kakari]

Win+R ncpa.cpl - I don't think I ever used the GUI to get to it in Vista - Tried it a few times in 7 and then decided it had no value so just use that shortcut when I need it.

THE Manual (Hardly)

[Anonymous Coward]

is probably mostly white space given all the space devoted to "Point and Click".

Point and Click is for losers.

Sign of changing times

[OutputLogic]

Only a couple of years ago /. would never allow anything with "Windows" in the article title on a front page. Either times have changed, or /.

Re:Sign of changing times

[dingen]

Now that Apple's market cap is larger than Microsoft, Windows became the product of an underdog and with that comes a lot of love.

Re:Sign of changing times

[ChefInnocent]

Maybe because the year of the Linux desktop has arrived (NetBooks & phones), and the other OS is offered by a more poisonous snake. Now that valid competition exists, and MicroSoft doesn't look so evil any more, we can consider it a valid alternative.

Re:Sign of changing times

[Blakey Rat]

What Slashdot were you reading?

Although it is true that the article is a lot more likely now to be positive towards Microsoft (or at least neutral) than previously, when it would never be posted unless it contained at least one accusation of baby-eating.

As an old school Mac OS user, I think the most amazing thing was how thoroughly Slashdot ignored Mac until OS X came out. Hell, I bet the Amiga got more stories during that era.

Re:Sign of changing times

[drsmithy]

Only a couple of years ago /. would never allow anything with "Windows" in the article title on a front page. Either times have changed, or /.

Say what ? Slashdot has fairly consistently had at least one "Windows sucks" article a week for over a decade now.

Re:Sign of changing times

[Alien1024]

Huff huff huff

the year of the Linux desktop has arrived

aiming for +1 Funny?

(NetBooks...

aiming for +2 Funny?

& phones)

phones != desktop

Libraries

[PoiBoy]

Is it me, or are the libraries in Windows 7 stupid? I prefer Vista because it doesn't have those damn things. I've read about registry hacks to disable them, though I've not had any luck getting those hacks to work.

Re:Libraries

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it me, or are the libraries in Windows 7 stupid? I prefer Vista because it doesn't have those damn things. I've read about registry hacks to disable them, though I've not had any luck getting those hacks to work.

Its probably only you. Libraries are good for me. Now, I can group all my music under one setting.

Re:Libraries

[MrTripps]

Or you could, you know, use them. I found it kind of nice to have my own called TV or eBooks and point them to a directory (or more than one directory) where those things are already at. If you don't want them, all you have to do right click on a library and select delete. No registry hacks required.

Re:Libraries

[hairyfeet]

What exactly is wrong with the libraries? I keep my music and videos on a separate drive and libraries make keeping up with new stuff as simple as drag and drop. I never have to go to where I actually keep anything anymore, simply drop it into the library under videos,music,whatever and it automatically places it into the appropriate place, easy peasy. And since Windows 7 disc image and backup gives you a simple checkbox for if you want your libraries backed up as well I don't even have to hunt or remember to back up my different media folders, just plug in the USB drive once a week and hit backup.

Trust me, libraries are one of those new features that if you just use them for a little while you'll start to wonder how you did without them. I felt the same way about having breadcrumbs instead of a back button, but after I got used to how quickly you can jump around with breadcrumbs going back to WinXP irritates the hell out of me. Just spend a few minutes customizing your library and telling it where you like to keep your stuff, and then you'll never have to mess with hunting media folders again.

Re:Libraries

[oakgrove]

I don't so much have a problem with the concept of "Libraries", however, I do think it's funny how people think it's a new thing considering the fact that Sun came up with it way back in 1986 and several other operating systems have been using it since the 90's.

Re:Libraries

[stewbacca]

Trust me, libraries are one of those new features that if you just use them for a little while you'll start to wonder how you did without them.

This same revelation happened to me when I bought OSX back in the early 2000s. I know MS critics will just blame them for yet another copy of OSX, but if it makes Win7 better, then why not?

The problem is, many hard core XP types have learned the XP way and this new (well, old) paradigm is really foreign to them. I'm going to guess most people who are used to their old way won't bother learning the new, even if the new could be argued to be "better".

Re:Libraries

[TheNetAvenger]

Is it me, or are the libraries in Windows 7 stupid?

I wouldn't say you are stupid...

However, once you 'grasp' the basic concept of the libraries and don't overthink them they are a handy feature, especially for the average home/office user.

Vista had featurs likes the Libraries, they were not something MS set up for the users. They are a variation of a 'Saved Search' or 'Search Folder' except they just return the contents of 'locations' based on the type you specify.

You can make your own libraries for things like Books, Presentations, etc.

You can also do like you could in Vista and use a 'Search Folder/Saved Search' to open a folder than 'returns' a criteria of content from specified locations. For example, create a Search for MP3 that looks everyone on your hard drive, and it will open a folder showing you all your MP3s as if they were in a single folder, no matter where you stored them.

Libraries are a bit too simplistic for advanced users, and that is where you use Search Folders to produce your own location and content results.

Re:Libraries

[devent]

Why you don't just use soft links to folders? I have my music, videos and my documents all on sepereated partitions, too, but I just soft link everthing in my $home directory. To put my stuff in the folders it's just drag&drop the files. I don't need some "libraries" for that, it's build in in the system since 1990 and I can use every file manager I like.

Re:Libraries

[irid77]

What exactly is wrong with the libraries? I keep my music and videos on a separate drive and libraries make keeping up with new stuff as simple as drag and drop. I never have to go to where I actually keep anything anymore, simply drop it into the library under videos,music,whatever and it automatically places it into the appropriate place, easy peasy. And since Windows 7 disc image and backup gives you a simple checkbox for if you want your libraries backed up as well I don't even have to hunt or remember to back up my different media folders, just plug in the USB drive once a week and hit backup.

But you can do all that with links/shortcuts. Libraries are just a more confusing way to accomplish the same thing.

Re:Libraries

[ShakaUVM]

I just use folder shortcuts in XP. Works the same way, and takes the same amount of effort (just right-click drag and drop) but without taking up my valuable top-level directory view space in the file browser.

If they made a version of Win7 with the Win7 internals with the XP interface, I'd buy it in a second. Until then, I'll stick with XP. I hate breadcrumbs, the file browser, the taskbar (unless I have a lot of windows open, it's just costing me an extra click and hunt every time I switch windows), and the start menu (a hierarchical layout is better than a flat one - didn't we learn that in the 80s?). Oh, and the system bar, and the way they integrated quick-launch with task switching.

I do like the internals a lot more (esp. memory management), the fact you don't need a floppy to install RAID drivers, the better support for multimonitor setups (without needing UltraMon) and a lot of the new keyboard shortcuts.

Re:Libraries

[Beelzebud]

How is it more confusing? It's basically the same damn thing...

Re:Libraries

[dave420]

Because libraries actually puts everything in one location, as opposed to still having shortcuts to different locations, where your stuff is actually kept. People used to just make shortcuts to their various folders, then put them in one folder called "Music", say, but now you just set up a library, go to "Music", and everything's there - no digging deeper, it's right there. Fuck soft links - they're so 1990, and have been completely outdated for purposes like you say.

Re:Libraries

[Anonymous Coward]

This post explains very well why Windows users think Linux is hard. All they know is Windows and anything that requires them to learn anything, even something new in Windows, is hard as far as they are concerned.

Re:Libraries

[SpeZek]

I would love to make full use of my libraries, but, they don't like folders on my networked Server2003 machine.

Re:Libraries

[devent]

What are you talking about? In my $HOME I have Documents, Music, Videos and Downloads. I go to Music and all is in one place, sorted by the Artist and by Album. The Music folder is a soft link to a different partition as the Documents is a soft link to a Truecrypt container, because I like to save my documents encrypted.

Soft links are working transparent to every application, so I can use file managers or other applications. If I need to backup I just copy it over or I use tools like rsync.

Re:Libraries

[drinkypoo]

I run Ubuntu on three machines, in the form of Jolicloud on one, and this shit is the gospel truth. Ubuntu peaked at Dapper and it's been going downhill since. A fresh install on one of my machines won't start half my panel applets even though they're clearly in my session. Ubuntu breaks drivers at will; e.g. my Linksys WUSB11s worked on Dapper and didn't on Hardy (didn't try them again yet since I don't need them right now.) I would go back to Debian but then I have to build more software myself, and package it too if I want management to be sane. I will probably end up with Windows 7 on the machine that has the panel problems because it has an ATI R2xx and I get graphics corruption when I scroll, even with RenderAccel turned off! And after recent updates now my screen goes black and won't come back on about 50% of bootups, I've never had this problem before. Ubuntu is officially a shark-jumper.

Re:Libraries

[drinkypoo]

Thanks for the advice, especially Ninite. I think $100 is too much to spend, though. I'll seek some sneaky deal. Perhaps an upgrade, the machine in question has a Vista Basic license.

Re:Libraries

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that he was confused by the time that he wrote "Because libraries actually puts everything in one location" because they, er, don't:

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/windows-7-libraries-%E2%80%93-and-why-you-want-them/

What they do do is make stuff appear when viewed in one particular way (via the Explorer) as being in the same location. Useful if the only way you ever access stuff is via the Start menu; not so much if it isn't.

The funny thing is that NTFS has supported the equivalent of Unix soft links for ages:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896768.aspx
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=205524

it just hasn't made it easy to create them.

Re:Libraries

[Curmudgeonlyoldbloke]

Maybe have a look at:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896768.aspx

Re:Libraries

[devent]

> it just hasn't made it easy to create them.

Why is it that, anyway? I remember Windows has introduced shortcuts which behaved like soft links but were some special file with more information. Why they made a more complicated feature that have the same functionality as soft links? More complicated, because the shortcuts were not transparent as links are. They only worked in Explorer - Was that the reasoning to introduce shortcuts instead of using links? Because they only working in Explorer, but links can work with any third-party application?

In Gnome or Kde to make a soft link you just drag&drop a file or a folder and than you can choose to create a link.

Re:Libraries

[devent]

> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/windows-7-libraries-%E2%80%93-and-why-you-want-them/

A big fad ROFL. I really rolled laughing on the floor. That is exactly how soft links are working.

Make a folder in your $HOME called "Pictures", open that folder. Now plug in your USB hard drive, open it. Drag&Drop the folder with your additional pictures from the hard drive in your "Pictures" folder at $HOME. Now choose to create a link. Voila, you have a Windows 7 style "Libraries".

Btw, since Linux mount the hard disk not as a random letter (i.e. D: or E: or H:) but with the name you give for the hard disk (for example, my usb flash have the name 'usbpictures', it will mount the flash on /media/usbpictures) the link will stay valid whenever you plug the same usb hard disk in.

Microsoft is really good at selling 1970 technology under different names to people. Hurray for the marketing.

Wait, what?

[Yvan256]

People keep saying they don't want to switch to Mac OS X or Linux because they don't want to re-learn how to use their computer... But simply changing the Windows version is enough to warrant an article on a nerd website about a manual about Windows 7?

I'm betting some people would find the switch from Windows XP to either Mac OS X or any Linux distro to be easier than switching to Windows 7.

Re:Wait, what?

[dave420]

You seem to be confusing "books for people to learn Windows 7 who have never used Windows before" and "books for people to learn Windows 7 who have used Windows for years". But yeah, as the mods say, you're a troll.

Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

Oceanis Change Background.

Additionally, while I'm a die-hard 2K and even kind-of XP supporter, I'm really not unhappy with Windows 7, now that I've had a chance to try it. 7 or 8 security/notifications to shut off, and I haven't had a problem with it for 2 months. I'm impressed. Only the 1 year mark will tell.

//Sat on a flight beside an MS engineer, told him the biggest problem I had was an annual reformat/reinstall. He said he did the same thing(?!?). He also suggested I install VMWare, as it eases the annual reinstall process considerably.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[clang_jangle]

There it is folks, a true endorsement from a real microsoft user in the field:

I'm really not unhappy with Windows 7...

Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

Free BSD Just Works for me.

See, I tried at least 6 different flavors. I'm no slouch, but I'm no guru either. They never "just worked" for me. (Of course those were the days when you had to find drivers for the specific chip on your eth0, then make them work for your card). Tried a VirtualBox Ubuntu recently. It was OK I guess. Tried VB - Fedora 12 as well, it just worked fantastically until I installed the guest additions, then it crashed and burned.

I'm a fan of the FOSS movement, because it just feels right. But if it comes to anything mission critical, I have to use Windows. Or at least XP32 emulated on XP64, because x64 never "just worked" either.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[clang_jangle]

It looks as though you may be under the impression that FreeBSD is a Linux distro, but it is definitely not.

My sig has an attempt at humor and irony about it, note that the link is to the FreeBSD handbook. It's kind of like, "FreeBSD Just Works for me -- now that I've RTFA!" Yes, I know -- very obscure humor, not likely to be appreciated by most people, etc. It's ok, I'm used to that sort of thing. :)

Thanks for being good-natured about my ribbing, BTW.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[oakgrove]

See, I tried at least 6 different flavors.

That's a shame you're having such a hard time with your Linux VM's. Maybe if you went here first and just downloaded Ubuntu or something that's already ready to go, you could get started on the right foot.

I find it interesting that I mirror your problems except in the reverse. I've had very positive experiences with Linux (primarily Debian and Ubuntu) and not so great experiences with Win7 vm's. I first tried 7 in vmware on a machine with an e8400 c2d and 1 GB of RAM allocated to the virtual machine but after a little while, had to just give up. It consistently thrashed the disk, pegged the CPU, and I just couldn't do anything with it. I then tried it in VirtualBox and it did run much better, especially after I turned everything off. The only problem was that while it started programs faster, they just didn't perform nearly as well as they do in my XP vm. This is a serious problem as I use XP primarily for Mappoint which needs a lot of CPU since the last 3 or so iterations. I don't really care a whole lot about the additional security in 7 since I leave the virtual network disconnected from Windows anyway.

I'm a fan of the FOSS movement, because it just feels right. But if it comes to anything mission critical, I have to use Windows. Or at least XP32 emulated on XP64, because x64 never "just worked" either.

There are a lot of people running mission critical stuff on Linux too so, since you at least like the idea of FLOSS, don't give up. Try one of the vm's on the site I linked to and if you break it, just start over. Don't let it beat you. That's how I started in a vm and now several years later, I find Linux to be an absolute joy to use and there is no way I would use anything else on my hardware. Something else too. I run Linux and Windows in virtual machines and on my Ubuntu host, I always find the Linux guests run better than the XP guests. For example, I can move windows on XP and get lots of tearing, not so in the Linux machines. Maybe it's just me but that's my experience.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

There are a lot of people running mission critical stuff on Linux too so, since you at least like the idea of FLOSS, don't give up.

If only, man, if only. When I said "mission critical" I mean stuff that makes me money. I would happily (and probably could) write an OSS software package that could "own" the proprietary crap I have to use, but it would take mucho tiempo. I have even toyed with the idea to the point that I've mapped out what my awesome free software package would need. Basically, with my limited skillset, I could get something good running in Windows in about 1 year (.net/fairly reasonably close to mono). To do something that could be truly portable and truly helpful to the data analysis/civil engineering community, I'd have to learn C++, as well as work around all the easy stuff that .Net takes care of behind the scenes. 2 years, no less. If I had unlimited money, I'd jump into it.

My latest (and unrelated) idea for a freaking fantastic FOSS package, if you are curious...

Take the sail design source from SailcutCAD, the hull design source from Free!Ship, combine the two along with a custom designed two phase (compressible/incompressible) CFD system solver (one for aerodynamics, one for hydrodynamics) built on OpenFOAM, but very streamlined so as to facilitate GPGPU (or more ideally OpenCL) acceleration... then give it away. I have big ideals but limited skills. For me alone? 5 years, no less.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

I really was under that impression. Huh. I'd ask what it is then, but I suppose the wikipedia will answer faster than waiting for a response post.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate to say it, but learning C++ properly (metaprogramming et al) takes way longer than 5 years. Most people I know, including me, are at year 10-onwards and still feel they only know about half of what the language has to offer.

If you worked with it 10 hours a day, and read 15-20 related books a year, perhaps you could accomplish maximally learning C++ in only 5 years.

I think you're on the right path with .NET. It should easily cut the time required in half.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[oakgrove]

When I said "mission critical" I mean stuff that makes me money.

I'm right there with you. Mappoint and a certain business critical all-in-one invoicing, pricing, follow-up, you name it app precluded me from using Linux for a long time. Then I just got to thinking about it one day and said, screw this, I'm going to make this Linux thing happen one way or the other. Not saying it's necessarily that easy, because it isn't but it gets me to this other thing.

I happily, after getting all hardware and logistical issues sorted out, used Windows 2000 in a vm for a long time. And was actually happier since when I needed to move to new hardware or my machine died, I didn't have to reinstall anything, I just moved the vm over and kept right on going. Then, I got to thinking, this business application kind of sucks and I sure do wish it ran on Linux. Wine was a non-starter as it was a .net monster that just wouldn't run on anything but just the right Visual C runtime, etc. So, to make a long story short, I got Learning Python and Programming Python by O'Reilly and 6 months later, not only did I rewrite the app from scratch but now it's much more specific to my business and it's so lean it runs on my cellphone. And I went from knowing nothing to "you can't tell me nothing" in 6 months flat with Python. There's even an awesome RAD tool for it with templates and Glade drag and drop GUI editing integration that makes it so you can turn out polished apps in hours once you learn your way around a bit.

Of course, this doesn't help you today but it's a good start. And don't necessarily be turned off by Python being a "script" language as it has seamless C binding integration for any performance critical parts of your application. And it's all free except for your time. I don't have a lot of free time either but with Python, learning programming is a snap.

Take the sail design source from SailcutCAD, the hull design source from Free!Ship, combine the two along with a custom designed two phase (compressible/incompressible) CFD system solver (one for aerodynamics, one for hydrodynamics) built on OpenFOAM, but very streamlined so as to facilitate GPGPU (or more ideally OpenCL) acceleration... then give it away. I have big ideals but limited skills. For me alone? 5 years, no less.

That sounds really cool though I don't know much about sailboats but I'll tell you what. If you were to get enough of it written with say Python or whatever and throw up the prototype on sourceforge or launchpad, provided there is enough interest, you might be blown away as the application practically "writes itself". That's the power of this stuff. If people think it's cool and it does something for them, if they have something to work with, they'll pretty much do the rest.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

I totally get that I could not fully learn C++ in 5 years, or for that matter 10 (unless I really applied myself). In fact, programming is only a hobby for me. I may have some natural talent for it, and pretty much had to train the CS graduates that came to work for us (then rewrite their software! USE COMMENTS GRADUATES!), but it is not a goal for me, just an entertainment, as well as a way to make my job easier from time to time. I meant an additional year to write a good number cruncher package, and 5 full years to write the nautical design package, partly because the learning curve would be so steep moving backward from C# (also, it would take me at least a year of independent study to get a half decent (implementable) understanding of the math I would need to implement for solving RANS and the other one I'd need - quick slashdot, what is the preferred equation set for airfoils, its not navier-stokes, its like davis something or other).

I had also thought C# was the way to go. I got half decent at it, as a hobby, and even earned a few g's with it. I have to stop relying on it though, simply on principle. At the risk of sounding full-on retarded, see my ProTip #1 at the beginning (OP). As soon as I saw that I couldn't change my background I decided that I was done with it. Why should my work, as a gift to the community, benefit a company that will cripple my system to get me to hit that 'Anytime Upgrade' button. Plus with Tao Framework being effectively dead, it only hurts not to move backwards. Yeah mono is a great effort. They're finally 2.0 compliant. 4.0 is coming out soon (or is out).

There are a lot of people far, far more capable than me that will be the real innovators in software design. Those are the guys who really need the 10 hour days + 25 books a year.

//If someday I ever own a company, I'm going to put a couple of those guys on the payroll. Everything they do will become public domain. I'll see to that.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

That sounds really cool though I don't know much about sailboats but I'll tell you what. If you were to get enough of it written with say Python or whatever and throw up the prototype on sourceforge or launchpad, provided there is enough interest, you might be blown away as the application practically "writes itself". That's the power of this stuff. If people think it's cool and it does something for them, if they have something to work with, they'll pretty much do the rest.

And that's exactly why it just feels right, people in it for people.

//I can't imagine that there are a great number of people with the interest and skills necessary to write an awesome nautical design package. Those people probably already work for the companies that sell that for 20k a seat. But I'll bet none (or few, rather) of them have even considered offloading this modeling to the GPU. As hardware makes more money than software.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[rdnetto]

//Sat on a flight beside an MS engineer, told him the biggest problem I had was an annual reformat/reinstall. He said he did the same thing(?!?). He also suggested I install VMWare, as it eases the annual reinstall process considerably.

I prefer creating an image of the system after I've done a clean install, install all my programs, etc. Turns a few days work into a 1 hour restoration process + updates.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

I prefer creating an image of the system after I've done a clean install, install all my programs, etc. Turns a few days work into a 1 hour restoration process + updates.

I like this approach as well, but for two things:
Drivers, which often need to be updated. I store and install the latest (or best) ones after the re-do.
I also use a lot of open source programs, which unlike commercial programs are freely updated, often.

I could, of course replace the image after updating stuff, but that would kind of defeat the purpose.

Re:Protip #1 for 7 Starter

[st_adamin]

which unlike commercial programs are freely updated, often.

And additionally, unlike commercial products, many times are not compatible with their previous selves, but require complete reinstallation (ala the Gimp).

WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

I always thought David Pogue was a hardcore Apple fanboy. He and Walt Mossberg seem to be about the biggest Jobs worshippers in the mainstream press. So it comes as a bit of a shock to me that he wrote this Windows 7 book (though the title follows exactly the same form as his OS X books).

Is this his first foray into non-Mac tech writing, or has he been doing it all along? The review doesn't mention any comparisons to Mac or jabs against Windows, but I wonder if he writes with that kind of slant?

Re:WTF?

[dingen]

Altough Pogue did write a lot of books about Apple and Mac-related software, he also wrote lots of other stuff, including books about every major version of Windows since ME, but also books about things such as Twitter, the Palm Pilot and the Opera web browser.

Re:WTF?

[Arthur Grumbine]

I also heard that he posts on /. under the UID "dingen" :-P

Re:WTF?

[dingen]

He is a very talented writer and you should all buy his books.

Re:WTF?

[Macrat]

Does he actually write them? Or is he more of just a publishing brand name?

Re:Windows 7 manual

[Jeng]

I haven't ran across step 9 yet or for that matter step 5.

I tend to do step 4 prior to the install so its ready for when I do connect to the net then I do step 2.

I also don't go to the extend you do on step 4 considering that malware and spyware are the same damn thing and tend to be incorporated into the anti-virus now.

wth?

[Anonymous Coward]

next on slashdot -NEWS AT ELEVEN - MANUAL HOW DO I TURN ON THE PC

i could understand if it was a description about api changes or about controlling the security layers - but since when is slashdot a place for kindergarten level manuals?

Re:Windows 7 manual

[clarkkent09]

That may have applied to some earlier versions of Windows but not Windows 7. It hasn't crashed yet even once, it comes with a firewall that works well enough. I don't know what you mean by "spend an hour turning off all the resident scanners so you can use it again", I certainly didn't have to do that. The rest of your list are things I expect to do when buying a new computer anyway.

Undoubtably...

[tthomas48]

Windows 7 is best when connected to a network, which makes it so puzzling why so many of its networking features only work with other Windows 7 machines.

I also like the fact this book explains regedit. That's one program that's seen a lot of change over the years.

Bells and Whistles?

[MLCT]

It would seem to me that the manual aimed at the xp -> 7 movers should spend most of its time covering all of the inexplicable little changes that have been made. There aren't many new things, just lots of changed (or entirely removed) things.

As I decided to change my work PC over to 7 last week I can testify. I had superficially played with vista and 7 up until now, but it is a different thing when your main machine moves completely. For example, in W7 MS have inexplicably removed the ability for auto arrange on files to be turned off in explorer - they now always "spring" to the grid - an annoying change. While day to day I didn't use this, it was used in xp now and then in sorting out a large folder full of files, as it is much more intuitive to spatially sort. Gone from W7, and no hack to get it back.

The picture viewer is also crap now, slow, with a initially loaded blurred preview, then 1/2 a second later the real preview loads. Also when you zoom in it doesn't interpolate as it did in xp, just pixellates.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[Draconmythica]

If you don't like auto arrange you simply have to right click and hover over View to see the option. I know that takes about 1 second longer that it did in xp and it must be hard but I would think you would have at least looked at little for it if it bothered you so much

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. For God's sake, how do I turn off the thing that messes with window positions when you drag a window near the screen boundaries? It drives me mad.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[MLCT]

sticks and wrong end. I want to be able to drag my files around in any way I want in explorer (for example creating a great big messy pile of them on the bottom right of the explorer window, and another big messy pile of file icons on the bottom left).

I was just doing a quick browse to find some moaning threads about it to show you when I discovered this:

http://www.winhelponline.com/blog/disable-full-row-select-explorer-windows-7/

an apparent hack to fix it which I didn't find last week despite half a day of googling the problem (and only finding exasperated people who said it was apparently hard wired). I shall promptly try this on Monday to see if it allows me the ability to drag files about again.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[Draconmythica]

It sounds like what your looking to turn off is "Align to Grid" rather than auto arrange. The option to turn this off is found in the same location. Just right click and expand the "View" options and you'll see it.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[MLCT]

If you would read the link provided you would find that it is all disabled in explorer. The only place it is not disabled in W7 is on the desktop. Jees, are you trolling or don't you have W7?

P.S. it is not "align to grid", in XP that is unticked and yet if you try to drag files around you can't move them away from their siblings, only rearrange the stack. Untick "auto-arrange" and magically I can drag files wherever I like, creating whatever distributions I want, even having them virtually all on-top of each other if I so care.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[Draconmythica]

My apologies. I had never tried to pile my icons like that anywhere other than the desktop. It appears you are correct that it is a problem in other folders. As far as the align to grid vs auto arrange question you'll find that auto arrange overrides align to grid but if you un-check that and keep align to grid checked (which is enabled by default in w7) then you can move the icons to other parts of the screen but they can't overlap which is what I expect you meant by piling them. So both need to be unchecked to do what you want.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[MLCT]

No worries. I have no idea why MS removed it. Some comments online indicated that MS found that 95% of people don't use it so they decided to simply eliminate it for a "consistent user experience". However, I am hopeful that the hack link posted above may bring it back - I find it extremely frustrating to not be bale to move files like that. Most of the time I have them all aligned, but if I am sorting through a large folder of files, and creating burn/move/listen/finish piles then the new default in W7 is basically impossible, you have to create subfolders to move files into, a needless complication.

Re:Bells and Whistles?

[Anonymous Coward]

dude... Just use fucking opus directory and stop bitching man, u sure love that fricking ability to arrange icons ala goatse u wouldn't mind shelling some buck to buy the goddam software and fucking masterbate in peace.. zomg pirate the motherfuckin app

http://torrentz.com/search?q=opus+directory

there, GO RIGH NOW and download that fucker, when instaled you WILL smear you face against your monitor and jizz in OCD nirvana, you will spend soreassweeks fine tunning that shit and youre going to love it, you are going to love your life again, and you are going to come to this discussion, someday, the last day of your life and say: "AC was right, all my life I worried about such small things" and me, AC, will be figgin smacking bitches in some lowandnastyrackhouse in amsterdam u know why? u know why is that our futured dude? because I can eat bacteria and you don't.

Yup, now go and download that fuker and get this shit going. :(:

Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[A Friendly Troll]

I'm not using 7even (or Fista), but I do "have" a 2008 Server that I often RD into, and the one thing that irritates me incredibly (even more than UAC) is that I have no idea how to pop up the shell context menu for the folder I'm currently in.

In XP and earlier Windows, you'd just right-click on the folder icon on the top left of the window.

In Fista and above, that just pops up the standard useless menu with move/restore/minimize/maximize, just as when you right-click on the title bar.

Google is not helpful at all. The best I could get is an addition of "Open command prompt here" through shift+rightclick, but that's not what I want.

Please help me out here if you've figured it out... I often use that context menu to fire up 7-zip, or grep, or a duplicate copy of Win Explorer, or other things, and every time I have to do something on that server, I want to scream.

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[ZERO1ZERO]

In XP and earlier Windows, you'd just right-click on the folder icon on the top left of the window.

Wow. I can honestly say I've never used that functionality and to be honest I don't even think I knew it was there.

I will try and use it and report back.

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[jpcarter]

Wow. A cool feature I never knew I lost. Thanks!

A workaround might be to just use the navigation pane & select "Automatically expand to current folder" from Folder Options.

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[waynetv]

Just right-clicking into the blank space of the folder you're in will give you the context menu for that folder.

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[A Friendly Troll]

Just right-clicking into the blank space of the folder you're in will give you the context menu for that folder.

Yes, it will, but it won't have the shell items that I need. That context menu is completely useless.

Right-click on a folder and notice what items the context menu has... Then right-click on an empty space inside the window and compare. They aren't even similar.

(And whoever modded my parent post troll - please die in a fire. Thanks.)

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[hf256]

I'm not using 7even (or Fista), but I do "have" a 2008 Server that I often RD into, and the one thing that irritates me incredibly (even more than UAC) is that I have no idea how to pop up the shell context menu for the folder I'm currently in.

In XP and earlier Windows, you'd just right-click on the folder icon on the top left of the window.

In Fista and above, that just pops up the standard useless menu with move/restore/minimize/maximize, just as when you right-click on the title bar.

Google is not helpful at all. The best I could get is an addition of "Open command prompt here" through shift+rightclick, but that's not what I want.

Please help me out here if you've figured it out... I often use that context menu to fire up 7-zip, or grep, or a duplicate copy of Win Explorer, or other things, and every time I have to do something on that server, I want to scream.

Right clicking on it in the folders list to the left (under Favorite Links)works for me

Re:Shell context menu for folder you are in?

[Gadget_Guy]

Right clicking on it in the folders list to the left (under Favorite Links)works for me

Yes it does, although I had to right click on an empty space in that pane to turn on "Expand to current folder" to ensure the list followed where is was up to in the right hand window. Otherwise it just showed the drives.

Windows8

[drumcat]

Bring on Windows Ocho (tm) already. 7 is another swing and miss.

I'll install Windows 7...

[sfled]

I'll install Windows 7 when IT pries Windows 98SE from m'cold dead fingers!

Just kidding - send help, IT is in love with XP.

I've never really seen the appeal of these

[Delusion_]

"missing manual" books. They all seem far too shallow for even basic users, and insufficiently technical for advanced users. Maybe the two I've browsed through were just bad examples of the series. I'm not pre-disposed to dislike the idea; at least unlike the "Dummies" and "Complete Idiot's Guide" books, they're not blatantly insulting the intelligence of the novice user.

I ran a comparison

[AndGodSed]

Interface wise Win7 is a lot better than XP in *some* areas, but is seriously beginning to trail behind popular Linux distros. I did a comparison of Win7, Ubuntu, PCLOS, Linux Mint, Kubuntu with 6 everyday tasks and found it wanting a bit.

(Warning shameless blog punt ahead, proceed with caution...)
http://g33q.co.za/2010/06/01/usability-comparison-five-pc-operating-systems-compared/

Given it's performance I think a book such as this will help out some users. I often buy books like these for the techs in our office to help them out, I use Ubuntu full-time myself since I am more involved with the servers atm, but given some confusing task layouts like checking connection info (in XP it used to be three clicks of a mouse, not it is a road-trip) it helps having something to refer to handy.

Re:I ran a comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

That is one of the most useless comparisons I have seen. The usability of an operating system has nothing to do with minimizing clicks, it's how easy it is to find the functionality you need. The two things are not the same.

Re:I ran a comparison

[AndGodSed]

I think it has a lot to do with the layers between the user and what the user needs to do. One way of measuring the layers are the amount of clicks (steps) are needed to do a simple task.

Hence I believe my method is valid.

Ease of functionality is also important, hence if you read my follow on post you will see that I am going to include that as well.

Re:I ran a comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux has significantly more clicks for volume control per application. Why you didn't measure that?

Re:I ran a comparison

[irid77]

Linux has significantly more clicks for volume control per application. Why you didn't measure that?

You don't need any clicks. Just hover over the volume icon and use the wheel.

Re:I ran a comparison

[jabelli]

Several times you took the longest path to an option, or count things that only need to be done once.

Tests 1, 4: Do the various Linuxes allow you to set different firewall settings per network? How do you do that, and how many clicks is it? That's what the "select work, home or public" is and is done only the first time you connect to that network. Now that it's set up, I don't have to click anything; Windows connects to my WLAN when it wakes up before I can finish typing my password.

Test 3 is 6 steps on Windows if you replace "Open IE, click TOOLS" with "Open Control Panel," which ties it with Ubuntu.

Test 5: Kubuntu Only got a higher score because you left out "Open web browser, type 'Kubuntu change wallpaper' into Google, read results until you find the instructions.'"

Re:I ran a comparison

[drsmithy]

Interface wise Win7 is a lot better than XP in *some* areas, but is seriously beginning to trail behind popular Linux distros. I did a comparison of Win7, Ubuntu, PCLOS, Linux Mint, Kubuntu with 6 everyday tasks and found it wanting a bit.

None of your tasks seem to be day to day events, and therefore worth being worried about when they take an extra click or two...

(To say nothing of the relevance of scoring by number of mouse clicks...)

Re:I ran a comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

What's interesting is that he intentionally chooses the most obtuse way to go about doing something in Win7, then does the most direct thing in Linux. The comparisons are completely bogus. For example, if you want to change your desktop background, it's probably because you found a new image you want to use. In this case, you literally just right-click the image and say "Set as Desktop". That's what, 1.5 steps? The steps for determining network status are also completely wrong, taking two completely unnecessary steps and utterly ignoring the clear "Local Area Connection" link in Network and Sharing Center

I also think it's hilarious that he counts the selection of Home/Work/Public network local as a step AGAINST Windows. This single step ensures that the average user has the correct security settings for the situation they're in, without needing to understand or fiddle with the specific settings. This leads to my next point:

THESE ARE NOT ALL COMMON TASKS. The author claims the average user will do these tasks MORE THAN ONCE A WEEK. How many normal users will EVER need to see their detailed connection settings? Almost none. Setting a proxy? Are you kidding? The entire purpose of the new Network and Sharing center is to hide unneccessary details that won't affect most users, and giving them easy to understand, simple interfaces for connecting to a network and sharing their documents. These tasks, which actually ARE common, take 1-3 clicks.

Re:I ran a comparison

[truesaer]

Not only that, but checking internet details is actually only 4 steps (not 7). Open the network connections panel, right click the connection, choose Status, then click Details. And, as you mentioned the option to set security settings is not a step. It is optional - you can ignore the dialog and the connection just works. You can also select for it to always treat networks as one of the options without asking.

Beyond that the scoring system makes no sense. He is testing 5 OSes, and chose a 4 point scale with a truly bizarre method of scoring ties. The number of points an OS receives isn't related to its own performance, it's totally based on how the other 4 are distributed. The scoring seems to consist of giving everyone 4 points for tieing for first and then miscounting the steps to give Windows a 0. Get some independent critera for christ's sake. Or just sum the total number of clicks.

Re:I ran a comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only do you choose tasks which are not extremely frequently repeated (making pure # of clicks required a pretty poor metric), and choose them very specifically, but you ding Windows because it prompts you for network type when initially connecting (in order to enable/disable file sharing and such). Hell, in at least one comparison you made it clear that the method employed by a particular distro confused you (select "Desktop Activity Settings" to change a wallpaper!), but because you're measuring clicks it doesn't matter.

Seriously win 2000/XP

[future assassin]

for day to day usage was just way simpler then Vista/7. No fancy graphics just plain old start button and control panel. Even easier would have been a separate button for Programs instead of Start > Programs > Your App. I don't get why the Desktop has to look fancy but thats just me.

Re:Seriously win 2000/XP

[prestonmichaelh]

I disagree. The search bar (or whatever its proper name in) in Windows 7 is amazing. I can't tell you how many people's computers I have worked on that have so many things in their "Start->Programs" menu that you can't even see them all. Couple that with the fact that they don't resort them (and if you do, they can't find anything anymore and yell at you), I have spent many minutes hunting through the long list of programs to find the one I needed.

With the Windows 7 search, all I need to know is a little bit of the program name. I click the Start circle thing and just start typing. By the time I have two or three letters of the programs name typed in, it has shown up. If it is the top result, I can just hit enter and it will run. If not, I just click it from the short list of apps/files.

Maybe it is because I use a Linux desktop at work all day, mainly CLI stuff, but once I upgraded to Windows 7 and got this feature I couldn't stand to use XP anymore on my home machine. Vista tried to have the same thing, but their implementation was so horribly slow (at least last time I tried a Vista machine) that it was next to worthless. Windows 7 it great.

Re:Seriously win 2000/XP

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't tell you how many people's computers I have worked on that have so many things in their "Start->Programs" menu that you can't even see them all.

So the solution was to hardcode the size of the "All Programs" viewer to something so small that you have to scroll/mousewheel, even before you install any apps?!

The new "Start" menu is one of my biggest annoyances with Win7. At least with XP, you could see everything at once, and move/sort things if you wanted to.

Re:Seriously win 2000/XP

[Nicolay77]

I have used this feature for years in XP. Just install a tiny app called Launchy.

Win7 vs...

[neostorm]

When Win7 came out, to much praise, I sat down at home and did some thorough tests. I am a developer who uses some resource-intensive applications for 3D visualization, physics simulations and graphic design. Currently my OS of choice is XP 64-bit.

When I compared the two however, while Win 7 stood out as being superficially faster through caching everything and *appearing* to boot your OS and your applications in a split second, prolonged use of these applications under this OS just ground to a snails pace over the course of a single weekend of use on a 16GB machine.
While WinXP64 didn't boot as fast or launch applications as quickly, it never crashed (Win7 crashed multiple times), performance within the applications I use was exponentially better when loading and managing large files, and the overall experience was much more robust.

Ultimately what it seemed to me was that Win7 was geared toward selling you a copy of itself in the store. 5 minutes of use will show you what appears to be an extremely fast OS that launches whole applications like they were text files. In reality it's Vista with an extremely efficient booting process and nothing more.

MS continues to push the bar though! XP used to be the worst OS you could make your machine suffer to run, but if history repeats I'm sure they'll release something so far worse in the future, after XP is deprecated and beyond maintaining, that will make me fall absolutely in *love* with the features of Win7.

Re:Win7 vs...

[Blakey Rat]

Maybe it just means Microsoft hasn't decided to optimize for your extraordinarily rare use-case. The caching changes you mention benefit the vast majority of Windows users.

While WinXP64 didn't boot as fast or launch applications as quickly, it never crashed (Win7 crashed multiple times),

If you literally mean Windows crashed (and not your application), then that is one of two things:
1) You have faulty hardware (perhaps overheating if it only happens after a long run?)
2) You have a faulty driver

Windows 7 is rock-solid, at least as much as XP 64-bit. (And, it's a lot more likely to have mature drivers, unlike XP 64-bit.)

performance within the applications I use was exponentially better

Again, assuming this isn't a blatant lie, you're dealing with a hardware or driver fault. This could be the result of a drive in PIO mode, for example. (My guess is that it's a blatant lie.)

In reality it's Vista with an extremely efficient booting process and nothing more.

That's not a bad thing.

MS continues to push the bar though! XP used to be the worst OS you could make your machine suffer to run, but if history repeats I'm sure they'll release something so far worse in the future, after XP is deprecated and beyond maintaining, that will make me fall absolutely in *love* with the features of Win7.

Then stop using it. Nobody's holding a gun to your head, there are many alternatives available, and you'd save us all a lot of whining.

Re:Win7 vs...

[Bengie]

Win7 has a whole new kernel over Vista. Not even close to the same.

Both Vista and 7 share the same higher level API, which is why drivers/etc are compatible, but 7handles memory better. 7 also has fewer locks, so it scales better with multi-IO and CPUs. 7 does have more overhead, but the overhead is mostly a fixed cost. It might run slower than XP/Vista in a few areas, but why care about running fast on single/dual cores with 8/16 cores coming out soon.

Re:Win7 vs...

[drsmithy]

No it doesn't. Non-trivial improvements - certainly. Completely new ? Not even close.

Missing Inaction

[NicknamesAreStupid]

After a quarter of a century, you would think that Windows would be so refined that you wouldn't need a 904-page, 3rd-party manual ($39.99). For those who want to peek under the hood, would the Windows 7 Resource Kit be better (http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Resource-Kit-Mitch-Tulloch/dp/0735627002)?

Re:Missing Inaction

[Hurricane78]

I think you are misunderstanding how the MS software design process works.
I can put it in geek terms for you:

app = code(design(BASIC_ARCHITECTURE)) # original design and intentions are instantly forgotten
bf = marketing.getBlingFactory()
while (sales.sell(app)) {
    f = bf.getNewFeature()
    management.fuckUp(f)
    sales.addLockIn(f)
    hammerIntoSomethingPhysicallyPossible(f,IGNORE_MANAGEMENT)
    try {
        code(f)
    } catch (ManagementExpectsItToBeFinishedAlreadyError) {
        tieTogheterLooseStrings(f,[SPAGHETTI_STYLE,IGNORE_BUG_HAZARDS,MAKE_HASTE])
    }
    try {
        app.add(f)
    } catch (DoesntFitArchitectureAnymoreError) {
        p = code(new Patchwork(NASTY))
        p.add(f)
        app.add(p,USE_BRUTE_FORCE)
    }
}

Which results in what I call the “upside-down pyramid” model of software design. Except that the pyramid looks like MIR in its late days. ;)

Re:Missing Inaction

[Beelzebud]

Going by your logic, Unix shouldn't even need instructions at this point...

Re:Missing Inaction

[Anonymous Coward]

But that thing doesn't compile !??

Re:Missing Inaction

[drsmithy]

After a quarter of a century, you would think that Windows would be so refined that you wouldn't need a 904-page, 3rd-party manual ($39.99).

I know what you mean. People have been building bridges for thousands of years, but you still need a 4-year engineering degree to learn how to do it. What a joke !

Who needs a manual??

[Hurricane78]

If you need a manual for Windows (pretty much any version), you’re offically mentally disabled.
It may be that what disables you, is being used to Windows’s way too much dumbed-down interfaces (Clippy would be proud), though.

But sorry, if you can’t handle Windows 7, then maybe you should try switching your brain to ON for a change. ^^
(Yes, I know that that won’t help in understanding Windows, as people would instantly switch to Linux. ;)

Re:Who needs a manual??

[codeAlDente]

I wish I could just switch my brain on, and stop being mentally disabled. No such luck yet. To me, it seems that a manual would be nice. I'm a long time Mac OS and Linux user who just built a Windows 7 HTPC/gaming machine, and takes me a long time to figure out how to do anything. The help is often no help, and my internet connection comes and goes. So I thought, "If I could just read through a manual like this on an airplane, when I don't have anything better to do, then I might be able to save some time later." Now I know that I was was really stupid to think this way. Thanks Hurricane78.

Pocket edition available for free!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's only one page long and it says:

format c:

I Am Reminded Of One Of My Favorite Titles...

[RobotRunAmok]

"AOL for Dummies."

When I first saw that on a shelf at B&N, I seriously thought it was a parody from The Onion.

Re:I Am Reminded Of One Of My Favorite Titles...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm... I wonder if they have a "How to Write a Book for Dummies" book?

Re:I Am Reminded Of One Of My Favorite Titles...

[Chris Mattern]

On the contrary, it seems to me to be very appropriate. Who else would want to use AOL?

Re:I Am Reminded Of One Of My Favorite Titles...

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely agree "AOL for dummies" quite an appropriate one. What I really get irate about are those that say "Unix/Linux for Dummies" and "C for Dummies" etc.

to be an asshole...

[macbiv]

1.start 2.control panel 3. click the arrow next to "view by" and select large icons 4. stop complaining

Re:Windows 7 manual

[ashridah]

Agreed. Win7 was remarkably stable even in the beta/RC period. My main problems came from the video drivers (I'm looking at you ATI, and at you to a lesser extent, NVidia). Fortunately, neither of these are instant-kill for the most part (Except ATI, I've had a few moments where video has been permanently hosed, but fortunately, the pwoer button still triggered a normal "turn off" process)

Who needs a manual?

[NetServices]

According to Microsoft commercials Windows 7 was my idea!

The laptop on the cover

[Anonymous Coward]

is a PowerBook G4 with the logo Photoshopped out.

That's not gonna run Windows 7 very well :)

Too old-fashioned, I have one for iPad

[microbee]

It's called: iPad, the Missing Fingers.

Windows 7, Advanced users, LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't stop laughing.

Short Version

[cmacb]

(1) Insert DVD in appropriate drive (no, the other one).

(2) If this is an upgrade edition, make sure you have an official upgrade license with Abraham Lincoln's original signature.

(3) Follow instructions on screen. If there is no screen, contact your hardware vendor.

(4) Don't call us, we'll call you.

(5) Send more money.

Re:Windows 7 manual

[stewbacca]

Agreed. The past 20 years of obligatory Microsoft jokes are seemingly dying out.

However, my Win7 does not wake up consistently, which requires a reboot. But other than that, in four months, I have not had one crash or hangup from an app.

OMG! He's right, it IS missing!!!

[rts008]

user@computer:~$ man windows7
No manual entry for windows7

Oh No!

Re:OMG! He's right, it IS missing!!!

[maxwell demon]

$ whatis windows7
windows7: nothing appropriate.

Re:Windows 7 manual

[maxwell demon]

1. Install/purchase it.

I think the usual order is: First purchase, then install. :-)

7. Defrag. Scandisk. Coffee.

I don't think it will improve your Windows experimence if you put coffee into your computer :-)

Industry users

[stimpleton]

I assist in support for software in the agricultural sector. This is a demanding sector, for it is somewhat unique in that users want to know how to fix there problem but also rant about some aspect of agriculture. Our support people are a best compromise of support person and policy pundit. Its not best but is fits a need.

This book seems to address the exact problem we have. From our perspective, Win7 is a bringer of pain. Developers seem to not realise any change to a UI can have dire and far reaching consequences.

bleh

[Beelzebud]

The absolute mindless 7 bashing here is getting pathetic.

Re:bleh

[Anonymous Coward]

The absolute mindless 7 bashing here is getting pathetic.

Nah. They're just kshing it,darn it.

Re:Windows 7 manual

[perryizgr8]

I think the usual order is: First purchase, then install. :-)

i think you are not taking into account all those chines who first install, then when it doesn't work, purchase a key.

No manual?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft was too cheap to print a manual?

Re:Windows 7 manual

[Anonymous Coward]

That may have applied to some earlier versions of Windows but not Windows 7. It hasn't crashed yet even once

You just need more time with win7, you'll find out that it's still as spiteful about your work as winXP was. I've already lost a major project to corrupt data in win7. No one yet has explained how a 500MB folder full of files can just turn completely unreadable. Luckily I had the whole thing on my ubuntu partition as well.

I also tire of having to check the disc EVERY time I move stuff from ubuntu to win7. Naturally I have to boot to ubuntu and transfer files over, and win7 always throws a WTF and runs chkdsk when I boot back to it. If I don't allow chkdsk to run, my data is NOT there. XP never did that, ever.

Re:Windows 7 manual

[fireylord]

Neither does putting Java in your computer supposedly