Have Comments about Windows 7 RC? (Do not post questions here)
Gesperrt
- To all forum users:
Please use this thread to note any comments that you have about Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC). Do not use this thread for any specific question or issue that you are having - just for comments or feedback. For questions/issues that require an answer, create a new thread.
Thanks
-Tony Mann
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums- BearbeitetAnthony_MannMSFT, BesitzerMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 23:55
Alle Antworten
- A lot of people have been asking for a "classic" start menu, but no one has given a good solid reason as to why it's needed ("it's better" is not a sufficient reason), or even which "classic" start menu they are referring to.
The Start Menu first appeared in Windows 95, almost 15 years ago, so is that one the "classic" start menu?
Or do they mean the default start menu in Windows 98, Windows XP, or Windows Vista?
Looking back, the Start Menu (even the "classic" one back in 1995) was difficult for people to accept -- not because it was "bad" but because it was different.
From an early review of Windows 95:
"The new "Start" menu can be annoying at times. If I want to play solitaire I would click Start, then Programs, then Accessories, then Games, then Solitaire. If I closed the application and wanted to re-open it, I would have to go through the same thing again.
This is a step backwards from Program Manager which kept the last accessed program group on top. Of course, an advanced user could create a shortcut to the application on the desktop or add it to the top of the main start menu."
http://toastytech.com/guis/win95.html
Shooting forwarding to today, people are now begging for this "annoying" start menu! Maybe, in a few years when everyone is used to the new Windows 7 / Vista start menu, people will finally realize that the new one is faster for techies and easier for Grandma to access.
- ZusammengeführtRonnie VernonMVP, ModeratorFreitag, 8. Mai 2009 04:54Feedback
As an IT professional I want the Classic windows XP start menu because:
1, When people work they are at the office to work and shouldnt fool around with graphical ____ like it is in Vista and in Windows 7. When you boot it up the users at different companies should feel comfortable working with the Windows user interface which they arent with Vista and not in Windows 7. Why change something good Microsoft has used since windows 95 untill Windows XP to something worse?
2, Older people like 45-65 doesnt like the new Start Menu because it is harder to find stuff, it takes still longer time to start programs in windows 7 then in Windows XP and so on.
3, It isnt Microsoft who gets the headache when the users wants to lynch the Technician. So if you want to sell ____ we will not buy Windows 7 untill administrators can use a policy on it showing a classic windows start menu, and loading it after performance and not after looks! With windows classic start menu buttons and with a graphical windows xp look alike userinterface as fast as Windows XP. If you dont do this believe me we will start using Linux Ubuntu! Thats a fact!
4, Linux Ubuntu is still more user friendly then Windows 7. It boots faster and it shutdowns faster. The user recognizes the userinterface, it looks like Windows XP and you can start Windows TS session on it and so on.
5, GIVE BACK the user friendly START MENU! We at companies arent interested of looks and games, we want easyness and efficiency. We dont want a "game look a like operating system ____"!!!!!
- Oliver__76 said:
As an IT professional I want the Classic windows XP start menu because:
1, When people work they are at the office to work and shouldnt fool around with graphical ____ like it is in Vista and in Windows 7. When you boot it up the users at different companies should feel comfortable working with the Windows user interface which they arent with Vista and not in Windows 7. Why change something good Microsoft has used since windows 95 untill Windows XP to something worse?
2, Older people like 45-65 doesnt like the new Start Menu because it is harder to find stuff, it takes still longer time to start programs in windows 7 then in Windows XP and so on.
3, It isnt Microsoft who gets the headache when the users wants to lynch the Technician. So if you want to sell ____ we will not buy Windows 7 untill administrators can use a policy on it showing a classic windows start menu, and loading it after performance and not after looks! With windows classic start menu buttons and with a graphical windows xp look alike userinterface as fast as Windows XP. If you dont do this believe me we will start using Linux Ubuntu! Thats a fact!
4, Linux Ubuntu is still more user friendly then Windows 7. It boots faster and it shutdowns faster. The user recognizes the userinterface, it looks like Windows XP and you can start Windows TS session on it and so on.
5, GIVE BACK the user friendly START MENU! We at companies arent interested of looks and games, we want easyness and efficiency. We dont want a "game look a like operating system ____"!!!!!
HERE HERE! Hail to the Oliver baby! I want it for my own productivity, but i do game on my machine. though i also file serve, print serve, media serve and so on! probaly why its a screaming beast! - I am a web developer and I use Windows 7 at work. As a web developer I have certain needs:
1. Quick access to launching "everyday" applications that I use everyday like Firefox, IE, Photoshop, SQLYog, Outlook, etc.
2. Quick access to less-common applications such as Calculator, Character Map, Command Prompt, etc.
3. Easily be able to multi-task between all of those applications.
The new Windows 7 Start Menu lets me do all of those things, and I can launch applications (both common and uncommon) much faster.
How do I do it?
1. I pinned all of my "everyday" applications to the taskbar. This alone keeps me from having to open the Start Menu at all on most days. I can easily just click the program's icon whether it's running or not, and I don't have to dig through any menus to get to it. It doesn't waste any space because the launcher icon becomes the task when it's running.
2. If I need to launch a less-common application, I click the Start Button and begin typing the application name. I usually only have to type in a few letters before the search box finds exactly what I need, and then I just have to press Enter to launch it. Again, no need to dig through any menus to find things like Calculator and Character Map.
All I'm saying is that by adjusting how I use Windows 7 to take advantage of its new features, I have increased my productivity, and it took me less than a day to get used to it. The "classic" start menu does not increase productivity beyond what Windows 7 provides by default.At home I am dual-booting with Windows XP, and the few times I have to go back to Windows XP, I always miss the Windows 7 taskbar and Start Menu.
- Pinning down all of your "everyday" applications to the taskbar is also available in Windows XP! So why use Windows 7? The only thing I miss in Windows XP is the step 2 in your list =).
- In Windows XP I generally disable Quick Launch because it competes with the taskbar, both physically and mentally. In other words, if I want to launch, say, Photoshop, I have to first see if I already have it running in the task bar. If it's not there, then I move over to the Quick Launch and launch it.
But the reason why I remove the Quick Launch entirely is because it can become "muscle memory" for me to want to click the Quick Launch button every time I need Photoshop (even if it's already running).Even though I still have to make that assertion in XP ("is Photshop already running?"), I am less likely to accidentally launch a new instance from the Start Menu than from the Quick Launch.
Windows 7 solves this for me with the superbar.I multitask over 60 hours a week with Windows 7, and I approve the new Taskbar and Start Menu.
- Oliver__76 said:
As an IT professional I want the Classic windows XP start menu because:
1, When people work they are at the office to work and shouldnt fool around with graphical ____ like it is in Vista and in Windows 7. When you boot it up the users at different companies should feel comfortable working with the Windows user interface which they arent with Vista and not in Windows 7. Why change something good Microsoft has used since windows 95 untill Windows XP to something worse?
2, Older people like 45-65 doesnt like the new Start Menu because it is harder to find stuff, it takes still longer time to start programs in windows 7 then in Windows XP and so on.
3, It isnt Microsoft who gets the headache when the users wants to lynch the Technician. So if you want to sell ____ we will not buy Windows 7 untill administrators can use a policy on it showing a classic windows start menu, and loading it after performance and not after looks! With windows classic start menu buttons and with a graphical windows xp look alike userinterface as fast as Windows XP. If you dont do this believe me we will start using Linux Ubuntu! Thats a fact!
4, Linux Ubuntu is still more user friendly then Windows 7. It boots faster and it shutdowns faster. The user recognizes the userinterface, it looks like Windows XP and you can start Windows TS session on it and so on.
5, GIVE BACK the user friendly START MENU! We at companies arent interested of looks and games, we want easyness and efficiency. We dont want a "game look a like operating system ____"!!!!!
I agree with you total as an sytem Admnistrator at a school - I'm a Microsoft Professional and I start each installation from my routine task to Switch Task bar to "Classic Start menu" moreover "Show Small Icons" in the start menu is ESSENTIAL to me.
It was introduced to me in Windows XP , this new approach for Managing files, Getting to Network Connections, Fax and printers, control panel etc.
I JUST HATE it.
Show Small Icons is essential because when I press START this menu doesn't take so much space on my desktop. It's small , little, tiny and this is the way I want it to be.
To get to "Network Connections" it's just two clicks ! I press Start, Settings , Network Connections and I have WHAT I WANT.
I don't see any fancy , gui , graphical Animation showing me where I stand with a network, No shiny buttons flying around telling me "YOU ARE CONNECTED" or not connected.
I have my NIC , I can get to it's settings in seconds... and that's what I want.
I appreciate that some people wish to use (especially home users) different , proposed menu.. which is fine.
BUT TAKING POSIBILITY FROM THOSE WHO USED TO CLASSIC VIEW from Windows 7 ITS A MISTAKE , and if it won't come back I'll be strongly against this system, not because it's bad, but because it doesn't give an option to CHOOOOSE.
MP- ZusammengeführtRonnie VernonMVP, ModeratorFreitag, 8. Mai 2009 04:53Feedback
- way to speak your mind, and i agree completely, thats the same way my GUI is set up.
- I hope this post is informative and not an seen as an attack on your opinion.
The fastest way to get to the network connections page in 7 is to click the Network icon in the system tray and click "Open Network and Sharing Center". If you need to manage your network adapters (which is what I think you were referring to in your post), click "Change adapter settings" on the left-hand sidepanel.
How often do you modify your network adapter? If the answer is "often", would it help if you could pin your network connection to the Taskbar, so it's always accessible from 1 click? BTW I just tried this, and it seems network connections currently cannot be pinned to the Taskbar. I was able to create a shortcut to it on my Desktop, but I still could not drag the shortcut to the Taskbar. - I agree with mpianka. I use the network icon to access my NIC properties fairly often, in fact many times each week. I also prefer the classic start menu and have customized it very heavily in XP-Pro from which still do all my work during the day. I have over 120 apps that take up 3 full sized columns within the classic start menu and each of those have many slide-out columns afterward. I know not many people use as many apps as I do, but still, it's nice to be able to customize the UI environment. In fact - isn't that what mainly distinguishes Windows from the Mac OS? (I'm not familiar with the Mac OS, but that's what it seems like from their TV commercials)
Mike - Just curious, why do you have to access your NIC properties so often? Are you changing your static IP address or adding networking protocols, or just reviewing the current settings?
If you have 3 full pages of apps openning classic menu, would this one not be nicer as it doesnt take up your entire screen doing that?
Also, classic menu has been dying for a LONG time before this.
I'm not a fan of everything they are trying to do atm, but I'm trying to play with the start menu / taskbar to try and make it work
for me, who knows I might find something that is even EASIER then I had it before and never would have bothered looking for it
if I wasn't given the opportunity to play with it.- You are absolutely right and there are a lot of users Who agree with you. See: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproui/thread/f942ad6a-9ce2-41b8-a1d7-d8fd6ba2cdc1, and similar posts.
- I agree completely!
I also miss the ability to switch between the ui themes (XP, Vista, W2k). It professionals have no use for a 3d effects... ui's should be simple and fast - I also agree as I've said in a couple of other threads. I like things set up the way I want them. After all, it is my computer! Bells, whistles and eye candy that don't help me work are useless to me. Don't necessarily take those things away, but at least give me the chance to opt out of some of them by returning the classic menu and the means to set up attached menus the way I want them.
- I agree the CLASSIC MENU should be a choice for any number of reason
Tek-Zar - I don't want this to sound like I'm disagreeing with you, because I'm all about choice and if it were still there, I'd say use it if you want it.
HOWEVER...
Asking for "Classic Start Menu" at this point is no different than the people who demanded Program Manager and File Manager from the old Windows 3.1 days when they upgraded to Windows 95/98. Microsoft forced the new UI on users for those versions, but left the old style in tact for 2 major upgrades afterwards to ease the transition. By the time Windows 2000 and ME were released, those old programs no longer existed.
Now, the Classic Start Menu was replaced with the XP style menu and was expanded in Vista, and now Windows 7 (two major releases later) is deprecating that classic interface in favor of the new interface that has been in place since XP.
At some point, no matter how much we love/hate an interface, it becomes imperative --- ESPECIALLY AS IT PROFESSIONALS --- to embrace the new interface to make it work for us, even if it means re-learning new tricks to make things as efficient as they were under a previous version.
The same can be said of Office with the new Office 2007 Ribbon interface. No matter how much some people may hate it, they're not going to go back to the menu style, and in fact, Office 14 is expanding it to Outlook, OneNote, Publisher, etc etc.
The bottom line is this... they're not asking if we like the decision, they're telling us to deal with it. To be honest, I resisted Vista with every ounce of my being, because I hated all the new changes and interface. With 7, because there are a lot of elements I like, I'm finally embracing the things I don't like and finding alternative solutions.
Now I don't want to rant and walk away leaving you disgruntled that I told you your grandmother is dying and there's nothing you can do about it, so here's a few ways that you can simply the task you're trying to accomplish:1) Enable and show all notification area icons... especially the network connection one. Click it once, click Network and Sharing Center, click Change Adapter Settings. 3 clicks. XP required two, and Vista requires 8. For the record, I have submitted feedback for them to add "Change Adapter Settings" and "Change Firewall Settings" back to the right click menu of the network notification icon. I hope they really listen to that one.
2) Click Start, type "view network connections" and press Enter. Bam, you're there. This is actually my preferred method for now, because I'm a keyboard junkie and press WinKey and immediately start typing while I wait for the animations to happen.
3) Create a shortcut on the desktop to the Network Connections folder. Then, copy the shortcut to a flash drive and it will work regardless of the PC you're using. Better still if you use your own autorun.inf to trigger that shortcut, it will run as soon as you pop it in.
- I don't think he was complaining about the Networks thing, I believe he was using it as an example. His point is give the paying customer an option of going to older versions, to ease them into the new ways of things. We're paying in excess of 200+ dollars for these OS's, why not make the customer happy while making your billions? I like the new options in Windows 7 (I went from XP to Windows 7 Beta.. but I've used Vista on my wife's laptop), but the fact I can't customize the look of this taskbar and install custom theme packs cause I have NO idea where they are stored, kinda bugs me. So just give us the options!!.. LOL
@GoodThings2Life
You quote:"At some point, no matter how much we love/hate an interface, it becomes imperative --- ESPECIALLY AS IT PROFESSIONALS --- to embrace the new interface to make it work for us, even if it means re-learning new tricks to make things as efficient as they were under a previous version."
You could not have said it any better.
As IT Professionals, it is incumbent on us to be up to speed on what is happening in the computer world. Regardless of what we personally like or dislike, there is going to be a customer somewhere that loves a feature that we just hate and is going to ask us for help. The last thing they want to hear is a fanboi-like rant about how messed up things are and how they should be.
To make it worse, once you learn and embrace the changes, you actually find that some are better, quite a bit better in some cases. I have been using Vista since its inception because I wanted to be in-the-know and stand out from those who refuse to use it. At first, it frustrated me to no end; however, as I read actual reference materials and understood what was happening, I slowly came around to realize it is much better than XP. As a result, I can get Vista to do things that people swore up and down—and still swear left to right—it could not do.
Although I can navigate each OS just as easily, I really prefer the Vista/7 interfaces to XP.
- I have to agree, I have supported Windows since the very 1st version and I also like the XP classic and also the taskbar method. I'm not a fan of the new taskbar. It is confusing and if some like it I would like an option that is either XP or W7 as a quick option. I prefer the way it extends "up" and the end of it a movable row which I can decide where that is take place. A bit like the Classic view option when Control Panel is opened. It's quick to return to the "Category View" for customers.
I have trouble opening a second copy of IE using this new taskbar. I want to open a new copy not restore the existing lowered version.
Also I am loosing icons from the desktop that I have made shortcuts of. eg Control Panel, Printers, System. They all disappear regulary when I start each morning.
Otherwise I am very happy. - I agree with what is being said here. I really only have 2 problems thought with the interface.
First and foremost is the Start Menu. I really did like the XP/2000 thinner version. I really don't like to see a most recent list on my start menu since there is the desktop to place icons and now a really nice tray that I can put my most used on.
Second and most minor of options is that I want the button on all my folder menus that goes up a folder. I know that I can just click on the name and go backwards but really, I don't like that as much as having a small button up there.
Oh and I thought of a third thing. I miss having "Windows Update" on my start menu. I think that should be a start menu option that you can turn on if you like.
I can really see why some people would like the start menu and I really can't say anything bad about it. It's just not what I want and I can see that there are many people that don't want it either. I hope that MS will make some additional options to bring back old looks.
- When it comes to the UI, don't bother complaining, this is the way Microsoft want windows to look and feel and that's it. In my opinion it's not change for improvement it just change for change sake, this was a complaint in in the early incarnations Vista and continues to be a complaint in Windows 7, but as I said it's falling on def ears. Alright Rant over.
With that being said, first right click on task bar, then properties, start menu Click on the start tab, customize, enable say Recorded TV and dislpay as menu, than click on orb right click on Recorded TV, click on include a folder point to "C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\programs"right click on Recorded TV again rename to "programs" and you have the fly out style menu of windows xp. For the life of me I can't understand why Microsoft will not just include this as an option, the only reason I can think of, is stubbornest, they are upset that a great deal of people don't like the new UI that worked so hard on and their going to force it no matter what. It's analogous to Office's Ribbon, Microsoft is forcing it, there is just as many bad reviews as good reviews on the ribbon, not a lot of companies are licensing the Ribbon UI, but they are Microsoft, they don't make mistakes they know better then their customers what their customers want. The only way this will change is either Bill Gates comes back like Jobs did or if Balmer retires than it will be a all new improved design once again.. that's my story I'm sticking to it...
PEACE! - I said in another post:
Microsoft says on The Welcome to Windows 7 site, "Over the past few years, you've asked us to make some changes to Windows. We listened closely."
It is obvious to me that they have only listened to the users whose opinions matched their own. - I also use the classical start menu in windows xp and windows ultimate.
Here is my good solid reason:
I use more than 100 different applications a day and have installed more than 3000 applications on my computer.
Most of them are seldom used. I use them if I get a question from others to solve a problem they have.
With the classical start menu I have groped them under themes like:
development->embedded->arm
development->embedded->microchip
development->embedded->cypress
development->embedded->atmel
development->tools->hex-edit
development->tools->programmer
picture->edit
picture->viewer
multimedia->audio
multimedia->video
multimedia->tv
...
and so on.
The main menu has about 20 entries which have sub menus up to 10 levels deep.
In the start menu of windows 7 it costs me very much time to scroll through the applications tree all the time to start a seldom used application.
- your best bet is not to bother using the menu but just type in the program's name in the search box
Why not use "new start menu style" side by side with "classic start menu style":
http://www.sevenforums.com/general-discussion/3154-classic-start-menu-available.html#post41112- I think we are represented, it is just lack of interest in us the people! 7 versions? WTF? way to listen!
- The recursive menus are also available in Win7' start menu. Not as easy as it was before, but still... you can organize your things by manually creating all the folders here:
%systemroot%:\Users\%user%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs - I have to agree that being forced to have enterprise setups is sub-optimal for many users. I have worked with or for many companies, including some with thousands of employees. I have only seen one case where roaming profiles were used -- an office of about 10 people where roaming profiles were apparently all the IT guy knew how to do. Every office has had one computer per user, even the one with roaming profiles. I would much rather have a switch on setup that let the install choose between having a single user setup (without all the c:\user\ZZZZ\... stuff) or a setup with multiple users. Having to drill down 8 to 10 layers to make a simple configuration change on a program should never be necessary.
- Simple solution for this would be to have one of the default themes be Windows Classic and let those of us who have to
administer this in a corporate/education environment chose what our users will see.
I'm not sure if Microsoft sees this as a way to demonstrate to the user that they've left the Win9x/Win2k?WinXP days
or if someone has decided that this "looks cool and by god it's gonna stay". It makes one wonder if the reasons for
leaving progman as a shell in Win9x have been completely forgotten.
In any event they need to learn from Vista's failings, accept that they completely misread what their customers
were willing to accept and use this as a base to move on. Simple solution for this would be to have one of the default themes be Windows Classic and let those of us who have to administer this in a corporate/education environment chose what our users will see.
Hi
I'm not sure a theme would solve this problem? I think one mistake people make with the current thinking about the Classic Start Menu is that austere or spartan equals productivity. I have never seen any real proof that this is true. However, I have seen that austere equals boredom and a lackadaisical attitude which usually results in much less productivity.
The main thing I remember about the Classic Start Menu was watching people click Programs and then see those cascading menus that completely covered the monitor. Then they would need to move all the way across the screen to get to the application they were looking for, and then oops, they accidentally moved the cursor across a menu that had sub-menus that popped open and covered up the application they were trying to reach.
I'm not sure if Microsoft sees this as a way to demonstrate to the user that they've left the Win9x/Win2k?WinXP days or if someone has decided that this "looks cool and by god it's gonna stay". It makes one wonder if the reasons for leaving progman as a shell in Win9x have been completely forgotten.
If I remember correctly, one of the most vociferous rants about XP was it's Mattel Toys look. People just could not handle all of the 'eye candy' J
In any event they need to learn from Vista's failings, accept that they completely misread what their customers
Uh, Vista still has the Classic Start Menu as an option.
were willing to accept and use this as a base to move on.
The one thing I do remember is a few years before I retired, I helped replace approximately 80 workstations running Win2k with XPPro. The excitement and increased productivity was amazing to watch. Most of the people in the office were in the coffee room 30 minutes before their start time. Even the stuffy old CEO was impressed. :)
Also, remember that Windows 7 is still at the earliest stages of beta, there may be some changes coming that will even impress the folks who balk at any sort of change.
I just plan on sitting back and watching the show.
My thoughts.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta
Ronnie Vernon MVP- the problem with XP, specifically, Luna, wasn't the eye candy. It was UGLY eye candy that looks like as you say My Mattel Computer.the Mac has eye candy, too. But it's pleasing and enhances functionality and not merely distracts. win7 is much better than XP, but I still give the edge to OSX.I do wish he theme were more customizable, like this concept shot:http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs28/f/2008/073/8/3/Windows_7_RTM_by_aesmon11.jpg
+1 for more customization, but I beg that Win7 doesn't look like that pic ^^.I do wish he theme were more customizable, like this concept shot:http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs28/f/2008/073/8/3/Windows_7_RTM_by_aesmon11.jpg
Can you imagine a taskbar like that on a 9-inch widescreen?
Can you imagine those small fonts on a small screen?
Can you imagine how awful it would look if you made them bigger?
Why no search in Start Menu? It's the best thing since sliced bread.
Why swap Programs and Folders in Start Menu? Start Menu is primarily about programs, thus they should be closer (right above the Orb)
Why is the only taskbar item in the middle?
It's made in 2008. Vista's out since 2006/2007. Where's Aero?- BearbeitetKristaps. Montag, 20. April 2009 01:49added info
One thing I've always wondered about is whether these people making mockup sketches of future operating systems ever considered actually using their creations. What's with the negative space? Why does the awkward-looking centered text of the left-hand column in the Start Menu have absolutely zero organization? Why is there zero distinction between the titlebar, breadcrumb bar, and command bar in this file navigator? Not only that but the command bar gives way and transitions into a really large status bar. And why the ____ are the controls so uneven, the bottom of the back button (I'm guessing forward goes from 0 to 100% opacity when necessary... weak) is right in the upper-middle region of the star button on the right side of "Explorer". ____, the upper lip on the back buttons decoration looks to intrude about three pixels into the captions space...
Gah... sorry, I just never understood these things. So, what were we talking about? Customization? Yeah, why not, but not every theme needs glass, Kristaps. :P
True, but it looks good :PYeah, why not, but not every theme needs glass, Kristaps. :P
Well, the glass sure looks better on than off :P
JUST MY WORDS !As an IT professional I want the Classic windows XP start menu because:
1, When people work they are at the office to work and shouldnt fool around with graphical
....
4, Linux Ubuntu is still more user friendly then Windows 7.
5, GIVE BACK the user friendly START MENU! We at companies arent interested of looks and games, we want easyness and efficiency. We dont want a "game look a like operating system ____"!!!!!
Here is some more:
6. The program list is too short. You don't want to scroll the list up and down when seeking the program you need. The expanded list in WinXP was good
7. Some installed programs just disappear from the list. There might be a bug
8. Keyboard shortcuts just don't work with the new menu. Try to shut down or hibernate he system.
WE WANT AN OPERATING SYSTEM AND NOT A VIDEO GAME !
Please remake your decision about the marketing profiles of Windows. Make one version without any AEROs and Mediaplayers, leave out all the tours, games, toys and eyecandy. Make it domain compatible.
Here is thousands of customers who want to WORK with the computer.
The last operating system which could be used in simple laboratory environments was MSDOS 6.22 and MS don't even sell it any more. (Is it now public domain ?)
Version after version MS operating systems have been less and less user friendly. Win3.11 was about 32 MB. Compared to Win 7 with 7.6 GB this Win7 should be 237.5 times better. Is it really ?
For example Puppy Linux is about 100 MB, runs fine in a 200MHz PC with 128MB of RAM and has all that is needed. What is missing, can be downloaded from the net for no cost = free.
- ok here are my 2 eurocents about OP
1 - evolition. Windows pre-95 didn't even have start menu at all , and everyone (read:ppl like you) was complaining about it.
2 - it is easier and faster , cos you can just use your keyboard (you are an IT expert, right?) without looking through multiple columns of start menu folders
3 - what has any of this got to do with Linux? Also, if you consider using Linux, that means you've made sure that all your applications are compatible. In that case, you could end up with saving a lot of money.
4 - what has startup/shutdown speed to do with user-friendliness? and could you explain this "Windows TS session" please?
5 - see #1 and #2 pls?
6 - to make the start menu bigger, increase the number of shown recent programs. and THIS has been there since WinXP
7 - smth wrong at your end
8 - alt+f4 - working. win -> left -> enter still working too. don't see problems there
@"WE WANT" part - there are many enterprise operating systems. IMHO Windows UI/u-experience is mostly oriented to home users (don't be fooled by all them 'business' versions)
@MSDOS again, noone is forcing anyone to upgrade. feel free to throw your computer out the window and grab a pen (or a feather).
@Win3.11 and no new features have been introduced, no new UI, no new security measures, no new device support (did you know that USB (your mouse and keyboard) support wasn't even in your beloved Win95 (introduced in 1996 with OEM Service Release 2.1)), no NOTHING , right? Well, kind sir, thanks for enlightening me! If you could pls send me a copy of Win3.11 (or better yet Win1), I would be very grateful, watching all those monochrome letters blur out on my Full HD monitor.
@PuppyLinux PL was made to be one of the lightest, plainest, most no-frills distros around. Don't you dare compare a it to full-featured OS with some attention to UI and design and beauty (finally) . Also, I woudn't call PL a operating system designed to use in any business.
@ the free part - ever heard of freeware? does FOSS (free and open-source software) ring a bell?
I don't want to continue this post (and risk losing my good mood), but TBH, I'm pretty pissed right now. kthxbye.
P.S.: YOUR CAPS LOCK KEY IS BROKEN. - Wow, Kristaps, I guess Microsoft can do no wrong in your eyes. Doesn't it get boring not thinking for yourself? :) I guess there was nothing wrong with Vista, either, contrary to popular belief.
- 1) Now why would you think that? Read my posts much?
2) If I wasn't thinking for myself, I wouldn't be there, trying to make the next operating system I'll use better.
3) There were many things wrong with Vista, but in most cases (and I'm dead serious) the problem was somewhere between the keyboard and the chair. Of course, there were driver problems in the beginning. Of course, UAC was much more annoying than it should. Of course people didn't like the changes (it's natural I guess). Of course it needed more resources than your average PC would have at that time (okay it was a resource hog).
but without Vista, there wouldn't even be Windows 7 .
Vista isn't as bad, really (most of what you know is probably from Apple's awesome Get A Mac ads, and other press bashing and hating). Sure, it changed a lot, and it was flawed, but it the end, many of the changes (mostly DWM) were for good, once MS tweaked them (see Windows 7).
Kristaps, I totally agree with you. Vista has so bad reputation from people who even never installed or used. One of the main problems is that people hate the changes. Personally, I think Windows XP has been out there for too many years. And, for those complaining about Vista/Windows 7, I have to say that XP had a lot of security issues in the beginning and until SP 2 was released, was another "crappy" Microsoft product.
3) There were many things wrong with Vista, but in most cases (and I'm dead serious) the problem was somewhere between the keyboard and the chair. Of course, there were driver problems in the beginning. Of course, UAC was much more annoying than it should. Of course people didn't like the changes (it's natural I guess). Of course it needed more resources than your average PC would have at that time (okay it was a resource hog).
but without Vista, there wouldn't even be Windows 7 .
Vista isn't as bad, really (most of what you know is probably from Apple's awesome Get A Mac ads, and other press bashing and hating). Sure, it changed a lot, and it was flawed, but it the end, many of the changes (mostly DWM) were for good, once MS tweaked them (see Windows 7).
On the other hand, Vista SP2 is excellent. They solved many of the issues the OS had since the release. But W7 is a step forward. They tweaked and improved a lot compared to Vista.
So, I think that the real pain here is to learn new features and mainly, a new way of interacting with the UI/desktop. I'm pretty sure that most of people (not everybody) complaining about the new start menu/taskbar or requesting the implementation of the "Classic Menu" hardly used Vista.
Regards.
W7 Beta running on an AMD Semprom 3200+ (1800Mhz) with 2 Gbs of RAM and a built-in Nvidia 6100 VGA, and mate, it runs like a charm! And now on my VAIO FE31M Laptop.Kristaps, I totally agree with you. Vista has so bad reputation from people who even never installed or used. One of the main problems is that people hate the changes. Personally, I think Windows XP has been out there for too many years. And, for those complaining about Vista/Windows 7, I have to say that XP had a lot of security issues in the beginning and until SP 2 was released, was another "crappy" Microsoft product.
Totally agree with you there :)
On the other hand, Vista SP2 is excellent. They solved many of the issues the OS had since the release. But W7 is a step forward. They tweaked and improved a lot compared to Vista.
So, I think that the real pain here is to learn new features and mainly, a new way of interacting with the UI/desktop. I'm pretty sure that most of people (not everybody) complaining about the new start menu/taskbar or requesting the implementation of the "Classic Menu" hardly used Vista.
Regards.I use Windows since 1993 spending around 10-12 hours a day on a PC.
I have 3 computers at work plus quite a few at home.
A computer is not a piece of art to stare at....
All my computers are set to "maximum performance" and tweaked with no system restore, no recycle bin, static swap files, clean msconfig, trimmed services, minimal use of “docs and settings”, etc. I use only overclocked quads up to 4Ghz and 8Gb Ram with raid arrays, and I’m still not happy with the performance.
I'm still looking forward to an OS focused on speed and not on features to have programs and windows opening almost instantly, to have a response close to or even faster than my reactions.
I do not care about features, fancy desktops, animated menus' etc. I want an ugly but fast interface with menus easily accessible.
In my experience, the fastest OS so far from Microsoft is XP x64 which is being abandoned...
In my nature, I have an open mind - I gave Vista 9 months of my time and had only frustration until I decided to go irreversibly back to XP. I'm not a slow learner, but after 9 months with Vista menu, I was still wasting a lot of time searching....and started using Run to type the *cpl or *msc shortcut....
I do not understand why Microsoft is focused so much on visual and ergonomic changes and not on the important things.
Why didn't they make a research on most common used application and tried to include them, like a decent download manager, an enhanced file manager (I use Total Commander for 10 years now), a better browser (Firefox and Opera are becoming more and more popular and IE is the falling way behind in speed and security), better taskmanager (see process explorer from Sysinternals), decent firewall, ghost utility, antivirus (I know they bought at least a couple antivirus companies....), etc
No, nothing of this..... instead, they adopted a stubborn attitude in annoying some of the most loyal users by changing menus (Office 2007, Vista, Win7).
Vista already proved itself to be a market disaster despite those 90mil copies pretended sold. Almost no major company in the world adopted Vista as standard OS. Major manufacturers like HP that initially released Vista only machines changed strategy offering XP option. Is Microsoft learning anything out of this experience? Again, No. Instead they removed even the feature to make the new OS look like legacy ones. With the present GUI, I do not see Win7 in the business envirnonment adopted either.
About the Classic start menu - my programs list on a 1920x1200 screen spans on 4 columns..., I know how to reach everything without thinking. I hate the scrolling “feature” in explorer (I use TC anyway)…I do not want to argue with the people who like and use the new start menu in Win7 but it's not for me.
It is a matter of preference, and I, as an old Windows user want my "outdated" menus back.
Regardless of how appealing a desktop looks like, you eventually get bored with it and stick with the main functionality of the system.Security is only an annoyance - there will always be exploits in windows as long it will stay the most popular OS. People who need security never did or will rely on Windows only.
Someone said that only 15% of the users want the classic menu. But if they are most the opinion makers, of the PC technicians and the ones who advise their peers, the impact will be much larger. I always advised all my friends to stay away from Vista, and not surprisingly, they all did. Hopefully I won’t have to do the same with Win7
I was defending Windows against Mac and Unix, and still do, but something changed in Microsoft before releasing Vista, which in my opinion leads, deliberately or not, to the wrong track.
It will take many years until Win7 or something similar will replace W2k3 server, and hopefully, until then Microsoft will come down to earth and start respecting their most devoted users.ok here are my 2 eurocents about OP
Reply:
1 - evolition. Windows pre-95 didn't even have start menu at all
2 - it is easier and faster , cos you can just use your keyboard (you are an IT expert, right?) without looking through multiple columns of start menu folders
3 - what has any of this got to do with Linux? Also, if you consider using Linux, that means you've made sure that all your applications are compatible. In that case, you could end up with saving a lot of money.
4 - what has startup/shutdown speed to do with user-friendliness? and could you explain this "Windows TS session" please?
5 - see #1 and #2 pls?
6 - to make the start menu bigger, increase the number of shown recent programs. and THIS has been there since WinXP
7 - smth wrong at your end
8 - alt+f4 - working. win -> left -> enter still working too. don't see problems there
@"WE WANT" part - there are many enterprise operating systems. IMHO Windows UI/u-experience is mostly oriented to home users (don't be fooled by all them 'business' versions)
@MSDOS again, noone is forcing anyone to upgrade. feel free to throw your computer out the window and grab a pen (or a feather).
@Win3.11 and no new features have been introduced, no new UI, no new security measures, no new device support (did you know that USB (your mouse and keyboard) support wasn't even in your beloved Win95 (introduced in 1996 with OEM Service Release 2.1)), no NOTHING , right? Well, kind sir, thanks for enlightening me! If you could pls send me a copy of Win3.11 (or better yet Win1), I would be very grateful, watching all those monochrome letters blur out on my Full HD monitor.
@PuppyLinux PL was made to be one of the lightest, plainest, most no-frills distros around. Don't you dare compare a it to full-featured OS with some attention to UI and design and beauty (finally) . Also, I woudn't call PL a operating system designed to use in any business.
@ the free part - ever heard of freeware? does FOSS (free and open-source software) ring a bell?
I don't want to continue this post (and risk losing my good mood), but TBH, I'm pretty pissed right now. kthxbye.
P.S.: YOUR CAPS LOCK KEY IS BROKEN.
1. Nothing wrong in Start menu in itself. Many users are agains the changes which seem to be there for just the fun of changing things. Users got to learn new ways of finding things.
2. Yes, You can and I can find ways to make things without using mouse, but there is a lot of people who has more important things to do than sit there trying to find new tricks.
3. Linux is evolving. The user interface is not changing radically, because the builders are listening the users. Microsoft builds the user interface without any interest to the users
4. The start/shutdown time doesn't matter anything for you, who are sitting at your computer day and night. For an average user it is annoying. Because of the slow response the computers are left on for the whole day spending energy.
..
6. Please tell us, how to 'clue' the most often used programs to the left panel of the menu as we had a habit doing in WinXP.
..
8. Nice to see there is some tricks. Tell me how can we teach these to the average users.
'@We want': As you said, the windows operating systems are more and more built for home use. Even the Professional version is not for a professional, if we mean by the word 'Professional' those users, who have a profession and are really working. I well know that nowadays this word professional is more often meaning 'kids' or something else without connection to work. I have even met a toothbrush with label 'professional'. Still I have newer met a person, who brushes her teeth as a work.
'@Win311'. Many things could have been changed without making radical changes to the user interface. The Start menu could have stll been copied there from Linux. The new device drivers added (for example USB) and the kernel grown to multitasking. If the changes had been gradual and well planned, we might still manage our everyday work with a lot smaller computers. For example the viruses are here because there has been too many radical changes. The size of Win7 is 200 times larger than Win311 because there is so much dead code. Microsoft has bought all kinds of programs from third party programmers and just thrown them there without checking. All those programs seem to have all their libraries there eating space. Compare this to Linux.
Win7 might be tens of procents smaller and not so vulnerable to viruses, if all the programs were built in one standardized and thoroughly tested programming environment.
'@PuppyLinux' is there only for a comparition. It is small, functional and expandable. It makes all the things needed. And it doesn't need an antivirus program eating power.
Check it: any antivirus program eats about 50-300MB of RAM and worth of 500MHz of CPU speed.
cut from another post:
'Kristaps, I totally agree with you. Vista has so bad reputation from people who even never installed or used. One of the main problems is that people hate the changes.'
If you have a company or EDU with some thousands of employees, you understand it better. Not only the new operating system cost something. Also you need new PC's, new servers, program versions, drivers, laboratory equipement. You got to cook up teaching for the users. You spend endless hours trying to find how to make systems work and find new drivers for our tools. We spared millions of Euros when we decided to jump over WinNT, Win2000 and Vista. If possible, we'll be clad to jump over Win7 too.
The users hate the changes, because they have to spend counless hours learning how to use the system. Their tools don't work while we are trying to find solutions.
The IT professional hate it, because it is just work in vain. They hate it, because HelpDesk got to find new ways to help users over the telephone and email. The customers think it is your reason, if you cant make it work.
Everyone hates the changes, because they make old computers obsolete. New systems just don't work any more. Old computers got to be thrown out -it is called pollution !
You say you are going to loose your good mood. This tells me you are in your teens. Real IT professionals have lost their good mood years ago with MicroSoft. There is no more frustrating work than this. You can't build anything for the future, because you don't know what is lurking in the minds of MS. Anything you have built and tested will be history, when the new MSWindows appears. It is no evolution. It is pure dictatory. Like sailing in a boat with a mad captain.
Someone said that only 15% of the users want the classic menu. But if they are most the opinion makers, of the PC technicians and the ones who advise their peers, the impact will be much larger.
When this data is collected, who were those, who takes part to the survey ?
Mostly this kind surveys are in the network. Who does spend their time in that kind of netsites -Mostly young iPod generation. Never those who are using their PC as a tool in their work !A lot of people have been asking for a "classic" start menu, but no one has given a good solid reason as to why it's needed ("it's better" is not a sufficient reason), or even which "classic" start menu they are referring to.
The Start Menu first appeared in Windows 95, almost 15 years ago, so is that one the "classic" start menu?
Or do they mean the default start menu in Windows 98, Windows XP, or Windows Vista?
Looking back, the Start Menu (even the "classic" one back in 1995) was difficult for people to accept -- not because it was "bad" but because it was different.
From an early review of Windows 95:
"The new "Start" menu can be annoying at times. If I want to play solitaire I would click Start, then Programs, then Accessories, then Games, then Solitaire. If I closed the application and wanted to re-open it, I would have to go through the same thing again.
This is a step backwards from Program Manager which kept the last accessed program group on top. Of course, an advanced user could create a shortcut to the application on the desktop or add it to the top of the main start menu."
http://toastytech.com/guis/win95.html
Shooting forwarding to today, people are now begging for this "annoying" start menu! Maybe, in a few years when everyone is used to the new Windows 7 / Vista start menu, people will finally realize that the new one is faster for techies and easier for Grandma to access.
the classic menu is borring and old. If you dont know how to use the windows 7 start menu; then you shouldnt be working with computers. Go take intro to micro computers or something.
"The new "Start" menu can be annoying at times. If I want to play solitaire I would click Start, then Programs, then Accessories, then Games, then Solitaire. If I closed the application and wanted to re-open it, I would have to go through the same thing again. "
How about you click "Start" and type in "solitaire"?
Maybe you think it's annoying because you dont know how to use the start menu.- Bearbeitetae69ae Freitag, 8. Mai 2009 16:44
"How about you click "start" and type in "solitaire"?
Maybe you think its annoying because you dont know how to use the start menu."
I don't type 50wpm neither can type blind...This is why I always prefer clicks instead of typing.
If you want to understand, change keyboard layout to Dvorak and try it for yourself in the dark, then tell others how great the new menu is....- Ok you've been waiting on pins+needles for my opinion:
Recent Items, Recent Docs, YAY
Translucent anything, ?? (boo?)
Customizable YAY
And be consistent, whatever you decide, (no wait, that was wasted air) I like pretty, just don't ask me to learn anything you'll justa change/abandon very soon.
I thought of around 20 synonyms for what I think MS thinks of our opinions, but I really believe its people like Kristaps and Wolfie who inspire the people who Do matter, (so that means they matter too). Use your powers for good. Ok you've been waiting on pins+needles for my opinion:
Recent Items, Recent Docs, YAY
Translucent anything, ?? (boo?)
Customizable YAY
And be consistent, whatever you decide, (no wait, that was wasted air) I like pretty, just don't ask me to learn anything you'll justa change/abandon very soon.
I thought of around 20 synonyms for what I think MS thinks of our opinions, but I really believe its people like Kristaps and Wolfie who inspire the people who Do matter, (so that means they matter too). Use your powers for good.
Those super-powers better be fast acting. According to MSNBC, whatever we see in the RC next week is pretty much going to be it.
"The company [MS] has still not said when the finished version would begin to be installed on PCs or available to buy in shops, but the company's chief financial officer said on Thursday it could be as early as July."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30395407/If I want to play solitaire I would click Start, then Programs, then Accessories, then Games, then Solitaire. If I closed the application and wanted to re-open it, I would have to go through the same thing again. "
Oh yeah, and in classic start menu you don't neet to go to Programs -> accessories -> games -> solitaire, no? Sheesh.
I'd like to actually do something good and/or valuable about it, but at the moment I'm just stuck giving out suggestions for everything :P- >>A lot of people have been asking for a "classic" start menu,
>>but no one has given a good solid reason as to why it's needed
>>Looking back, the Start Menu (even the "classic" one back in 1995) was difficult for people to accept --
>>not because it was "bad" but because it was different. From an early review of Windows 95: "The new "Start" menu can be annoying
>> at times. If I want to play solitaire I would click
>Oh yeah, and in classic start menu you don't neet to go to Programs -> accessories -> games -> solitaire, no? Sheesh.
The guy who wrote that prolly died or retired, hector was quoting that guy, and I am quoting Hector (and you). When do you sleep? O, I accidentally discovered Office2007-SP2 thanks to you, so um, thanks. The guy who wrote that prolly died or retired, hector was quoting that guy, and I am quoting Hector (and you).
I like quoting you quote me quoting hector quoting that other guy ^^
When do you sleep? O, I accidentally discovered Office2007-SP2 thanks to you, so um, thanks.
What is this sleep thing you're talking about? :D And you're welcome :P
I'd like to actually do something good and/or valuable about it, but at the moment I'm just stuck giving out suggestions for everything :P- >> When do you sleep?
MS pays overtime for fanboys :) MS pays overtime for fanboys :)
Get your facts right. I am not a fanboy, nor am I getting paid.
I'd like to actually do something good and/or valuable about it, but at the moment I'm just stuck giving out suggestions for everything :P- RIGHT ON!
cact25 - I don't want to pin things to the taskbar. That is what the Quick launch in XP is for, or pin them to the start menu. You can also use the old fashioned desktop short-cuts...........
cact25 - That theme would definitely drive me to a MAC!
cact25 - Maybe MS should watch the MAC vs PC TV commercials................
cact25 - You can also pin GAMES to the start menu..................
cact25 - I almost always know what programs I have running. For the few times that I do forget, a quick glance at the task bar reminds me...........
cact25 - Win 7 could have been born without us using Vista. Was there a Win96 or 97? Win98 right to XP.
cact25 - I agree there. Vista is on the shelf and XP went back on the PC. I'm one of those who hardly used Vista, but I used it enough to dislike it. I also got free when I bought an HP/Compaq Pressario.
cact25
Although, I must admit... it does look appetizing. :)- BearbeitetRonnie VernonMVP, ModeratorSamstag, 2. Mai 2009 09:09Edit
- Could someone please give me a sensible and reasonable reason (legit reasons, not all that "office" and "old ppl" BS) why you prefer the Classic vs New? No hate, just reasons, please -- I'm willing to hear you out ;)
Regards, Kristaps. - Most people would be satisfied with a flyout menu option. This could be easily done by a simple option under "To Customize how links,icons,and menus look and behave in the startmenu, click customize." They have recourdered tv in there they have personnel folders, videos etc, Why not just have the option of the "Programs" displayed as a menu in there. I have already changed Recorded TV to point to all the programs in the program directory giving me a classic feel of a flyout menu.
Here is some reasons.
1 Flyout menus are for many easer to navigate.
2 I don't have to use numrous clicks to get to one program.
3 I am comfortable with the flyout menu.
4 I can find programs faster with a flyout menu.
5 the new program menu system is in a small box, thus limiting my field of view and choice.
Trufully it dosent matter why people want it. What really matters is why Microsoft will not give the option? "display progarams as a flyout menu" very simple, very easy fix that would saticfy a lot of people, for Microsoft is that really too much trouble. I've seen comments from Microsoft in the windows blog, but that would be redundant because it would give two different way of doing the same thing, my comment to that statment is "so what" Again a flyout menu option, would quell alot of indignation or discontent, would not require any major code additions. it's all right there already all Microsoft has to do is allow people to access it....
PEACE! - Kristabs - Great diagram, excellent response. So, now that you have proven that this issue in NOT about funtionality, what's left that could get all these folks so fired up? It's all ultimately about losing Flyout, and a corresponding loss of PC productivity.
The human eye is the fastest PC interface device there is. By taking away FLYOUT and limiting the use of your eyes to scan for what you are looking for, the new Start Menu is just plain slower. That's the core issue in this whole debate. Hopefully, with RC1 there will be an awakening. Hopefully, with RC1 there will be an awakening.
Not going to happen, since RC has been already released :P
I just hope for RC2 with all the change's we've suggested all around these forums :)
Regards, Kristaps.- So is it really safe to talk about the RC1 build 7100? Just want to make sure before I waste time with comments like last time. I'll be installing it in the next day or two and will have a couple of comments after I see the issues first hand.
- RC running fine here for a couple of days. For those who may be wondering, yes you can still add the Quicklaunch toolbar to the Taskbar. Also, you can get Windows Mail working also, although I see NO REASON for it to be included but disabled!!!!
- It's safe, even Ronnie will not lock you out. lol
Having said that, I thought there was supposed to be a major overhaul of the UI. Result: not a lot. Startmenu a bit more "readable". Explorer still has the flaws the beta had (I'm not saying internally, but as an end-user...).
Nevertheless it's the best OS Microsoft has ever made.
Regards
Rem - I just got RC installed, had less than a hour to play with it. Later, after work, I will have more time.
For now, I´m happy the list view of long file names is fixed. List is good to use again.
But, I´m really disapointed that Windows explorer still have all the flaws it had in beta. Windows XP explorer is (for me) still much better. It show me the file sizes without having to select files, and, even better, if I select more than a few files, I don´t have to click the STUPID "more details" button.
In xp, I can customize the windows explorer buttons bar. In 7, I can´t.
The image importer (when you plug a digital camera) is still the same one used in vista, back in 2006, that is just limitaded. In xp, I can select the pictures I want and the ones I don´t want to import, in 7, or you import everything, or nothing. (Why broke something that was good?)
In fact, the only way (for me) to work with a digital camera is windows 7 is installing Windows Live Photo Gallery, once it adds a decent picture importer to the autoplay of my camera. But it just means I need to download/install onther software to be able to use a function that was present and good in xp out of the box, for more than a decade.
The autoarrange function still can´t be disabled, even if I hate that thing, and is a huge drawback for my way of working with files.
The Classic start menu is out. Period. Even if people like it, they can´t get it anymore. I don´t want classic back, I like the new menu, but I would want it to float out when I go to "All Programs" having to scroll and scroll and scroll again to find a program is terrible, once I have a big screen, plenty of space to float my menu, and no option to do that. It still confined to that little corner of the screen, no matter if I don´t want it there.
Let me use it a little more, later I post more impressions... - In that case, here is some disk art for Epson printers with the type 2 tray. Print from Photoshop or extract the image area out and use your other disk printing software
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/win7rc1disksmall.jpg - Zeus76,
I have to chime in here. That "dig" about Ronnie locking you out is not fair or warranted.
Whether you realize it or not, we have a very difficult job to do here in these forums, including keeping messages on track. We have many internal discussions about how to handle specific threads, including if and when we lock threads and specific users. Certainly everyone should be able to understand that discussing non-public builds in a public forum cannot be supported. RC is now public, so discussing it instead of Beta is the appropriate thing to do in these forums.
I don't want this thread to get off track, but I thought it was important for me to chime in, so please take my comment for what it is worth and let's get back to testing RC. Please do not respond further on this thread for non-RC issues. Thanks for your cooperation.
Thanks
-Tony Mann
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums - I agree we should still have the Classic Start Menu Option. It is then up to the user to decide how their desktop and start menu workd.
Don't take functionality away
Regards - ditto Anthony.
If you want to work on tech issues of Win 7, here is the place.
If you need to trash MS, go elsewhere! I have waded through enough of that garbage and will report you in a flash!
As to the d/l after the 5th, I realized at midnight last night that it was now the 5th and sure enough it was available - took about 32 minutes. Very nice, MS!!! Cudos!!!
I have been using 7100 for about a week now, and love it!!!!!!
As to the quick launch - yeah, I totally forgot about that - I am reminded only by programs, whom, when installing, ask me if I want it added to the quick launch bar - I always say "no" as I have no idea where it would put it. I find the natural win 7 taskbar works beautifully for me - I get the advantages of both.
I have not noticed any change in 7100 from 7000, other than sfloppy now works, which means to me that the changes are transparent to me. I know a ton of work has gone into it as I have installed a couple of the in-between's just for fun.
I can not believe that they are giving this to us for a year. And in this economy.
Such a present!!!!!
Kris - Tony,
A comment from Ronnie to Darien about a question of mine really pissed me off. I'm an IT professional and have a good reputation. His comment was way out of line. (and of course no apologies)
This being said, my remark on Ronnie was a direct answer to Greg-999. (and I added "lol" (no hard feelings))
I agree that this thread should not go off track and therefore there will be no further "digging" about Ronnie (who I'm sure does a good job).
Back to business?
Taskbar->properties: the dropdowbuttons are too small for languages not as concise as american. - yes and I am a bigger IT professional. and far older than you and weigh more and my father is stronger. When will you guys learn to just take it elsewhere. You just gotta have the last word putting someone down.
Ronnie has done a lot of hard work here. If you don't like it, don't read his posts. I will not respond further to you.
Kris yes and I am a bigger IT professional. and far older than you and weigh more and my father is stronger. When will you guys learn to just take it elsewhere. You just gotta have the last word putting someone down.
Ronnie has done a lot of hard work here. If you don't like it, don't read his posts. I will not respond further to you.
Kris
Are you going to stop. I'm on this forum to help people when I can, not to support childish language. I was writing to Tony. Now stop.- This RC certainly solved a lot of issues we had with build 7000. MS has done a fantastic job in a very short time. Nevertheless although it's stable and functions OK, it is by no means ready to be shipped.
When you try to delete a bunch of files and than cancel that on the fly, explorer dies. It really tries to read / discover the contents of the files which are to be deleted. A nonsense to me.
Regards
Rem - I also miss the old Classis Start menu and I don´t like the Taskbar, since my first 95 and up, i allways have use Classic and the old taskbar,
i will NOT buy Windows 7 for years to come, because i (Classic, Taskbar) and IS´NT soooooo user freindly as Windows 95 and up to Windows 2008, i can´t find around in W7, but with Classic Start/Taskbar in W7, i will but it that day it´s come on the market...
:-( When your using UNIX (HP-UX, AIX, Spark), Linux, RTE-A, CPM (yes ma they still have a few around), CAPS, OS-11, Win98, Win2000, WinXP, Vista and Luck number 7, it would be nice for once for the new kid on the block to have an XP interface along with 7’s new interface.
With today’s processors, 4 plus GB of Ram and 1TB or more hard drives why can’t an intelligent programmer when teamed up with a savvy Marketing type give the XP users what they want, a new engine under the hood but the steering and gas pedal where you expect it to be. And just in time for a Xmas present.
JSThe only thing I noticed with Window Vista and Windows 7 is that the logon banner doesn't have the white background like Windows XP had. If you put a wallpaper on the desktop and if you have the DoD warning banner, then you can't read it that well. May suggeest that MS should look at making the logon banner with a white background. The whole point in the logon banner is so that people can read what the warning message states. This is a very critical when anyone signs on to a computer.
-Daniel HankinsDon't take functionality away
Classic Start Menu has less functionality than the new one, so basically it's the other way around xD
Regards, Kristaps.- I just found one nice improvement over the Beta. (one out, several to go!)
Internet Explorer now have "Tasks" and now is possible to open InPrivate navigation with just one click. No need to open a non in private instance and just them open inprivate.
But, thinking about it now, what if (keeping the moto: User in control) the user can personalize "tasks" and so on for the programs? Like.. I can right click a program in start menu and edit the menu I see there, puting or removing "tasks", would be very good.
The same can be applyed to notification area. Many times I want to open the Reliability Monitor, to check something. I can do that typing in "search" of start menu, but so far, I found that the faster way of doing it, using only mouse is: Right Click in Action Center "White Flag", open Action Center, expand Maintenance and click View reliabilty story. It would be much better if I can add The monitor to the White flag, pretty much like the new Jump Lists, but for icons in the system tray too.
Talking about the "white" flag, we still have all icons "white". The flag, the Volume Control, The Fork, or, I mean.. the network (it will always be like a fork for me)... they are all plain white. We don´t have the visual network indicator anymore, even with lots of users asking for put it back.
Let me talk about something sensitive now. the UAC. In a short analysis, its is much better than it was in vista. In a bigger analysis: It is still a pain to deal with.
Lots of applications I use (like games) always trigger UAC when I start them. WHY, for god sake, can´t we have a option like: NEVER AGAIN DISPLAY UAC FOR THIS APPLICATION?. Of course I know the reply: If MS put such option in UAC, it would be less secure, and more vulnerable to malware. Ok. Now, lets see the facts: I, and I believe lots of users have a good firewall instaled. Does it keep asking the same thing over and over again? or a GOOD application for safety have the option to store user rules? I think I don´t need to say more. The way UAC is, there is only one think I can do to use it without being anger: DISABLE UAC ONCE AND FOR ALL.
Ok, I know it will be much less secure. but... WAIT!!! WAIT! So, the user CAN DISABLE the UAC for good, but the user CAN´T create UAC rules, because it is LESS SECURE that way? Can please, someone explain it to me? If malware could be malicious enough to create a "safe rule" for itself, why can´t this same piece of malware disable uac?
But, again, let´s face the facts in here. Windows 7 is DONE. They will never change it. No matter how we say it, how many of us asks for it. Even from beta to RC many things didn´t change. Now, it´s even worse.
So, I think I will just stop wasting my time putting comments in here, or any other place. So far, all I can say is that MS don´t want our feedback anymore (Do you see any "Send Feedback" button in RC?). If they can´t change my mind about it, I will just assume windows is done now. They will fix little bugs, and, here we go, ship it, because "its good for you, the way it is. Don´t you DARE say otherwise, ok?" - Okay, I'm going to re-post some of my (and some other pupil's) suggestions, just because no-one at MS listened (and no changes were made for RC), even though people agreed.
- Add your own folders to start menu right side
- In a shortcut 's properties , the shortcut 's name in title should be placed in quotes , or separated by a dash . At the moment it's like this:
Just make the title say "shortcut name" properties or shortcut name - properties instead of shortcut name properties ;) - A new color picker (would be best if similar to Adobe Photoshop)
- There is a small bug, which I think has been carried over from Vista (haven't used Vista for a long time, so I might be wrong) -- when a window is maximized, its application icon directly touches the screen's edge - there is no padding on the right side.
The normal icon has equal padding on the left and the right side, while the maximized icon has only one on the right side.
This makes it hard to see the icon, and in general looks ugly. - Clicking on a taskbar icon with multiple windows open should bring up the last active document . (major UI flaw here)
- Middle-Click on show-desktop button to activate Flip3D
- Better "Overflow Mode" (when you have about 30 windows programs open)
As you can clearly see by the scrollbar buttons (up/down), the "overflow mode" is vertical , which, in my opinion, is its biggest weakness and makes it very flawed.
I suggest that "overflow mode" gets a horizontal layout (instead of the current vertical ).
And then there is this totally crazy idea -- make the scrolling continuous (like in Media Center)! Like, there is no beginning , there is no end -- you could just keep scrolling forever ! Of course, when "overflow mode" isn't needed anymore, all your programs return to how they were before - Two new buttons for ejecting removable drives (c'mon this was needed even in Vista - eject buttons inside the <expletive removed> drives !!)
- Big clock option in taskbar
- Always on top feature for DWM (= works with all windows)
- An included tool to unclutter right-click menus (and some work by Microsoft in right-click menu shortening field)
- Side-menus, thumbnails or whatever you call them, they should be connected to the item you just clicked. This is really needed , especially when taskbar is vertical:
1) Live Thumbnails
2) Notification area (okay this one maybe doesn't look very good, but still)
3) Jump Lists
- Permanent UAC-prompt disabling per-application
- Manual un-grouping of windows
- When taskbar is vertical (left/right), the start menu must open to the side , not down . (sry no pic here, but point still valid)
- Fix Aero-Snap (snap works, but unsnap doesn't) with windows with custom window themes (Office 2007 , Skype )
- Multi-launch shortcuts
- More use for Start Menu search bar (picture thumbs are a must )
Regards, Kristaps.- BearbeitetAnthony_MannMSFT, BesitzerMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:44expletive removed
- BearbeitetKristaps. Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 22:37dash
- My comments about the RC are here: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/w7itprogeneral/thread/2edd2c2e-d14c-4c93-8015-91c4ef352701
I've waited the RC like you suggest me, but some bugs are still not fixed... - Hi SadSlash
Please understand that all of the bugs reported in the previous Beta 1 Build 7000 may not be fixed in the new RC build.
Many of these bugs are still being evaluated and fixes developed for them.
Hope this helps.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta
Ronnie Vernon MVP Hi SadSlash
Please understand that all of the bugs reported in the previous Beta 1 Build 7000 may not be fixed in the new RC build.
Many of these bugs are still being evaluated and fixes developed for them.
Hope this helps.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta
Ronnie Vernon MVP
Oh yes, I know this... But the bug 8 and 11 are frustrating for two reasons:
8 because I've read that it's fixed, and I discovered that it doesn't...
11 because removing external hd only when the pc is shutdown is a step down than Vista, where my two hd have no problem to removing...
A good news is that Office Update are, I hope, fixed completly... Now I don't have to select one by one the update, now it does updates without any errors (for now...)- I have to repeat my feedback which I did for the beta release since I still believe it is a serious usability flaw and not fixed yet for the RC (seems like nothing is fixed from the previous topic):
There is a serious usability flaw in W7 Beta. When I open multiple windows of the same program (Word, for instance), it takes me click + looking for the right window + mouse movement + click to switch back to the window I just worked with.
How about changing the default icon behaviour: click to open the last used window, hover to see the list of open windows. Clicking should bring up the last active document and hovering brings up other instances of the process.
If I have two Word files open and actively working on the first document and moving forth and back in this document and a browser page (researching something on the internet?), I'm bored of hovering stuff just to bring up my last active document!
Clicking and hovering on the icons in the taskbar do the same things so no one is hurt if you guys made it possible that clicking brings up the last recently used instance of a process and leave hovering as it is.
- Bearbeitetshadow_shooter Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 19:18
- Bearbeitetshadow_shooter Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 20:05
- I think user must have a choice what he would like to use without any intrusion. So please return back old startmenu/taskbar. :)
- By the way I totally AGREE WITH ALL THE THINGS kristaps recommended in this topic (except ungrouping the icons along the taskbar).
- Little enhancement Idea for IE8!!
I really wish Microsoft would add an option for when clicking on the drop down arrow in the address bar.
When you highlight an address there should be a little arrow next to it which would allow you to open that address in a new tab.
Just like your Favorites menu has.
Did I explain this ok? :) Please understand that all of the bugs reported in the previous Beta 1 Build 7000 may not be fixed in the new RC build.
What is the point of having a RC - RELEASE candidate, if Microsoft KNOW about lots of bugs not fixed yet? Why not just make a Beta 2 or something? Doing a RC, knowing it still have lots of bugs seens very strange for me.
Many of these bugs are still being evaluated and fixes developed for them.
In beta, you don´t know what to expect.. lots of bugs can and will happen. But once you leave the beta and start the RC, is supposed you think the release is fine, unless new bugs are found? Why leaving the old ones open in a RC build, knowing it?I have to repeat my feedback which I did for the beta release since I still believe it is a serious usability flaw and not fixed yet for the RC (seems like nothing is fixed from the previous topic):
There is a serious usability flaw in W7 Beta. When I open multiple windows of the same program (Word, for instance), it takes me click + looking for the right window + mouse movement + click to switch back to the window I just worked with.
How about changing the default icon behaviour: click to open the last used window, hover to see the list of open windows. Clicking should bring up the last active document and hovering brings up other instances of the process.
If I have two Word files open and actively working on the first document and moving forth and back in this document and a browser page (researching something on the internet?), I'm bored of hovering stuff just to bring up my last active document!
Clicking and hovering on the icons in the taskbar do the same things so no one is hurt if you guys made it possible that clicking brings up the last recently used instance of a process.
I totally agree. Hovering and clicking should have different behaviours. No need to be the same for them both, but real need to view the last active window when click the icon.I really wish Microsoft would add an option for when clicking on the drop down arrow in the address bar.
You can middle click in the address to have it opened in a new tab. But, some consistence with the behaviour of favorites (having the arrow) could be good.
When you highlight an address there should be a little arrow next to it which would allow you to open that address in a new tab.
I really wish Microsoft would add an option for when clicking on the drop down arrow in the address bar.
You can middle click in the address to have it opened in a new tab. But, some consistence with the behaviour of favorites (having the arrow) could be good.
When you highlight an address there should be a little arrow next to it which would allow you to open that address in a new tab.
Middle click does not work for me.Middle click does not work for me.
Strange, it always worked for me. But you can´t middle click in the address bar itself, middle clicking works only if the drop down menu is used to select one address.I really wish Microsoft would add an option for when clicking on the drop down arrow in the address bar.
You can middle click in the address to have it opened in a new tab. But, some consistence with the behaviour of favorites (having the arrow) could be good.
When you highlight an address there should be a little arrow next to it which would allow you to open that address in a new tab.
Unfortunately, notebook touchpads do not have a middle button.- I agree with ALL suggestions that have been made here, especially the one about clicking to switch to the last opened window, but some of the changes asked to the context menu and the double quotes in the Properties dialog. A dash would be better (i.e. I Love Myself Some Good - Properties). It has the same purpose (separating the filename and the word "Properties", but without the ugly double quotes.
- I've installed it on three machines with no problems whatsoever. This is not a guarantee that some problems will not arise but so far it looks clean.
Alex Stevens
Alex Stevens For those who may be wondering, yes you can still add the Quicklaunch toolbar to the Taskbar. Also, you can get Windows Mail working also, although I see NO REASON for it to be included but disabled!!!!
I don't miss them, at all, but, just out of curiosity, how did you do that?
As Ronnie told me, I also think that the three bugs (or features? :-| ) I showed here should be fixed. To summarize up:
- If you rename a file inside the Save as... dialog, and then click outside the editing field (do not press Enter), and then on Save, you get a message saying that the file xxxx already exists.
- If, in Tiles view in Windows Explorer, you rename a file changing only the case of some letters ("MyFile" -> "mYfIlE"), that change is not shown until you refresh the folder. Does not happen inside a library.
- If in regedit you rename a value changing only its case (see above), you get an error message and it does not work. I know that registry is not case sensitive (and this is probably the cause of the bug), but some very maniacal people (like me) like to see the correct case everywhere and sometimes they also rename some registry values for this reason... :-P
yes. what's really dumb is often the second window is not even a window proper, but may just be a dialog. for example: if you initiate a file operation in windows explorer, when you click on its icon, you get a preview of the explorer window and the file progress window. duh!If I have two Word files open and actively working on the first document and moving forth and back in this document and a browser page (researching something on the internet?), I'm bored of hovering stuff just to bring up my last active document!
Clicking and hovering on the icons in the taskbar do the same things so no one is hurt if you guys made it possible that clicking brings up the last recently used instance of a process and leave hovering as it is.
some have speculated they do it this way for touch screen, since you can't "hover" with touch screen. well, then they should do that for touch screens. why should 95% of people suffer this idiocy to accommodate 5% (conservative approximation).anyway, considering how many people have harped on this and it's unchanged for RC, I give up. I've set the taskbar to 'never combine'.When I say "clasic start menu" I mean the clasic start menu that is included in the taskbar properties of Windows XP and Vista, which allows us to switch the start menu from Windows XP or Vista mode to "Clasic Start Menu". You can also call it Windows 95 Start Menu.
Let me give you a good reason why I need a "clasic start menu".
I am legally blind, and I use a screen reader to operate my PC. I cannot use mouse, that's why I have to use keyboard for navigation. In Windows 7 Start Menu, It is very difficult to navigate between sub menus.
For example, when I open start menu, I up arrow to go to all programs and right arrow, down arrow to games and press right arrow, and then I press down arrow to listen the items in the games submenu.
When I move to the last item in the Games submenu, I will never know if it is the last item. If I continue to press the down arrow, the keyboard focus will leave the Games submenu, and move to the All Programs Items, but the Games submenu remains opened. In most cases I never know that the keyboard focus has moved outside the submenu.
If I need to close the Games submenu, I have to move my keyboard focus to the "Games", and then press the left arrow. This means if I am on the last item of the games submenu, I have to press up arrow 17 times and then press the left arrow. If I press left arrow while the keyboard focus is on the Games submenu items, the keyboard focus will move to the right navigation area of the start menu. It is very difficult to move from the right navigation area to the exact location on the left navigation area of the start menu. This means that I have to start all over again.
I'm sure that you noticed that I have to be very very careful when using Windows 7 start menu. This is just an example of games submenu, now imagine me using Accesseries submenu, and its submenus on Windows 7 Start Menu.
When I use a "Clasic Start Menu", I just press the Windows key to open the start menu, press the letter "P" to open the programs submenu, press "G" to open the Games submenu, and then I press down arrow to listen the Items.
When I'm on the last item of the Games submenu, and I press down arrow key one more time, the keyboard focus will move back to the first item on the Games submenu. The keyboard focus will not jump outside of the Games submenu. While my keyboard focus is on the games submenu Items, at any point I can press the left arrow key to close the Games submenu.
The clasic Start menu is more accessible, and a lot sympler than windows 7 Start menu while using it with the keyboard. The Windows 7 Start Menu is still accessible, but very time consuming. I'd prefer Clasic Start Menu.
Zaheer Sheikh- a dash would be better indeed :) I updated the post.
Regards, Kristaps. Hi Zaheer
I understand your special needs.
In Windows 7, I think one thing that can help with your disability is the Search Box on the Start menu.
As an example, if you press the Windows Key to open the Start Menu and then simply begin typing the name of the program you wish to open, the name of the program will appear in the top of the Results and you simply need to press Enter to open the program.
For instance, press the Winkey, type Spider and press Enter and the Spider Solitaire game opens. Type Solitaire and the classic game opens. Type Chess and Chess Titans opens. You can do this for virtually any program.
Hope this helps.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 RC
Ronnie Vernon MVPMiddle click does not work for me.
Hi Superman75I have another solution you might want to test.
Please your original thread on this subject.
Little enhancement Idea for IE8!!
Hope this helps.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 RC
Ronnie Vernon MVP- Just installed the RC version. Two notes so far....
(1) My first initial windows update after install showed that the driver install for my Dell Printer AIO 922 failed...I hit "retry" and it seemed like it succeded but I tried to print and the printer doesn't work. The printer works on my Vista partition.
(2) McAfee Total Protection Beta for Windows 7 failed to install. I was using it on the Windows 7 Beta. The installation failed, and now I can't even get to the McAfee page without getting a runtime error.
Intel Pentium 4 @ 3Ghz, 2GB DDR Ram, Nvidia 7600GS - AGP type. - my beta -> RC report.I did both an upgrade from build 7000 (yes I know I should not do this, but I'm using win7 full time now and did not want to reinstall everything) as well as a clean install on a separate disk, so that I can give proper feedback.things that are fixed/changed:1) cisco VPN works now, although uninstalling still gives a B(lack)SOD and reboot.2) the task manager's tray icon now stays visible. before, the beta kept changing it from "show icon and notification" to "show notification only".3) taskbar icons shrunk a bit, giving more space.things not fixed/unchanged:1) as reported above, when you set taskbar to combine icons and have multiple instances of the app opened, clicking and hovering do the same thing: show the previews. You have to click twice just to bring up the last active window. Of course you can ctrl+click, but I can't get used to it. (silly rabbit, cmd+click is for macs!)2) windows explorer still does not show free disk space on the status bar. still does not show total file size when selecting more than 20 items or so. you have to click 'show details'. I won't rehash why this is idiotic.I'm frustrated with windows explorer in general. it has some improvements over XP, but takes some steps backward. the fact of the matter is windows explorer has not seen much innovation simply because it has no real competition. if you doubt this, imagine if we lived in a world where google, mozilla, apple, opera, etc. for some reason had an incentive to create free windows explorer alternative. do you think windows explorer would be in a same state it is now?3) you still cannot drag and drop files from WMP to another app, e.g., to explorer to copy songs to a USB disk, to iTunes to put songs onto your ipod. this makes it rather useless as an app to manage your media files, which is a shame considering other media players don't (yet) understand the Library concept of win7.(speaking of which, why can't win7 virtualize a Library into a folder? I want to tell iTunes that I keep all my music in a Library called... wait for it... Music. this Library links together several folders that I have scattered among 3 disks. However, when I select the Music Library, win7 says I need to select a folder, not a library. well, isn't the point of a Library to create a virtual folder that you can treat as a single super folder? Seems to me for backward compatibility, an app should be able to open, enumerate, and traverse a library just as if it's a folder. Kind of like how you can map a network path to a drive? There are complications, such as dealing with duplicate names. But if you can run a whole other OS inside win7, I think you can pull itoff!)I think like many people here, I'm disappointed that a lot of the suggestions in the previous threads were passed over. It seems MS was content to use the beta trial to iron out problems rather than to get feedback for significant improvements. also, considering that there isn't expected to be another RC, I think what we see is pretty much what we'll get for the final release. I think MS wants to get win7 out the door due to the (relative) failure of Vista, real or perceived. which is too bad. I personally would've welcomed a longer beta period where more of user suggestions could've been implemented. but I'm not trying to run the world's biggest software company.PS: the new shell icons: pale, flat, indistinct, forgettable. It feels as if the prime directive behind the design was not to draw attention instead of showing what the heck the icon is for. I can't even tell, for example, what the icon for control panel is supposed to be. why does that remind me of one of those cutesy imacs?PPS: on the other hand, there are some good looking and funky wallpapers.
- "I don't miss them, at all, but, just out of curiosity, how did you do that?"
Do an internet search on "Windows 7 Quicklaunch". You will find the directions. I have my taskbar setup exactly like in 2000/XP/Vista, because I LIKE IT THAT WAY!!!! Dual row taskbar, open app icons on the top row, Quicklaunch icons on the bottom row. Don't need ANYTHING on the desktop this way. Plus you get the Show Desktop and Flip3D icons back!
Here is one:
http://windows7center.com/windows-7-tips/how-to-enable-the-quick-launch-bar-in-windows-7/
I'll not reveal my method for getting Windows Mail to work yet. I'm worried that MS will do something in the final to prevent it from running. I WANT WINDOWS MAIL FOR USENET NEWSGROUP ACCESS!!!! Why is it included in Windows 7 but disabled?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
This is how I see it (and your quote ^ proves it) -- some people are just convinced that the new start menu is bad and the classic one was better (some of them probably haven't even used the "new" start menu). They just scream and shout and demand and rant without knowing what the new start menu can and can't do, without even using it themselves and discovering how it can help them.In Windows 7, I think one thing that can help with your disability is the Search Box on the Start menu.
For example, take this point: "I can find programs faster in classic start menu". -- Hello, have you noticed the search box? (nothing beats start menu search, hat off to MS) How about the pinning ability?
So I suggest that ppl, before demanding classic start menu back, actually use the new start menu how it was supposed to be used.
Nothing personal, just my 2 eurocents.
Regards, Kristaps.- BearbeitetKristaps. Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 01:01
- There always has been 2,3 or more ways to accomplish the same task in Windows. There is nothing wrong with 7's Start Menu but the customer is always ..... and we are the customers. No demand = No sales for Microsoft, since so many people stayed away from Vista for whatever the reason the idea here is not only to make a better Vista but also to sell a product that XP users will like and migrate to. Therefor a truely XP style Start Menu and other XP style features not only makes for happy XP users but leads to good sales.
Corporations are still using Windows 2000 and XP and never moved to Vista, that a lot of lost sales so Microsoft's first priority should be the average home user, after all if it wasn't for us the world would all be eating Apples and using a one finger mouse.
JS Overall, the RC is somewhat disappointing. Really large amounts of feedback have *seemingly* been ignored, I'm not sure who exactly requested some of the UI/UX features but certainly no one I know did. One thing I'm disappointed about in the RC is that Wordpad and Windows Explorer still don't work well with .docx files.
Windows Explorer can't preview the formats now compatible with Wordpad (.docx and .odf, it also can't preview .ico, .ps1, .m4v) using the Preview Pane. The metadata in the incompatible .doc documents can be be seen and edited (via Properties > Details or the Details Pane) but not .docx documents, even though .docx is now an out-of-the-box compatible format via Wordpad. If Wordpad opens a tagged .docx file it will erase some of the user-editable metadata if saved out. The only way I know of to get access to .docx metadata in Windows 7 is to install Office 2007. Weak. Utilizing Tags, Authors, and Titles is a great way to get more use out of Windows Search.
I'm not even getting into a lot of the small visual problems with Wordpad... (lie):
»Like a number of icons that don't match the rest of the OS.
Cut and copy don't match Explorer/Powershell ISE, Date and Time doens't match the CPL item.
»The artifacting around font text in the "Font Family" DropDownList on mouse hover.
»And, at least to my eyes, ClearType doesn't work in Wordpad. Text looks a bit different in Wordpad.
I didn't expect the visual things to change when using 7000 but I'm surprised they let the metadata go unchanged.
------
And Naddy, use Live Mail.- I suppose by the look of things this is still not "A" release candidate" but rather another beta of one and for that reason much can still be changed, but I'd really like a lowdown on Superfetch soon. I want to know if its current state is what is meant to be in Release Candidate level and if so; is there anything the user can do to modify its behavior?
- I believe this is very much the release candidate. They said one beta and release candidate and I think they meant it. I think some people were expecting a bit much of it.
- I downloaded the RC yesterday and installed to a spare partition on a 64bit system.
The install was flawless and very quick,all hardware was found and working in minutes.
I have not seen Win7 before and for the most part have to say I am very impressed,certainly it seems to be a vast improvement on Vista.
2 things that I see so far that are not good, 1) Defender was apparently running but is nowhere to be found in the start menu,the programs list or Control Panel,I only found it by accident,it is so invisible I assumed it was not included in this OS.
2) Windows Mail, why is this incomplete/disabled. I and many other Vista users run Windows Mail,I need to be able to import all mail/settings/contacts etc. The offered Windows Live Mail is definitely not something I would use,frankly I think it is truly dreadful. Fine for those that want a facebook /social networking app that looks like it was designed by 10 year olds but certainly not an application for serious /business use. If this "Live Mail" is the thing of the future it needs to be able to lose all the tacky looks and have the abilty to import all WindowsMail settings.
Why?
And Naddy, use Live Mail.
Live Mail is totally unsuitable for home office/ business use , mail and account settings cannot be imported and the interface is truly awful.
Fine for home use and those that want to share media etc. but as an app for a busy environment no way, Live Mail is a home user toy.
- I've "discover" also this bug:
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproperf/thread/2c4c95d6-fe48-48d3-a378-2d122bbecb26
Anyone can check this? - OK! I'm a convert.
On January 15th I posted a tirade (same Title: Taskbar) against mixed Program (pinned) shortcuts, and Program buttons:(
Thankfully it was treated gently by those who responded.
The springboard videos are very helpful, and the whole Taskbar thing now has me in raptures! - as do many of the other UI features :)
GLITCH:
On ONE startup, the desktop Gadgets did not appear.
Right-Click>View showed the box ticked.
I needed to untick then re-tick to show the Gadgets.
Only happened once, but DID happen.
Great effort by, and Great credit to, the development team!!
Regards,
Pat Garard
Melbourne Australia
Pat Garard, Melbourne Australia- BearbeitetPat Garard Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 09:11Accuracy
- ZusammengeführtRonnie VernonMVP, ModeratorMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 08:34Feedback
- I can not believe they got rid of the option for the classic menu!! I have so many freeware apps on my system and I can never remember their names so I group them together based on their use. I don't use the same 3 or 4 programs each day - even if I did I would stick them on my desktop.
Im finding this really hard to adapt to as its a lot less intuitive. I keep sneaking back to XP which is no good as I know its on its way out. - "And Naddy, use Live Mail."
No thanks, I will continue to use Windows Mail. It can be made to work in 7!
This is how I see it (and your quote ^ proves it) -- some people are just convinced that the new start menu is bad and the classic one was better (some of them probably haven't even used the "new" start menu). They just scream and shout and demand and rant without knowing what the new start menu can and can't do, without even using it themselves and discovering how it can help them.In Windows 7, I think one thing that can help with your disability is the Search Box on the Start menu.
For example, take this point: "I can find programs faster in classic start menu". -- Hello, have you noticed the search box? (nothing beats start menu search, hat off to MS) How about the pinning ability?
So I suggest that ppl, before demanding classic start menu back, actually use the new start menu how it was supposed to be used.
Nothing personal, just my 2 eurocents.
Regards, Kristaps.
As I already posted in the "have comments about 7 beta", here is my 2 cents for this:
The search feature is a good thing, IF I NEED TO SEARCH!
Why do I need to search for something if I know exactly where is?
I always had my Start Menu organizated, and I know exactly where my programs are. So, if I need to lauch something, I just use the MOUSE, click all programs, and click the program I want, simple as that, click, click, done.
Why do I need to click start menu, leave the mouse, put the hands on keyboard, start typing the name of the program, wast processor cicles to search for it, then, put the hand back in mouse, and only then, click the program? Nice improvement!
If I don´t know where the program is, or if im searching for a document, I agree the search function is amazing, but it simples is not all the times I need to SEARCH, sometimes, I just need to have a nice floting menu, and CLICK.
and, soon after I posted it, barth2k posted:
I agree with Warel. We need an option for fly out menu. the new start menu is great if you're using an iphone, but now that we can get 1920x1200 monitors for 300USD, it's really dumb to confine your menu to that little window and force the user to scroll scroll scroll.
people keep pointing out that you can use the search. but isn't that just an indictment of the new menu? it's so cumbersome to navigate that it's faster to take your hand off the mouse, type, then go back to the mouse? this is exactly what I do if the program I'm looking for isn't on the MRU list.
And, I totally agree with barth2k. For me, there is no need to classic menu come back. Overal, I like the new menu, but not having a option to a fly out menu, and make me scroll and scroll and keep scrooling a confined little place, when I have a huge monitor in front of me, and I WANT to use it, is just stupid.
- BearbeitetWarel Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 13:50Html color was red?
- Ok, now, after using Windows RC for a bit more time, here is my list of what I think is missing:
1) Windows explorer: It is still not customizable, nor user friendly, as it was since Windows Vista.
- We can´t configure the commands bar anymore. Can I put my most used buttons in there? No. Can I remove something? No. It is "as is" like it or not, you can´t change it.
- Status bar / Details pane still use 3 lines and don´t provide the information (file sizes) that Windows XP provided with ONE SINGLE LINE.
-If I want to know the sizes of more than a few files, I need to click the STUPID "More Details" button. Did I said STUPID? Yes, just because I don´t want to use a heavier word here. but STUPID is not enough for this behaviour. I´m using it just to be polited.
- Explorer don´t show (anymore) the free space of a disk / partition / device. So, if you are going to copy / move files, or you guess, or you open "Computer" to see it.
- Can I pause a copy / move operation after it started? NO. If windows explorer is given this single improvement, that people are asking for YEARS, this only would be a nice compeling feature to buy Win7.
- If I´m coping a file over a network, and the connection is lost, can I resume the file transfer later? NO. after all this years, even with a "homegroup" the only option is to replace the file and start copying again.
- Autoarrange for files: I HATE this "feature" Can I disable it? NO. AGAIN, I can´t disable / modify one setting that I dislike.
2) Internet Explorer:
- Download resume if connection is lost. It is a MUST. and we don´t have it YET.
1+2) For both, Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer, I like very much the new "Progress bar" integrated in the icon on superbar. THIS is improvement. But, again, I don´t like the green color. Can I change it to be blue? NO. Why not? The system is not suposed to have "User in control"?
3) Program elevation:
I use winrar a lot. Lets think if a need to rar a file or folder inside "Program files" or "Windows". In XP, I could right click it, and make the rar. Now, I cant. Winrar is not running with administrative privileges, so, it can´t write to this folders. But, Windows don´t ask my permission. It just says: DENIED. Wait, it´s my computer, I´m the admin, I want to do it. Ask. Don´t put a DENIED in my face.
The only way to do that, is to put winrar to run with admin privileges, or, when right click, change another location for the file. I can do that, for sure, but I still don´t like the idea of windows saying I´m denied of doing something without asking first.
4) UAC: As I already said a lot of times, but never got listen too:
In a short analysis, its is much better than it was in vista. In a bigger analysis: It is still a pain to deal with.
Lots of applications I use (like games) always trigger UAC when I start them. WHY, for god sake, can´t we have a option like: NEVER AGAIN DISPLAY UAC FOR THIS APPLICATION?. Of course I know the reply: If MS put such option in UAC, it would be less secure, and more vulnerable to malware. Ok. Now, lets see the facts: I, and I believe lots of users have a good firewall instaled. Does it keep asking the same thing over and over again? or a GOOD application for safety have the option to store user rules? I think I don´t need to say more. The way UAC is, there is only one think I can do to use it without being anger: DISABLE UAC ONCE AND FOR ALL.
Ok, I know it will be much less secure. but... WAIT!!! WAIT! So, the user CAN DISABLE the UAC for good, but the user CAN´T create UAC rules, because it is LESS SECURE that way? Can please, someone explain it to me? If malware could be malicious enough to create a "safe rule" for itself, why can´t this same piece of malware disable uac?
5) ISO Files: Why windows can not mount iso files out of the box yet?
6) Disk manager:
A option to resize / merge disk partitions without data loss would be very very welcome.
7) Programs starting with windows:
We can hide the icons. But why not integrate a function in the "Notification area" like: Stop this program from starting with windows.
For sure we can use regedit or msconfig to edit it, but why not make it more user friendly?
8) Start Menu:
Why not put a option to have "all programs" Fly out? We can put almost all other options to Fly out. Computer, Control Panel, Documents, Videos, Pictures, Games, almost all. but the most needed one for me, the ALL PROGRAMS, don´t have the option to be show as a menu. Even with bigger / high res monitors becoming cheaper and cheaper, the user have all the programs confined to a tiny small place and is forced to scroll, scroll, scroll scroll... its (again) stupid, unnecesary and inconsistent with all other options beeing alowed to be show as a menu.
9) Superbar icons: I think the default icons are too big. But the small ones are too small. Why there is no option, like in personalization to set a specifc size? We can set the exactly size for icons in desktop, why can´t it be done in the superbar too? - Is there a way to switch to classic start menu in Windows 7 and how can I enable quiklunch on taskbar?
- ZusammengeführtRonnie VernonMVP, ModeratorMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:44Focus
- Installed Vista Ultimate 32 bit SP2 a few days ago, but this platform blows that away. I'm impressed with 7's "nurturings".
- Warel: did you vulcan mind meld me in my sleep, because I agree 100% with all your points.
- I simply want to turn off the taskbar preview. It's not neccesary for my use of Windows. But when opening gpedit.msc it says "Compatible with Windows Vista ONLY"
- Classic Start menu is gone Gone Gone For Good. There is no way to switch to it.
Quick launch can be enabled as a "Toolbar". Follow the directions here: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2009/01/14/how-to-enable-or-disable-quick-launch-bar-toolbar-in-windows-7/
This toolbar is a workaround as opposed to the actual quick launch but it does work. - Yes, Windows Explorer would need many improvements. Ok, the copy in Vista and 7 is handled better than in XP, but until I am given the ability to pause and resume copies I'll just go on with TeraCopy.
As I reported in another topic, the string "Invert Selection" should be replaced with "Invert selection".
A nice feature which is probably now too late to ask to be included is what QTTabBar does. It was a software for Windows XP which added an address bar similar to the one we have in Vista or Windows 7 in Windows Explorer (the one which allows you to click on any level of the path). It was better, since the dropdown menu that is shown when you click on one of those arrows in order to select a folder, had submenus for other folders, so basically you could navigate directly to a complicated path using those menus. I haven't explained this very well, I hope I was clear.
This minor bug should also be fixed. It's a minor bug in the installer.
Finally, I've also noticed that when you are renaming a system file (tried that with C:\bootmgr), you are asked once to grant administrator permissions plus 3 more times with exactly the same message (warning: if you rename a system file the system might be damaged, or whatsoever). And that when you assign a label to a disk, the warning asking for administrator permissions which you get, shows the error symbol (X) instead of the exclamation mark , which would be more appropriate since that is a warning, not an error. - Hi Zarsen
You need to always consider that Windows 7 is still a beta product.
You won't see any 'compatible with Windows 7' notations until the final version is released.
Windows 7 will support all of the current GP settings, plus a reported 300+ new policies.
Hope this helps.
Thank You for testing Windows 7 RC
Ronnie Vernon MVP - That's true, but it would just make a little more sense that if the option is not available, why even have it on the list of OS configurations to modify when you can't modify it.
And so far, aside from a few graphics bugs, I'm pleased with this RC, more so than the first beta release. - It is not a "workaround". It is the actual Quicklaunch functionality from Vista. You even get the Show Desktop and Flip 3D icons back!
- The RC has been a bit of a cold shower for me.
Windows Explorer once again hangs when accessing network drivers over slow connections. It confusingly displays the old folder while navigating to the new. To top it of, if you create a new folder, and then navigate to it by clicking "Enter", it gives the error "Folder 'New folder' does not exist."
Windows Libraries no longer work with network drives on Linux or Vista machines, giving an error about indexing. This makes libraries useless for me (and anyone that has at least 1 non-Windows7 machine? which must be everyone?) But... Windows Media Player seems to use *different* libraries, which do seem to work with network drives? I don't get it.
Search is harder to use than ever; the integration with explorer feels forced. I can't figure out what it's searching for, why it won't find things I expect it to find, and find things I think it should not have found. If I click search, I'd like a blank page with one search box, one advanced button, and one go button. At the very least, when a search has been done, display what you have searched for, and where?
Still, a big step forward from Vista. It's just that the great beta had made me expect better. :) - And why you want that when you have desktop dimming and show desktop on the taskbar corner?
You need to always consider that Windows 7 is still a beta product.
Sorry, Ronnie, but I have to disagree. My copy of windows don´t have "beta" on it anymore. As long as I know, we have a Release Candidate now, BUT, as I already said in this same thread "What is the point of having a RC - RELEASE candidate, if Microsoft KNOW about lots of bugs not fixed yet? Why not just make a Beta 2 or something?"
I believe we should be still in beta now, but unfortunately, this is RC, and this kind of talk can not apply anymore.
barth2k: I think we have a very similar vision, we agreed a lot in many threads! And, as I said to Ronnie, I think we should still be in beta, but I´m too disapointed about the way the Windows developement appears beeing rushed.The RC has been a bit of a cold shower for me.
It is exactly my point in the previous post. I can see this general feeling of "The beta was GREAT for a beta, imagine the final product!!"
...........
It's just that the great beta had made me expect better. :)
But then, we got a RC, and we see it and think: "Well.... its still good for a beta... but, it´s not a beta anymore. For a RC we need much more!"
I keep thinking what will happen when the final *rushed?* product arrives. People will look at it and say: "Wow, that great beta evolved into an amazing windows!" OR they will say: "Yeah... the beta was very good for a beta, so sad the final one ended like this."
I really really hope to have the best windows ever made. But, so far, my hopes are little down.- BearbeitetWarel Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 19:11Typo correction
- I think XP has the best functionality of all the MS OSs. Therefore I would like to see these features on the Windows 7.
- Allow Un-grouping of tastbar buttons.
- Start Menu option to use XP style menus (I hate the big menu), I turn off "frequently used programs and it shows a blank white box, I want to get rid of that and just use the "fly out" (as some people say) menu for All programs.
- I think Windows Explorer is extremely hard to use. don't hide the + and -, I like seeing the full filepath and being able to use a "parent folder" button.
- ClearText is fuzzy to me. I turn it off and it looks great for everything except dialogs. Windows dialogs are still fuzzy.
IE8:
- I don't want anything to "pop down" when I type a url (I tried to turn off everything that I thought could affect this but it still does it).
- I prefer the "File Edit View Favorites Tools Help" toolbar over anthing else. If I could get rid of "Favorites" huge button or even move it. Right now it's taking up a whole bar even alone and it can't be move afaik.
I'm sure I have more. Basically I want an XP UI :). Also, in general I strongly dislike all browsers past IE6. - Microsoft please for the love of god Allow Un-grouping of tastbar buttons in Windows 7!!!!
Please allow this! Also, in general I strongly dislike all browsers past IE6.
You, sir, are one in a trillion. A very small minority indeed!- I want the classic start menu, that's it. Simple.
I prefer it to the horrible screen hugging monstrosity that, thankfully was able to be replaced with the wonderful classic start menu in both XP and Vista.
I don't want to have a dumb space where programmes I've previously opened are displayed. I don't want a pretty bar on the side linking to folders that I never use (as I do all my navigation in explorer). I read somewhere earlier that 'it's not going to happen as it's a candidate release' in which case I will not buy it....
I installed it and it looked nice, I began the task of making it more user friendly, stopping warnings and stuff like that, when I got to the start menu and couldn't find the classic option I immediately restored my Vista from a backup...Windows 7 didn't last long in my laptop.
I tried the new menu in XP, couldn't get on with it at all. I know what programmes I want to install, they are always pretty much the same, I like to have updated software but I also like the interface to be familiar. It's only a little niggle to a lot of people here, but to me it decides whether I will buy it or not - so far the answer is not.
I think, regardless of who thinks what is best, we should at least have the choice. Shouldn't we? - The Windows 7 RC is incredible! :D One of my favorite aspects of Windows 7 is the pretty blue screen with a few leaves while it's loading up. It's very fast but I have to click a few icons about 4 times before it actually opens. Hopefully this will be fixed in the final version of Windows 7. Overall, this is a very good Operating System. :)
Evandela - How do you think the Classic start menu (if implemented) should look under Win7? Plain grey or aero'd? Aero'd classic start menu would look funny IMO.
Regards, Kristaps. What is the point of having a RC - RELEASE candidate, if Microsoft KNOW about lots of bugs not fixed yet? Why not just make a Beta 2 or something? Doing a RC, knowing it still have lots of bugs seens very strange for me.
TBH, this keeps bugging me too :P
In beta, you don´t know what to expect.. lots of bugs can and will happen. But once you leave the beta and start the RC, is supposed you think the release is fine, unless new bugs are found? Why leaving the old ones open in a RC build, knowing it?
Regards, Kristaps.- Two more things that keep bugging me:
1) When I press the Cancel button (like, when deleting or copying files), I'd expect the action to be canceled, not just show "Canceling..." for an eternity.
2) Why does windows need to "discover " files when moving/deleting? Seriously, could someone please explain this? I just want to know. Thx.
Regards, Kristaps.- BearbeitetAnthony_MannMSFT, BesitzerMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:45expletive removed
- BearbeitetKristaps. Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:51removed explict, sry.
- BearbeitetKristaps. Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:00
- I hear your pain. It's incomprehensible why M$ got rid of Explorer Bar customization. I hated Vista for this very reason. And now W7 is the same dog...How many times do I need "Burn these files to disk" ? And why have this stupid Organize menu? All of these were available under Explorer Toolbar. Why take away a perfectly fine feature of Windows....Very disappointed.
- And why there still isn't an "EJECT " button inside the removable drives!?
Regards, Kristaps. - Why would Microsoft get rid of the Classic Start Menu are they idots or what one of my main problems with vista was I couldn't use it because of the start menu and the way it is laid out I just found it so confuseing and that was my main reason why I stop using Vist and went back to XP
I just started using Vista again with in the last 6 months because the Dummies site showed me how to setup the Classic Start Menu in Vista and now I like Vista just because of the Classic Start Menu and the many thing you can do with it
I used to work for a computer shop in there Warehouse stripping down old computers for Recycleing and You don't have any idea how many time I heard from customer how Vista was ____ because of the many changes made to it some people felt the same way I did about the Start Menu others just didn't like the look and feel of Vista to them it just wasn't Windows
In my opinion Microsoft might want to rethink about the Start Menu issue so far I like what I see with Windows 7 all except for the Start Menu I would hope that Microsoft would add that into Windows 7 before it goes to RTM because I can tell you now if it isn't in Windows 7 by the time it goes to RTM I Will Not Buy Windows 7 just for that reason alone and stay with Vista or Go back to XP
Microsoft Lost alot of Money With Vista are they willing to to lose more money with Windows 7 because they didn't listen to the customer and keep some the things that the customer is used to using in Windows Two more things that keep bugging me:
Hey! Thanks for remind it! I forgot about this two!
1) When I press the <expletive removed> Cancel button (like, when deleting or copying files), I expect the action to be canceled, not just show "Canceling..." for an eternity.
2) Why does windows need to "discover " files when moving/deleting? Seriously, could someone please explain this? Thx.
Regards, Kristaps.
1) Most of times, pressing the "Cancel" button show a "Cancelling" dialog that takes the same time, or even more, than if I just had the damn action finish!
2) Please, I want to know it too!
and, 3) How could I forgot to mention? I want the UP one folder button back, please!- BearbeitetAnthony_MannMSFT, BesitzerMittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:40expletive removed
- Sorry, can anyone check this problem: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproperf/thread/2c4c95d6-fe48-48d3-a378-2d122bbecb26
It's most important... Scandisk sucks more than 1 GB of RAM for running on my external hd...
And, calmly, if you can check all this bugs I've reported: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itprogeneral/thread/2edd2c2e-d14c-4c93-8015-91c4ef352701
I want to be more helpful in the process of bug fixing... I dream a perfect OS... Now that Seven is fast, "enough" stable, less expensive resources and beautiful, with the fix of these bugs (mine and the others of all the people have reported), Seven can be the perfect OS...
Microsoft have the possibility to create this, so don't delude us ;)... - Warel:
I motion that you become M$ president to "Dictate" these changes on us: "users" !
Anyone to second the motion? - Hey,
I have no clue if this is where i should be posting comments and inputs from my expirience with the RC build.. so here goes:
1 thing i noted from using the build for maybe just 2 hours is that when you access the device manager and click on properties on any device and move the mouse pointer to the red x square (to close) it starts flickering very quickly, and it does it only on that perticular window, not other windows.
I have an intel 4500m onboard video card ver 8.15.10.1662 (WDDM 1.1).
I hope this is the place to post these kinds of bugs im seeing so that the Win7 development team can take care of it by the time this ships. If this is not the place to post these kinds of things than i would love it if someone points out to me where i can post these things im seeing/will see.
Thanks,
Eddie. - Not missing the UP button, sry - breadcrumbs are much better, as they allow you to go up multiple folders.
Regards, Kristaps. Not missing the UP button, sry - breadcrumbs are much better, as they allow you to go up multiple folders.
Regards, Kristaps.
So true! :)
By the way, I repeat my suggestions for UI upgrade: a more intelligent (and maybe faster, but that is secondary) file transfer method. I mean, why copying two files of 1GB in 2 separate copy processes takes FAR more than copying the same files in the same process? Why can't the second copy (or move, that is) go in queue after the first one, and get execution after the first ends? Or at least... please, put a "pause" button in the copy/move window. That way, while doing heavy backups, I can put music in my PDA without waiting AGES for a 100MB copy...
Cancel operation is choppy as usual, aborting file copying/moving may take AGES too.
Please, those arent't inhuman changes in the way good old file manager has been working for the last 20 years or so. I got the AWESOME feature of automatically select filename without extension (when shown) when renaming files, a feature I didn't even think would be done: but handling files should be revamped, it's soooooooo old. On the contrary, Seven looks soooooooooo new! :DThe "Classic" Start menu is the original Start Menu -- in Windows 95/98/ME/2000, it was THE start menu, no change from one version to the next. Then came Windows XP which introduced a new "Start menu" that was not a menu, instead its contents were constantly changing on some arbitrary algorithm dreamed up by an MS GUI developer, and introduced the "All programs" entry, which added an additional click to the process to accessing the true program structure. If you preferred a consistent user interface, you could select the condescendingly renamed "Classic" Start menu, as if preferring the consistent menu was somehow quaint or old fashioned. Vista also subscribed to the new XP-style "Start menu", and continued to provide the "Classic" Start menu for power users. Windows 7 has gone one step worse with a completely unstructured, constantly changing scrolling mass of icons rather than returning to a simpler, structured design. On top of that, eliminated the better-designed "Classic" Start menu completely.
Simply put, it is much faster to navigate a set structure than constantly having to re-digest and revaluate a constantly changing landscape to find what you're looking for. If this weren't the case, highways would arbitrarily re-route themselves daily based on some unknown algorithm, and drivers would need to search for a different way to accomplish the same task every day. For people who only use a half-dozen or fewer programs, perhaps a "Start menu" that reshuffles those 6 or less items around is not an issue. But for power users who are using 20, 30, 40 or more different programs on a regular basis, the half-dozen constantly changing icons on the XP/Vista/Win7-style "Start menu" is a complete waste of screen real estate.
Many argue that they prefer typing the name of a program into the Search box in the Win7 "Start menu" rather than going directly to the exact item they want in a set menu structure. After having used Windows PCs since 1989, I can authoritatively declare that the fewer times a user has to switch from using their mouse to using their keyboard and then back again, the far more efficient that user will be. Having to mouse over to the Search box then change to typing takes far more time than simply mousing through a set menu system. The constant switching between input modes is counter-intuitive and time consuming.
So count me in as another long-time IT professional and Windows user who hopes MS comes to their senses and restores the "Classic" Start menu as a selectable GUI option in Win7. Granted, MS could arbitrarily disregard those of us who prefer the structured Start menu, since MS will kill off WinXP and force us all to kludge around with the inconsistent WinXP/Vista/Win7 "Start menu" system by ending security update support for the venerable old OS. But those of us they alienate are a large portion of the underpinnings of Windows popularity and support. I have never seriously considered another OS for business operations imply because Windows always was dependably doing what needed to be done, in a very predictable and dependable manner. Regardless of your view which might embrace the idea that predictable and dependable is boring or "old school", those are the exact traits upon which solid foundations and success are actually built. Fads are built on squishy, relativistic, reactionary constructs, and fads are washed quickly away.
Someone in a forum thread lambasted "Classic" Start menu adherents as being behind the times, and brought up an analogy of people not being able to buy a brand-new 1995 Ford F150 pick-up truck. Actually, the analogy was flawed on several levels.
1) You can go out and buy a completely restored old car, and many of those are of much higher value than new cars, even ones which are "retro" versions of the original. Granted, it is restored, not brand new, but it is the exact same vehicle, and performs, looks, feels and drives exactly like the original did directly from the factory, perhaps slightly better. The 1968 Shelby GT-KR500 will never be duplicated in a brand new chassis, no matter that a new version with the same name is now for sale. The Studebaker Avanti was a bizarre exception to that rule, having been built for decades after the demise of the original manufacturer by enthusiasts who bought the original factory tooling to build more. Perhaps Microsoft needs to sell off Windows XP and let an outside firm continue to develop and support it as a stand-alone product.
2) New pick-up trucks are available that perform substantially the same tasks in substantially the same manner as the 1995 version did. In the new version of the pick-up truck, Ford didn't arbitrarily change the way the truck was controlled. They could have researched and found that most aircraft pilots find that using control peddles to control the yaw movement of an aircraft was more intuitive to them, and that the location of the throttle mounted on the dash or in the center console was more familiar to them. Because pilots are "cool" in their eyes, and it seemed "cool" to change those functionalities in their truck, they could have suddenly removed the pick-up truck's steering wheel and replace it with steering peddles, and placed a throttle lever next to the floor shifter or center armrest. Doing so might make pilots happy, but would require a much less efficient control of the vehicle for everyone else, if not outright dangerous.
3) Similarly, 3-speed automatic transmissions have been labeled "P-N-D-2-L", representing "Park-Neutral-Drive-2nd Gear-Low Gear" for nearly forever with extremely few variations. What would you do if suddenly confronted with a shifter marked "S-F-I-B-M-S" for "Stop-Forward-Idle-Backward-Medium-Slow", simply because the manufacturer determined that that was the order their polls found was the most popularly used shifting positions. Or worse, find that every time you parked your car, that the shifting order changed to match the most frequent order, or perhaps most recent order, that you used those gears? How many garage doors and vehicle fenders would you smash because you expected "P" for "Park" to be the forward position, but instead it was "F" for "Forward" this morning, but then "B" for "Backward" this afternoon? And far worse, that the gear positions changed dynamically while driving, so you had to look directly at the shifter to determine where 2nd gear actually was at that exact moment before trying to shift to that gear? It would be insane. Yet that is what the XP/Vista/Win7 "Start menu" does.Two more things that keep bugging me:
1) When I press the <expletive removed> Cancel button (like, when deleting or copying files), I expect the action to be canceled, not just show "Canceling..." for an eternity.
2) Why does windows need to "discover " files when moving/deleting? Seriously, could someone please explain this? I just want to know. Thx.
Regards, Kristaps.
Kristaps,
You can get your point across without using offensive language. We reserve the right to ban you for such conduct. Read the code of conduct. We will not tolerate such language in these forums. Let's keep this professional, OK?
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web ForumsKristaps,
Okay, sorry. I edited it out.
You can get your point across without using offensive language. We reserve the right to ban you for such conduct. Read the code of conduct . We will not tolerate such language in these forums. Let's keep this professional, OK?
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums
To stick to the topic: I was unable to find the cause for this "Discovery" thing. Could someone please enlighten us? I'd really appreciate it.
Regards, Kristaps.Not missing the UP button, sry - breadcrumbs are much better, as they allow you to go up multiple folders.
Regards, Kristaps.
Hey, I never said I don´t like or use breadcrumbs, I like it!
But, sometimes I miss the up button when going up like 3 or more folders. I can just hit up, up, up without having to move the mouse.
Another thing: I don´t use the recycle bin. When I delete a file, I just want it gone. So, one thing I ever do is go to recycle bin and disable the "use recycle bin".
In windows xp, there is a nice button: Do that for all drives. I click it. Done. Now, it´s removed in windows 7 (I think removing things is becoming the usual...) and I have to manualy check "don´t use recycle bin" for everyone of my hard drives.- i would like to say that windows 7 downloaded great! it installed perfectly i have a newer pc with vista 64 and had no issues u all at microsoft did a fine job on this one good job
But, sometimes I miss the up button when going up like 3 or more folders. I can just hit up, up, up without having to move the mouse.
Use ALT+UP on your keyboard ;)
Regards, Kristaps.- In Win7 the MRU doesn't change that often and in the top i have my most used programs and i have a couple pinned to suit my needs, i find the serach box just amazing, and i don't ned to leave my hand from the mouse for that sheeez i have a left hand...
I hated "classic" start menu right from the begining i love the new one, i think it was about time for MS to give us something with real usability, it could be better in some small things but i like how it is going, BTW on the right side you have a list of items that is customizable, you can change wich ones go in there, no need to stick with default...
I think the main problem here is the same problem of new technologies all the time, there is allways people that finds hard to adapt / to embrace / to learn new ways period. In Win7 the MRU doesn't change that often and in the top i have my most used programs and i have a couple pinned to suit my needs, i find the serach box just amazing, and i don't ned to leave my hand from the mouse for that sheeez i have a left hand...
+1 to all he said :) Exactly my thoughts.
I hated "classic" start menu right from the begining i love the new one, i think it was about time for MS to give us something with real usability, it could be better in some small things but i like how it is going, BTW on the right side you have a list of items that is customizable, you can change wich ones go in there, no need to stick with default...
I think the main problem here is the same problem of new technologies all the time, there is allways people that finds hard to adapt / to embrace / to learn new ways period.
Regards, Kristaps.Folks,
Thank you for your input. Actually, I've been using Windows 7 beta since Feb 15, and I have tested almost every feature in it. I use the search box in the Windows 7 start menu, and it is a good feature. I have also pinned several Items on the left navigation of the Start menu, but these features are not enough for any PC user. We have to use the All Programs submenu.
It looks like that you guys are suggesting me to ignore the All Programs submenu because of my disability. In most cases I have to go into the All Programs submenu, and locate the Items that are included in the newly installed program's submenu. I cannot search for any thing in the search box unless I know it.
I did a bit more testing on Windows 7 Start menu with my screen reader. I encountered difficulty navigating through the submenus, especially the All Programs submenu, and its submenus. While I navigate through the submenus in Windows 7 Start menu, the keyboard focus doesnt stay in the same submenu. When I press right or left arrow, the Keyboard focus leaves the submenu, and it moves in to the right navigation area of the Start menu. If I keep pressing down arrow in the submenu, again, the keyboard focus leavs the submenu, and moves on the All Programs submenu, search box, and then in the right navigation area. The keyboard focus keeps spinning round and round.
From my point of view, the Windows 7 All Programs submenu, including its submenus are quite messy. The keyboard focus should not leave any submenu, unless the submenu is closed.
I believe that Windows developers can make the Windows 7 All Programs submenu work just like Windows Classic Start menu. I have sent some suggestions through the feedback link, but I havent seen any improvement. Is there any other way to contact or work directly with Windows 7 developers?
Zaheer Sheikh- So far so good with RC 1, a lot of improvements over the Beta. So far, I have only one real complaint, and that's about the removal of the "Restore Previous Folders at Logon" option in the folder options. When I was installing drivers, I had to restart my computer repeatedly, and every time, I had to reopen three different folders I was using. That option has been there for many versions of windows, and I was upset to see it removed. I hope they bring it back.
First, let's please stop with the vague "Classic" label and say what we mean. Talk about the characteristics of the menu you want to see.
The fact is that the Start menu needs an option to show ALL PROGRAMS in a treeview with no additional clicks. People who want the "friendly" edited list CAN HAVE IT TOO. People act as though everyone wants to take away their pet mode. NOT TRUE.
Typing the names of programs in is NOT a suitable replacement. First, typing can be more time-consuming than going to Start/Graphics apps/Photoshop. Second, you may not remember the name of the program you're looking for. Let's see, what was that app I used to convert FLAC audio files? Oh, here it is under Audio Apps.
The current Start menu is ridiculous simply because of the waste. Look at this; why have this giant empty pane, when it could be the complete application tree:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3365/3508263035_d8bf4858fa_o.png- Bring back the Classic Start Menu in Win7 just like one could opt for in Vista. Why? Because it's all about personal usability. It's faster to use and more easily customized.
- So far... Not too bad... I've had the RC up for a bit over a day now, and haven't seen any serious problems.
Love IE 8 now that it's actually running at normal speed. IE 8 from beta = Tortoise. IE 8 from RC = cheetah..!
I did have one small problem. After installing and joining to my domain, I walked away from the computer for a few and when I got back, it was asleep. I woke it up using the mouse - and most everything came back to life (surprising since so many have complaints about Nvidia video cards not coming back to life) I tried accessing one of my network shares - and could NOT, for the life of me reconnect. I got the old error about being unable to connect the drive because the drive letter was already in use. And when I went to the Network section in Explorer, it couldn't find any of my networked computers. The motherboard has an Nvidia Nforce 4 chipset.
Fortunately, a reboot was able to fix whatever the problem was. Needless to say, you'd think this kind of issue would have long been fixed. - My problem with the old start menu was that 1) it would close everything if your mouse strayed too far, which ment having to re-open everything to get to the program you were looking for. 2) didn't work well if the list went too big for the screen.Now neither of these problems are much to people who can keep a steady mouse and can work with a resolution over 800x600. But I just like not having to dash my mouse from one side of the screen to another to get to the program folder at the end of the list.Also helps to have a scroll wheel.
- >8) Start Menu:
>Why not put a option to have "all programs" Fly out?
http://win7vista.com/index.php?topic=1414.0
displays the exact procedure to fly out.
This thread does not allow questions, so this is not an answer, just a hopefully helpful workaround.
I did it.
it works
like this.
PS
@wolfie in case you're reading this, Apple mac users had a similar network share problem a few years ago and the suggested workaround was to run a utility when a computer wakes up to re-establish connections. You need to always consider that Windows 7 is still a beta product.
Sorry, Ronnie, but I have to disagree. My copy of windows don´t have "beta" on it anymore. As long as I know, we have a Release Candidate now, BUT, as I already said in this same thread "What is the point of having a RC - RELEASE candidate, if Microsoft KNOW about lots of bugs not fixed yet? Why not just make a Beta 2 or something?"
I believe we should be still in beta now, but unfortunately, this is RC, and this kind of talk can not apply anymore.
barth2k: I think we have a very similar vision, we agreed a lot in many threads! And, as I said to Ronnie, I think we should still be in beta, but I´m too disapointed about the way the Windows developement appears beeing rushed.
True words, totally agree with you. What is that rush of Microsoft releasing a new operating system so fast? I think they do not want to lose any more share in the market but to their surprise they might lose even more if Windows 7 was not the way as we home users or IT professionals want it. They did a good job even so far for many things but the beta cycle should have been longer (maybe a month more)...I think XP has the best functionality of all the MS OSs. Therefore I would like to see these features on the Windows 7.
- Allow Un-grouping of tastbar buttons.
- Start Menu option to use XP style menus (I hate the big menu), I turn off "frequently used programs and it shows a blank white box, I want to get rid of that and just use the "fly out" (as some people say) menu for All programs.
- I think Windows Explorer is extremely hard to use. don't hide the + and -, I like seeing the full filepath and being able to use a "parent folder" button.
- ClearText is fuzzy to me. I turn it off and it looks great for everything except dialogs. Windows dialogs are still fuzzy.
IE8:
- I don't want anything to "pop down" when I type a url (I tried to turn off everything that I thought could affect this but it still does it).
- I prefer the "File Edit View Favorites Tools Help" toolbar over anthing else. If I could get rid of "Favorites" huge button or even move it. Right now it's taking up a whole bar even alone and it can't be move afaik.
I'm sure I have more. Basically I want an XP UI :). Also, in general I strongly dislike all browsers past IE6.
Fysiks,
You can do most of what you want by customizing Windows 7. Ungrouping option can be found in the properties of taskbar. You can see the full path if you click on the very space next to the new use of path view.
I'm in someone's doghouse, so I'd better explain this carefully: I liked it when one browser opened everything everywhere. Now I use msie plus a standby browser when msie just stops. I know that was vague, but then so is msie.Also, in general I strongly dislike all browsers past IE6.
You, sir, are one in a trillion. A very small minority indeed!
Maybe I'd love the latest version if it gave more helpful "I refuse to go there" messages.- I'm incredibly disappointed. After Beta working so beautifully I have not been able to install Windows 7 RC1 without getting the dreaded BSOD.
It seems directly related to a PCI-E issue and or Nvidia driver issue.
As this release is unsupported, I fear that a large number of potential testers will not be able to provide feedback as they will be unable to test the RC version.
Just disappointed :-( - I have to agree that Windows Explorer is not as helpful as it was in XP, but I feel it's probably not going to change much between now and RTM :) Oh well, I can more than live with it.
On another front, I upgraded my notebook memory to 2GB DDR2, with the Celeron M 1.73 Ghz processor and a SATA hard drive. Unfortunately, even with the new Intel 945 chipset graphics driver from Windows Update, and the increased available video memory, the graphics still only gets a 2.0 on the Windows Experience Index. It's noticeable, too.
Overall, the OS itself boots as quickly, if not more so, than XP Pro, but some programs, especially Microsoft Outlook 2007, open and run slowly. Better success with Word and Excel, as well as other "lighter-weight" programs. I also like the fact that so far, every Vista program I've thrown at it appears to be compatible except for all antivirus/security suites but one: Eset Smart Security 4, which seems to run just fine.
Anyway, hope this post was in the spirit of the thread. I'll ask questions elsewhere. Thanks to the team for providing this resource! I have to agree that Windows Explorer is not as helpful as it was in XP, but I feel it's probably not going to change much between now and RTM :) Oh well, I can more than live with it.
On another front, I upgraded my notebook memory to 2GB DDR2, with the Celeron M 1.73 Ghz processor and a SATA hard drive. Unfortunately, even with the new Intel 945 chipset graphics driver from Windows Update, and the increased available video memory, the graphics still only gets a 2.0 on the Windows Experience Index. It's noticeable, too.
Overall, the OS itself boots as quickly, if not more so, than XP Pro, but some programs, especially Microsoft Outlook 2007, open and run slowly. Better success with Word and Excel, as well as other "lighter-weight" programs. I also like the fact that so far, every Vista program I've thrown at it appears to be compatible except for all antivirus/security suites but one: Eset Smart Security 4, which seems to run just fine.
Anyway, hope this post was in the spirit of the thread. I'll ask questions elsewhere. Thanks to the team for providing this resource!
It's difficult comparing your 2.0 without knowing what it was in Vista, the numbers changed, But I think win 7 is faster overall than Vista. A benchmark I've been using for around 7 years just to test video shows Win7 beta/RC64 to be as fast /slightly faster than XP32. By comparison, My original benchmarks on Vista64-toXP 32/64 showed a 15%-20% drop in video performance, although that may have changed recently. Bottom line, win7 Yay. Why all this matters (to me) is that slower video (4.4/5.1) seems to be great, although I disagree with the assesment, because according to it games are less demanding than Aero. (Isn't it the other way around?)- A very very impressive piece of work, some babybugs with compatibility, but no big deal. Well done ;) (finally :P)
System Specs: Windows 7 x64 RC Build 7100, AMD A64x2 5300+ Black @ 3GHz, 2GB DDR2 SDRAM @ 800MHz, Gigabyte GA-MA790X DS4 Motherboard, Sapphire Radeon HD3870 512MB GDDR4, SB Live24 Sound- BearbeitetDexSK Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 08:18
- Suggestion for the Suggestion box:
Can we get the default for "Hide Extentions for Known File Types" to be defaulted to OFF? I don't know about everyone, but that's probably the first thing I turn off when I install a copy of Windows. It seems F-Secure is now complaining about this being a security weakness in Win 7 and the tech media seems to be jumping in on this as being a potential issue. 1.) bring back the classic start menu (so many people have been using it for years and WONT upgrade to windows 7, they will stay with windowsXP / vista)
2.) PLEASE bring back the quick launch, I can't stand not been able to have applications launch from there, what if I want multiple IE windows open?
not everyone likes TABS
3.) PLEASE, for the love of god, do NOT leave that SHOW DESKTOP button on the far right of the task bar, seriously, I have dual monitors, am I supposed
to move my mouse, over 2 monitors, in order to show my desktop? -- and its annoying, at LEAST make it movable, let users place it where they want to,
it should be near the start button, it makes sense been over there.
seriously, microsoft are going to risk stuffing windows 7 up, I think its great so far, nice and stable, nice and fast, good compatability, but the navigation
is ____, please fix it.
apart from that, nice work, we all appreciate your efforts guys.- I honestly ripped my Vista Ultimate installation apart and I perfectly migrated to the Windows 7 RC without facing any problems.
However, although I don't have currently something constructive to add from my experience (due to infinite amounts of work during the RC launch week I couldn't nitpick the OS as much as I wished to), I do think that there's a Power Management problem at least with my hardware. Seems like the choice "never" doesn't quite become clear to my W7 installation, so I was forced to manually input timers that would only occur if I ever get kidnapped by aliens :
http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i134/Madvil/Power-management-plan.jpg
Still, I haven't found many other performance issues, other than finding Adobe AIR applications consuming too much CPU than they previously did (or maybe that's just my idea?). However, I do agree to many (if not everything) the posters so far noticed (from hiding the print option if no printer is installed, lack of showing the free space in a hdd/usb stick, opening the last known window without hovering all the available choices with a click, bigger clock and of course the IE proposals).
Keep up the good work. - please give us the option to show the text of the name of programs on the taskbar.
i have 1900 x 1200 screens and so i put the taskbar on the left side of the screen.
with that in vista, i can show 8 to 9 programs plus 20ish open windows--all with small icons and the text of what they are.
in windows 7, the text shows only if a program is open. :(
we text people want text.
and yes, i added in the old quicklaunch and guess what--it will show you the text only if you use large icons (and thereby waste a ton of taskbar space). with small icons--no text appears even though i tell it to.
Elemental10 -1.) bring back the classic start menu (so many people have been using it for years and WONT upgrade to windows 7, they will stay with windowsXP / vista)
2.) PLEASE bring back the quick launch, I can't stand not been able to have applications launch from there, what if I want multiple IE windows open?
not everyone likes TABS
3.) PLEASE, for the love of god, do NOT leave that SHOW DESKTOP button on the far right of the task bar, seriously, I have dual monitors, am I supposed
to move my mouse, over 2 monitors, in order to show my desktop? -- and its annoying, at LEAST make it movable, let users place it where they want to,
it should be near the start button, it makes sense been over there.
seriously, microsoft are going to risk stuffing windows 7 up, I think its great so far, nice and stable, nice and fast, good compatability, but the navigation
is ____, please fix it.
apart from that, nice work, we all appreciate your efforts guys.
1.) Don't hold your breath... I'm not seeing Microsoft changing their collective minds on this.
2.) What if you want multiple IE windows? Right-click on the IE icon on the task bar and select "Internet Explorer" - viola! Instant 2nd window.
3.) Eh.. Makes sense... Though sticking it near the start button can cause more problems. That would need some thinking..
For what it's worth - getting around isn't all THAT bad.>8) Start Menu:
Yes, this is something that can work. But, why should we users be having such a trouble to implement a little function that have LOTS of people asking for?
>Why not put a option to have "all programs" Fly out?
http://win7vista.com/index.php?topic=1414.0
displays the exact procedure to fly out.
This thread does not allow questions, so this is not an answer, just a hopefully helpful workaround.
I did it.
it works
like this.
As I ALREADY (again) said, its just illogical. We can put almost everything in the "new" start menu to show as a menu. Documents, Games, Music, Downloads, Control Panel, Pictures... why, I ask again, WHY not putting a nice little option to show "All Programs" as a menu too? If my programs can be viewed in a fly out menu, like virtualy ALL OTHER OPTIONS in the start menu, the problem is solved for me. I just don´t want to have to scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll (did I say I need to scroll? and scroll A LOT because I have LOTS of programs) and, for some strange reason, I´m forced to have them confined in a little corner of my screen, even if I want otherwise.
The simple existence of this topic, and people searching for ways to workaround this behaviour is enough (at least for me) to proof that this behaviour is stupid.- So far I can see only one good argument about "classic" start menu, the point from Zaheer Sheikh is perfectly understandable and I think Microsoft should take accesibility more into account for blind users to be able to use the menu.
- You have my vote!
JS "How about you click "start" and type in "solitaire"?
Maybe you think its annoying because you dont know how to use the start menu."
I don't type 50wpm neither can type blind...This is why I always prefer clicks instead of typing.
If you want to understand, change keyboard layout to Dvorak and try it for yourself in the dark, then tell others how great the new menu is....
If you can't see in the dark--Turn on the lights.
And why blame it on the start menu that you can't see in the dark?
If you can't see with the Windows 7 start menu what makes you think your going to magically see your keyboard with the classic menu?
The only reason why I(as a college student) am against this is because in my college they put the classic menu on ALL the vista computers and it just ruins the whole experience
of Vista.
This would also happen with Windows 7 is they include a classic menu. Whats funny is that you're fighting for something that is going to be implemented in Windows 7 just like it was inplemented in Vista.
But don't blame it on your lack of sight at night. Plus the light generating from your screen should be enough to light up your room.- You can emulate the classic start menu in Windows 7.
So you have the features of the new menu and the classic start menu side by side.
-
Features of the new menu:
- recent opened programs
- pinned programs
- jumplists
- special links (right area of start menu)
- search bar
-
Bad in new menu:
- All programs: louvre opened menu
- Reduced space for "All programs" menu by start menu
- Search bar without "history"
-
Features of classic menu:
- Laterally opened menu without mouse click
- Menus uses full screen height
-
Bad in classic menu:
- No recent opened programs
- No jumplist
- No search bar
Suggestion for the Suggestion box:
Can we get the default for "Hide Extentions for Known File Types" to be defaulted to OFF? I don't know about everyone, but that's probably the first thing I turn off when I install a copy of Windows. It seems F-Secure is now complaining about this being a security weakness in Win 7 and the tech media seems to be jumping in on this as being a potential issue.
Some big important guy wrote a nice blog: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=16860
in which he says, "Ten Seriously annoying default configurations", and mentions
"I’m glad it’s available for use in the product, but does anyone know anyone actually using IPv6?"
ccccccccccccccccccmy o ok 20 minutes to adjust "bold"
Please send a more useful HOSTS file. Mine is 645k and blocks lots of stuff, but its from 1945 when the neighborhood was safer.- There should be a list of repaired bugs between the beta and RC1.
I have seen lists of user interface changes, but no list of bugs fixed. It would be very helpful to have a list of the most serious or frequently reported bugs from the beta which have now been fixed.
I'm sure that a full list would be excessively long and would also be considered proprietary. I'm just asking that the top 20 or maybe 100 issues fixed be listed. It would be a positive indication of progress made, and would also help us know what to look for (and not expect) in the RC.
Steve - "2.) PLEASE bring back the quick launch, I can't stand not been able to have applications launch from there, what if I want multiple IE windows open?
not everyone likes TABS "
The Quicklaunch can be added back. Follow the directions here (or many other places):
http://windows7center.com/windows-7-tips/how-to-enable-the-quick-launch-bar-in-windows-7/
I have my Windows 7 taskbar EXACTLY like the way I had it in XP and Vista. Double height, running program icons on the top, Quicklaunch icons on the bottom. I have my Windows 7 taskbar EXACTLY like the way I had it in XP and Vista. Double height, running program icons on the top, Quicklaunch icons on the bottom.
Lol take no offense, but why bother upgrading then?
Regards, Kristaps.- Am I the only one who just can't get Windows Update in Start Menu's MRU list? It was there in 7000, but not anymore in 7100 :(
Regards, Kristaps. - Just installed the RC (I never got round to installing the beta's due to personal issues) it took a little over 14minutes to install and be setup onto the desktop which impressed me, all my hardware is working. Sofar first impressions are good, I like the show desktop tab in the lower right, love the network centre (a big improvement over vista) liking all the little neat gfx touches. I am a big vista fan tbh and I like the look and feel of win7 so can see me upgrading when there is an RTM available, I like it!
Regards ;) Lol take no offense, but why bother upgrading then?
Regards, Kristaps.
When they honor the hallowed few who contribute to the max here, I hope you're there in lights.
I'm not sure a UI is worth 299.99 or whatever, I figure there are other reasons, and quoting the video, we ordinary users won't see all of them for a few years.
My tuner card works! but it did in vista/xp, so um,
O, I know, it's more secure. At least I hope so.
It's easier doing stuff. (That's stretching it, but) yeah.
because there's more to the OS than the taskbar? (or at least we'd hope so). anyway, until it's on store shelves, no one has upgraded yet. it's called testing.I have my Windows 7 taskbar EXACTLY like the way I had it in XP and Vista. Double height, running program icons on the top, Quicklaunch icons on the bottom.
Lol take no offense, but why bother upgrading then?
Regards, Kristaps.- "Lol take no offense, but why bother upgrading then?"
Are you serious? Like the taskbar is the ONLY change from Vista to 7?
I use VPC daily for my work. The increased performance (and USB support) of the new VPC7 ALONE is worth the upgrade. Having a familiar taskbar arrangement just makes me more productive. If I want the OS X dock, I'll run OS X. - For those of you who are wondering about WHY to upgrade from Windows XP or Windows Vista, take a look at the TechNet Springboard site for Windows 7. It contains lots of resources, including videos, whitepapers, including What's new in Windows 7 Release Candidate. Also, don't forget to check out the Talking About Windows site, where you can see videos of folks on the product team who talk about the decisions that went into the product.
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner- BearbeitetAnthony_MannMSFT, BesitzerDonnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 19:15
- " anyway, until it's on store shelves, no one has upgraded yet. it's called testing."
I have upgraded. I did my testing last weekend when I installed it. I am now beyond testing, I am working in it right now. Have my normal Server 2003 and XP work VMs running, I'm connected to my office network with VPN, etc. - If someone could go through the documentation for the WAIK kit that was released with the RC, that would be great. Alot of the walkthrough's don't work, and many directions that are given contradict each other.
So far, i love both the beta and RC of Windows 7. Keep up the good work. - A big improvement over the beta and Vista. A few comments:
- dual monitor support is GREATLY improved from Vista. However, if I have a tablet in table tmode and a regular monitor, and they are different sizes, the background isn't handled properly. I'll post this issue elsewhere.
- Libraries: I think the libraries, as implemented, are very annoying. I understand the use case, but it isn't mine and I have no way to turn off having left pane show them, making it more difficult to get to normal folders. How about a folder option to "not expand libraries automatically". Then I'd have just a single item. If I used them, I want to define my type and behavior not just have the canned types. And, it would be really useful to combine the library and saved search into a single view. I can have search results, specific folders and a default store.
- I'm seeing some gadget issues where things aren't displaying correctly that worked in the beta. Actually it is weirder, a gadget will start off improperly rendered and then if I open the settings and cancel it renders (sometimes) correctly. be a shame to have the release break a library of gadgets, especially since thye worked in the beta. BTW, I use a 125% scaling for my desktop fonts.
- I have a laptop with the infamous Intel 945GM graphics that caused so many issues in Vista. Better in Win7, but still a bit flakey. I know the driver is newly updated so I have my finders crossed.
- Love the new biometric support. Very simple and smooth now that it is integrated.
- It is awkward that I have to go two places to set up my system for a location. The network stuff handles the firewall and sharing issues, but I have to go to devices to set the default printer. As a user, location includes a set of changes to defaults and I'd like to have them all managed together.
- Really wish that the email client and the like shipped with the OS. MS is now the only OS that doesn't ship with this. Pain to have to go somewhere to download something that is really basic functionality of any system for decades. Strange that sticky notes are included but email isn't. Big step backwards.
Thansk for all the improvements. For those of you who are wondering about WHY to upgrade from Windows XP or Windows Vista, take a look at
respectfully humorous,
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner
Dear Owner,
I looked at http://talkingaboutwindows.com/Default.aspx and all I could think of was Edie Brickell on Win 95, and maybe "Rob Roy", and the commercial of Beyonce playing a cute game.
and "Five Dollar Foot Long".
I humbly submit many people tried for years to make win 7 the great product it is, and now it's time for saatchi+saatchi (whoever) to take over.- Mark L. Ferguson suggested me to post this here, so here is:
One of the reasons for which I downgraded Vista back to XP, was because it lacked this XP feature:
- The capability to select many files, right click on the selection, and open all the selected files at once.
I hoped that Windows 7 recovered the feature, but still contains this annoyance.
Windows 7 forces to open each file one by one. If you have 100 files, it takes a lot of time.
¿Is there a workaround? - it is enough to reject any update from XP to Windows 7; an OS should SAVE time, not waste user time. -
A bat file, of course, or a script could do this easily.
I tried to add a bat file to my SedTo folder, but then started the HHell of the SenTo folder being forbidden access even to administrators.
Rating posts helps other usersMark L. Ferguson MS-MVP
To add the bat to my own SendTo folder, I tried to change the security policies, starting in fail safe mode, etc. Nothing worked.
Then I got a disgusting feeling, and just abandoned it. For those of you who are wondering about WHY to upgrade from Windows XP or Windows Vista, take a look at
respectfully humorous,
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner
Dear Owner,
I looked at http://talkingaboutwindows.com/Default.aspx and all I could think of was Edie Brickell on Win 95, and maybe "Rob Roy", and the commercial of Beyonce playing a cute game.
and "Five Dollar Foot Long".
I humbly submit many people tried for years to make win 7 the great product it is, and now it's time for saatchi+saatchi (whoever) to take over.
Imag. friend:
>o you mean "more babes"/
>pig.
I just mean Edie Brickell was irrelevant to how great win95 was, but wasn't she really great to look at, and listen to over those tinny desktop speakers? An image is worth millions of technical sounding words.- guillermo -
EH? What do you mean Windows Vista (and 7) doesn't have the ability to select multiple files and open them all at once?
That feature's never gone away... Granted, with the way Explorer works in Windows Vista (and 7), it's a bit tricky to select multiple files if you're viewing them in Details mode, but it's not impossible to do so. In Details mode, you have to find a spot to start the selection process that ISN'T on top of a file, so you have to make sure that the Explorer window is set to be wide enough so you CAN find a spot. But it CAN be done.
You can also hover-select one file and hold the shift key down and move to the begning (or end) of the list of files you want to open. Alternatively, you can also use the Ctrl key to select individual files in this method. Once you've got the files selected, right-click and Open or Open With... And they're opened. - your message does not update in MS connect, so I answer by mail in hope
it goes to the forum:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Windows Live Alerts from TechNet Forums
> Anthony_MannAnthony:
>
> Reply:
>
> guillermo -
>
> EH? What do you mean Windows Vista (and 7) doesn't have the ability to
> select multiple files and open them all at once?
>
> That feature's never gone away... Granted, with the way Explorer works in
> Windows Vista (and 7), it's a bit tricky to select multiple files if you're
> viewing them in Details mode, but it's not impossible to do so. In Details
> mode, you have to find a spot to start the selection process that ISN'T on
> top of a file, so you have to make sure that the Explorer window is set to
> be wide enough so you CAN find a spot. But it CAN be done.
>
> You can also hover-select one file and hold the shift key down and move to
> the begning (or end) of the list of files you want to open. Alternatively,
> you can also use the Ctrl key to select individual files in this method.
> Once you've got the files selected, right-click and Open or Open With...
> And they're opened.
>
Fortunately you guessed that I use details mode. I forget to say it. My bad.
No. It does not worked that way in Vista 32 bit, and does not work
that way in Windows 7 x64 RC1.
No Open option appears after right click (did it really works on you PC?) - +1
Classic menu must be back, we must have the choice - guillermo -
It's not hard to guess - and even so - it can be a bit difficult in other modes as well. The icon spacing in NT 6.x is fairly tight.
I suppose you also forgot to mention that you're trying to open multiple file types as well. If that's the case, then yes, you're right. You can't open a few DOC(x) files, XLS(x) and pictures all at once - but you CAN open 10, 100 or 1000 (if you've got the RAM) files of the SAME type at the same time without any grief. - We don't need old start menu, we just need some tweaks to the new one ;) [read on]
@Microsoft -- we need 3 checkboxes in Start Menu options to fix everything and stop the cries for the old start menu:
- "Open 'All Programs' menu outside the Start Menu"
- "Hover on folders to open them"
- "Show right-side navigation buttons"
P.S.: Couldn't you have used one of the existing recent threads, instead of bumping a 3 months old thread? :P
Regards, Kristaps. - Gonna re-post this, with hope that MS Devs read it.
We don't need the old start menu, we just need some tweaks to the new one ;) [read on before flame]
@Microsoft -- we need 3 checkboxes in Start Menu options to fix everything and stop the cries for the old start menu:
- "Open 'All Programs' menu outside the Start Menu"
- "Hover on folders to open them"
- "Show right-side navigation buttons"
Regards, Kristaps. - I just tried this and it worked here. Selected several PDF files in details mode. Right click, Open is at the top. All opened fine in a single Acrobat window.
guillermo -
No. Yesterday I tried with *.txt files ONLY, ONLY with .HTM, ONLY with .HTML, and it NO worked.
It's not hard to guess - and even so - it can be a bit difficult in other modes as well. The icon spacing in NT 6.x is fairly tight.
I suppose you also forgot to mention that you're trying to open multiple file types as well. If that's the case, then yes, you're right. You can't open a few DOC(x) files, XLS(x) and pictures all at once - but you CAN open 10, 100 or 1000 (if you've got the RAM) files of the SAME type at the same time without any grief.
by the way, in XP you also can select different types, and open all of them.
any day I select many different web type formats in XP (html, htm, asp, etc), and open it on my browser. Vista/W7 do not open they, but that is another issue.
Vista/XP does not open even an unique file type.I just tried this and it worked here. Selected several PDF files in details mode. Right click, Open is at the top. All opened fine in a single Acrobat window.
for in the case that is a specific hardware issue, this is my hardware:
Motherboard Gigabyte M51GM-S2G, AM2, chipset Nvidia NForce 4 w/ integrated Gforce 6100 (disabled), (many BIOS updates used, today, F14 or higher)
Processor Athlon X2 3600+
Video Geforce 8800GT
RAID0 of two WD80 HD
Also is missing the useful option Open with...guillermo -
No. Yesterday I tried with *.txt files ONLY, ONLY with .HTM, ONLY with .HTML, and it NO worked.
It's not hard to guess - and even so - it can be a bit difficult in other modes as well. The icon spacing in NT 6.x is fairly tight.
I suppose you also forgot to mention that you're trying to open multiple file types as well. If that's the case, then yes, you're right. You can't open a few DOC(x) files, XLS(x) and pictures all at once - but you CAN open 10, 100 or 1000 (if you've got the RAM) files of the SAME type at the same time without any grief.
by the way, in XP you also can select different types, and open all of them.
any day I select many different web type formats in XP (html, htm, asp, etc), and open it on my browser. Vista/W7 do not open they, but that is another issue.
Vista/XP does not open even an unique file type.
it allows to change the default file type managerguillermo -
Weird... I was able to open 20 JPGs by selecting them as a group from my pictures. I was able to open 6 TXT files without issue from another location... The only time I had an issue was when I tried opening an XLS file and a few TXT files at the same time.
Granted, I've got the 32 bit Win 7 RC, but that shouldn't be an issue. Win 32 and 64 should (in this case) work the same way.
Do you have the extensions for your files displayed or hidden?- How much RAM do you have? Maybe that could be a problem?
Since several ppl (including me) have denied your bug, probably something's wrong on your end :(
When you installed the RC, did you do an upgrade or a clean install? Updates sometimes mess up the system.
Regards, Kristaps. - I so beyond agree. Windows 7 is nicer, but I don't need all the bells and whistles. The screen themes are not useful. The Classic Menu is short, sweet and to the point. Are any developers listening out there? My user base (and I) will be continuing to ask this question.
guillermo -
Weird... I was able to open 20 JPGs by selecting them as a group from my pictures. I was able to open 6 TXT files without issue from another location... The only time I had an issue was when I tried opening an XLS file and a few TXT files at the same time.
Granted, I've got the 32 bit Win 7 RC, but that shouldn't be an issue. Win 32 and 64 should (in this case) work the same way.
Do you have the extensions for your files displayed or hidden?
I ever use extensions displayed, and also no hidden files (even have system files ever displayed)Kristaps -
Doubting the RAM is an issue - unless he's below 1GB.. That's all my box has here and I'm able to open multiple files of the same type without a problem.How much RAM do you have? Maybe that could be a problem?
Since several ppl (including me) have denied your bug, probably something's wrong on your end :(
When you installed the RC, did you do an upgrade or a clean install? Updates sometimes mess up the system.
Regards, Kristaps.
I have 2 Gb of OCZ DDR2 800 4-4-4-11
I Installed former Vista and today W7RC1 on a partition which I deleted and reformated at install time with the installation CD of vista 32 bit (no Service Pack) and W7 64 bit RC1.
It runs on a nvidia RAID0 (Nforce4). NTFS.- you're right. if you select multiple files of the same type, the Open option is present on the right click menu. if you select files of different types, it's not an option. pressing Enter doesn't work either.I can't tell if this is windows protecting us from ourselves or just windows being windows.
How much RAM do you have? Maybe that could be a problem?
Since several ppl (including me) have denied your bug, probably something's wrong on your end :(
When you installed the RC, did you do an upgrade or a clean install? Updates sometimes mess up the system.
Regards, Kristaps.
I have 2 Gb of OCZ DDR2 800 4-4-4-11
I Installed former Vista and today W7RC1 on a partition which I deleted and reformated at install time with the installation CD of vista 32 bit (no Service Pack) and W7 64 bit RC1.
It runs on a nvidia RAID0 (Nforce4). NTFS.
I had found exactly the same issue on my sister laptop Packard Bell with Vista home Basic (one of the reasons for wich I wipped out Vista, and replaced it with XP SP3).
On my computer, I tried Vista Ultimate, and Vista Home Premium.
it may be a localization Issue? all of the computers I tested where on culture Spanish (Argentina) Es-Ar.
W7RC1 is pure english version, but I localized it in spanish (Argentina) GMT-3 (Buenos Aires), with a MS internet keyboard pro latin distribution.
- So, it's cool that I can hit the winkey + a number to quickly launch or switch to the apps that are in my taskbar, but when I have 8 icons or so, I'd have to stop and count to see what number I'd have to hit. I think it'd be cool if there could be a small number in the corner of the icons. Optional, perhaps, because maybe not everybody would want it.
Just add a "Open 'All Programs' and other folders on hover " feature :))
That defeats the purpose of what people are asking for here: QUICK access to all programs. Forcing the user to put the cursor somewhere and wait for something to happen is never a good UI design. It's just tolerable with ToolTips, because those are not a command or function that you need to execute.
As far as your Start menu collection goes: Not sure how that helps other folks.short
Even though new Start Menu has a minimum height (why, MS?), it is pretty short :P
At least it's shorter than the classic menu could ever be, with the 'All Programs' menu spanning the entire screen :D
Not saying that it couldn't be made shorter :P
Regards, Kristaps.- I wish we could use WinKey+Numpad[number] for the same purpose :) [numpad junkie talking ^^]
Regards, Kristaps. That defeats the purpose of what people are asking for here: QUICK access to all programs.
I remember someone else here recently crying just for this xD
And there goes down another argument for classic start menu - ability to open folders by hover. :P
Regards, Kristaps.- BearbeitetKristaps. Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 21:52
So, it's cool that I can hit the winkey + a number to quickly launch or switch to the apps that are in my taskbar, but when I have 8 icons or so, I'd have to stop and count to see what number I'd have to hit. I think it'd be cool if there could be a small number in the corner of the icons. Optional, perhaps, because maybe not everybody would want it.
This wouldn't be problem if you were Rain Man!seriously, I think the thing to do is to pin your 9 most frequently used apps and work until you've memorized their positions.- I put 7100 and it works great avg 8.5, firefox, antivir, malwarebytes, all working as planned.
only program did not install aol 9.0
ctaw So, it's cool that I can hit the winkey + a number to quickly launch or switch to the apps that are in my taskbar, but when I have 8 icons or so, I'd have to stop and count to see what number I'd have to hit. I think it'd be cool if there could be a small number in the corner of the icons. Optional, perhaps, because maybe not everybody would want it.
This wouldn't be problem if you were Rain Man!seriously, I think the thing to do is to pin your 9 most frequently used apps and work until you've memorized their positions.
The problem is, I often re-arrange them. For example, I put my chat programs together. Sometimes I use MSN Messenger (Live Messenger?), and sometimes I'm also using Yahoo or IRC, and I'll drag them over to be next to each other. IMO this is one of Win7's best new features.- guillermo -
I don't see how a language pack would affect a menu - that would be a bit of a stretch. I could see a typo... A misspelling, but a drastic change like a menu item being completely missing? I dunno.. I find that a bit of a stretch. It could happen, I suppose, but I find it quite unlikely... - "2) Click Start, type "view network connections" and press Enter. Bam, you're there."
LOL! Yeah man, with a combined 26 key presses/mouse clicks and BAM! Super fast and user friendly!
That's the silliest thing I've ever read! A million key presses and BAM! You've written a novel! - To be totally honest I am slightly disappointed as I had expected more. I was quite happy with Vista and didnt think it rated the abuse it took with the only exception "gaming". Have not seen a big improvement in gaming in Win7RC1 . At the moment I cant see any real reason to upgrade from Vista but I guess the more I use this RC1 the more I will get used to it and like it.
"2) Click Start, type "view network connections" and press Enter. Bam, you're there."
'view net con' would also do the trick :)
Regards, Kristaps.- i have experienced quirky behavior in the Rc that surprised me.
For example:
on my network map.. I was getting "unknown device listed
The Action Center seems to hang on reboot... used to load alot faster in the BETA
ACHI mode can cause the RC not to install. I had to change the mode to IDE to get the RC to work (not a issue in the BETA)
I think MS has a lil bit more debugging to do before actual release of any retail version. But on a better note... once installed it does seem pretty stable. - wouldnt it be cool to have a taskbar visible both on the main display and extended display? It is really annoying sometimes to go back to the main display just to launch a program or see whats running.
- So I have been running the RC for about 6 hours now and have already run into three problems. 1) If you have a copy/paste(etc) dialog box open with a desktop slide show, when the background changes the dialog box gets sent behind the explorer window. 2) I still can't Pin anything to my Explorer on the task-bar. 3) The Desktop Slide Show still stops at random points and wont change until I go in and reselect all the images in the folder.(This has only happened once though and the Beta probably would have done it 12 times by now. I don't know how to report these so I am posting them here. _____________ Otzen
- Did something change in the sidebar? The gadgets used to snap to a certain spacing, but you could move them closer if you wanted. Two of my gadgets are snapping really far apart and the only other place it will let me put the bottom one is partially on top of the other, no happy medium. This is not an improvement.
- Can we get rid of the title bar at some point? Or come up with a sleeker design. Right now, it is taking a lot of screen real estate, considering that it is most of the time not used or experienced by the user. And it is truly ugly :-) One suggestion might be to have an auto-hide feature. I love the interface of Gadgets: clean and sleek...no title bar, no close, minimize buttons...these buttons are there but they show up only when you need them. Why not a similar interface for the rest of the apps?
- Well After installing both beta and now RC i like the fact that i had no hicups with instalation or running of Windows 7 64 bit ( whaere as vista 64 BSD on install of vid driver and shut down every thing i tried to open )
yes there are still some bugs with IE 8 closing but it better then before Still not crazy about how the network wizard sets it self up to hard to get to my personal named network vrs homegroup and so WISH i could have 2 file explorer running at the same time or a 4 pane explorer like powerdesk i tend to move files a lot and have the abilty to have to trees and the subfolders open is realy nice. only other quirk is antiverous but only cuz mcafee and symantic have not kept up. - I suppose you are running into the >15 files limitation. If one selects more than 15 files of any type there are a couple of things that change automatically. For instance you won't see the collective file size listed in the properties pane(the one at the bottom, not sure if I got its name right) without clicking for more details. The choice to open all those files also disappears from the right-click menu. I don't have a Vista installation nearby but apart from there possibly being a different number involved with the limit I clearly remember this annoyance being the default behavior since Vista.
- Ok, there are my first comments about RC. Not the lasts...
1. Installation - finnaly works fine - no more problem with my nvidia graphic card.
What I don't like too much - the 3 points who moves indicating the "progres", well there is so much space on that window so perhaps using bigger points or rollback to XP progress bar could look better.
2. Interface and Start Menu - no much visible changes since beta.
I see no return of the Classic Menu and Quick launch as OPTIONS. I like the right of choose, and if they will not re-appear in the final version I definitelly not buy it. And I will also recommend to my company to not do it. It took me 2 years to implement the xp visual styles in the company computers, because people was confused. i don't want to do it again without options. Also the flat taskbar looks worst than Vista one.
Creating Themes is a little annoying, because there is no option to edit or to delete an already created theme - created by me, not defaults. So, if i don't like it i have to keep-it there ? ok. Ok, I found a way to delete-it but not easy for an simple user. Have to select a default theme, then check "show hidden files" and go in the User's documents searching for the theme I want to delete...
3. WMP - is better than Beta - now I can acces almost all I need directly from the main windows, but still no "Properties" for played files.
Also the CPU is still very stressed when playing files - about 30-40% when playing an DVD compared with PowerDVD using 5-7%. That means the codecs used don't use hardware acceleration.
And also - when playing divx or xvid avi files - it does not play the subtitles if they are present, or this is a must for most people having this kind of moovies. That means the need to use ffdshow or vobsub in order to get those subtitles visible.
4. Media center - the introduction looks nice, but i really don't like the interface.
First - the letters are too big. I use glasses for reading, but having 5" letter high on my LCD TV is damn ugly. Second - i'm a little confused in the Up/Down navigation. In Vista I can see what's Up and Down of the selected Item. Now I can see only what's Up. So I have to memorize the order of navigation ?!?
Also when trying to set MC it try to much to connect the internet, probably to download files for settings. In XP And Vista those files (like movies for color settings) were presents aready on the computer. Sorry, but there are still a lot of people not having internet acces or having low band internet in this world !
Well those are the first impressions, I will come back. In Windows XP I generally disable Quick Launch because it competes with the taskbar, both physically and mentally. In other words, if I want to launch, say, Photoshop, I have to first see if I already have it running in the task bar. If it's not there, then I move over to the Quick Launch and launch it.
But the reason why I remove the Quick Launch entirely is because it can become "muscle memory" for me to want to click the Quick Launch button every time I need Photoshop (even if it's already running).Even though I still have to make that assertion in XP ("is Photshop already running?"), I am less likely to accidentally launch a new instance from the Start Menu than from the Quick Launch.
Windows 7 solves this for me with the superbar.I multitask over 60 hours a week with Windows 7, and I approve the new Taskbar and Start Menu.
I have to agree about the taskbar. At first I was really set on using the Quicklaunch bar. That was in the beta release. Now that I have installed the RC I decided to give the taskbar a try and like it better than the quick launch bar. The taskbar seems to get things loaded faster and makes it easier to see different pages of programs running, IE the different tabs running in my web browser. I think as people begin to get used to the new features and learn how to work with them people will not miss the older versions. So far I much happier with Windows 7 (even it is the RC) than Vista. Seems faster and less resource intensive.
Top
- I have been using MS Products since the days of MSDos 3.3. Throughout that time, there have been O/S's that I,personally, disliked, for example, Win 95 & ME. However, even though I really liked MSDos 6.22, Win 3.11WFG & Win 98, time waits for no man & as a system builder, I have to, at least, have a basic understanding of current (& past) operating systems to be able to assist & sell to my customers.
For me, I think Microsoft are back on track with Windows 7. it has been many years since i took an instant like to an operating system before fully using it, but win 7 has potential & I like it. For many home users who have programs that run extremely well under XP, the XP Mode can, & probably will be very beneficial to them. One suggestion I would like to make is that many current systems have a copious amount of ram compared to the past, therefore the minimum default ram for XP Mode should at least be 512mb rather than the current 256mb.
What I would really like to see is Microsoft including XP Mode & Windows Virtual PC as part of the RTM release.
I don't think that MS will experience the disaster that Vista produced as at my level (mainly dealing with home users) is the fact that many like Win 7. - Sirius B -
You DO realize that XP Mode is only available to those who have Win 7 Professional, Enterprise or Ultimate. Right? That and the system running it MUST support hardware virtualization. There are an awful lot of gaps in both Intel and AMD's chip line ups where their respective virtualization technologies are absent or disabled.
Either way, it won't be available for Home Premium and below.
Nor should you get your hopes too high for an inclusion of XP Mode or Virtual PC technologies in the RTM. That goes against the Windows 7 philosophy of offloading stuff that can be offloaded to Windows Live Essentials. This is, no doubt, a preemptive strike against anyone who might be considering a complaint to the EU because Microsoft is bundling feature X, Y or Z with the main package. - I doubt MS will include XP Mode in lower editions of Windows 7. And, for sure, I hope they don´t include it in RTM. I keep asking for more options to customize windows explorer and start menu, and many times I heard "you don´t need it, more options just means more bloat to the system". Now, I see the very same people asking for xp mode out of the box. So, they want ms to bundle a ENTIRE OLD OPERATIONAL SYSTEM, but not put more options to customize windows explorer because IT will add code to system? Come on. Where is the logic in here?
Besides, AMD is in a much better situation about virtualization in cpu´s than intel. Almost all AMD relatively new cpus have AMD-V enabled, but many intel cpu´s don´t have it, because intel says that "virtualization is reserved for high end cpu. low end don´t need/have it".
And, talking about putting stuff in the system out of the box, I still can´t understand why Windows DVD Maker is included. I think it would be much more logical to rip it off and offer as a free download as a Windows Live familty product. Movie Maker (beta) is out of the box. Image Gallery and Mail are out to. And, I bet people tend to use much more mail and photo than they create dvd´s.
Personally, I think this new way of doing things a great improvement. The system should be as simple as possible, a kernel, drivers, basic files and midia viewer / organization. There is no need to bloat the system with stuff some will never use. I, for speak, dont use Windows Media Center, and I glad I can remove it (and other features) now. Acting like this unbloat the system, and make easier to Microsoft to update the applications, because they are no longer integrated in the system.
____
Now, another thing I think that need to be tweaked: Yesterday I installed Word and Excel 2007. I don´t use the other programs in the suite. I will NEVER use Outlook, for example. I don´t need it, and I didn´t installed it in my system. But, just after the installation completed (SP2 too) Windows Update found several updates to do. 1 or 2 of Word, another one for Excel, one for Office in general, and TWO updates for Outlook. One of them, marked as "important" is about new filters for junk mail in outlook. And, even if I mark to hid this update, Windows Update keep asking me to install it, because it is "IMPORTANT". (If I hide a "recommended" update, Windows Update don´t bother me anymore.) But, in this case, I don´t want nor will use this "important" update. If I hide it, why Windows Update keeps bothering me? And, most important, why did it want me to install a update to a software that is not even in my system?
I think if the user set a update to hide, Windows Update should stop asking anything about this update. you're right. if you select multiple files of the same type, the Open option is present on the right click menu. if you select files of different types, it's not an option. pressing Enter doesn't work either.
I can't tell if this is windows protecting us from ourselves or just windows being windows.
It is another problem by itself.
If you select different file types, you should have the option of open them; each one with his own software.
XP does it, and I need it. No excuses.
Without it, I gonna block any upgrade from XP. I gonna buy second hand XP licenses on new computers.guillermo -
Its weird, but as far as I see, is the only personalization I did at install time.
I don't see how a language pack would affect a menu - that would be a bit of a stretch. I could see a typo... A misspelling, but a drastic change like a menu item being completely missing? I dunno.. I find that a bit of a stretch. It could happen, I suppose, but I find it quite unlikely...
anyway, you can't discard it as the bug origin; If you ever debugged code, you should had found very weird bug sources.To be totally honest I am slightly disappointed as I had expected more. I was quite happy with Vista and didnt think it rated the abuse it took with the only exception "gaming". Have not seen a big improvement in gaming in Win7RC1 . At the moment I cant see any real reason to upgrade from Vista but I guess the more I use this RC1 the more I will get used to it and like it.
I program CUDA, so one of the first things I tested, was a heavy game. Win7 gets slower frame rates, but it have much better responsivity, and it does the lower framerates much less painful; In fact, I prefer the better responsivity over the higuer framerates.
Although I are comparing it with XP 32 bit. I think that the enhancement have more related to 64 bit than to Win 7.It never ceases to amaze me how retrograd people is about new technologies, instead of going on with the advance and enjoy a better experience, like most of us do they are whyning and complainig about how "they don't listen to me and, despite the fact that the change is for the best, i liked it the other way so if you don't go back and put like it was before i'm not going to buy your new product", I, honestly, find that way of thinking plain retarded.
This not only appñliies to Microsoft or Windows 7 it is there way long before that is just "resistance to change" in 99% of the cases...I suppose you are running into the >15 files limitation. If one selects more than 15 files of any type there are a couple of things that change automatically. For instance you won't see the collective file size listed in the properties pane(the one at the bottom, not sure if I got its name right) without clicking for more details. The choice to open all those files also disappears from the right-click menu. I don't have a Vista installation nearby but apart from there possibly being a different number involved with the limit I clearly remember this annoyance being the default behavior since Vista.
I tested it with far more than 15 files. I gonna check it with less files (if it works, then I hope a simple register edition changes the limit).
Unfortunately, I can't check it just now, because my neighbor closed his house, and the morons of the electrical company disconnected my electricity instead of my neighbor >:(It never ceases to amaze me how retrograd people is about new technologies, instead of going on with the advance and enjoy a better experience, like most of us do they are whyning and complainig about how "they don't listen to me and, despite the fact that the change is for the best, i liked it the other way so if you don't go back and put like it was before i'm not going to buy your new product", I, honestly, find that way of thinking plain retarded.
This not only appñliies to Microsoft or Windows 7 it is there way long before that is just "resistance to change" in 99% of the cases...
"resistance of change" means that more than 60 persons on my company asked me to downgrade his factory default Vista do XP in the last 6 months.
I did it until XP licenses started to be scarce. Even then, people like my boss literally begged me to replace the Vista they payed for, with pirated XP.
The problem is, that Vista DON'T works. It hangs for minutes doing apparently nothing, in task that XP does instantaneously.
Sometimes the UAC simply appears on a hidden window, and people waits for an hour, until they call me because his notebook "hanged".
and is not "retrograd people about new technologies". Almost any young women on my company simply wants Vista because is "new". They ask me before about what computer purchase, and even when advice them to NOT buy vista, or buy XP separately, they play the "innocent" game, and buy Vista anyway, because is "new".
A month later, they runs to me desperately whining that his laptop don't works at all (and even with core 2 Duo T7xxx, 4 Gb DDR2 800 in dual channel, and a nvidia/ATI chipset).
Sudendly, they want me to change it to XP, which is a ____, since many vendors does NOT provide XP drivers, and you need to modify .inf files, and install generic drivers. Even vendors as Toshiba, a former trusworty trademark, provides XP drivers that simply don't works.
Some girls asked me to install the linux included in his netbook, because all they do is to use Internet, and occasional text edition. I mean, it is CRAZY. Girls HATE Linux.I wasn`t talking about Vista, i found some annoyances on Vista too, i used it anyway because i "only" use Visual Studio, Office, and a bunch of third party software, included my own, that works perfectly fine with it and i liked the enhacements, but, to the point: I wasn't talking about vista, it was more focused on the whole "Classic start menu" issue... still the point aplies there, Vista is a resource hog but it does the job and it does'nt do it any worse than XP same as XP didn't do it worse than 98 and i dowgrade hundreds of clients from XP to 98 because the find difficult to adapt to it in that time...
It is the same for every major release of almost any software...XP does it, and I need it. No excuses.
Without it, I gonna block any upgrade from XP. I gonna buy second hand XP licenses on new computers.
XP does A LOT, let me tell again, A LOT of things that Seven don´t.
1) XP shows file sizes of the current folder in status bar of Windows Explorer.
In seven, we needto select the files to see their sizes. But wait, don´t select more than 15 files, or you will then need to click the (stupid) "More Details" button.
2)XP show free space in status bar of Windows Explorer.
If you want to see free space in status bar / details pane in seven you... well... you just can´t. NO SINGLE WAY. The better you can do is going to "Computer" and see the devices there.
3) XP let you choose the pictures you want to import when you plug a digital camera and the "Windows Importer" is used.
In seven, you have to import ALL imagens or NO imagens at all. No option. (For sure you can install Windows Live photo gallery to provide this, as you can install any software to do anything you want, but, I´m talking here about what is BUILT IN windows and now works less or simple don´t work at all when compared to XP.)
4) In XP you can disable Clear Type.
In seven, it´s never full disabled. Some windows (like wordpad?) insist in show Clear Type even if it´s turned off.
I love clear type, and always use it. But, I´m all for option. If there is people over there that don´t want / like Clear Type they should be able to get off it easily. (and MS knows it, because in the study to implement clear type they found that a large % of people don´t like it)
5) In XP, I can make a RAR file inside windows or program files folder with 2 clicks. Right Click in the file I want, click make rar. DONE.
In seven, because winrar is not running with admin privileges, it can´t write to Windows or Program Files folder. So, no more 2 clicks file done. Now, I need to select a patch and filename to save.
6) In XP, I can fly out the All Programs if I´m using the New Start Menu, and not the classic one.
In seven, I can´t fly out. All my programs (and I have several) are confined to a little screen space and force me to scroll and scroll to find what I want USING THE MOUSE (stop this bs of "type in search box" I´m using mouse, I don´t want to switch mouse / keyboard / mouse every time I need to open a program, knowing I dont NEED to search anything, as I know where the program is, and I just want a fast "click".)
7) In XP you can have a Classic menu.
In seven, you can´t. Period.
8) In XP I can have the system with the look I want. If I want a blue progress bar, I can use a theme for it.
In seven, I´m still searching for a way to get rid of the green progress bar. I don´t like green. It´s simple, it should be easy to change, but it´s not.
9) In XP, you can have a installed version of windows with less than 2gb in disk size.
In a new disk, with zero files, just a Windows Seven installation goes to almost 15 gb in size. I still think it´s a lot of space for a system. There are entire linux suits with office and image editor applications that uses less than half of it.
Ok, let me stop here. I think will be a shame if I reach a 2 digits count of things that seven can´t do and XP always did.
Yes, people tend to resist changes, but here, I´m talking about real functionality lost.It is the same for every major release of almost any software...
- guys, if you are happy with windows xp, why are you even here? Just pressure MS to keep producing more licences for XP. Come on, dont spoil windows 7 for us :-) This is probably the only time some of us are enjoying a quite efficient and nice interface. Sure, it can be better. There are rough edges here and there, like the ugly title bar :-) I personally dont think a title bar is necessary (check the interface of the gadgets! a perfect example of a nice interface)....Anyway, good job with the new UI! keep it coming
... and you can right click a folder, and search on it an his subdirectories!...
XP does A LOT, let me tell again, A LOT of things that Seven don´t.
1) ...
...
9) In XP, you can have a installed version of windows with less than 2gb in disk size.
In a new disk, with zero files, just a Windows Seven installation goes to almost 15 gb in size. I still think it´s a lot of space for a system. There are entire linux suits with office and image editor applications that uses less than half of it.
...
As a programer, I understand that common user, prefer simpler, completely un-featured interfaces. Any extra information you facilitates and show to them just confuses and scare them. So I understand why Google slaughtered any other search engine (and windows live s*cks). And I understand why some people fancy Apple, and each Windows version loses the most useful features.
But WHY MS sell a -Professional- version?. I NEED those lost features, and they don't even are available on professional versions.
With each version, I need to add a lot more extra software just to recover lost features. And Windows "Professional" have no reason to hold that name.
Each version have more "versions", so WHY I can't have one with all the features?guys, if you are happy with windows xp, why are you even here?
I´m here because I want to use Windows 7.
I´m here because if something do the job very well in xp (a system from a decade ago) I think it can, in minimun, do the same job in seven. For sure I want it to do BETTER, but if MS can´t provide this, at least provide the same.
I´m here because if no one complain about what is or appears to be wrong or worse, then there will never be evolution in the world.
I´m here because I´m trying to provide my opinion and experience as a user of windows to be able to buy a better product when it is released.
- Chitbill,
Your comment is completely unprofessional and offensive. You are contributing to invalidate and polute these forums. I have deleted your post. You need to read the code of conduct. Another such comment and you will be banned from participating in any Microsoft forum. Thank you for your cooperation.
-Tony Mann
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner - Sorry I'll go,
guys, if you are happy with windows xp, why are you even here?
-Because I want a better OS, and I want MS to make money from it, so he can finance development for new OS.
-Microsoft did really wrong with Vista, and I want Windows 7 to be better.
-Because I got a free beta and RC1 which is easier to use than many Linux.
-Because although I rant here, I hold hope for W7.
-Because is wonderful that MS allow me to rant and whine here all I want. Is good sign.guillermo -
I don't see how a language pack would affect a menu - that would be a bit of a stretch. I could see a typo... A misspelling, but a drastic change like a menu item being completely missing? I dunno.. I find that a bit of a stretch. It could happen, I suppose, but I find it quite unlikely...
What about a missed string in the language pack?, would probably not be displayed?
Excellent points :-)guys, if you are happy with windows xp, why are you even here?
-Because I want a better OS, and I want MS to make money from it, so he can finance development for new OS.
-Microsoft did really wrong with Vista, and I want Windows 7 to be better.
-Because I got a free beta and RC1 which is easier to use than many Linux.
-Because although I rant here, I hold hope for W7.
-Because is wonderful that MS allow me to rant and whine here all I want. Is good sign.To all forum users:
Please use this thread to note any comments that you have about Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC). Do not use this thread for any specific question or issue that you are having - just for comments or feedback. For questions/issues that require an answer, create a new thread.
Thanks
-Tony Mann
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums
I had found DirectX 11 on W7.
Wonderful. It has being promised with GPGPU support, but I still had not heard of Physics acceleration (I mean DirectX Physics).
It is really, really, really important. Lack of it really hurts the PC platform.To all forum users:
Please use this thread to note any comments that you have about Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC). Do not use this thread for any specific question or issue that you are having - just for comments or feedback. For questions/issues that require an answer, create a new thread.
Thanks
-Tony Mann
Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums
Something that Windows 7 should absolutely have, is supporting many users with one computer.
Software like BetWin allows to connect manu mouses, monitors, and keyboards to a single computer, and run many simultaneous users on it.
-It is really useful. You can buy an expensive computer instead of many poor ones.
-You can buy just minimal hardware, and if it does not works, you lost nothing. Just need to buy the extra hardware which already was needed.
-Today computers have 4 processors, many of them doing nothing.
-You can save lot of money in hardware, and /or invest it in software.
-Is easy of implement with Virtual machines. Just need to associate each keyboard/mouse with a specific virtual machine.
-Is easier to maintain and upgrade.
-Bosses love saving money.
-The bottleneck is commonly the hard disk access, but today SSD drives solve it nicely.guillermo -
> Something that Windows 7 should absolutely have, is supporting many users with one computer.
The Windows family already does this - it's called Terminal Services or Remote Desktop. It's primarily available on the Server editions. Windows 7 already sports a client that allows you to connect to either a terminal server or another computer running Windows XP, Vista or 7. I'm not entirely sure if it'll connect to NT 4 terminal services or Windows 2000 boxes with TS.
With the client side of Windows, there IS a limit of one user/connection at a time. With the server end, the default is also 1 connection - but you can install the full terminal services package and add as many CALs as needed.- In Windows XP and Vista, there was an option in the "Folder Options" -> "View" tab to "Restore previous folder windows at logon". So if I restart my computer with 5 directories open in Windows Explorer, upon rebooting those same 5 directories will be open and in the same location on my desktop. But in Windows 7 RC, that option is gone from the "View" tab, and I can't find it anywhere else. Does anyone know where it is hiding? Thanks.
Originally posted in the "Windows 7 User Interface" forum, but moved here on advice of moderator:
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/w7itproui/thread/80609b61-eed5-494e-bb40-3e571c20323b Windows Vista had handy buttons to change the sort order of any directory in Windows Explorer. In Windows 7 RC, those bottons are gone unless you are viewing that directory by Details. But I like to view by List, and still have any easy way to change the sort order.
As it stands, if I want to sort by descending Date, I have to right-click in an open space in the folder, select "Sort by", select "Date modified", then right-click AGAIN in an open space in the folder, select "Sort by", and select "Descending". That is compared to a simple double-click on the "Date modified" button in Vista. The Vista buttons also displayed the current sort criteria and order, whereas in Windows 7 there is no way to know on which criteria a given folder is sorted by.
This is a dramatic step backwards in usability. I understand that there is a push to simplify the UI, but I should at least have the option to display the "sort order toolbar" (or whatever you want to call it) in some or all folders if I choose to. Does anyone know if there is a way to restore this functionality in Windows 7? Thanks.
Originally posted in the "Windows 7 User Interface" forum:
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/w7itproui/thread/eaed7f8b-9011-41ae-97cf-23135a045888?prof=required
RC IS A BIG DISAPPOINTMENT
Let me be clear: I love Windows 7. But, the incredibly few changes in the UI between the Beta and the RC are very disappointing.
There are masses of really good comments and suggestions in these forums - some of them are so obvious as to be "no brainers", and many of them would be genuine improvements.
Like many people I put a lot of effort into making a number of carefully thought out and constructive suggestions for improvement. Browse these forums and you will find dozens of really great suggestions, many of which would almost certainly be perfectly feasible to implement (I'm not talking about major things like bringing back the XP-style start menu).
I'm sure there must be many people wondering why Microsoft set up these forums, invited our feedback, only to ignore the vast majority of it (in terms of the UI, virtually all of it).
W7 is really good, but those remaining stupid annoyances and inconsistencies in the UI are stopping it from being really great. What a terrible shame!
Thack- I have been using windows 7 for a while now. I have two displays. Desktop is extended to the secondary display. One thing I find annoying is that whatever happens on one of the display area also effects the other. For instance, lets say I have a movie running on the secondary display, if I hover over the taskbar on the main display (over an app running and pinned to the taskbar), the movie window on the secondary display also gets hidden along with the windows on the main window. Wouldnt be more convenient to have an option to set these two desktop areas as almost indenpendent desktop areas?
Windows 7
Start button (Windows logo button) glow is overdone. It should be more subtle.
Small windows appearing above icons (when hovering on icon) in the task bar aren’t updated if the corresponding application window is minimized. Perhaps it’s a deliberate behavior, but I’d wish if they would update even if their application window is minimized.
Windows Media Center
Settings > TV > Guide > Edit favorite lineups
- Renaming of existing favorite list not possibleTV > Guide > Right click on any channel > Sort by Name / Number
- The channel list is not updated. Need to exit/enter TV-Guide to apply sortingMedia Player 12
Application freezes for 5-10 seconds every few minutes during gathering of media information (e.g. album cover art) from the internet.
Application always freezes for 5-10 seconds when clicking Music, but not when clicking Album, Artist or Genre (4.300 tracks in music library).
Play tab: Track appears multiple times in playlist if currently playing track is drag-dropped to a position further down in the list. The “false” track listings can appear multiple times above or below
