Connect with us


Windows 7 Unveils Tuesday. What Are You Hoping For?



The wraps get taken off of Windows 7 tomorrow at PDC2008. Windows 7 bits will get distributed to developers and it won’t be long before we start seeing screen shots and posts about what’s there and what’s not.

So, while we wait, what are you hoping for in Windows 7? What are your expectations? Loren Heiny has published his wish list here. What’s yours? Or does it even matter to you?



  1. Gavin Miller

    10/27/2008 at 1:38 pm

    Scalability to different systems would be good, a more modular approach.

    Oh, and get rid of the registry……..

  2. LCS

    10/27/2008 at 2:25 pm

    Mr. Warner, I will say this to you frankly: there are no drastic improvements over this new OS. At best, it is a better touch screen system. The will be os will endure the same security problems, issues of performances, and crops of bugs. I can garrantee this will be at best with improvements like Leopard and at worst, improvements like Leopard. New tablet PCs that born out of this OS will suffer the same issues and problems like you have today.

    However, we all like to see little new trinkets and some new changes like the look of the system or maybe a few seconds faster.

  3. everbrave

    10/27/2008 at 2:52 pm

    first hope is that it is not Vista!
    Second, it supports multi-touch so well that the N-Trig screen on my Dell XT will as responsive as my iPhone.
    But …. I do not trust it!

  4. S!ick

    10/27/2008 at 3:02 pm

    I want an operating system that loads fast, and where non-basic and necessary functionality can be loaded AFTER it has “booted”. There are times where I just want it to boot so I can manipulate some files, use some other functionality if I desire, and then maybe shut down. I want to be able to turn it on and use it…if I want to use some service, I can wait for it to load when I call upon it.

  5. Joe

    10/27/2008 at 3:19 pm

    To the above poster… uh Windows already does load the ‘non-basic’ functionality after it’s booted. Why do you think it displays your desktop before it’s entirely ready? Its because everything else is loading in the background. And if you want, you can already manually disable services.

    As for the so-called performance issues of Vista, its already been tested that games run just as fast in Vista as in XP. There was a major network performance bug in transferring files over the network, that’s been fixed. If you don’t have a fast enough computer, you can turn off Aero, or just turn transparency off, and it runs just as fast as XP did.

    Sure, there’s no reason to go out and buy Vista to install on old computers, but I’m still shocked at the number of people who think they need to downgrade to XP on their brand new computers, whether its because of the hearsay (and entirely false) reputation of Vista, or because they’re resistant to change.

    As for Windows 7, it seems like it will be a lot of small improvements, which is perfectly fine with me. There’s absolutely no need for something revolutionary when what we have works well. I’m hoping for more 64-bit support by developers and hardware makers (come on, its about time already), maybe some UI tweaks (there’s no reason there needs to be 4 different control panel menus for the network), and building on the basic framework of Vista even more (multitouch is a good example of this, I’d love to see even more attention paid to Media Center with regards to streaming other filetypes to extenders like the 360, but I’m pretty sure this won’t happen).

  6. GoodThings2Life

    10/27/2008 at 3:31 pm

    I spent my whole weekend playing with Windows Server 2008 as I finally upgraded and replaced my aging WS2003 server. In spite of the Vista-like interface, I *really* like the improvements to WS08, so knowing that Windows 7 is based on the WS08 code base is pretty promising.

    That said, since I already know that most of the applets are getting the Office 2007 Ribbon interface, the only thing I want to see next is for Windows Explorer to be revamped, because I really, really, REALLY hate the Vista/WS08 interface.

    Oh, I wouldn’t mind if they got rid of the Network Center and tweaked the new Control Panel structure a bit more since they really screwed those up in Vista.

  7. Gavin Miller

    10/27/2008 at 3:44 pm

    Aaron, I LOVE the ribbon interface and XP feels old fashioned and clunky to me.

    Just shows you how preferences can differ greatly, and why we’ll never have the perfect OS….. :-)

  8. GoodThings2Life

    10/27/2008 at 3:50 pm

    @Joe… I hear people like you praise all that is Vista in terms of performance (and I agree– more on that at the end), but you overlook the fact that most people choose to downgrade to XP for one or both of these two reasons:

    1) They find it better to standardize on one OS platform at a time rather than a hodge-podge cluster of XP and Vista; since XP is familiar and known to be dependable, it’s the more common choice.

    2) They find the new Vista interface to be annoying at best and frustrating at worst.

    I’m a member of the second group, and while it’s not because of major issues, it’s because of the significant number of little things– I find Windows Explorer (the My Computer view) to be frustrating…I don’t need gigantic large-icon highlights for file drag-and-drop when I have the directory listing in LIST view, and I want my damn folder-tree scrollbars back. Meanwhile, the new control panel is excessively overwhelming (even for an IT veteran like myself), and UAC with SP1 is STILL annoying and misleading for less technical users (nevermind when I’m trying to fix problems and have to hassle with dozens of extra clicks and keyboard sequences to get things done). I mention clicks, and here’s a perfect example– in order to get to the TCP/IP properties of a network connection in XP it takes 4 clicks (6 if I have to go through Control Panel). It takes at least 10 to do the same in Vista. A few extra seconds on a one-time basis, but add that up in a full day of desktop support and it becomes inefficient.

    It’s simply NOT a friendly experience. That said, Server 2008 really made a number of improvements that I hope will translate back to Vista SP2 and that I am sure will translate back to Windows 7.

    This is a good thing, and you’re definitely right about the performance and stability factor. Since SP1’s release, and the year of driver releases and updates on the OEM side, things are definitely improved on that issue.

  9. GoodThings2Life

    10/27/2008 at 3:52 pm

    @Gavin… I *LOVE* the Ribbon interface. I would be THRILLED to see a revamped My Computer interface that sports it and goes back to an XP-style folder-tree listing (left side).

  10. Aaron Axvig

    10/27/2008 at 8:43 pm

    S!ick, you should check out a feature called Standby. Or Hibernation. Whichever floats your boat.

  11. Medic

    10/28/2008 at 6:17 am

    Probably not all will be applied as the tablet pc group is not as great as the mainstream users. As touch is advertised more in the upcoming windows 7 I think people at microsoft should start to listen more to all the tablet pc users, and deliver a complete package instead of the impression of an incomplete product, yet again having to wait and wait for the well known routine of “here we go again” service packs. I think consumer testing is a good customer service. I think the former is a sign of poor consumer service and quality and an ineffecient way of delivering a product.

    The first teaser trailers and pictures of the upcoming Windows 7 looks quite similar to the current Vista. Although microsoft mentioned that the operating system itself is complete rebuilt from the ground up, I think microsoft in this case should not be pressured to deliver their new product in 2009. Give them a bit more time to use the consumer feedback to good use, and let them build a more solid and stable and complete product for 2010. Perhaps microsoft then will deserve a new respect to a better system, which is now apparently praised to Apple OX.

    Since the oil crisis energy management is looking to become a more crucial business management. All the current windows OS system crashes and disfunctioning elements cause unnecessary reboots, which is an energy consumptive process. Slow boot ups, ill-working sleepmodes, and the countless hours of uninstalling and reinstalling must then surely also play their part in this process. In my opinion it is time to make Windows OS more energy efficient themselves, decreasing start-up times, decreasing memory footprings, more stable with unnecessary reinstallings, rebootings and the like.

  12. Gordon Cahill

    10/28/2008 at 4:31 pm

    I would like the option to “vlite” the OS on install. I don’t need Windows Mail, Calendar etc. I don’t use the inbuilt DVD burning engine. Likewise Windows Fax, Paint, Wordpad, Movie Maker, Journal. The list goes on and on. Not loading these options would make for a leaner, faster, more efficient OS with a quicker boot time. On install a “custom” mode like offered in office so I can not install stuff I don’t need. And then the ability to add components later.

    I’d like a “lite” boot option at start up. One that just loads the absolute minimum if all I want to do is check an email or my calendar or watch a movie.

    I’d like them to fix the sleep of death I’m getting on my Mini-Note. Yes I know it’s not all MS fault but it did start with SP1.

    And I’d like a complete uninstall system. One that removes ALL registry keys and folders on the uninstall command.

    I’d like to see a deeper integration of the tablet pc functionality. I think this will come as multi-touch comes. Small touches like a loupe view (ala iphone) when you hold your finger on the screen to make selecting easier. I’m more interested in getting the features they have now right and better implemented than I am in a whole host of new stuff.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.