# Windows 7 - Things that still need fixing



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

Article on MSNBC:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33335161/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/

Feel free to comment with some of your own too - *keep the thread Windows 7ish* - no OS wars.  For me, I would have to add these:

11) Price - Windows 7 is a LOT of money for a very "meh" OS.  Microsoft would have much better uptake and less bitterness toward the quality of their OS if they stopped charging so much for it.  Eg: You're basically paying for a Lexus LS, and you're getting a Honda Fit.  If you buy a Honda Fit, with the intention of only getting a Fit, then you'll likely not complain that it wasn't a Lexus. 

12) Less fluff out of the box - lots of pretty animations, automated features, sounds and goofy things are on by default in the OS.  I wish they would stop assuming people want these as the default and change them to an option to turn on later if wanted.


----------



## Aurali (Oct 20, 2009)

frickin buggy as hell explorer.exe always crashes on me.. >.>


----------



## Steel_Wolf (Oct 20, 2009)

The commercials are awesome and cool but Microsoft took away that coolness when they suggested that everybody should have a Windows 7 Launch Party

Link 1

Link 2


----------



## Aurali (Oct 20, 2009)

Steel_Wolf said:


> The commercials are awesome and cool but Microsoft took away that coolness when they suggested that everybody should have a Windows 7 Launch Party
> 
> Link 1
> 
> Link 2



but.. but.. more happy is coming.


----------



## FuzzyPinkRaptor (Oct 20, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> 11) Price - Windows 7 is a LOT of money for a very "meh" OS.  Microsoft would have much better uptake and less bitterness toward the quality of their OS if they stopped charging so much for it.  Eg: You're basically paying for a Lexus LS, and you're getting a Honda Fit.  If you buy a Honda Fit, with the intention of only getting a Fit, then you'll likely not complain that it wasn't a Lexus.
> 
> 12) Less fluff out of the box - lots of pretty animations, automated features, sounds and goofy things are on by default in the OS.  I wish they would stop assuming people want these as the default and change them to an option to turn on later if wanted.


well, I'm gonna start with 12 first, THEN 11. Although I agree entirely.

12) I understand to a competent user, all the Fluff is pointless, But they assume it because, PEOPLE DO! Alot of the less knowledgeable people love the stupid little animations and goofy things! They see it as a cool feature of the OS, and never actually use it to it's fullest extent. A majority of Windows users are just Recreational users. You're under the assumption that people are smart.

11) Yes, The Honda Fit/Lexus argument was good. But think about it, Who else is making OSes, Linux? That shit is complicating to the normal user, It's scary and Intimidating, an Unknown. Mac OS? Yeah, they're cheery and bright, but there not REALLY used at the office that well, and they only represent less than 20% of the computer market.
So Microsoft has this stranglehold, This death grip over the competition...So why not squeeze a little to get some money for it's "Well designed Product". They have enough people buying it that they could sell it for $200 more and people would STILL buy it, If not in bulk by Businesses. Microsoft is short of being a monopoly by two very weak forces.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 20, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> 11) Price - Windows 7 is a LOT of money for a very "meh" OS. Microsoft would have much better uptake and less bitterness toward the quality of their OS if they stopped charging so much for it. Eg: You're basically paying for a Lexus LS, and you're getting a Honda Fit. If you buy a Honda Fit, with the intention of only getting a Fit, then you'll likely not complain that it wasn't a Lexus.


 
Go to a school that's enrolled in the MSDNAA.


----------



## AlexInsane (Oct 20, 2009)

For those of us still running XP, I'm afraid it's shit or bust. No longer do we have the option of sitting (relatively) pretty with XP and thumbing our noses at Vista users. We either a) upgrade to 7, b) buy a Mac, or c), run an alternative OS that a minority of people can understand.


----------



## net-cat (Oct 20, 2009)

AlexInsane said:


> For those of us still running XP, I'm afraid it's shit or bust. No longer do we have the option of sitting (relatively) pretty with XP and thumbing our noses at Vista users. We either a) upgrade to 7, b) buy a Mac, or c), run an alternative OS that a minority of people can understand.


You've got until 2014 on XP. Granted, I already see Microsoft cutting the strings on new XP development, but you can use it and get security updates until 2014.


----------



## FuzzyPinkRaptor (Oct 20, 2009)

AlexInsane said:


> For those of us still running XP, I'm afraid it's shit or bust. No longer do we have the option of sitting (relatively) pretty with XP and thumbing our noses at Vista users. We either a) upgrade to 7, b) buy a Mac, or c), run an alternative OS that a minority of people can understand.



I see this problem, and it makes me sad.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

FuzzyPinkRaptor said:


> well, I'm gonna start with 12 first, THEN 11. Although I agree entirely.
> 
> 12) I understand to a competent user, all the Fluff is pointless, But they assume it because, PEOPLE DO! Alot of the less knowledgeable people love the stupid little animations and goofy things! They see it as a cool feature of the OS, and never actually use it to it's fullest extent. A majority of Windows users are just Recreational users. You're under the assumption that people are smart.



HAHAHA... no!  I believe the majority of people are ah... intellectually challenged.  If it were MY choice, people would require a license to own and operate a computer.  The reason I think the fluff should be off is two-fold.  One, if the user is installing it on an older PC, they don't go "Durrr! This sure runs bad on muh Pentium III! :V", the other is that it wouldn't hurt to have users actually try to find where something is and activate it.  How else are they going to learn to do stuff if they don't have to do stuff?



FuzzyPinkRaptor said:


> 11) Yes, The Honda Fit/Lexus argument was good. But think about it, Who else is making OSes, Linux? That shit is complicating to the normal user, It's scary and Intimidating, an Unknown. Mac OS? Yeah, they're cheery and bright, but there not REALLY used at the office that well, and they only represent less than 20% of the computer market.
> So Microsoft has this stranglehold, This death grip over the competition...So why not squeeze a little to get some money for it's "Well designed Product". They have enough people buying it that they could sell it for $200 more and people would STILL buy it, If not in bulk by Businesses. Microsoft is short of being a monopoly by two very weak forces.



Linux is quite easy to use now, about as much so as the MacOS, but that's not the point.  The fact is that there _are_ other OS's out there, and many of them are either free or at least are a reasonable price (particularly for upgrades if you look at the MacOS).  These OS's are, for the most part, on par or better than Windows, and each passing year, MS loses a little more of their market dominance to them.  Example:

Let's say we got Joe Worker who lives on a bit of an extreme budget 'cause he's got 2 kids and lots of bills.  He's managed to get enough parts to build a basic PC, but now he's gotta put an OS on it.  Pirating a copy of Windows is not an option.  The midrange version of Windows 7 is gonna run him about $200, and the latest Open-source OS of choice is free.  Both are going to allow him to surf, watch videos, chat with friends, do e-mail, do documents and basically all the other tasks that are both work and personal related.  Which choice do you think he's going to choose?  If he doesn't have $200, there's really not much of a choice.

Now... imagine the same scenario except that Windows 7 is $20.  Coming up with $20 isn't too hard, and that means he can now run an OS that is more common and that he is perhaps more accustomed too.  He still has a free choice, but at least it's a choice he can afford to make, plus, he can't really complain that the OS was an expensive piece of trash (if he had issues) because it wasn't expensive.

Microsoft's profit doesn't come solely form the sale of OS's, in fact, that's only a small portion of it.  Money on Consumer grade OS's could be made up largely by support contracts instead of sales ones.

The reason they continue to charge a lot goes back to what I said after your first comment - people are generally not very smart.  To use the Honda/Lexus analogy again, the average consumer pays for a Lexus LS, gets the Honda Fit, but Microsoft has crossed out the name and written "Lexus LS!" in crayon on the Honda, and the consumer believes they actually got a Lexus. Eventually, they get bitter 'cause the "Lexus" they bought doesn't live up to the hype.


----------



## FuzzyPinkRaptor (Oct 20, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> HAHAHA... no!  I believe the majority of people are ah... intellectually challenged.  If it were MY choice, people would require a license to own and operate a computer.  The reason I think the fluff should be off is two-fold.  One, if the user is installing it on an older PC, they don't go "Durrr! This sure runs bad on muh Pentium III! :V", the other is that it wouldn't hurt to have users actually try to find where something is and activate it.  How else are they going to learn to do stuff if they don't have to do stuff?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The smarter people get, the less jobs people like us get, and that means less money for us...Bad business, having smart people.

Besides, if Joe Worker is smart enough to build a PC without crying, Isn't he smart enough not to buy Windows 7, and Torrent a copy of Windows XP? Or get a better job? You're assuming the cattle is smart enough to know it's steak.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

FuzzyPinkRaptor said:


> The smarter people get, the less jobs people like us get, and that means less money for us...Bad business, having smart people.
> 
> Besides, if Joe Worker is smart enough to build a PC without crying, Isn't he smart enough not to buy Windows 7, and Torrent a copy of Windows XP? Or get a better job? You're assuming the cattle is smart enough to know it's steak.



*snickers* I do love your particularly brutal (but true) views.  Could have been a bare-bones PC buy or a used one, but yeah - I suppose if he could actually build it himself, he'd probably be smart enough _not_ to put Windows on it. 



			
				AlexInsane said:
			
		

> For those of us still running XP, I'm afraid it's shit or bust. No longer do we have the option of sitting (relatively) pretty with XP and thumbing our noses at Vista users. We either a) upgrade to 7, b) buy a Mac, or c), run an alternative OS that a minority of people can understand.



Meh... change can be fun.  Everyone had to once learn Windows, so sometimes it's good to shake things up a little.  I chose C, others in my immediate department have done C or B, some are waiting to do A only after SP1.  I'll probably keep XP around until 2014 for games (or until they're not supported anymore on XP), then will say good-bye to the world of Windows.  It's really not a big deal.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 20, 2009)

Yea, windows seven doesn't need fixing. the "fluff' only happens if the os determines you have the capability to use it. Yup, w7 is sure meh, complete revamp of the os, nothing really new to it at all, right. It's funny people bitch about a brand new os, but they don't seem to bitch about paying for updates for osx. Aurali, you must have terrible computer; Windows seven has never crashed for me; even on my buggy as hell hp tx1000. People are just looking to  poke holes in microsoft. It's the same with everything, media blows it out of proportion.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> Yea, windows seven doesn't need fixing. the "fluff' only happens if the os determines you have the capability to use it. Yup, w7 is sure meh, complete revamp of the os, nothing really new to it at all, right. It's funny people bitch about a brand new os, but they don't seem to bitch about paying for updates for osx. Aurali, you must have terrible computer; Windows seven has never crashed for me; even on my buggy as hell hp tx1000. People are just looking to  poke holes in microsoft. It's the same with everything, media blows it out of proportion.



You don't find it amusing that the story comes from a media outlet owned by Microsoft? 

Also, people bitch about everything.  Always.  For every positive article about Windows 7 (and there are lots 'cause it's a great re-work of Vista), there are negative ones too.  Such is life.  Every other OS, free or no has the same pro/con issue and plenty of grumble-monsters to volley either side. :roll:


----------



## Carenath (Oct 20, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Go to a school that's enrolled in the MSDNAA.


And yet, you're still paying for that software, albeit indirectly.



ToeClaws said:


> Also, people bitch about everything.  Always.


QFT

What do I think needs fixing in Windows7? Plain and simple, the bloat. Regardless of how cheap and capacious hard drives are today, the OS shouldnt need 15GB just for itself.


----------



## ferix (Oct 20, 2009)

student, W7 ultimate kosts me like 70 bugs instead of 200 for a retail version.
so i will try it, it cant be worse then vista


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 20, 2009)

ferix said:


> student, W7 ultimate kosts me like 70 bugs instead of 200 for a retail version.
> so i will try it, it cant be worse then vista


To bad vista didn't suck, amirite?



Carenath said:


> And yet, you're still paying for that software, albeit indirectly.
> 
> 
> QFT
> ...




Yup 'cause it's not worth paying 100$ to get a 1tb drive so you can have a nice os. I mean, who has 100$ these days.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> To bad vista didn't suck, amirite?



You are on the same planet as the rest of us right?  Vista is regarded as one of the biggest flops in OS history.  Possibly only Windows Me was a worse failure.



Sinjo said:


> Yup 'cause it's not worth paying 100$ to get a 1tb drive so you can have a nice os. I mean, who has 100$ these days.



That's not the point - there is no reason an OS should be so bloated as to occupy that kind of drive space - it's called bad code.  Just because you _can_ get big drives and fast processors doesn't mean it's okay to make bloated and slow products to fill them up.  

To Windows 7's credit, however, Microsoft _did_ dramatically reduce the OS's footprint.  Vista was a 15g install (probably for the upper-end versions) whereas Windows 7 seems to be coming in around the 5g mark for a clean install.  Still big, but a heck of a lot smaller than it's predecessor.


----------



## WarMocK (Oct 20, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> To Windows 7's credit, however, Microsoft _did_ dramatically reduce the OS's footprint.  Vista was a 15g install (probably for the upper-end versions) whereas Windows 7 seems to be coming in around the 5g mark for a clean install.  Still big, but a heck of a lot smaller than it's predecessor.


Approximately 10 Gigs. However, 50 % of the diskspace needed is occupied by the shadow copy of the installation image. Windows 7 uses it for restoring the system if necessary, just like a recovery CD.


----------



## The Blue Fox (Oct 20, 2009)

So the article is complaining about problems that an beta OS has? 
Why dont people wait til it done them bitch.


----------



## Azbulldog (Oct 20, 2009)

As I'm getting my student copy for only $30, I can't complain. It's an excuse to wipe everything clean on this computer anyways.

As for #3 in the article: "it may still insist on rebooting when you are in the middle of important work"
I was hoping this has been fixed right now, because telling XP to 'Restart Later' and have it bug you again in five minutes, and restart automatically if you are away, just...ugh.


The Blue Fox said:


> So the article is complaining about problems that an beta OS has?
> Why dont people wait til it done them bitch.


But it's not the beta, the release candidate is what you're going to get out of the box, pretty much.


----------



## incongruency (Oct 20, 2009)

The Blue Fox said:


> So the article is complaining about problems that an beta OS has?
> Why dont people wait til it done them bitch.



Windows 7 is now, and was at press time, currently available in the RTM phase.  This means that the OS is done, but you cannot get it pre-installed on a new computer, that would be OEM.

RTM stands for Release To Manufacturer, this means that companies that make create and sell computers (HP, Dell, etcetera) get copies from which to create images, which are later sold as OEM.  It basically means that it is a complete product, but it hasn't been released to customers via new computers yet.

OEM stands for Original Equipment Manufacturer, this is the license for Windows that you receive when it comes pre-installed on a new computer from a company that creates and sells computers. (again: HP, Dell, and so on)


As far as the article, it's not exactly complaining as much as it is pointing out the short-comings of the OS which could have been improved upon.  It is hopefully with such reviews and criticisms that Microsoft will improve the product, or, failing that, another developer will write a program to fix the short-coming.


And as for the install size, I'm hoping that something along the lines of tinyXP will be released for 7... Then perhaps I'll install it somewhere other than a virtual machine.


----------



## net-cat (Oct 20, 2009)

The Blue Fox said:


> So the article is complaining about problems that an beta OS has?
> Why dont people wait til it done them bitch.



Uh...



incongruency said:


> Windows 7 is now, and was at press time, currently available in the RTM phase.  This means that the OS is done, but you cannot get it pre-installed on a new computer, that would be OEM.



... pretty much that.

They don't just hit the "build" button and have it magically appear on store shelves, you know. 

They have to press the DVDs, make the cases, send it to the OEMs for them to build images, send it to developers for them to make any last-minute adjustments to their programs, and a whole host of other things. Hell, they usually even send a few early copies out to reviewers who they know will kiss their ass. There's a big difference between when software is "done" and when it's "ready for sale."


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 20, 2009)

net-cat said:


> They don't just hit the "build" button and have it magically appear on store shelves, you know.



But... that's how management thinks development works!  Aw man... now you've gone and made CEOs and Marketing executives cry.


----------



## pathfinder118 (Oct 20, 2009)

my new computer comes with a free upgrade to windows 7, so in a few months ill be rollen 7 an not have to worry about vista anymore. (woot)


----------



## AlexInsane (Oct 20, 2009)

Wait a minute, 15 Gigabytes? What computer has that kind of built in memory? Mine didn't when I bought it. Hell, most of the notebooks on sale I've seen have 5 gigs or less.


----------



## ArielMT (Oct 20, 2009)

Hard drive space, not RAM.


----------



## incongruency (Oct 20, 2009)

AlexInsane said:


> Wait a minute, 15 Gigabytes? What computer has that kind of built in memory? Mine didn't when I bought it. Hell, most of the notebooks on sale I've seen have 5 gigs or less.



Most new computers that do not rely entirely on a solid-state disk, which are prevalent in netbooks, have hard drives with capacities well exceeding 80 gigabytes.

Unless you're thinking of RAM, which is a different type of memory entirely, in which case Windows 7 suggests one gigabyte as a minimum, but more should be recommended to run comfortably.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> And yet, you're still paying for that software, albeit indirectly.


 
Kinda yeah, but I think it's better than having to pay for it while you're trying to not starve in school.  :v


----------



## Vaelarsa (Oct 21, 2009)

The only problem I've had with Windows 7 so far is that it likes to cut out my internet at random upon starting up.
Usually a couple restarts will fix it, but it's still annoying. I don't know if it's a driver problem or my POS internet cord, though.

And I can't find out how to make certain colors invisible on the new MS Paint, which pisses me off when I need to draw guidelines for a picture.


*EDIT:* Also, that link makes it sound like there are less real problems with W7, and more like the author of said article is just someone who didn't have anything real to bitch about, so they nitpicked pointlessly and to the point of sounding like a spoiled little child.
_"IF ITS NOT EXACTLY THE WAY I WANT THINGS EVEN IF THERE MINOR ITS WRONG!! WHY DOESNT THE WORLD REVOLVE AROUND ME! WHY!"_
The only real problem I saw in that list is lack of being able to network backup in less expensive versions.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

Vaelarsa said:


> *EDIT:* Also, that link makes it sound like there are less real problems with W7, and more like the author of said article is just someone who didn't have anything real to bitch about, so they nitpicked pointlessly and to the point of sounding like a spoiled little child.
> _"IF ITS NOT EXACTLY THE WAY I WANT THINGS EVEN IF THERE MINOR ITS WRONG!! WHY DOESNT THE WORLD REVOLVE AROUND ME! WHY!"_
> The only real problem I saw in that list is lack of being able to network backup in less expensive versions.



I don't think the point of the article was to try to expose problems, rather, just point out things that still need tweaking from the point of view of an experienced Windows user.  

Windows 7 looks to have far less direct issues than its predecessor, and the so called problems are more in its aesthetics or in ethical issues around it.


----------



## WarMocK (Oct 21, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Windows 7 looks to have far less direct issues than its predecessor, and the so called problems are more in its aesthetics or in ethical issues around it.


Indeed.
I was skeptical when I gave Windows 7 a try on my new Desktop, but it proved to be pretty stable so far. No hick-ups during installation, no BSODs yet (after 2+ months), and it runs pretty smooth on my hardware, pretty much comparable to windows XP (which I ran on the same machine before I switched the harddrive). The only issue I had so far was the installation of the 64-bit driver for my scanner (which was way tougher than MS fanboys claim it to be under Linux, but I'm slightly getting off-topic now ;-)). That isn't a problem caused by microsoft, though.
From what I can say so far Microsoft seems to have gotten their heads pulled straight, and they FINALLY gave both the core components and the ressource management far more testing than with Vista. I'm sure it will stay on the market for quite some time, just like XP - unless both Mac OS X and Linux will start evolving even faster than they already do atm.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 21, 2009)

incongruency said:


> Most new computers that do not rely entirely on a solid-state disk, which are prevalent in netbooks, have hard drives with capacities well exceeding 80 gigabytes.
> 
> Unless you're thinking of RAM, which is a different type of memory entirely, in which case Windows 7 suggests one gigabyte as a minimum, but more should be recommended to run comfortably.


They're putting a special version on netbooks "super light" and all that.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Indeed.
> I was skeptical when I gave Windows 7 a try on my new Desktop, but it proved to be pretty stable so far. No hick-ups during installation, no BSODs yet (after 2+ months), and it runs pretty smooth on my hardware, pretty much comparable to windows XP (which I ran on the same machine before I switched the harddrive). The only issue I had so far was the installation of the 64-bit driver for my scanner (which was way tougher than MS fanboys claim it to be under Linux, but I'm slightly getting off-topic now ;-)). That isn't a problem caused by microsoft, though.



Haven't run it on anything myself as I'm in disagreement with the ethics part of the issues around it, and have been since Vista.  XP/2003 are my final personal uses of Windows.  Work may eventually upgrade to Windows 7, but it likely won't happen until SP1 is released.  Some folks switched to Vista when it came out, but most switched back to XP or changed to Ubuntu.  One of the nice perks of the university is that they don't really care what you run on your workstation so long as it's a modern/current OS that is secure.



WarMocK said:


> From what I can say so far Microsoft seems to have gotten their heads pulled straight, and they FINALLY gave both the core components and the ressource management far more testing than with Vista.



*nodsnods* Yes - they did a _much_ better job with Windows 7 than with Vista.  I wouldn't say their heads are quite on straight - more like they are at least occasionally glancing in the customer's direction now as opposed to not caring in the least about them.



WarMocK said:


> I'm sure it will stay on the market for quite some time, just like XP - unless both Mac OS X and Linux will start evolving even faster than they already do atm.



Yep - this will likely be their new "XP", unless they are able to produce another OS that lures people away from it.  I don't think Microsoft wants to quite have a run quite as long as XP's again 'cause I would imagine it gets very hard to support an OS that's approaching a decade in age.  

As for the Linux/Unix and the MacOS thing, I'm not sure evolving quicker will make a big difference.  Already, they have more features than Windows 7 and are more advanced, but only Apple has money enough to advertise that fact.  The media is a massive influence on consumers, so even if the evolution sped up to the point where Linux was 20 years ahead of Windows, I doubt many folks would take notice of it unless it was highly publicized.  Advantage; Microsoft.


----------



## WarMocK (Oct 21, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Haven't run it on anything myself as I'm in disagreement with the ethics part of the issues around it, and have been since Vista.  XP/2003 are my final personal uses of Windows.  Work may eventually upgrade to Windows 7, but it likely won't happen until SP1 is released.  Some folks switched to Vista when it came out, but most switched back to XP or changed to Ubuntu.  One of the nice perks of the university is that they don't really care what you run on your workstation so long as it's a modern/current OS that is secure.


I probably wouldn't have installed it either if the EULA would have ANY legal validity in Europe (and especially in Germany). But the EULA violates so many laws here that it's considered irrelevant by court (which already was approved several times). ;-)


ToeClaws said:


> *nodsnods* Yes - they did a _much_ better job with Windows 7 than with Vista.  I wouldn't say their heads are quite on straight - more like they are at least occasionally glancing in the customer's direction now as opposed to not caring in the least about them.


This is what I actually mean with "getting their heads straight". They were FORCED to listen what the customer wanted, otherwise Windows 7 would have been another desaster like Vista, and that would have hurt Microsoft so hard that it would most likely have cost them most of their market share.


ToeClaws said:


> As for the Linux/Unix and the MacOS thing, I'm not sure evolving quicker will make a big difference.  Already, they have more features than Windows 7 and are more advanced, but only Apple has money enough to advertise that fact.  The media is a massive influence on consumers, so even if the evolution sped up to the point where Linux was 20 years ahead of Windows, I doubt many folks would take notice of it unless it was highly publicized.  Advantage; Microsoft.


The evolution I'm refering to is the usability part. Sure, they have more features than Windows, but like I already wrote in the Puppy Linux Discussion Forums: the vast majority of Linux distributions needs a more consistent look&feel, and a userfriendly set of wizards and tools that help the common user to do both their daily work and configuration of the system. The common user is "dumb", he wants a system that simply works. I can already tell you that lots of people WILL complain about Windows 7 because it really feels differently than XP. Microsoft praises the ability to build your personal folder out of links to other folders located on other partitions (or even other drives in a network). WOW, you got symlinks in windows now, what a revolutionaly idea (NOT). But many users will start whining because this is all so new and never done before, and they feel lost and totally helpless now.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

The "newness" of Vista and Windows 7 is an interesting dilemma though - put enough change into the interface, and users feel alienated from the familiar.  Do that, and suddenly you got folks thinking it's maybe not so bad to try the Mac or one of the open-source offerings since no matter what they do, they have to relearn how to use their OS.  My folks, for example, are not very keen on the Windows 7 look and feel.  They've used Windows since 95, and have always used the "classic" interface options, so Vista and Windows 7 are both dramatic departures from what they're used to.  They're considering getting a Mac or a Ubuntu-based PC when they update next time rather than try to deal with Windows again.  (I hope it's not the Mac, 'cause I can't help them out if they go that route.  Err... wait, what am I saying... that might be nice!)

Anyway - will remain to be seen.  Given the much more positive feedback on Windows 7, its uptake should at least be a considerably better than Vista, plus, for those who don't want to abandon the Windows world, there's really not going to be much choice.  XP may be support until 2014, but already it's getting hard to find device drivers for new PCs if you want to run XP on them.

MSNBC had another similar article today about 5 things we won't miss from Vista now that Windows 7 is coming:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33399824/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/


----------



## SnowFox (Oct 21, 2009)

Azbulldog said:


> As for #3 in the article: "it may still insist on rebooting when you are in the middle of important work"



I've never even seen a working copy of windows 7, but I think the forced reboot only happens on limited accounts. 

If you run these on the command line it should disable that (assuming these still work in 7)

```
reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate\AU" /v RebootRelaunchTimeoutEnabled /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f
reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate\AU" /v NoAutoRebootWithLoggedOnUsers /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f
```



Azbulldog said:


> I was hoping this has been fixed right now, because telling XP to 'Restart Later' and have it bug you again in five minutes, and restart automatically if you are away, just...ugh.



You can extend it to a maximum 24 hours interval between nags.

```
reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate\AU" /v RebootRelaunchTimeout /t REG_DWORD /d 0x5a0 /f
```


----------



## ArielMT (Oct 21, 2009)

If Windows Update retained the behavior present in Vista and XP, then it will force a reboot regardless of any logged in account's privilege level.  I can't find any news one way or the other.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> If Windows Update retained the behavior present in Vista and XP, then it will force a reboot regardless of any logged in account's privilege level.  I can't find any news one way or the other.



Not sure here either, but it may be possible to disable the automatic update service and only run it once a month when you need to do the updates (which is what I do with XP and 2003).


----------



## ArielMT (Oct 21, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Not sure here either, but it may be possible to disable the automatic update service and only run it once a month when you need to do the updates (which is what I do with XP and 2003).



I found articles on a couple of places detailing how to stop the automatic post-update reboot, suggesting that SnowFox's registry hacks posted above work.  It's just that if Windows 7 allows reboots to be indefinitely delayed by the class of user logged on and nothing more, then it's news to me.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 21, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Not sure here either, but it may be possible to disable the automatic update service and only run it once a month when you need to do the updates (which is what I do with XP and 2003).


You have no right to bitch about Win 7 if you don't know how to turn off auto update.

Control panel > windows update > change settings ( left side of window) > important updates > never


----------



## net-cat (Oct 21, 2009)

I always just stop the Automatic Updates service when it bothers me. When I reboot, it comes back normally.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Oct 21, 2009)

Windows 7 has been nothing but good to me.

I've got Win7 Ultimate 64 (from MAPS) on my office computer, and for a while now, the only issue I have is with a whacked-out nVidia driver making my NIC do strange things. The OS itself is incredibly stable, and I've got two retail copies of Ultimate on the way for home.

I also loaded 7 Professional on my Netbook, just to see how well it ran on an underpowered system. It actually runs NOTICEABLY faster than XP home, and I left all the shinies on. Loading time was cut by 20%, the OS is much faster in function, and I just don't have a thing to complain about!

This is the first OS that Microsoft has ever released that convinced me enough to buy it. And _thats_ saying something. ('course, with two MAPS licenses and a free copy from a MS conference, I only had to buy one! )


----------



## Ilayas (Oct 21, 2009)

I think people forget that XP still needed fixing when it came out.  So I'll wait a year a so to pass my judgment.  I'm just praying that Window's 7 works out enough bugs to be better then Vista so when I HAVE to upgrade it won't feel like a down grade.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> You have no right to bitch about Win 7 if you don't know how to turn off auto update.
> 
> Control panel > windows update > change settings ( left side of window) > important updates > never



a) I'm not bitching about it on Windows 7 - I've never used Windows 7.  

b) I know it can be turned off within Windows, but I shutdown the service because I don't trust it as being "off" if the service itself is still running (talking about XP here).

c) Stop assuming.


----------



## Ilvenis (Oct 21, 2009)

I actually dont' have any complaints about 7 thus far about the OS itself.  There does seem to be a noticeable lack of driver support though for some peripherals.  I had to use the Vista 64 mode for my keyboard and initially my webcam wasn't recognized either.  And Daemon tools keeps telling me that there may be incompatabilities.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 21, 2009)

Ilvenis said:


> I actually dont' have any complaints about 7 thus far about the OS itself.  There does seem to be a noticeable lack of driver support though for some peripherals.  I had to use the Vista 64 mode for my keyboard and initially my webcam wasn't recognized either.  And Daemon tools keeps telling me that there may be incompatabilities.



Given that it's just officially coming to market this month, that will improve quickly.


----------



## Lazydabear (Oct 25, 2009)

Here is a clip from a Japanese Morning show of the Demo of Windows 7 Touch Screen first movie show the techincal issues Windows 7 had. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbJGzyYV_X8


Here is the working version of Windows 7 which looks cool but not for me its way too adance for my taste.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_gkLVwMAW8


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 25, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Here is the working version of Windows 7 which looks cool but not for me its way too adance for my taste.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_gkLVwMAW8



Wow, are you for serious?


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 25, 2009)

Ilvenis said:


> I actually dont' have any complaints about 7 thus far about the OS itself.  There does seem to be a noticeable lack of driver support though for some peripherals.  I had to use the Vista 64 mode for my keyboard and initially my webcam wasn't recognized either.  And Daemon tools keeps telling me that there may be incompatabilities.



That will get resolved in time.  Considering how new the OS is, the driver support is actually not too bad so far.  Remember, it was far worse for Vista when it first came out.


----------



## Lazydabear (Oct 25, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> Wow, are you for serious?


 
Yeah considering that Software has problems its nice and all but not for me.


----------



## Marticus (Oct 27, 2009)

They need to make CTRL ALT DEL go straight to task manager.

They need to make their volume bar take less time to pop up, mine takes like 2 seconds.

the show desktop button on the taskbar should be moveable.

Quick launch should be on the taskbar as default, also, the taskbar should look like it did in XP by default, I hate having to customise it a load. Whats with the massive icons, seriously, this isnt MAC world.

Needs more low CPU desktop themes, though these will probably become more popular.


----------



## incongruency (Oct 27, 2009)

Marticus said:


> They need to make CTRL ALT DEL go straight to task manager.


This you can already do by hitting Ctrl + Shift + Esc

As for the others you mention, I'm not sure as I haven't used it extensively, but a program like Windows Tweaker might help.


----------



## Marticus (Oct 28, 2009)

incongruency said:


> This you can already do by hitting Ctrl + Shift + Esc
> .



But I want it to be ctrl alt delete 
Also:

The volume mixer needs a GAIN function, some programs need to be louder.

Pressing Alt in a folder to bring up the menu bar at the top... that should be there all the time. Any way to fix it?


----------



## Zero_Point (Oct 28, 2009)

net-cat said:


> You've got until 2014 on XP. Granted, I already see Microsoft cutting the strings on new XP development, but you can use it and get security updates until 2014.



Will Microsoft have a GOOD OS by then? :<


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 28, 2009)

Zero_Point said:


> Will Microsoft have a GOOD OS by then? :<



Probably not, but by that time, you'll probably have people going "Dammit... Windows 9000! is retarded - I can't believe it's 38g in size.  Windows 7 was SO much better!"

They seem to only succeed in making many of their past offerings look good when they make new ones.   (ugh... Vista and Me are a couple exceptions)


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 28, 2009)

Marticus said:


> But I want it to be ctrl alt delete
> Also:
> 
> The volume mixer needs a GAIN function, some programs need to be louder.
> ...


 It's funny how much you bitch about problems that are actually related to hardware. My volume control pops up the instant I touch it, The sound, that's all the program's fault; that or get speakers where you can turn the volume up. Windows isn't made exactly the way you want it, cry some more, maybe they will make it exactly to your specifications. Aero will only come on if your computer can handle it, otherwise it's off. quick launch bar is dead, get over it.


----------



## Geek (Oct 28, 2009)

I've been beating 7 senseless in my testing.

There have been users here that have barely touched 7 but are still making some rather large claims.

I set my Leopard installation aside and used the Win7 RC1 for approximately two months, and then after that have been using it on and off with Mac OS X Leopard/Snow Leopard. I installed a variety of programs on Windows, and ran all sorts of games as well.

I don't intentionally try to "test" OSes in general. I just "use them." The goal, for me, is to see what it is like for me to actually use the OS, what my real world experience is doing what I do on computers.

Windows 7 drove me nuts, and made me want OS X more and more. Here is a short list of some of the problems I encountered despite doing two full reinstalls and changing out hardware:

* Firefox would launch OK, then if I tried to shut it down, it would appear to shut down. However, an attempt to launch it again would pop up a window saying it's already running, and it appeared in the Task Manager despite the window being unavailable. Had to End Task on it to run it again.

* When copying files from one location to another, the destination location would show nothing. I had to right click and choose "Refresh" for the items to show up.

* When launching Halo while using dual monitors, it would reset my resolution to a lower one, the music would play, I could hear my mouse moving over options on the screen, but I could only see my desktop. Had to End Task. Never got it working without unplugging the second monitor.

* When launching Fallout 3 with dual monitors, the game would crash instantly. Did this for about a month or so. Now it doesn't do that, nothing has changed as far as I know.

* When launching a number of other games, including Bioshock, Mass Effect, and others, the program would hang in the Task Manager without showing any windows. After several attempts it would generally start up.*

* A lot of general slowness. Many apps, games, and system navigation seem to take much longer than they should.

* A Windows Update disabled my ethernet. Had to find the proper drivers manually with another computer, then attempt two installs, a reset, another install, and a reset before the problem was solved.

* And much more

Funny thing is, I've read through this entire thread, and I have found a number of contradicting statements. One person says Control Panel is snappier and easier to use, another says the same thing about System Preferences. One person says the whole GUI is snappier in SL, another says the same of Windows 7. One says Windows 7 is more responsive and easier to navigate, another, SL.

A lot of opinion involved, but it seems that people cannot agree which is "snappier."


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 29, 2009)

Geek said:


> A lot of *opinion* involved, but it seems that people cannot agree which is "snappier."



And therein is the large part of the problem with the OS argument and why I asked this thread now to spiral into one - OS's are all about "opinion" and personal preference.  You can only argue for or against their technical merits to a point.

As far as Windows goes, if there's one thing it's been very good at over the years it's that it can be wildly inconsistent.  It's also very sensitive to the changes made by the individual user, be it app.s that he/she installed, or configuration differences on the machine at both hardware and software levels.  It makes performance very inconsistent across hardware that at first glance seems similar.  

To some degree, that is true for any OS, but more so for Windows because of a few factors such as poor ability to maintain it's health (orphaned and obsolete registry entries, fragmented drives, unneeded post-install files) and dramatically larger vulnerability to malware (largely due to the fact that it is the most popular OS and thus most heavily targeted, and less so to the fact that it has poor security).

So it doesn't surprise me that people are reporting conflicting run downs on how well (or not) Windows 7 is working, and I imagine that state of things will be true until the day it's retired.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 29, 2009)

Geek said:


> I've been beating 7 senseless in my testing.




All those problems you have, seem to magically work for me o.o . Maybe my computer is magic.


ToeClaws said:


> And therein is the large part of the problem with the OS argument and why I asked this thread now to spiral into one - OS's are all about "opinion" and personal preference. You can only argue for or against their technical merits to a point.
> 
> As far as Windows goes, if there's one thing it's been very good at over the years it's that it can be wildly inconsistent. It's also very sensitive to the changes made by the individual user, be it app.s that he/she installed, or configuration differences on the machine at both hardware and software levels. It makes performance very inconsistent across hardware that at first glance seems similar.
> 
> ...


 At least with a windows computer, you can openly change hardware without having to worry about compatibility. Apple tests, tests and does more tests to make sure hardware is compatible. I'm sure if microsoft actually made computers and shipped the os on them, everything would be dandy.


----------



## Marticus (Oct 29, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> It's funny how much you bitch about problems that are actually related to hardware. My volume control pops up the instant I touch it, The sound, that's all the program's fault; that or get speakers where you can turn the volume up. Windows isn't made exactly the way you want it, cry some more, maybe they will make it exactly to your specifications. Aero will only come on if your computer can handle it, otherwise it's off. quick launch bar is dead, get over it.



lol, hows about *fuck off* , I whine far less than most people here.

I'm just saying the minor things that annoy me with Win7 that XP had no problems with. I like Windows7 and will be formatting to it when the time comes.

No, I wont get over quicklaunch being absent as default, it saves having icons over desktop.

That aside, my speakers already have a volume control and my hardware is great.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 29, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> At least with a windows computer, you can openly change hardware without having to worry about compatibility. Apple tests, tests and does more tests to make sure hardware is compatible. I'm sure if microsoft actually made computers and shipped the os on them, everything would be dandy.



*nods* It's both the curse and the charm of a Mac.  As long as you play in Apple's sandbox, things work absolutely beautifully, but try to stray outside and it can mean a world of hurt.

Given the vastness of offerings in hardware, Windows does a pretty slick job of getting most of the drivers, but the OS with the most native support is actually Linux as of approximately the end of 2008.  Windows, however, still has an edge in that if it doesn't natively support the hardware, the drivers are readily available from manufacturers.  Manufacturer-provided drivers for the MacOS are at least fairly common, but for Linux they're still lacking from some companies.

Pros and cons aplenty, no matter what way one goes.


----------



## Geek (Oct 29, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> All those problems you have, seem to magically work for me o.o . Maybe my computer is magic.
> At least with a windows computer, you can openly change hardware without having to worry about compatibility. Apple tests, tests and does more tests to make sure hardware is compatible. I'm sure if microsoft actually made computers and shipped the os on them, everything would be dandy.



Michael DeAgonia just published a comprehensive and comparative review of W7 and SL, entitled:

Smackdown: Windows 7 takes on Apple's Snow Leopard

It's worth the read, as it clarifies as well as confirms concerns about the Windows Registry, as well as other underlying issues.  This is the conclusion:

*Conclusion*

_"In terms of pure interface, Microsoft has raised the bar for Windows users. Windows 7 is the best-looking OS out of Redmond, Wash., yet. But let's not confuse that with "innovation."

Many of these features aren't new at all, and many have been available on Mac OS X for years. While Windows 7 closes the gap with Snow Leopard, it does so only at a superficial level. At first, I was impressed with the interface changes and got caught up in the beauty of the Aero themes and sleek look. But after a few weeks of use, reality began to set in. After a Registry issue prevented me from installing an app, I realized Windows 7 is still Windows. Prettier, a little snappier than Vista, perhaps more stable. But at some point, you still face many of the underlying issues that have made Windows a pain to use in the past.

Microsoft's main enemies here aren't really Mac OS X or Linux. What Microsoft needs to worry about are the users and sysadmins who think the hardware and OS already on their desks works just fine. If you're still using XP after all these years, the slick interface and modest under-the-hood changes may not tempt you to spend money on Windows 7.

A friend of mine who works in IT for a major corporation explained it this way: The biggest problem Microsoft has is that after all these years, XP still works for many businesses. "What will force us to move [to Windows 7] is when Microsoft stops releasing security updates [for XP]," he told me. I believe that if Windows 7 appears to be solid right out of the gate, companies may move toward adoption quickly. XP is, after all, nearly a decade old.

If you're still using XP or are finally fed up with Vista, by all means check out Windows 7. It's certainly the best version of Windows yet -- just as it's equally true that Snow Leopard is the best version of Mac OS X. That's why you'd be well advised to check out Snow Leopard before shelling out money for Microsoft's latest.

As an IT professional, I support both operating systems at work. But I have Macs at home; after all, who wants to troubleshoot computer problems on their own time?

My final verdict in this smackdown? It's not even close: Snow Leopard is the better OS."_


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 29, 2009)

Like I said, apple makes it's os and it's computers, so they can do nothing but work together. If microsoft did the same, we'd probably have fly cars by now.

Side note. Apple has nothing but time on their hands, the can make their os pretty because it's stable, only because they don't need to write drivers for every piece of hardware out there. Let's say SL is Latin and windows is english. Everyone(exaggeration, I know) can speak english, only a few can speak or want to speak Latin.


----------



## Marticus (Oct 29, 2009)

incongruency said:


> This you can already do by hitting Ctrl + Shift + Esc
> 
> As for the others you mention, I'm not sure as I haven't used it extensively, but a program like Windows Tweaker might help.



Thanks, this app is really awesome!
REALLY AWESOME!


----------



## ArielMT (Oct 29, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> To some degree, that is true for any OS, but more so for Windows because of a few factors such as poor ability to maintain it's health (orphaned and obsolete registry entries, fragmented drives, unneeded post-install files) and dramatically larger vulnerability to malware (largely due to the fact that it is the most popular OS and thus most heavily targeted, and less so to the fact that it has poor security).



That last bit is still up for debate.  The popularity of Windows does play a very large role, but not so much that its problems with Internet security design at the OS level take a back seat.  The former makes Windows a low-hanging fruit for the bad guys, but the latter makes it sweet and tempting enough, no matter how much bitterness Microsoft added.



Sinjo said:


> All those problems you have, seem to magically work for me o.o . Maybe my computer is magic.



If there's one thing that still surprises me about Windows, it's exactly this.  It works perfectly for some people, whether customized or not, and it refuses to work properly for other people even in its most pristine and compatible state.



Sinjo said:


> At least with a windows computer, you can openly change hardware without having to worry about compatibility.



To an extent.  Is Windows 7 still as married to the motherboard as Windows XP?

Windows XP tends to give BSODs on boot-up if the motherboard is replaced with one having a different brand chipset or different type of Intel-compatible CPU, needing a repair install or (as often as not) a nuke-and-pave just to boot again, while desktop Linux distros essentially couldn't care less.



Sinjo said:


> Apple tests, tests and does more tests to make sure hardware is compatible. I'm sure if microsoft actually made computers and shipped the os on them, everything would be dandy.



Microsoft do make computers and ship the OS on 'em, in a way: The XBox and XBox 360 run heavily modified versions of Windows 2000, and the Zune I would imagine runs a similarly modified version of Windows Mobile.  The effectiveness would be a debate for another thread, but in this small way Microsoft are just like Apple in that they dictate the exacting requirements of the Microsoft-branded hardware on which their OS will run.


----------



## net-cat (Oct 29, 2009)

Marticus said:


> Quick launch should be on the taskbar as default, also, the taskbar should look like it did in XP by default, I hate having to customise it a load. Whats with the massive icons, seriously, this isnt MAC world.


Right click the program you want in Quick Launch and click "Pin this program to task bar."

And yes, it _is_ a rip off of Mac OS X's dock.



ArielMT said:


> To an extent.  Is Windows 7 still as married to the motherboard as Windows XP?


For the OEM versions, they've actually defined your computer as the motherboard in the EULA. Changing the motherboard means getting a new Windows License.

Of course, the minimum wage making folks at the Microsoft Licensing call center who don't really give a shit if Mr. Gates makes another $200 off of you will happily generate an activation key for you if you lie to them.



ArielMT said:


> Windows XP tends to give BSODs on boot-up if the motherboard is replaced with one having a different brand chipset or different type of Intel-compatible CPU, needing a repair install or (as often as not) a nuke-and-pave just to boot again, while desktop Linux distros essentially couldn't care less.


This was true in Vista and I don't see why it wouldn't be true in 7, especially given the above.

Main problem that pops up in Linux is if your drive changes device nodes. (I like how Ubuntu deals with that, actually...)


```
$ ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid/
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 2009-10-29 06:46 7de69bdc-28f4-46f5-9c3c-857ecec4c0e9 -> ../../sda2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 2009-10-29 06:46 86c078aa-5b88-4b76-8638-8962b6fb63ae -> ../../sdb1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 2009-10-29 06:46 90e671dc-ec42-4afc-8cf3-a242a2c92558 -> ../../sda1
```



ArielMT said:


> Microsoft do make computers and ship the OS on 'em, in a way: The XBox and XBox 360 run heavily modified versions of Windows 2000


False


----------



## ArielMT (Oct 29, 2009)

net-cat said:


> Main problem that pops up in Linux is if your drive changes device nodes. (I like how Ubuntu deals with that, actually...)
> 
> 
> ```
> ...



I like that.  I wish distros were more consistent in that respect.  In the past, I've been bitten by kernel upgrades changing my hard drive nodes from /dev/hdx to /dev/sdx without grub updating menu.lst.  Result: edit it before reboot, or you'll have to pay a visit to the server and don't forget to bring a KVM head to edit the boot command.



net-cat said:


> False



I stand corrected about the details.  Nice link.


----------



## net-cat (Oct 29, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> I like that.  I wish distros were more consistent in that respect.  In the past, I've been bitten by kernel upgrades changing my hard drive nodes from /dev/hdx to /dev/sdx without grub updating menu.lst.  Result: edit it before reboot, or you'll have to pay a visit to the server and don't forget to bring a KVM head to edit the boot command.


As far as I can tell, that's a standard thing in Linux's udev implementation. (I just checked Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS... they all have it.) However, Ubuntu distributions seem to be the only ones that actually use it in /etc/fstab.



ArielMT said:


> I stand corrected about the details.  Nice link.


It's one of those things I've heard for years and decided to go research. (Yay Wikipedia and their citation requirements. )


----------



## Marticus (Oct 30, 2009)

net-cat said:


> Right click the program you want in Quick Launch and click "Pin this program to task bar."
> 
> http://blogs.msdn.com/xboxteam/archive/2006/02/17/534421.aspx



No no, thats different.
To get quicklaunch you have to add the toolbar :
*C:\Users\(user-name)\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch*
 to the taskbar.


----------



## ToeClaws (Oct 30, 2009)

Relevantly amusing: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/10/30/


----------



## net-cat (Oct 30, 2009)

Marticus said:


> No no, thats different.
> To get quicklaunch you have to add the toolbar :
> *C:\Users\(user-name)\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch*
> to the taskbar.


Functionally equivalent?

(And just so we're clear, "pin to task bar" is different from "pin to start menu.")


----------



## icecold24 (Nov 3, 2009)

Need to get rid of all the unnessecary security bullshit. I don't *care* if unsigned drivers are a security risk, at least let me *take* the risk instead of babying me and telling me what I can't and can install on my own damn computer.


----------



## LizardKing (Nov 3, 2009)

Yeah I'll try 7 around 2011 or so, I expect any big problems will have been fixed by then and I can get it on the cheap *cough*.


----------



## Sinjo (Nov 3, 2009)

icecold24 said:


> Need to get rid of all the unnessecary security bullshit. I don't *care* if unsigned drivers are a security risk, at least let me *take* the risk instead of babying me and telling me what I can't and can install on my own damn computer.


But then, if they let you and you had a BSOD, you'd turn around and yell at them.


----------



## Carenath (Nov 3, 2009)

Sinjo said:
			
		

> Yup 'cause it's not worth paying 100$ to get a 1tb drive so you can have a nice os. I mean, who has 100$ these days.





			
				Sinjo said:
			
		

> You have no right to bitch about Win 7 if you don't know how to turn off auto update.


And you have no business criticising people when you consistantly demonstrate a lack of comprehension and resort to ad hominems to compensate for your lack of knowledge and understanding.



Sinjo said:


> ...only because they don't need to write drivers for every piece of hardware out there.


Nor does Microsoft, the onus is on hardware manufacturers to provide drivers for the different operating systems, not the operating system vendor.


----------



## net-cat (Nov 3, 2009)

Eh. Driver signing in Windows is really no different from tainted modules in Linux.

Ultimately, it comes down to quality control. I/E: Without driver signing or taint, there is none.

(Though I've never been able to get a good justification for "no unsigned drivers in x64" from the Microsoft fanboys I know.)


----------



## Sinjo (Nov 3, 2009)

Carenath said:


> And you have no business criticising people when you consistantly demonstrate a lack of comprehension and resort to ad hominems to compensate for your lack of knowledge and understanding.


Example?



net-cat said:


> Eh. Driver signing in Windows is really no different from tainted modules in Linux.
> 
> Ultimately, it comes down to quality control. I/E: Without driver signing or taint, there is none.
> 
> (Though I've never been able to get a good justification for "no unsigned drivers in x64" from the Microsoft fanboys I know.)


Don't forget apple's app store approval.


----------



## Aurali (Nov 3, 2009)

net-cat said:


> (Though I've never been able to get a good justification for "no unsigned drivers in x64" from the Microsoft fanboys I know.)


There isn't one. Most people remove this obstacle anyway. I just upgraded to the full version on the 22nd It fixed every issue I had with the RC o.o


----------



## Irreverent (Nov 3, 2009)

AlexInsane said:


> We either a) upgrade to 7, b) buy a Mac, or c), run an alternative OS that a minority of people can understand.


and


FuzzyPinkRaptor said:


> I see this problem, and it makes me sad.



uh....the days of hand compiling Mandrake or Redhat with an abacus and a billion floppy disks are long, long gone.  Or was that Novell 2.1?  I digress.

Drop a live MINT 7 CD into the cdrom drive of the average XP user, have it autostart FF3.0, Thunderbird and Open Office and they wouldn't know that they weren't running XP.  The learning curve is that simple.  Yeah, the games are gone, but most games are moving to Consoles only anyway. 



ToeClaws said:


> You are on the same planet as the rest of us right?  Vista is regarded as one of the biggest flops in OS history.  Possibly only Windows Me was a worse failure.



Windows ME was an OS?    I thought it was just win9x with MS-Bob as the the gui?

The corporate world will love Win7, as will the SOHO and OEM crowd.  Is it perfect?  Hell no.  I'll wait for SP1 (and then give it a good long soak) before adopting it myself.


----------



## ToeClaws (Nov 3, 2009)

Irreverent said:


> and
> 
> 
> uh....the days of hand compiling Mandrake or Redhat with an abacus and a billion floppy disks are long, long gone.  Or was that Novell 2.1?  I digress.
> ...



Actually, a great many games run under WINE (kinda surprised me actually, but woo!).  But... best keep that talk in the Linux threads and keep this one on a Windows track.



Irreverent said:


> Windows ME was an OS?    I thought it was just win9x with MS-Bob as the the gui?
> 
> The corporate world will love Win7, as will the SOHO and OEM crowd.  Is it perfect?  Hell no.  I'll wait for SP1 (and then give it a good long soak) before adopting it myself.



*snickers* Bob... yep, when MS fails... they do it with unforgettable distinction.  Agreed though - I think I said it earlier in this thread too - if you really do insist on having Windows 7, then you're best off to wait for SP1.

Also... are you back home yet!?  I wanna hear about the adventures...


----------



## Carenath (Nov 3, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> Example?


You're response to my earlier post...
And http://forums.furaffinity.net/showthread.php?t=54275


----------



## Forgotton (Nov 5, 2009)

So many complaints about OS's 
you guys installed the OS you purchased or pirated it. If you don't like it make your own that IS better and drives Microsoft or whom ever you want out of business. 
As for those whom complain about vista. I run Vista Ultimate 64x have since 1 week before release. Had a couple initial issues with some of the driver signing but ended up disabling that irritation and have not had an issue since. My sys runs 24/7 365 with a reboot about once every 2-3 months and a yearly OS reinstall (that Iâ€™ve done since windows 3.1 graced the public market) and I never have the issues I see people everywhere complain about. I am able to run all the programs I have all the way back to some of my really old text biased dos 3.2 games *using Dosbox of course*
  I think most problems people encounter is from Mal Ware Spy ware or just plain old user error. So if you have a computer question about an issue thatâ€™s not related to one of those 2 sources Iâ€™ll be happy to answer and help you solve your issue having been tech support for 23 years for many companies. But please no whining when I tell you that your best solution is to reinstall your OS because you fed up your sys with your surfing and browsing ways. 
  Well this is my intro and offer to those who want a no complaining strait answer to what caused your issues and what your options are for a solution
  MCSA MCSE certified.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 5, 2009)

> you guys installed the OS you purchased or pirated it. If you don't like it make your own that IS better and drives Microsoft or whom ever you want out of business.


Mm. Yeah, that's gonna happen. Let's see... There's a bunch out there (Syllable, Linux (recently), BSD (sort of), OS/2 (back in The Day(TM), SkyOS, ReactOS, Haiku...) that had fond expectations to doing just that, but there's this thing, see - It's called a monopoly and proprietary software. When a company makes something that everyone uses and closely guards the methods by which it does what it does, that makes for a hard time when trying to promote compatibility between them - Take for instance the WINE project. Excellent project, but it will never be perfect. Why? Because they have to reverse-engineer (the hard, legal way) the Windows codebase in order to actually get anything coded for Windows (read: the majority of software, ever) to run on *NIX platforms. As newer versions of Windows are released, those, too, need to be reverse engineered. It's a constant game of cat and mouse that won't ever end.

Now, I ask you, if a game console came out that completely blew every other console away in terms of performance and value for your money, and yet there were no games on it, would you buy it? Of course you wouldn't - And that's happened in the past (See: Sega Master System, the 3DO, WonderSwan, NeoGeo). The same is true for operating systems, and this is why nobody can actually make any headway in the OS market. Even Apple, the "major" competitor to Windows on the desktop, barely has a fraction of the pie, and Linux is all but missing in the desktop market except in more experienced hands and embedded applications. Again, why? Because the software people want to run doesn't run.

It isn't as simple as that, and that purely capitalistic fallacy (build a better one, then!) doesn't apply under a monopoly such as this.


----------



## ToeClaws (Nov 5, 2009)

Let me fast forward this thread deviation and save everyone the trouble of heated posts...

Someone: Well... I think... <opinion>

Someone else: What!? You're a <insult>, 'cause <opinion>

Someone: <insult!> <opinion!>

3rd Party: Yeah! what Someone Said.

Someone else: <global insult> <OPINION!>

Someone:BWAAHHHHHH!!

3rd Party: I one slept with a bear, eh?

*Moderator:* <thread locked>


----------



## Carenath (Nov 5, 2009)

Forgotton said:


> So many complaints about OS's
> you guys installed the OS you purchased or pirated it. If you don't like it make your own that IS better and drives Microsoft or whom ever you want out of business.
> As for those whom complain about vista. I run Vista Ultimate 64x have since 1 week before release. Had a couple initial issues with some of the driver signing but ended up disabling that irritation and have not had an issue since. My sys runs 24/7 365 with a reboot about once every 2-3 months and a yearly OS reinstall (that Iâ€™ve done since windows 3.1 graced the public market) and I never have the issues I see people everywhere complain about. I am able to run all the programs I have all the way back to some of my really old text biased dos 3.2 games *using Dosbox of course*
> I think most problems people encounter is from Mal Ware Spy ware or just plain old user error. So if you have a computer question about an issue thatâ€™s not related to one of those 2 sources Iâ€™ll be happy to answer and help you solve your issue having been tech support for 23 years for many companies. But please no whining when I tell you that your best solution is to reinstall your OS because you fed up your sys with your surfing and browsing ways.
> ...


And you don't sound like a Microsoft fanboy whatsoever, no sir!



ToeClaws said:


> Let me fast forward this thread deviation and save everyone the trouble of heated posts...
> 
> Someone: Well... I think... <opinion>
> 
> ...


That's prettymuch how most threads here go.. fun times.

@Forgotten: Face it, not everyone has a perfect time running Windows.. given the wide variations between users hardware and the different compatibility issues, users installed software.. you cant say that your experience is the norm for everyone and that the OS is without fault.

@Runefox: I did link a nice set of papers.. *fetches links*:
http://cryptome.org/cyberinsecurity.htm
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html


----------



## ArielMT (Nov 5, 2009)

I was just seconds away from tearing every sentence in that post apart.

@Forgotton:  Welcome to Fur Affinity Forums!


----------



## Sinjo (Nov 5, 2009)

Carenath said:


> And you don't sound like a Microsoft fanboy whatsoever, no sir!



And you have no substance. Stop trying to sound intelligent by agreeing with everyone :>


----------



## Forgotton (Nov 6, 2009)

Thank you *ArielMT
And honestly I think windows is a horrible system overall as a general rule. But you have very few options in OS's out there you can go Linux / other lesser known and not as easy to use programs that come with just as many conflicts as windows. Or you can go Mac which does not have the compatibility with basically any games unless they are 10 years behind. 

Unless thatâ€™s not what you want. If you are a computer drafter or engineer or a graphic designer whom doesnâ€™t play high end games and doesnâ€™t ever want to fix their own computer system then Mac is the perfect system for you and you will generally have no issues.

And I know Iâ€™m also not the average user as I know what Iâ€™m doing with a computer that alone takes me out of the average circle. And itâ€™s sort of my point. Most the people you see complaining about OS's never really ask for assistance with the issues they just fix them their selves then complain about having to do it. when it was probably your own fault you had the issue in the first place and you knew enough to avoid the problem weather it be by upgrading to newer parts to handle a newer 64bit O.S. or not upgrading to the O.S. because your hardware was outdated.

Windows 7. I have not tried yet. My expectation of it is it will be basically a slightly tighter tied down version of Vista Ultimate. with less features and options available (perhaps even a fix to the windows firewall that would pop up every install, so it didnâ€™t just have to be near turned off) but in doing this they will create a few other issues that you didnâ€™t have in the older systems. Itâ€™s the nature of programming on very large scales. 

If you want help with an issue then ask for it and people will try to help you. But the wining about the O.S.'s or the previous versions of O.S.'s is not productive and should be just abandoned as the BS it is...

again. Contact me if you have any real computer issues. And Iâ€™ll be happy to help. Iâ€™ll post in here from time to time to refresh so people can see to contact me about issues otherwise Iâ€™ll be ignoring the people trying to tear apart what I had to say here as it is pointless you will not change my mind. You will not do anything about the issues them selves. And nothing will change with the companies. 

One parting response.
Monopolies = only one source...


Microsoft, lynx, OSX+ (Mac) 
just 3 mainstream ones ... and there are a lot of lesser known ones out thereâ€¦*

It isn't as simple as that, and that purely capitalistic fallacy (build a better one, then!) doesn't apply under a monopoly such as this.
  This is in part true but you see the problem isnâ€™t Microsoft. And their OS. Itâ€™s all the software companies and people out there whom do not know the keyboard from the power plug. They drive the market. Example, PS3 shoe in, everyone wanted even before it was made! Wiped off the table by WII better more original consul system and design. If you can wow people enough with the features and originality of what you have done people will follow. You just got to break the sheep mentality that is so inbread in the human race at this point. It CAN be done itâ€™s been done before it just takes someone doing it. The trick is getting software companies to go along with it. In fact the most recent instances of other OSâ€™s winning on the market most people do not consider as OSâ€™s. Thatâ€™s how brilliant they were. Your consul systems are nothing more then a gaming box specialty build that are slowly growing more and more expensive just like the computer market has done since personal home computers 80808â€™s were released 

*Please learn about what you are trying to argue about before you make your self look like *Runefox


----------



## Runefox (Nov 6, 2009)

Good god my eyes. Is there any reason why your whole post is bold? 

Anyway, it's a virtual monopoly - One company has such a large share of the market that it's able to operate as if it were a monopoly. It's kind of like picking a small ma 'n' pa ISP instead of one of the big telcos - It doesn't matter that you've got the choice of going with them, but in the end, you're using the big telcos' lines anyway, since smaller ISP's simply lease from them - How can they be expected to lay down an infrastructure to compete with the big guys? This is actually a point of contention in the Canadian neck of the Internet woods right now, since the CRTC is planning on letting the big telcos have full control over the lines and the pricing for leasing them - Snuffing out smaller ISP's. Anyway, It's an illusion of choice in the marketplace, and while it isn't an identical situation, it's close enough; Enough people use Windows in both the home and where it actually matters - the server rooms and all those office computers - that it's almost a default when you think about computers. Mac OS and Linux are *not* mainstream in terms of market share or any way, really.

It just isn't as simple as you make it out to be - The example of the Wii is flawed. Nintendo has a solid base in the console world, and has the resources to build something like the Wii (which, by the way, has a library of great first-party titles and nothing more than shovelware from the third-parties); A new operating system taking off overnight "because someone made it awesome" doesn't happen. People have been trying and putting the effort in - Hell, one of the major computer manufacturers the world over has been trying for DECADES - and yet Windows remains the de facto standard much like x86 became the de facto standard in the face of more powerful architectures. The major reason? Virtually everything is coded for Windows/was coded for x86.

I don't appreciate being talked down to and told that I don't know what I'm talking about, here, because I in fact very much do. I'm not one of the ones whining about Windows - I actually rather enjoyed Windows 7 from the user experience perspective. What I'm saying is, it's just not that easy to take over a market where Microsoft/Windows is so entrenched. Just because a technology is superior doesn't mean people will adopt it. There are far more forces at work that need to be paid attention to in order for even a chunk of a market share to exist - Hell, look at how Mozilla Firefox had to fight tooth and nail for its share of the browser market.


----------



## ToeClaws (Nov 6, 2009)

Yep... good thing I said "... *keep the thread Windows 7ish* - no OS wars." in the first post, otherwise this would just be a long winded, ranty thread about OS's, corporations, trolling and... oh...wait.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 6, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Yep... good thing I said "... *keep the thread Windows 7ish* - no OS wars." in the first post, otherwise this would just be a long winded, ranty thread about OS's, corporations, trolling and... oh...wait.



Ehh... Sorry.  I'll shut up about it. I've said what I've wanted to say anyway.


----------



## Aurali (Nov 6, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Yep... good thing I said "... *keep the thread Windows 7ish* - no OS wars." in the first post, otherwise this would just be a long winded, ranty thread about OS's, corporations, trolling and... oh...wait.



yeah, you can't talk about OSes on any forum without it debating into OS wars.. but it comes simply down to this, no matter which way you slice it.

You are all wrong.



On topic: I'm still having retarded explorer.exe crashes... but it's been beautiful besides that.


----------



## Forgotton (Nov 6, 2009)

Aurali 
On topic: I'm still having retarded explorer.exe crashes... but it's been beautiful besides that

this sounds like you have one of 4 issues and should be narrowed down
1. ram going bad that is causing one of the largest files you have running to hit a bad sector of ram which crashes the program
2. driver conflict when you access a specific program for a certin length of time it calls out to a bad driver and the windows seams to have this crash
3. Malware or a worm has infected your system and is running somewhere in the backround causing you to have issues with explorer
4. some other 3rd party softwear or hardwear is confliting and this is the how the issue is ending.

ways around it.
1. restart explorer.exe (I know this works in older versions of windows like i said have not tried in win7.) pull up task manager. usualy by holding Ctrl Alt Delete and selecting it. then go to file. run. type in explorer.exe this will restart explorer and stop you needing to reboot the system to get your desktop back.

2. watch for if there is any like conditions happening when you get these errors.

report those here it will assist in narrowing down where your issue truly lies.

if you are a hardwear tech or techable you can test some things on your own to rule stuff out. swap out your ram. (assuming you like most people have 2-4 512sticks of ddr ddr2 or ddr3 ram at this point) take them out and switch positions of ram and see if there is any change in the frequency of the crashes. 

for malware we need something that in older O.S. was Msconfig. will give you a list of all that is set to run and start on your system at boot and other times so you can disable programs with weird names that are not microsoft. if you can type the list out here I can look up all the instances and see if they are safe required to run your system or some junk that can be disabled. this may also eliminate the issue.

Please mail me any responces or post to this thread and i'll look over them to see if we can narrow down the source of the issue


----------



## Aurali (Nov 6, 2009)

I'm not techtarded sweetheart. It's not a virus, and I've seen a lot of other people report it as well. It's definately a bug in Win7. Please, I'm slightly insulted.

http://www.sevenforums.com/crashes-...click-desktop-causing-explorer-exe-crash.html  <-- exact problem.


----------



## Forgotton (Nov 6, 2009)

In that thread Iâ€™m seeing many different issues not just one 
Right click causes crash (probably a problem with the mouse not working right with standard windows driver and a 3rd party one should be used)
ntdll.dll
problem with the network loader software routing DLL file and file should be reinstalled and perhaps even manually change the port that you are standard using to connect to the internet
http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000961.htm
*comctl32.dll*
When you work in a program that loads both version 5 and version 6 of the Comctl32.dll file in Microsoft Windows XP, the program may stop responding, and an access violation may occur in the Comctl32.dll file.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/884883

ok so I was not meaning to talk down to you or call you a techtard in anyway but was offering help and expressing that I need more information to try and track down your specific issue and actual solutions to your specific problem. One reason Iâ€™m sure Microsoft has not responded to that thread is I see so many different issues and tons that could be caused by something as simple as forgetting to install a motherboard driver for your usb device before plugging the USB mouse in!
Iâ€™m not accusing you of anything like this just saying the wide spread epidemic that is being described there does not seam to be the same all over.
Also have you installed any windows updates yet? Honestly I will never install windows updates till an O.S. has been out for at least 2 years. Just as a rule of thumb.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 6, 2009)

... Are... Are you from 1998? Motherboard driver for USB? "Network loader software routing DLL"? MSConfig? I mean, I'm not MCSE or MCSA certified or anything, but...


----------



## Forgotton (Nov 6, 2009)

USB drivers do still exist for certain types of motherboards especially if you use multi button mice. Like the ergonomic one I use on my 
*MSI 790FX-GD70 Socket AM3/ AMD 790FX/ DDR3/ A&2GbE/ ATX Motherboard*

*http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=MB-79FGD70*

http://netsquirrel.com/msconfig/msconfig_vista.html
Msconfig has been around the whole time.
Every time you post to me in an attempt to discredit me you make me shake my head in a bad way...
Runefox I will not respond to you again. Be well.


----------



## Carenath (Nov 6, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> Yep... good thing I said "... *keep the thread Windows 7ish* - no OS wars." in the first post, otherwise this would just be a long winded, ranty thread about OS's, corporations, trolling and... oh...wait.


You expected different?
This _was_ a thread pointing out issues that are still present in Vista.. it's gone off that, and
Closed...


----------

