Windows 7

[mikester]

Originally Posted by exitwound

People fear change.

This is the kind of attitude that I have repeatedly run into in the MS Forums I have been browsing for my answers to various windows 7 questions.

Folks don't seem to get that it isn't that I fear change - I just - simply - don't need it.

I am VERY satisfied with the usability of Windows XP; to qualify this I will tell you that I am a UNIX/LINUX orientated person. I prefer the command line interface when I work. I enjoy the simplicity of the classic interface. I only use Windows because I require some windows programs that unfortunately will not operate well in a windows emulated or virtual environment (games, office productivity, finance) so I use windows. I never tried very hard with Vista but I thought it would be useful to try 7. Changing the UI to something that may be 'better' in one person's eye and removing the option of restoring previous usability costs me TIME and PRODUCTIVITY. Now I have to spent time learn the UI a part of the product which in my perspective provides me the least benefit of all.

This computer is a TOOL for me and this one is awkward in my hand.

It really steams me the attitude of these folks who think that the Microsoft||Apple dictated way of doing things is THE way of doing things and everyone else is wrong.

I don't think the Linux/Unix way is THE way - I don't even think it's the BEST way - it is A way and one that in the right environment works well.

[island911]

Originally Posted by svandamme

i hate the lack of a classic interface ...

...

I'm running Win7 w/ classic interface.

[juanbenae]

i like it except i have not been able to figure out how to declare my default email?? anyone?

[LakeCleElum]

Originally Posted by car 311

i like it except i have not been able to figure out how to declare my default email?? anyone?

FireFox, gmail and ThunderBird for me.........

[mikester]

Originally Posted by island911

I'm running Win7 w/ classic interface.

I've got it mostly looking like classic myself but I can't get the regular old explorer - I think someone already said it. I just want a list of files. I don't want previews, tiles, whatever - just a list with the details.

I love that view. Now everything is 'grouped' to make things 'easier' and I'm sure some people like it. I don't. I like to sort by columns, name, type, date, what not. Haven't figured that one out yet - if you have pass it on.

Granted, I've probably spent less than an hour on the OS...

[slodave]

Mike, I'm not running the classic interface but are you trying to get explorer to look like this:

[mikester]

Originally Posted by slodave

Mike, I'm not running the classic interface but are you trying to get explorer to look like this:

I've got it looking like that - I just don't like the navigation in general nor the overall look. I guess it is something I'll have to get used to.

[slodave]

I am starting to like the "Search programs and files"... I have no idea where putty is, but I just type it in and in a couple of seconds, it shows me the options.

The UI does take a little getting used to.

[slodave]

I have to retract what I said earlier about the memory usage with 7 and FF. It sucks. The other night, FF was using 1.2 gigs of RAM.

I had a couple of 3rd party apps for Photoshop and I recently misplaced my list with serial numbers. I was able to find one serial in the XP registry (XP is on a different drive). The other two, I decided to try and export all the keys from the XP registry and import into Win7. The normal reg entries imported just fine. I ran into a small problem with a few keys that were in the unique ID section of the registry, but after switching in the new ID, they imported as well. I copied the old directories from the XP drive to the new Win7 drive and... It worked. The two apps work and are still registered. No need for me to find my missing serial numbers.

Time will tell, but I think 7 is off to a good start.

[alf]

Windows 7 on work laptop works great, a few very minor driver issues initially but Lenovo is all caught up with it now. Vista was a pig, home machines all still running XP and I have no intention of switching those.

[exitwound]

Originally Posted by mikester

Now I have to spent time learn the UI a part of the product which in my perspective provides me the least benefit of all.

This computer is a TOOL for me and this one is awkward in my hand.

Things change and evolve in the computer world faster than pretty much anywhere else. You still want graphics cards on an AGP interface too? How about IDE Ribbons because they're familiar? Were you reluctant in giving up floppy disks for CD-r?

You've accepted the idea of using the operating system that's synonymous with GUI and you still complain about it.

Windows 7 is a fantastic leap over XP in nearly every way. Even over Vista.

People freak out because Windows has so many critical updates and insecurities yet you DEMAND that they provide backward compatibility from older OSes to preserve your environments. You can't have both. The backwards compatibility is what cripples Windows as much as it keeps it the #1 OS on the planet.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I got my wife a netbook with Windoze 7 on it for xmas. My initial impressions are not that positive. I find the user interface to be cumbersome, needlessly complicated and a pig on resources just to accommodate Micro$oft's predictable onslaught of stupid doodads, animations, fadeouts, dancing clowns and christ-knows-what-else that only get in the way of having a simple, efficient interface (like the "windows classic" desktop that's been around since the days of Win95).

As an added annoyance, the version of Win7 that came with this netbook (a Dell) is a dumbed-down, crippled version called "Windows 7 Basic". Among the things that are crippled out of this idiot-ized version is the ability to set your own windows desktop background to whatever you want (you're cheerfully provided with a big giant obnoxious Dell logo instead, which you have no say whatsoever in changing). Well, this pissed me off to no end. I didn't just spend several hundred bucks to have my wife's computer be a farkin' billboard, and I sure as hell wasn't going to be conned into shelling out ANOTHER few hundred bucks (more than the cost of the netbook) to "upgrade" to a full version of Win7 just so I could change the frikkin' desktop.

I finally (after an hour of digging around) managed to find a crack program that allowed me to change the background to a family photo my wife wanted. But I was HUGELY irritated by this whole "typical Micro$oft" crap where their pushy marketing trumps any engineering excellence or technological innovation they come up with. If it were my netbook, I'd have wiped the entire thing clean and installed Linux or XP, but it's not mine and my wife just wanted to get to using it without sitting around for two days while I fiddled with setting it all up.

She agrees with me about the default Win7 interface though - it's horrible and creates a lot of (confusing) duplication of shortcuts, is way too dependent on needless and superfluous animated garbage and ding-dongs, and makes a simple task like point-clicking to open the application you want a 5-step process since there is so much "clickable" junk all over the place that's easy to accidentally select - especially when using the touchpad. A mouse did solve some of the cursor control issues, but what helped the most was turning off all the stupid default crap and reverting to a simple, "windows classic" type desktop interface.

M$ got it right back in 1994/1995 with respect to that interface. Why the need to fart around with it? Leave it alone already.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by exitwound

Things change and evolve in the computer world faster than pretty much anywhere else. You still want graphics cards on an AGP interface too? How about IDE Ribbons because they're familiar? Were you reluctant in giving up floppy disks for CD-r?

Your arguments don't make sense, you're mentioning AGP or IDE interfaces, or floppies, those are technical improvements.

The start menu, that's not a technical improvement, it's a simple cosmetic change to the user interface, and whatever they wanted it to be, many folks think it sucks donkeyd1ck.
They did not need to force their installed userbase to have to adapt, simply because MS decides they should.
They could have left classic in there, just like they had left it in there in some form when they went from 95 to 98, to 2000 to xp/2003, to 2009/Vista.
It's not a technical issue at all

And the new menu, in my opinion is crap. If i have to learn another interface, that doesn't allow me to use the way i used to use my previous one, eg, muscle memory in my hands. Then i might as well learn a completely different OS altogether, maybe Linux, maybe Mac, time will tell.
Untill that time, as long as XP still has all the drivers, and still runs all the programs i need, i'll be using XP. And other folks like me do the same, as such MS made a dumb decision.

And they get away with it, because they force folks to buy their OEM licence when they buy a computer... and few folks complain and request the licence refund form the pc reseller...

[exitwound]

Blame Dell, not Windows. They have the right to do what they want when they sell a product to you. There is no Windows 7 Basic in the USA. If you're referring to Starter, then you BOUGHT the crippled version by your own choice. Windows 7 editions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GUARANTEED, Microsoft tested their interfaces at the cost of millions of dollars to get the best possible interface across all their user bases. They did this with the color blue when XP was released. They've done studies on the craziest things because user interaction is the number one thing people using the OS will notice across home users and office users.

And I don't know what you're talking about referring to the 'old interface'. The windows interface has changed little. There's a start button (just like XP) that's not labelled start anymore. All your programs are still there (just like XP but easier to find). There are the most frequently used software (just like XP). I really don't see the difference except it doesn't cover your desktop as it expands. And if you want a command line type interface, press WindowsKey, start typing. you found your program.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Well, another issue was that the Dell PC came with software installed that added a bunch of "extra functions" to the touchpad. You could program it so that using two fingers meant one thing, using three fingers meant something else, tapping with two fingers meant something else, etc. It was maddening because it was set up with too many of these default settings enabled, so an untrained/unsophisticated user was naively tapping/brushing against the touchpad and inadvertantly telling it to zoom, magnify, pop open some window, etc. without knowing it. Couple that with the extra stuff on the desktop (courtesy of windows 7)and it made for a very clunky, confusing and difficult-to-navigate initial out-of-the-box experience.

Yeah, I realize some of the fault is Dell's here, but the Win7 "Basic" thing is clearly being pushed by M$ - I researched this. The part I REALLY don't like is that as an ADMINISTRATOR you can't change the permissions on a lot of the files. I initially tried to "fool" the OS into thinking that the picture my wife wanted as her desktop was the "default" one by renaming the default one to something else. Wouldn't let me because of permissions. Went into the file attributes (as admin) to change the permissions on that file. Wouldn't let me because I wasn't "TrustedInstaller". Fking bullsheet. It's MY computer - not Dell's or Bill Gates'.

One more reason I like Linux so much.

[svandamme]

pop, what netbook did you get?
the real mini's with Atom
or the inspiron 11z with Dual Core low voltage cpu??

I've got full XP drivers for the latter

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by exitwound

There's a start button (just like XP) that's not labelled start anymore. All your programs are still there (just like XP but easier to find). There are the most frequently used software (just like XP). I really don't see the difference except it doesn't cover your desktop as it expands. And if you want a command line type interface, press WindowsKey, start typing. you found your program.

It changed, a lot.

I don't want a start menu that has things move around all the time.
I do not want to type anything to find what i need, i want it to be at the same place, every time so i can press the windows key
and blindly navigate to the program i need with the arrow keys, done.

And i want to use start, run, slam in some command line, press enter.
Which the darn Se7en interface wouldn't do

the stupid search box would come up with "no i didn't find this or that"


To each his own, if you like it , great, but many do not
so stop being the MS fanboy defending the ignorant way MS forces people to just deal with change, when those people have no desire to change something that works for them.

[exitwound]

Bottom line is if you don't like the product, don't use it. You wouldn't buy a car that doesn't have air conditioning or power steering or limited the number of miles you can drive before it shuts off...so why do you continuously buy the OS? Because you "have" to? Stop complaining if it's an "I have to because I have to" scenario. It's already a last resort if you're only using it for a few programs and not daily use. If XP works for you, fine. But you don't have the right to say that they should cater to your demands when you're a niche user. Their business depends on the developing and evolving industry in which they exist...just like any other business.

[svandamme]

their business depends on customers being happy, something they seem to forget quite often in Redmond.

If they had bothered to leave classic interface in there, i wouldn't have to learn a new interface
I would be quite happy with Se7en, and not have to look at Linux or Mac... I would be happier then i am now, in respects to the OS'es now on the market, i would not be using "antique" XP
I would not have to dig up drivers for new hardware, when my new pc is delivered with Se7en.

[tchanson]

Originally Posted by gr8fl4porsche

Microsoft has really dumbed down the whole network install with a system called HomeGroup. It only works with '7' computers but basically you install the OS and it instantly recognizes the other computers on the network and configures the sharing and permissions depending on how you answer a couple of questions.

Not quite. I've spent hours over the last several days trying get the supposedly dumbed down Win7 Homegroups to work properly. The file sharing was more effective and simpler in Vista, or at least it worked more consistently than Homegroups.

We've got 3 Win 7 Home Premium machines on our home network, running McAfee, Norton and Trend Micro A/V programs respectively.

After going through and manually disabling the A/V on each machine, creating a homegroup on one, sharing the password and joining the other two to the network, the homegroup occasionally works. For awhile. And then one or another machine will either not recognize the homegroup at all, or will recognize it but not open shared folders/files, etc., with no apparent reason. Very frustrating and time consuming.

I've decided that I will have to wait for the inevitable SP1 for W7 for an effective Homegroup fix...






Tim