The Last Days of Windows 7

[FranzB]

As posted elsewhere, explorer has a myriad of sort options, you just aren't using them.

A myriad of sort options? Just wait till someone starts complaining that the files cannot be sorted according to the number of times the word "the" is used.
But seriously, all these options on options on options in one single OS in order to satisfy EVERYONE is madness. It's as if trying to redesign a Ferrari, keeping
things like looks, speed, etc., so that you can take a long trip with it through the desert or the Amazon jungle. It's individualism gone over the hill.
Imo, this road the OS have been taking is a dead end. It has all become too intertwined and those spyware artists are taking advantage of it.

 

[FranzB]

Being totally an 80 year old beginner How do I get my machine to call me to attention when I get an incoming Email

Open Windows Live Mail
Click on "Tools"
Choose "Options"
Activate "Play sound when new message arrives" under Send/receive messages.

 

[EarlGrayHot]

Windows 7 (not Internet Explorer) does not have a "myriad" of sort options. Sort options are limited and this OS lacks the options a lot of people liked since there are a whole lotta people complainign about this. It's not like we're asking for everything-it's thaqt we're asking for choice and I can't believe there was some great reason for this stupid change. Out tech department says options are limited and since we're a beta test site I tend to believe them. This is just another example of Microsoft wanting to control everyone and how they use their computers. Why would it be such a problem for these supposedly brilliant engeineers up in Redmond, Washington to allow us to sort other than alphabetically? Why can't I click and drag files around at will? That was a big selling point of Windows and now it no longer exists except in the very limited ways Gates and company give us. It's no wonder people are unhappy with Microsoft.

 

[cluberti]

Why can't I click and drag files around at will? That was a big selling point of Windows and now it no longer exists except in the very limited ways Gates and company give us. It's no wonder people are unhappy with Microsoft.

I'm not entirely sure that was a "big selling point of Windows". In general, Windows' "big selling point" is that most of the software written in the last 25 years or so was Windows-based. As to "the very limited ways Gates and company" gives you options, you might want to consider Bill Gates hasn't been involved in designing anything at Microsoft since Vista, and even then he hasn't written much of the software sold by Microsoft since the late 80s. I almost think this is trolling, but I truly believe for some reason the lack of being able to be helter-skelter with icons does annoy you. You, unfortunately, are not "mainstream" in use - in fact, I'd say you're probably not even a member of a large enough group to be considered "niche". Ultimately though, yes - you can't arrange icons at will in Windows anymore (either on the desktop, in explorer views, etc), so you are indeed lacking a feature you used to use. You will have to either change with the times, or use another operating system that allows this. I wish I had a better answer for you, but I don't - without adding some third party app to Windows to allow this (I don't know if one exists or not, mind you), you're stuck with those sorts of options.

 

[gregrocker]

There is always one of these gripe threads going. :haha:
Must be a pressure relief valve on the busiest tech forum in the world.

If it helps at all, I've found you can get your desktop icons to stay where placed by right-clicking on an empty area of desktop to Refresh. Don't know about other Explorer windows, which sort by columns just fine for me using Details view.

 

[Mark Phelps]

I hope W8 with bring back the ability to sort files however we want instead of forcing the user to sort alphabetically with no other option. I hate Windows 7 for that reason alone and will stick to old XP if this is what I get by upgrading.

The limitation of Window Explorer in Win7 are what drove me to purchase Directory Opus. It lets you do LOTS of things explorer doesn't do. And while it's not cheap, it brings a lot of features to the table.

And, OK, I've seen the ribbon bar in Win8 -- and I'm not impressed -- but let's not take this thread off topic into Windows 8. There is a whole other forum for that -- eightforums.com -- which I highly recommend to anyone interested in what Win8 really does today.

 

[faisalbinaziz]

Windows 9

After Windows 7, there will be Windows 8, and Windows 9, and the economy will be economy 3.1 from economy 10. :shock:

 

[carwiz]

I guess I don't understand what some of you guys are talking about. I have icons on the left and right of my desktop. I can drag them any where I want and they stay there. I have apps on the left in groups and utilities on the right along with a gadget or two. My windows open in the middle and if I don't like where they are, I can reposition those too. If I want to go full screen on one, I do.

And, I can sort files by any displayed column. If I don't like the columns, I can change those too. Bigger, smaller, more and less. Add icons, pictures and details on top of that. The options are endless so I'm at a loss at what is meant by the claims. I also haven't had a problem moving files around. There are a few rules but it's just like driving. Imagine the chaos if you could move boot files across any drive or drive your car any where your wanted at any time. People need order. Without it, we become idiots.

 

[Barman58]

I've been in this business long enough to have gone through this "Ah! it's New and different" scenario many times. Back in the early days of Windows 95 it was so different that people wanted their 3.11 back.

I spent two years or more downgrading XP to Windows 2000 because people did not like the "Disney Graphics" on business systems and there were technical problems with XP on real-time data systems I was working on at that time, I personally still switch off the Luna interface on any XP system I have to work on.

I ran Vista successfully on suitable hardware without any issues, including mixed OS networks. I have been supporting win7 from release and will probably do the same for Win8, [unless I've retired by then ].

Unfortunately I see examples of official training establishments teaching "computing", using office 2003 on XP, even though their students have Office 2010 on win7, there are System Managers in the workplace that do not know anything other than XP, and have no experience of a system migration. It's amazing that win7 has the uptake rate it does considering the official inertia.

What I do see is that over time that the absolutely new user finds it easier to learn how to work the system with each release, with win7 producing far less "how do I?" questions that any previous OS.

Win7 is one of the best overall Operating systems that has come out of Redmond when you consider stability, reliability, out of the box experience, and ease of use. I would not be at all surprised to see Win8 continue the trend of win7, even with the metro interface

 

[FranzB]

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

What I do see is that over time that the absolutely new user finds it easier to learn how to work the system with each release, with win7 producing far less "how do I?" questions that any previous OS.

That's exactly "it". A point also often made on the LinuxMint forum when it is thrown back and forth why "newbies" do not stick to one of the Linux Mint releases once they have downloaded the OS. It is simply too much additional trouble (and laziness) to learn how to use it, especially for people who use the machines for chatting, mailing and surfing. Pushing buttons is about all they are willing to do and once they know that they don't want to push different buttons. In a way they are maybe right.
PS. Maybe the next Windows OS should be Windows AU (average user) without all these fancy programs like photoshop, office programs and firewalls that require a study to adjust while knowing (more or less) what you are doing.
And i like to add the following. This forum maybe densely "populated" but it has an insignificant
number of users/visitors compared to the millions and millions of W7 users. And then, as once mentioned by Corrine, most of them come here via googling for a problem they have encountered.

 

[Barman58]

For the Net/Email/Odd Letter class of "average" user Windows 7 is usable "out of the box", more so with the systems that this type of user buys, from the major OEM suppliers with their Extras Packages.

I would personally class the "average" windows user as one who uses Office in Work, in addition to their personal home system.

The issue with Linux that prevents it becoming more than a very minor player is that the big names in software development simply do not support it. Yes you can get an office suite or a graphics package for Linux but they do not compare with those available on The Windows, or even the MAC, Platforms, Microsoft Office is one of, if not, the biggest sellers in MAC software.

What we have to realise as Industry professionals or enthusiasts is that the vast majority of users of computers do not care about the operating system they use, they just want the Office program at home to operate the same as the one in work.

You would be amazed at the number of users who consider either Office or Internet Explorer to be "Windows". I offer clients the like of OpenOffice where cost is important but often have the users state "no I want Windows Office". I have set up many systems where Office components are included in start-up and some users may not actually interact with the OS at all, even performing all file management within Office.

The great selling point of Windows is that it works for everyone at all sorts of levels, on all sorts of hardware, for everyone from an occasional user to a full time graphics artist, for the avid gamer, and it also runs a lot of real time scientific and industrial processes

 

[panais]

For the Net/Email/Odd Letter class of "average" user Windows 7 is usable "out of the box", more so with the systems that this type of user buys, from the major OEM suppliers with their Extras Packages.

I would personally class the "average" windows user as one who uses Office in Work, in addition to their personal home system.

The issue with Linux that prevents it becoming more than a very minor player is that the big names in software development simply do not support it. Yes you can get an office suite or a graphics package for Linux but they do not compare with those available on The Windows, or even the MAC, Platforms, Microsoft Office is one of, if not, the biggest sellers in MAC software.

What we have to realise as Industry professionals or enthusiasts is that the vast majority of users of computers do not care about the operating system they use, they just want the Office program at home to operate the same as the one in work.

You would be amazed at the number of users who consider either Office or Internet Explorer to be "Windows". I offer clients the like of OpenOffice where cost is important but often have the users state "no I want Windows Office". I have set up many systems where Office components are included in start-up and some users may not actually interact with the OS at all, even performing all file management within Office.

The great selling point of Windows is that it works for everyone at all sorts of levels, on all sorts of hardware, for everyone from an occasional user to a full time graphics artist, for the avid gamer, and it also runs a lot of real time scientific and industrial processes

Exactly!

 

[cluberti]

Microsoft Office is one of, if not, the biggest sellers in MAC software.

It is funny to look at the best sellers for software on Amazon, and seeing Office Home and Student for the Mac at #4, with the family pack version at #9.

 

[Heyyou]

Microsoft Office is one of, if not, the biggest sellers in MAC software.

It is funny to look at the best sellers for software on Amazon, and seeing Office Home and Student for the Mac at #4, with the family pack version at #9.

Before I bought my new Dell with WIN7, I had a moment of temporary insanity and considered going for an iMac. My Best Buy has an Apple section, and the first software you see on the shelf is Microsoft Office Home and Student and Office Business for MAC.

 

[cluberti]

If it weren't for Steve Jobs, Apple may have eventually died out at the turn of the century. However, if it weren't for Microsoft (and Bill Gates, mostly), Apple may still have died out with Steve Jobs at the helm - $150 million in cash for non-voting stock and an agreement to continue selling Office for the Mac for 5 years (in exchange for dropping the lawsuit Apple had against Microsoft - it wasn't all altruism, or perhaps none at all) was ultimately what put Apple on their trajectory. Office for the Mac was important then (and Steve Jobs knew it, hence why he wanted the 5 year agreement to continue making it available on Apple's platform), probably more so than it is now. Also, there is rumored to have been much more cash exchanged (the schedule B portion of the deal that was secret) than the $150 million reported, as Apple lost over a billion or so dollars over the previous two years, and had another billion lost on revenues (and reported only $1.2 billion in cash holdings at the time) and yet ended in the black and maintained their investments (and even started accumulating cash) very quickly after that point, without a huge uptick in sales to account for it - interesting indeed, and it would still have been nothing for Microsoft (or even Bill Gates himself) at the time to do without affecting anything in either's lives. Also, Microsoft got access to Apple's labs and R&D over that same 5 year span, so it seems like both companies' cultures were affected positively by the deal, regardless of what it ultimately was behind closed doors.

Viewed in the lens of Apple as a hardware company, and Microsoft a software one (mostly, anyway), it makes sense Microsoft would write Office for the Mac, as that's what Microsoft does. It's a little odd because you'd think they'd want to push Office licenses for Windows instead of the Mac, but I doubt it makes a huge difference or impact on Windows' dominance in the market. It makes money, and probably isn't a threat to Microsoft's market position(s) at all; thus, as long as that stays true, Microsoft will gladly take money from whomever is willing to give it to them - be it a Mac user or a Windows user .

 

[FranzB]

You can argue long and short about it but 70-80% of W7 users have no need for all these extra gadgets but they are - in essence - subsidizing the 20-30% who use them. It's a straightforward calculation how much W7 with all the gadgets would increase in price for those 20% if those 80% did not pay the full price but maybe half. Now you are forced to pay for something you will never use.

 

[bravo659]

For the Net/Email/Odd Letter class of "average" user Windows 7 is usable "out of the box", more so with the systems that this type of user buys, from the major OEM suppliers with their Extras Packages.

I would personally class the "average" windows user as one who uses Office in Work, in addition to their personal home system.

The issue with Linux that prevents it becoming more than a very minor player is that the big names in software development simply do not support it. Yes you can get an office suite or a graphics package for Linux but they do not compare with those available on The Windows, or even the MAC, Platforms, Microsoft Office is one of, if not, the biggest sellers in MAC software.

What we have to realise as Industry professionals or enthusiasts is that the vast majority of users of computers do not care about the operating system they use, they just want the Office program at home to operate the same as the one in work.

You would be amazed at the number of users who consider either Office or Internet Explorer to be "Windows". I offer clients the like of OpenOffice where cost is important but often have the users state "no I want Windows Office". I have set up many systems where Office components are included in start-up and some users may not actually interact with the OS at all, even performing all file management within Office.

The great selling point of Windows is that it works for everyone at all sorts of levels, on all sorts of hardware, for everyone from an occasional user to a full time graphics artist, for the avid gamer, and it also runs a lot of real time scientific and industrial processes

Exactly!

I have to agree with you. The average users or more likely to be the office and home personal computer users. They do want their computers to operate the way it does at their offices and only play office products and internet to be their windows operating system. They also call themselves as experts when they actually haven't played a role in the Windows 7 file management as you mentioned. There is more to Windows 7 than just fun and games. There is the ability to learn more and do more with Windows 7.

 

[cluberti]

You can argue long and short about it but 70-80% of W7 users have no need for all these extra gadgets but they are - in essence - subsidizing the 20-30% who use them. It's a straightforward calculation how much W7 with all the gadgets would increase in price for those 20% if those 80% did not pay the full price but maybe half. Now you are forced to pay for something you will never use.

How is that any different from any for-profit OS? Your argument is misguided and shows a lack of understanding of how software is developed, tested, released, and marketed anyway - without all the bells and whistles to satisfy as many corners of the market, the software (in this case, Windows) would by design be useless for the portions of the market to whom it wasn't specifically designed for. Given the immense R&D and actual development/test costs of the software in question, yes indeed you are in fact "subsidizing" all of the features and functions of the software, including features you "don't need", so that you can get the ones that matter to you or your organization. It actually costs less to do this when it comes to software development, than to release versions with multitudes of features for each at the scale Microsoft releases software.

 

[FranzB]

@ cluberti

Well, i painted it black and white. Still it is justified to put big, fat questionmarks behind the monopoly it certainly is.
However, we'd better stop it or Brink will throw us out, or rather will have to.
Just have a look at the writings of Ed Bott on ZDNet.

 

[msongs]

windows is not a monopoly....

there are other choices. blaming windows for anything on that account is incorrect. In the spirit of capitalist competetion, choose apple or linux or that new thing goggle is cooking up