What don't you like about Windows 7?

[Antman]

With my photos and video folders, I have quite a few sub-folders. I have to keep scrolling the left pane to find a nested folder.

In XP, this wasn't necessary. The selected folder expanded down from the top of the pane. In 7, the selected folder expands from the bottom of the pane - not revealing the sub-folders within it.

I have tested a number of file managers over the years, even paid for some, but have always returned to Explorer. This one issue may force me to another manager.

Before I clicked Submit, I opened the 7-Zip manager just to check something out - and it froze up a couple of times.

I should neg rep MS

 

[egydarceyes]

I can't be negative just yet. I'll wait after a week from the release date to see the updates/upgrades/firmware and I'll report back if I seriously dislike anything with the system.


So far, the installation is a breeze, the performance is quite an upgrade from vista. I like the new features, kind of wished there were more features involved.
I'm impressed. 95% satisfied =]

 

[Paarkhi]

Nothing, its good and some more features can be added to make it better

 

[Martin]

video drivers issues.. since the first release of windows 7 i've experienced a lot of BSODs regarding vga problems. if this could be fixedwould be great

 

[SquonkSC]

With my photos and video folders, I have quite a few sub-folders. I have to keep scrolling the left pane to find a nested folder.

In XP, this wasn't necessary. The selected folder expanded down from the top of the pane. In 7, the selected folder expands from the bottom of the pane - not revealing the sub-folders within it.

I have tested a number of file managers over the years, even paid for some, but have always returned to Explorer. This one issue may force me to another manager.

Before I clicked Submit, I opened the 7-Zip manager just to check something out - and it froze up a couple of times.

I should neg rep MS

Really strange.

Here a screenshot.

I clicked on the arrow left of the "installatie" folder and it jumped up to show every sub-folder in it.



This is default behavior on all my machines.

 

[mickey megabyte]

yes, but if you click a folder on the right pane, what happens then?

(PS belated congrats for guru badge!)

 

[Antman]

What a coincidence...
.

 

[SquonkSC]

yes, but if you click a folder on the right pane, what happens then?

(PS belated congrats for guru badge!)

When I click on a folder? It gets selected and turns blue.

thanks for the belated congrats.

 

[Badmax]

That my network adapter won't work correctly on it

 

[Tews]

That my network adapter won't work correctly on it

We would gladly help correct your problem, if you took the time to completly fill out your system specs...

 

[s0c9]

On the bar chose organize -> folder and search options

Uncheck "automatically unfold ......"

That solves it

Chuckle. Yes, that does solve "it", but does not address the "issue".

I understand what soc9 is describing. I sincerely hope that this nuisance is addressed in a Service Pack.

??? joke??

It stops the automatic placement of the selected item at the BOTTOM of the tree pane. hence solves it.

What more is needed for it to be addressed? A stamp? :sarc:

j/k

Well thanks for the info, that appears to have fixed the auto placement problem

Beats me why that would be a default setting - as it's incredibly annoying - and while [yes] I did go look for solutions [25 yrs of IT has taught me how to do that!!], the "automatically expand to current folder" option gives absolutely NO indication of resulting behavior in its verbiage.

Other than that, thanks.. MS did a pretty good job on this OS, tho' I'm still running into compatibility issues with stuff that ran on XP 64 just fine.

 

[joschw]

I'm objective, not biased. It's a big change for nothing in my opinion, just for "keep the market going".

 

[Antman]

I'm objective, not biased. It's a big change for nothing in my opinion, just for "keep the market going".

As a shareholder, I must say - Exactly. Job well done.

 

[joschw]

I'm objective, not biased. It's a big change for nothing in my opinion, just for "keep the market going".

As a shareholder, I must say - Exactly. Job well done.

So you're biased. Not me.

 

[Antman]

Biased and comfortably retired. And that was my objective.

Any bias or anti-bias notwithstanding, MS hit a home run with Windows 7. It doesn't matter what the strike count was. We fail to understand the game when we do not look at the big picture.

Ever notice how some owners are perennial losers and some are repeat champions?

 

[joschw]

Biased and comfortably retired. And that was my objective.

Any bias or anti-bias notwithstanding, MS hit a home run with Windows 7. It doesn't matter what the strike count was. We fail to understand the game when we do not look at the big picture.

Ever notice how some owners are perennial losers and some are repeat champions?

Considering plastic area in pacific, the size of about Texas I prefer to be objective.

 

[JFelgemacher]

Although i like the new features i have seen on Windows 7, i think that the code could be gutted a bit. The system requirements for my current OS (linux) is 256 MB of RAM and 4 GB of disk space and it can do most of the stuff i saw on Windows 7. Yes, it may be a little more complicated at times, but it works great, free, and i don't need as high of a system rating to run the same type of programs.

So the end result of my opinion, It looks great and they got their heads in a good spot, now i feel that they should work with the lower end of things and gut some of the code to lower the system requirements. I feel that if they do this, windows 7 sales will sky rocket.

Thats just my 2 cents on this.
[edit] If windows 7 wasn't such a resource hog, i would recommend it and buy it myself! It would be the only operating system i have ever boughten that did not come with any of my computers!

 

[joschw]

Although i like the new features i have seen on Windows 7, i think that the code could be gutted a bit. The system requirements for my current OS (linux) is 256 MB of RAM and 4 GB of disk space and it can do most of the stuff i saw on Windows 7. Yes, it may be a little more complicated at times, but it works great, free, and i don't need as high of a system rating to run the same type of programs.

So the end result of my opinion, It looks great and they got their heads in a good spot, now i feel that they should work with the lower end of things and gut some of the code to lower the system requirements. I feel that if they do this, windows 7 sales will sky rocket.

Thats just my 2 cents on this.
[edit] If windows 7 wasn't such a resource hog, i would recommend it and buy it myself! It would be the only operating system i have ever boughten that did not come with any of my computers!

Read my lips

"keep the market going"

http://www.iamanidiot.com/http://www.iamanidiot.com/

 

[logicearth]

[edit] If windows 7 wasn't such a resource hog, i would recommend it and buy it myself! It would be the only operating system i have ever boughten that did not come with any of my computers!

Calling Windows 7 a resource hog would be an incorrect assessment.

Using resources to there fullest does not make it inefficient or a hog. Taking those abundant resources you so graciously installed in your computer and making use of every last drops improves efficiency. Using free RAM as a cache frees up the computer from having to wait for extra I/O jobs to the HDD. Running task while the computer is idle (i.e., no user applications are running in the foreground), keeps the CPU working instead of wasting time and electricity keeping your room heated.

Now get this, ready for the shock of your life? When you require the maximum resources from your computer, aka some video game perhaps. Windows will give it everything! Well behaves low priority task will be kicked out of the way, and ignored until that foreground application is done. RAM will be freed but the absolute minimum (about 50 MB for the kernel). The complete opposite of a resource hog. For Windows 7 (or Vista) to be a resource hog, it must starve applications of resources, it must consume everything and never leg go. Windows and its services do not hog resources. Third-party services and application, however, do (Sadly).

 

[joschw]

Calling Windows 7 a resource hog would be an incorrect assessment.

Well, if you can tell me why all of a sudden you need at least 1GB of RAM and (most of all) 13GB of HDD space, then you can talk about incorrect.