What don't you like about Windows 7?

[hdmi]

better product (...) probable increase in efficiency

After you've copied a large chunk of disk content in Vista or in 7, you often have to click View | Refresh because the Windows Explorer still can't refresh it automatically. In XP, there never was such a problem. Nor in DOS 5.0, either. As far as breadcrumbs goes, I can tell you this: people who want an increase in efficiency are often doing more than one thing at the same time. They have to be able to focus on what it is they're doing. With breadcrumbs, the location where you have to click your mouse is changing all the time. The up arrow never budges even a quarter of a pixel. The green color of the arrow even helps me find it with one eye closed. Like in the fairy tale, breadcrumbs get eaten by the birds (read: 'bugs') all the time so that 'Junior Member' :sarc: still easily got lost in the forest.

Why should I choose Windows 7 when it can't use multiple soundcards simultaneously? In terms of audio quality, 9.1 surround is the future. My laptop has native HDMI, which comes with its own digital audio. It also has Realtek HD, which comes with its own digital audio. So Windows XP is perfectly capable of 9.1 surround and even better. Vista is not, 7 is not.

 

[severedsolo]

new gripe, Aero Peek's preview feature is spotty, sometimes it updates instantly, sometimes you have to restore the window to get it back, noticeably ALWAYS on utorrent, and on and off on Windows Live Messenger

That would be to the fact that certain applications are programmed not to update there window when minimized, this saves on resources. It is up to the application developer if they want to constantly update even when minimized.

ah thats fair enough then... you would have thought that Windows Live Messenger would get it right though surely?

 

[antt]

better product (...) probable increase in efficiency

After you've copied a large chunk of disk content in Vista or in 7, you often have to click View | Refresh because the Windows Explorer still can't refresh it automatically. In XP, there never was such a problem. Nor in DOS 5.0, either. As far as breadcrumbs goes, I can tell you this: people who want an increase in efficiency are often doing more than one thing at the same time. They have to be able to focus on what it is they're doing. With breadcrumbs, the location where you have to click your mouse is changing all the time. The up arrow never budges even a quarter of a pixel. The green color of the arrow even helps me find it with one eye closed. Like in the fairy tale, breadcrumbs get eaten by the birds (read: 'bugs') all the time so that 'Junior Member' :sarc: still easily got lost in the forest.

Why should I choose Windows 7 when it can't use multiple soundcards simultaneously? In terms of audio quality, 9.1 surround is the future. My laptop has native HDMI, which comes with its own digital audio. It also has Realtek HD, which comes with its own digital audio. So Windows XP is perfectly capable of 9.1 surround and even better. Vista is not, 7 is not.

Apparently using multiple outputs was never actually supported by XP, it was a programmatic workaround. Vista was also able to output to do it as well, through macro workarounds. However, these workarounds do not work in Windows 7.
It would be nice id a workaround was found, for both multiple outputs and outputs on both digital & analogue.

 

[cbleman]

By the way, the shell program mentioned in previous posts does have the up arrow in a new menu bar. It works very well. I guess, i'll have to visit, and thank the programmer. For me it's a keeper until MS puts the arrow back.

I'm afraid you'll have to always rely on third-party tools in the future. There's no way that the "Up arrow" is coming back to Windows. Breadcrumbs are the future. Just like the ribbon UI of MS Office. If you take a little effort to get used to these features, it will not only improve your productivity, but also save you the hours wasted in finding third-party tools.

If it dosn't.. Oh well. The arrow is one of the things that was replaced by something else. Learning a new way to do the same thing is just a price I'll have to pay. There is a very large user base that would like to see it back again however. I'm not holding my breath for it to come back; but with such a large amount of people that would like to see it back, I'm hoping it has a chance to make it back in. hdmi: Great point about the static location. A deep directory is also less intuitive in bread crumbs, than clicking the arrow a few times.

BTW: There is no denying that breadcrumbs is a very usefull tool, and I can also see the need to eliminate redundancy. (Still want to see it back though.)

 

[cbleman]

After windows live is downloaded and installed, I am unable to uninstall the specific apps I don't want. (Windows live messenger for instance.)

I would STILL like to see a custom install option in Win 7. If size is an issue, this would help. I know things can be disabled, but there they sit... taking up space (and perhaps ram), and not being used. That way, perhaps, I could keep my (Relatively) tiny little menus, and get rid of the larger space/memory hungry graphic intensive things I don't use. I don't want to see things go away that I don't use; I'm sure there are plenty of people who use things I don't. I do want my non redundant menus/options back however. The size/number of the install disks I don't feel would be a real issue to users, if the setup were done properly to minimize "Disk Swapping". Items/Options you find you didn't need before, but do now, could be added later using the install disks.

New computers are being sold now with Win7 installed. I wonder what the percentage of total users, "Power Users" and "IT Professionals" are.... I guess there would be no way to find out; and "Power User" is an awfully broad term.

I installed 7 for a family member last weekend. I had little trouble explaining why the drivers were incompatible, and the old install disks for her peripherals would not work. Since I was doing the install this was not an issue. Explaining the lack of an email client was impossible. The general consensus was, if MS can include the browser, get real and include the email client too.
Once I got the OS up, configured, and explained some of the major differences, she was fairly happy. Her overall experience was summed up when she said you need to be an engineer to get it up and running properly (Cursing omitted.). Like the Teacher, she surfs the Net, retrieves her email, and uses her set programs. I think she will continue to be happy with the new OS. She also wanted the Azul background back. hehehe, I'll fix that later. (Input from the majority.)

 

[logicearth]

I would STILL like to see a custom install option in Win 7. If size is an issue, this would help. I know things can be disabled, but there they sit... taking up space (and perhaps ram), and not being used.

Without the page file or hibernation file, and with temporary files cleaned out, of course restore points deleted...the install is well under 8 to 6 GB. Is that really something to be concerned about? Storage increased in size, not decreases. And there is nothing taking up your precious RAM unless it is running.

There is nothing to gain from having a means to strip components out of the OS. Just more issues to deal with.

 

[musiclover7]

Given the choice between up arrow, and bread crumbs, I would choose bread crumbs without hesitation. I am one of those who wishes the up arrow had not been taken out, but I am also one of those who is over-all, immensely pleased with the OS... Truth be told, bread crumbs is the better of the two options, as you can quickly move up 3..4..5 tiers in the file system with a single click, but for me, there was something intuitive about the up arrow, that I sometimes miss. At this pnt though, I am over it.. I do not want to install a 3rd party app to get the functionality back.

I used to always replace explorer with an app called Directory Opus, which far exceeds explorer in functionality, but I have not done that yet in 7, and probably won't feel the need. I can get what I need to get done pretty easily with the current explorer, and don't feel installing 3rd party functionality is worth the over-head required to run/maintain it..

I am boggled by the notion that 9.1 surround sound is not supported in Windows 7. Having done absolutely no research on the subject what-so-ever, the idea bothers me, and boggles me. I wonder if it is a case of lacking drivers, or lacking code in the OS.. Still, very interesting..

 

[logicearth]

I am boggled by the notion that 9.1 surround sound is not supported in Windows 7. Having done absolutely no research on the subject what-so-ever, the idea bothers me, and boggles me. I wonder if it is a case of lacking drivers, or lacking code in the OS.. Still, very interesting..

It would depend on if you have the equipment and the driver support to make use of a 9.1 setup. Is this functionality backed into the OS? No... But, how many people in the world have a 9.1 surround systems? So my question...would it actually be worth the cost of maintaining code for a fraction of people?

 

[Frostmourne]

I am boggled by the notion that 9.1 surround sound is not supported in Windows 7. Having done absolutely no research on the subject what-so-ever, the idea bothers me, and boggles me. I wonder if it is a case of lacking drivers, or lacking code in the OS.. Still, very interesting..

It would depend on if you have the equipment and the driver support to make use of a 9.1 setup. Is this functionality backed into the OS? No... But, how many people in the world have a 9.1 surround systems?

More to the point where would you put them? Speakers have to be placed right to ensure the sound sounds "right".

 

[andjayik]

come on 9.1 for a computer?? U want that in a home theatre system in a basment with a big tv and a amp and all the other bells and whistles!!

 

[Frostmourne]

come on 9.1 for a computer?? U want that in a home theatre system in a basment with a big tv and a amp and all the other bells and whistles!!

I would prefer a PC connected to said home theatre system.

 

[isecasa]

It's too much commercial product

 

[MUff1N]

Here's the one & only thing I don't like about W7.

It wasn't offered to the regular Beta testers (Seven testers in general) for a big discount for all the bug reports & input during testing or offered 1 free copy.

Instead our reward for all that work (not to mention TONS of PR advertising) & testing was a "Thank you" & now go pay FULL price for the OS if you want it... :huh:

 

[antt]

Here's the one & only thing I don't like about W7.

It wasn't offered to the regular Beta testers (Seven testers in general) for a big discount for all the bug reports & input during testing or offered 1 free copy.

Instead our reward for all that work (not to mention TONS of PR advertising) & testing was a "Thank you" & now go pay FULL price for the OS if you want it... :huh:

Do you mean the public release, or the invite only beta?
Invite only beta testers received a free copy.
As for the public release, I can understand why no discount was offered considering the sheer number of people who downloaded.

 

[Barman58]

The whole beta test program was run on more than one level

There was the closed invite only beta and the open public beta but there were also various telemetry level options available to public testers who were willing to run a constant reporting program for Microsoft for a period of time. As far as I am aware the full beta testers and the telemetry providers, who completed the required time, were all offered free copies of windows 7.

This is I think a considerable number of people but I can fully understand the lack of any offer to the "Basic" public testers, as Antt has said this would be an immense number.

 

[logicearth]

It's too much commercial product

Because it is a commercial product made by a commercial company? And commercial companies are in business for the purpose of making money, are they not? I fail to see a problem with a business out to make money....

 

[cbleman]

Without the page file or hibernation file, and with temporary files cleaned out, of course restore points deleted...the install is well under 8 to 6 GB. Is that really something to be concerned about? Storage increased in size, not decreases. And there is nothing taking up your precious RAM unless it is running.

There is nothing to gain from having a means to strip components out of the OS. Just more issues to deal with.

And the point of leaving unused apps on the HD taking up space is...? The whole point is to "minimize the bloat", so things I use can return. Perhaps I misunderstand. If it's disabled, not using Ram, and just sitting there taking up space on my hard drive, how can never installing it cause problems?? Thank you for clarifying the Ram question. It is precious.

 

[hdmi]

I would prefer a PC connected to said home theatre system.

That's what I have, it's a silent laptop using a HDMI cable and Realtek HD audio. Both audio devices are only 5.1 surround and they can't be combined into a single 9.1 surround device.

 

[pparks1]

I am boggled by the notion that 9.1 surround sound is not supported in Windows 7. Having done absolutely no research on the subject what-so-ever, the idea bothers me, and boggles me. I wonder if it is a case of lacking drivers, or lacking code in the OS.. Still, very interesting..

I'm a bit into home theater and I know quite a number of people running 5.1, some at 6.1 and the rest at 7.1....but I'm not aware of most home theater users running a 9.1 setup. I don't find it odd whatsoever that Windows 7 doesn't support 9.1. But hey, to each his own.

 

[cbleman]

come on 9.1 for a computer?? U want that in a home theatre system in a basment with a big tv and a amp and all the other bells and whistles!!

Evidently sound is not as important to you as it is for some. Some people do watch movies on their PCs, and like to listen to high quality audio. With the newer high def, larger monitors, and killer sound cards, this is not as absurd as it seems. Although the "Majority" might not have or be able to afford higher end systems, this (I feel) is a valid issue considering the point/theme of the thread. It may fall upon the people who make the sound cards to write the drivers for them however.