Jump to content

Windows 7 Hidden Features

mrforgetful

By mrforgetful
in Windows 7

 Share

Recommended Posts

gshaw

gshaw

Posted
Posted

How well will they run 7 anyway then? Thought I read somewhere that Microsoft is making 7 so it'll run on "2007 hardware", which is practically all 64-bit.

 

Or are MS going for the magic bullet and trying to make 7 run on everything back to a 500MHz PIII?

 

I also really hope they abandon the stupid number of versions from Vista, although seeing the Beta as Windows 7 Ultimate doesn't inspire much confidence. Whatever was wrong with Home and Pro?!

tmcd35

tmcd35

Posted
Posted

See now I'm going to be accused of starting a fan boy flame war (which honestly wasn't my intentions with the above posts) - I like and have a certain amount of respect for Windows XP SP2 ... Honest.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICT_GUY View Post

i would just like a small fast operating that was 64bit and just worked quickly and efficiently. All I want from an os is the ability to organise my files and run applications of my choosing. It should also be stable.

 

Sounds like you want Linux then...

 

Erm, more like MacOS :getmecoat:

 

Killing off 32bit is great, but not everyone is running 64bit architecture in their computers - I don't think half of our computers are 64bit...

 

Again like MacOS. How can Apple release an OS that is backwards compatible, transition between CPU architectures and even run 32bit and 64bit apps side by side in one OS release - and M$ can't?

Gatt

Gatt

Posted
Posted
How well will they run 7 anyway then? Thought I read somewhere that Microsoft is making 7 so it'll run on "2007 hardware", which is practically all 64-bit.

 

Or are MS going for the magic bullet and trying to make 7 run on everything back to a 500MHz PIII?

 

I think I heard that it should run on the same hardware specs as Vista

 

I also really hope they abandon the stupid number of versions from Vista, although seeing the Beta as Windows 7 Ultimate doesn't inspire much confidence. Whatever was wrong with Home and Pro?!

 

Agreed - Re-market vista for the Home - and market Windwos 7 as a Business OS - as we had with 9x/ME and NT/2K

Quackers

Quackers

Posted
Posted
I think I heard that it should run on the same hardware specs as Vista

 

 

 

Agreed - Re-market vista for the Home - and market Windwos 7 as a Business OS - as we had with 9x/ME and NT/2K

 

I wish they would go back to the 2 seperate lines. Business wants a more stable life with the OS, like XP offered, not a new OS every couple of years and a must do upgrade because it now has flashy lights.

 

Maybe revamp XP a little and make that the business OS, then keep this Windows 7 for home users, who am i kidding, Microsoft would never do anything like that. :(

Guest Guest

Guest Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
i would just like a small fast operating that was 64bit and just worked quickly and efficiently. All I want from an os is the ability to organise my files and run applications of my choosing. It should also be stable.

 

Sounds like you want Linux then... :)

 

:D They are making progress in getting ASIO to play with Wine via Jack. If they ever do get it right ill be very tempted to put a nix distro on my main PC. I can live without games (although Wine is getting better at that too) but i cant live without my audio apps.

 

Same as ICT_Guy, all i want from my OS is for it to be quick and stable, thats it but MS cant even get that right. If i want to do x,y and z then i will download an application which will do x,y and z, and do it far better than Vista/etc does.

Edited by Guest
Guest Guest

Guest Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
I wish they would go back to the 2 seperate lines. Business wants a more stable life with the OS, like XP offered, not a new OS every couple of years and a must do upgrade because it now has flashy lights.

 

Maybe revamp XP a little and make that the business OS, then keep this Windows 7 for home users, who am i kidding, Microsoft would never do anything like that. :(

 

I was thinking more along the lines of "Windows for people who arnt f'ing morons and actually understand how to use the £1000 peice of equipment they are sat infront of".

Not really as snappy as Vista but...

Edited by Guest
tmcd35

tmcd35

Posted
Posted

Maybe revamp XP a little and make that the business OS, then keep this Windows 7 for home users, who am i kidding, Microsoft would never do anything like that. :(

 

I can see why revamping XP as a Business OS might not be an option. There were/are good reasons for merging the Home and Business lines. Most of the important changes between XP and Vista and Windows 7 are beneath the hood. The types of things that make the OS faster, more stable, able to take advantage of new hardware, etc.

 

Two lines - XP Home and XP Pro, Vista Home and Vista Business - is the right way to go. What I object to is the more obvious changes being forced upon end users who don't want them.

 

Why can I not have the Windows 7 kernel with the XP Classic GUI? But yes 12 different versions of Windows when they only need 2 is a little...silly!

mrforgetful

mrforgetful

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How can Apple release an OS that is backwards compatible, transition between CPU architectures and even run 32bit and 64bit apps side by side in one OS release - and M$ can't?

 

Because Apple stick to their own hardware as opposed to having hundreds of manufacturers make stuff?

Sirbendy

Sirbendy

Posted
Posted

There is NO such thing..., this annoys me. A PC is a PC. A hardware base, a collection of circuits, a non-intelligent non-SMT entity. x86, x64, Intel, Amd, Transmeta, whatever - THATS a PC. A Personal Computer.

 

Windows is an OS, OSX and linux ditto. There is no "windows PC", merely a PC with Windows on.

 

I know nothing about intel based macs, but I have to assume they can use industry standard hardware, surely? Even powerPC based Macs can use non-apple hardware - I've fitted non-apple kit into G3/G4 units before...no issue?

 

Sorry, but that's a very personal hatred...

tmcd35

tmcd35

Posted
Posted
There is NO such thing..., this annoys me. A PC is a PC. A hardware base, a collection of circuits, a non-intelligent non-SMT entity. x86, x64, Intel, Amd, Transmeta, whatever - THATS a PC. A Personal Computer.

 

We could argue symantics here. IFAIR 'PC' derives from an IBM brand name from the 80's. IBM PC-XT and latter IBM PC-AT, which was then superseded by their PS2 models. The term 'PC' or more correctly 'PC Compatible' means a collection of hardware and software compatible with the original IBM PC models.

 

Yes PC was short for 'Personal Computer' as in IBM Personal Computer XT.

 

What your referring to as 'Personal Computer' may more correctly be labeled as 'Home Computer' or 'Desktop Computer'or, given the raw computing power of todays models, 'Workstations'.

Gatt

Gatt

Posted
Posted

IIRC - a PC is technically anything that is "IBM Compatible" (aka Open System)- which dates right back to hwen Gates first approached IBM and "leased" DOS to IBM

At the Same Time, Jobs was developing Apple, whcih was a closed system..

 

Wiki link - [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC]IBM Personal Computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

Also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence_of_the_IBM-PC_on_the_PC_market

Sirbendy

Sirbendy

Posted
Posted
You know what I mean.

 

I mean a lot of manufacturers make hardware addins that work in a PC running Windows.

 

Or Linux. Which isn't far removed from OSX..heh..

Sirbendy

Sirbendy

Posted
Posted
We could argue symantics here. IFAIR 'PC' derives from an IBM brand name from the 80's. IBM PC-XT and latter IBM PC-AT, which was then superseded by their PS2 models. The term 'PC' or more correctly 'PC Compatible' means a collection of hardware and software compatible with the original IBM PC models.

 

Yes PC was short for 'Personal Computer' as in IBM Personal Computer XT.

 

What your referring to as 'Personal Computer' may more correctly be labeled as 'Home Computer' or 'Desktop Computer'or, given the raw computing power of todays models, 'Workstations'.

 

Hell no, Personal Computer predates IBM, I'm sure. They just associated the term with a given box. Maybe not x86, but there's a wealth of "pre model 5100" kit that was in it's time referred to as "personal computer"

 

I refer you to "Personal Electronic Transactor", the Commodore PET. Lots of others too.

 

Or the Amstrad PCW.."Personal Computer WordProcessor".

 

PC has only become generic to IBM and clones since they became mainstream. :)

 

And please don't remind me of the PC-XT and the PS/2...gah..PS/2 Model 55SX with MCA, what a bag of angular spanners. Even upto the PS/Valuepoint models of the 90's, I hated that line..The 5100 and 5150 had character, the XT was a whiny dead end with a rakish case, and the AT was quite nice monolith in its way, but the PS series...aarghhhh...

lfcwhoelse

lfcwhoelse

Posted
Posted

Hi

I know people have mentioned it before in the last few days but its that issue with windows 7 and classic view (Start menu). I am using build 7000 and have looked everywhere to find a setting for classic even in `ease of access` but cannot find anything please help :mad::mad:

mrforgetful

mrforgetful

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hi

I know people have mentioned it before in the last few days but its that issue with windows 7 and classic view (Start menu). I am using build 7000 and have looked everywhere to find a setting for classic even in `ease of access` but cannot find anything please help :mad::mad:

 

I think it's been concluded that the Classic Start Menu is gone, only the awful basic Classic Theme remains.

tmcd35

tmcd35

Posted
Posted

LOL - if it was just the case of changing a desktop theme I'd be happy. The problem is there are some more fundamental changes in the start menu and explorer windows that IMHO make Vista a nightmare to use (perhaps I just need to get used to it).

 

The problem though, as said above, is not my own personal likes and dislikes (what do I care I run OS X and Win XP and see no reason of ever changing!) but the problems with staff. By Windows 7 taking away the option for the Classic start menu, when the upgrade comes I will have to force staff to make the change and for no good reason.

 

As it is we are looking at removing Winsuite from our network next summer. I can only begin to imagine the grief I'm going to get from staff over that one but, finally enough, to be able to eventually migrate to Windows 7, Winsuite has got to go!

Gatt

Gatt

Posted
Posted
If you people don't like the new theme of Windows 7, it's only set by default, it's not stopping you changing it, it does have the option for you to put it as XP theme.

 

Cant find that option in Personalization - only seeing Windows Classic....

 

LIke the new "Slideshow" backgrounds (Right Click Desktop --> Next Desktop Background Picture), and the "Theme for United Kingdom" too...

gshaw

gshaw

Posted
Posted

What Microsoft seem to be doing with the Windows UI at the moment makes me think of this...

 

http://www.channel4.com/4car/media/classics/austin-allegro/03-large/allegro-colin-cork-009.jpg

 

:p

Teth

Teth

Posted
Posted

This is a beta. It is the time to comment constructively on the new features as well as hunt for bugs.

 

Change is inevitable and will always be so because the engineering mind is always looking for the tidy, more efficient and more convenient way to do anything. Some changes don't work out and get buried by history as dead ends.

 

The Ribbon introduced in Office 2007 is clearly a step forward in UI design for microsoft and is making its way into the company's other products steadily. There are people in my school still insist on having a windows 9x start menu and a my computer icon on their desktop or a computer is unusable. Meanwhile there are others who feel a computer is broken if they can't right on the my computer shortcut on a 2 pane XP start menu and choose "Explore".

 

I use a KDE4 Linux system, a Gnome 3 Linux system, a couple of command line only headless linux servers, several 2003R2 servers, an XP SP3 Desktop in work and a Vista machine at home. Not to mention a host of devices like playstations and smartphones etc. Everything has a UI that their respective designers thought was the best that could be done for that device. There is no doubt that some are more successful than others of course. When vista came out it was new and uncomfortable 2 years since the launch of Vista and the small programs menu really doesn't bother me anymore I just keep my program groups a bit tidier than I might have on XP or type the first 2 letters in the universal search if I'm being lazy. I also appreciate the cleaner screen layout with it rather than the infinite cascading of the windows 95 era programs menu. Otherwise its the same old 2 pane start menu as XP. The one poor decision in vista that I think will be gone for windows 7 is the network and sharing centre. That was a very poor UI design choice and I hope it is sorted.

 

My point is what was good about Vista will stay. What was bad will go and there will be some new features for time and us users to judge.

 

This isn't the time to be passing offhand damnations of it tho. Live with it for a few months and judge it on its merits instead of making a snap judgement like the users that we all have to support every day. Who complain about every carefully planned and tested update we make to our networks because its different.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...