10 Features Longhorn needs

My wish list

Friday, October 7, 2005 by Frogboy | Discussion: Windows Vista

The next version of Windows really does need to take things to another level.

 

Let's face it, Windows XP is basically Windows 2000 with some fixes and cosmetic enhancements.

 

Longhorn needs to be much more than that.  Here are a few things I think it needs:

 

1) New display system. This is what Avalon is supposed to address. The new display system needs to let us always run our systems as the maximum resolution our monitor supports and have the DPI (dots per inch) be fluidly scaleable without impacting software compatibility.  I shouldn't have to run my laptop at 1024x768 in order to be able to read text if it supports 1600x1200.  I should be able to run at 1600x1200 and size everything on the fly to be bigger. 

 

2) Updated Searching.  Google Desktop search only exists because the Find Files feature of Windows is essentially useless.  I should be able to quickly find something on my system instantly.  WinFS won't be out as part of Longhorn so what will they be improving in the meantime?

 

3) Smoother Multitasking.  Windows still sucks at multitasking.  Even when running on an SMP box, if the OS is "busy" doing something, you still can't quickly do something else.  I eventually gave up on SMP since on Windows it's only good for CPU bound tasks and doesn't really affect multitasking efficiency very much (on MacOS X and OS/2, for instance, SMP basically made it so you could always be doing something in the UI, but on Windows, the UI is apparently not as multithreaded as it could be). In the meantime, I use Multiplicity to maximize my computing power. But I'd like the OS itself to let me always be able to do stuff -- even if the app is written badly.

 

4) More Componentized. Whether we'll get Microsoft to make it so that pieces of Windows can be replaced or inherited from remains to be seen. I would like to be able to easily add more views (no, Ishell stuff doesn't cut it) to foldrers. 

 

5) Stop bloating with needless bundling.  Every new version of Windows throws in some half-assed immitation of third party software.  While we can all appreciate having a "free" version of ZIP or uxtheme or movie maker, it damages third party software development. I'd rather think that when I BUY my copy of Windows that the work was put into features that only the OS vendor could do.  Especially since Microsoft rarely puts any effort to let third parties expand on what they bundle (like adding RAR support to the compressed folders for example). There are some features only the OS vendor can really do. I'd rather see resources put there.

 

6) Make Networking better. I don't know about you guys but the LAN support in Windows is still quite a pain.  As I type this, I am on a wireless LAN which has several computers on the same work group.  It often takes several seconds, if at all, to find all the machines on the network.  It would be nice if Microsoft re-thought how people use network resources and included ways of working with them in a more straight forward, ROBUST, centralized way.

 

7) Better use of memory. I have 2 gigabytes of memory on my main machine. I turn off the swap file.  And yet I still hear the hard drive chipmunks going away.  Why is that? And don't even get me started about the limited number of handles. Even on my 2 gigabyte machine, if programs use more than 24,000 or so handles, programs start crashing. The average person doesn't even know why their system becomes unstable because limited user handles on Windows XP has been largely ignored.

 

8) Fix Internet Explorer. CSS 2.0 compliance would be a nice start. How about making it much smarter about what it caches? I have lots of friends at Microsoft who admit to having switched to Firefox (or Opera).  That's sad.

 

9) Fix your third party licenses. One of the ugly secrets of the PC OEM market is that computer manufacturers can't install things on Windows that changes the first boot-up experience. At best, they can put a few things on the desktop.  But they can't, for example, include an alternative shell or have WindowBlinds running by default or change the boot screen or many ohter things.  In short, there's not much way for PC manufacturers to distinguish their computer from every other computer.  That means a LOT of lost innovation.

 

10) Fix Security.  Outlook Express is still a spyware/spammer's dream. We shouldn't have to "upgrade" to Outlook to have some basic protections. There should be more end user tools that make it very easy to monitor net traffic.  The "Network" tab in task manager is a nice start but it needs to go much furthre than that.  Worms and the like should be stopped at the OS level. SP2 was a nice start, but there's still so much more to do.

 

There's lost of little things that are being addressed that I'm very excited about.  Avalon is the big thing for me. XAML in particular is interesting but I fear it may lead to a ton of wacky looking "apps". I don't want my apps to be as poorly designed UI as the typical website. Let me put it this way, the people who make Office are VERY different from the people who made http://www.microsoft.com.  I want the former writings the stand alone apps I use, not the latter.

 

So what would you like to see? What features in Longhorn make you excited?

First Previous Page 3 of 4 Next Last
CaptainWin
Reply #41 Sunday, April 10, 2005 2:48 PM
Use plain English! What I mean by that is I would love to see a pop-up that tells me in plain language what happened and what went wrong instead of the stupifying, coded blather that pops up now that even the best computer geek is at a loss as what it is trying to say. This would make the system sooooo much more user friendly!

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
thomassen
Reply #42 Monday, April 11, 2005 12:16 PM
Use plain English! What I mean by that is I would love to see a pop-up that tells me in plain language what happened and what went wrong instead of the stupifying, coded blather that pops up now that even the best computer geek is at a loss as what it is trying to say. This would make the system sooooo much more user friendly!


And let people click disabled items and get information about why the item is disabled.
sharpshark28
Reply #43 Tuesday, April 12, 2005 1:15 PM
Another thing I think windows should try is to switch to some sort of vector based graphics for the start bar, icons, ect. I really hate looking at this crap and knowing that it looks good from far away. But if you zoom in, even a little, the quality goes away instantly. At LEAST make them higher quality with smaller pixels. I really think that StarDock and windows should work together in some way to make an OS. I also would like windows instead of "using the web" to open an "unknown" file and taking you to CKnow every single time to take me to another spot on the windows web site that tells me exacly what it is and what it does. Non of this CKnow crap. Thank you for your time.
Shaman47
Reply #44 Saturday, April 23, 2005 4:57 AM
1)An included skinnable interface, like what Linux has.
2)Lots of fun, free, addictive games, like what Linux has.
3)Better stability, security and some virus protection thrown into the mix aswell!!!!!!!

Its like saying windows are easy to smash, but not if there bullet proof
Dr Guy
Reply #45 Monday, May 9, 2005 4:26 PM

#5 should be 2 in  itself!

#6 is not networking, but network discovery, and that sucks (I think of networking as the ability to connect to the network, which with DHCP, is pretty plug n play.

All great tho!

lancea
Reply #46 Saturday, May 14, 2005 7:40 PM
I'm amazed that it is still so easy for an application to hog resources to the extent that you can't even bring up Task Manager. so multitasking is the biggest one for me. Someone above says it's multitasking in Explorer that's the problem - and it is certainly Explorer that needs to restart more than anything else. But why should loading a page in Internet Explorer cause everything to slow to a crawl? The other one is when a faulty CD, DVD or floppy disc can freeze Windows. It's always been that way and I hoped XP would fix it. Perhaps Longhorn will? If I remember correctly, OS/2 appeared to be far less prone to being locked-up by a process or application.

Next ones on my list would be networking and display. I agree absolutely with what you've said. They also need to fix things so a failed network or server process doesn't lock-up my desktop.
Madcat0607
Reply #47 Sunday, May 15, 2005 2:05 AM
I'm in agreement with most of the arguments here however a feature I'd like to see is a definitive list of what you're buying. There are exe's and other assorted programs let alone files with unfathomable extensions buried in various directories and I've no idea what they do or what they're there for. This in turn raises the issue - can I get shot of them to make (for example) my Anti-virus and AdWare scans faster? - let alone speeding up Searches! A file detailing what every file in the release was, what it did, and any dependency/cies would be nice. Yes I know that it would be huge (so what?- you could delete it!) but at least the user could make an informed decision as to what bloatware they kept on their computers.
An OS I used to work on (back in the good 'ole days) didn't change it's system directory unless an (OS) patch came along and, although it didn't object if you really wanted to put your own stuff there, developers simply didn't, they always loaded their software in different directories. I know XP has gone a long way toward resolving DLL hell, but the simplest solution would simply be not to allow 3rd parties to overwrite system stuff in the first place. The reasons Windows did this in the past (re-using components to save expensive disk and memory space, a joke since everyone seemed to have a different supposedly 'standard' components anyway) seem to no longer apply.
MAXXX22654
Reply #48 Sunday, May 15, 2005 8:58 AM
I just realized something about that list.
1 = yes
2 = yes
3 = yes
4 = yes
5 = yes
6 = yes
7 = yes
8 = N/a
9 = N/A
10 = N/A
and it is already here and being used everyday.
It’s MAC OSX.
Bernytheking
Reply #49 Tuesday, May 17, 2005 1:43 PM
Quoting number 8) I just thort ide say that IE is crap! I now use Firefox and would never go back , if Microsoft dont sort one of their mainly used apps. soon all its users will have moved to more usefull and safe software.
benOne3
Reply #50 Saturday, May 21, 2005 2:33 PM
Microsoft, allow Stardock to include ObjectDock (the free version) so it will be easy! Don't forget Winamp with Modern Skin Support either!
ThemeCop OUT
Yellow Sign
Reply #51 Tuesday, May 31, 2005 6:10 AM
I very much agree with your list, Draginol.

Regarding point 5 - which is one point where people seem to disagree a lot - I'd make the suggestin:

Just give us some more options during installation!

Because I think both sides have valid points. I can understand that there are people who like an OS that comes with everything bundled (WMP, zip/rar etc.) but then there are guys like me who want 'just an OS' and prefer to install only the stuff they really need, and often prefer third-party-tools to the default windows stuff.
I guess it would be the most obvious thing to just have some checkboxes during the installation:
- Do you want WMP? Do you want this and that? Do you need support for bla0.9Xsomething....?
So everybody gets what he/she wants.

And, please please make a dialog:
- Yes I want annoying 'Did you knw...?' -PopUps and retarted dogs.
- No I've been using windows for YEARS so please PLEASE spare me!
Tarkus
Reply #52 Tuesday, May 31, 2005 10:30 AM
I have a simple request: Allow me to drag and select the text that I want, instead of assuming what I want.

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
XX
Reply #53 Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:16 AM
I have a simple request: Allow me to drag and select the text that I want, instead of assuming what I want.


Indeed. That's a "feature" I don't want.

Does anyone, ANYONE know if there's some setting to kill that feature??
Martin Eden
Reply #54 Sunday, June 5, 2005 8:29 AM
One thing I'd find very helpful is a "find as you type" function (similar to that in Firefox) in windows explorer.

eg. If I'm looking at a folder with a thousand files in it I should just be able to type in a few letters from the name of one of those files and have it displayed a filtered view of the folder.
Alex2x3
Reply #55 Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:42 PM
I'd also love it too just look a little "better"

I know where all here, because we skin our computer. But why not make it not need, make it look awesome, out of the box.
I have Apple OS X running her at home to, and the truth is, when i get onto it... I just feel better, it's alot cleaner and runs alot smooth... M$ should take some pointers from Apple.
CaptainWin
Reply #56 Friday, June 17, 2005 2:19 PM
All the suggestions here would be nice to have in Longhorn. Unfortunately, at the rate Microsoft is removing features that were previously slated to be in the OS, I am afraid all we will end up with is the equivalent of Windows XP SP3.

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
thecat2000
Reply #57 Saturday, July 2, 2005 10:26 AM
I agree and dissagree with the comments of this article

1) I thought Longhorn was now supporting a new indexing system where you just find your files very quickly and easily. Saw this demonstrated in the new 5048 build.

2) some bundled software is necessary for people who just want a quick and small program thats easy to use to do some thing with out being baffled on how to use it. Windows Movie maker is a great little windows addon but lacks a lot of features found in '3rd party software' so therefore the end user is still free to upgrade to better video editing software (if they wish).

Stripping an OS of bundled software leaves that OS bear and theres nothing for a new user to just 'play with' out of the box. You would never hear this comment being mentioned if it were a linux platform mainly because the software is all open source.

I prefer my Os to have Windows Media Player in it - I like using it and I bet thousands of other end users do to. (Besides its essential to this OS version being Windows MediaCenter 2005) so in some cases bundled software is still neccessary to help the new end user get up and running with the OS - before they look at the option of buying third party software. Does it damage 3rd party software developers - I don't think it does. JMO
danharker
Reply #58 Friday, July 15, 2005 6:56 AM
re: #5, What you must remember as far as bundling is concerned, is that Windows XP is making a large effort to point towards end-user, people with BASIC knowledge of computers. Many of your run-of-the mill PC World customer's have never heard of WinZip. Even less have heard of CentralZip. XP also tries to make Muiltimedia tools available to customers instantly, hence the likes of Windows Media Player and Movie Maker. Certainly I like Windows Media and am fed up of having to download the likes of quicktime or realone to watch a trailer! I certainly have no problems with the Windows Zip Client, there is nothing that it can't do that I need. Since I am an advanced user, I doubt that many of my Currys customer's would have a problem. Same goes for the inclusion of Roxio - the only things that i've ever needed full burning software for was Slipstreaming.

#7 Windows is rather limited s to how many handles it can have until Longhorn comes. Like it or not, it is still a 32 bit OS. Longhorn will be "true" 64 bit. This will multiply the number of handles considerably. If your HDD is whirring, get spyware doctor and steganos on it. I have 512 MB and 1 GB VM. It rarely whirrs.

#9 This is just WRONG. Manufacturers CAN, they just DON'T. Check out the setup manager. I have an XP disk here which installs XP + SP2 totally unattended. It also does MSN, Yahoo, and all my driver software at the same time. If I wanted, I can include a Macromedia SWF file and a runtime environment.

#6 Got to disagree whole heartedly with this. I have 3 Computers and one networked AIO printer connected to a Wi-Fi router. Set it up properly, and it works perfectly well. It is NOT Microsoft's job to re-write the whole OSI. TCP/IP MUST be left as it is or things will fall flat - would anyone REALLY like to loose internet access to Linux based web servers?
patrickbrans
Reply #59 Sunday, July 17, 2005 1:57 PM
#8 I don't really care, i will stay using firefox on windows, linux and mac!
kona0197
Reply #60 Sunday, July 17, 2005 2:33 PM
#7 Windows is rather limited s to how many handles it can have until Longhorn comes. Like it or not, it is still a 32 bit OS. Longhorn will be "true" 64 bit. This will multiply the number of handles considerably. If your HDD is whirring, get spyware doctor and steganos on it. I have 512 MB and 1 GB VM. It rarely whirrs.


Only problem I see in that is the fact that not very many people are going to go out and either buy a whole new 64 bit system or upgrade there 32 bit system to 64 bit just to run Longhorn. I know I'm not. Hopefully there will be a 32 bit version og Longhorn as well but by the time Longhorn comes out hopefully I have switched over to Linux for good or bought a Mac.

Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
  • Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
  • It's simple, and FREE!



web-wc01