News Behind the scenes with Windows 7

[ar81]

To design Windows 7, Microsoft analyzed billions of pieces of data. It studied exactly what PC users do in front of their screens. It tallied hundreds of thousands of Windows surveys. It got feedback from people all over the world who tried different versions of the software.
As a result, every change or new feature in Windows 7 comes with a back story. Here is a sampling of things you’ll see in the next operating system and explanations of how each came about.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/technology/view/behind-the-scenes-with-windows-7

 

[Artlav]

• New feature: Libraries, or virtual folders that have shortcuts to files that are actually stored in many different places on a hard drive or home network.

• Back story: From its Vista data, Microsoft could see people’s photos, music and other files were swelling in number and stashed all over the place, not organized into the dedicated folders Microsoft had set up.

Why are they treating the users as memoryless idiots that need to search for files and have them in one place for that?

 

[the.punk]

I have Win7 beta and for my opinion it is better than vista.:lol:

 

[Jarvitä]

I have Win7 beta and for my opinion it is better than vista.:lol:

Same, but then again, gouging out your eyeballs with a ballpoint pen is better than vista. Out of my 3 PCs, one has windows installed, and my intelligent guess is that it spends around ten hours per week actually running windows. Hopefully, this will change with orbiter 2009 and OGLA, because with the approaching windows XP EOL, I really don't feel like buying another microsoft "you are hereby granted the privilege to run our software until we decide you're a criminal and have it revoked despite paying" license.

 

[Hielor]

Why are they treating the users as memoryless idiots that need to search for files and have them in one place for that?

You can still go directly to wherever it actually is on your system; the libraries don't remove that possibility. They just make it faster to see all of your pictures or music or whatever, even if it's scattered all over your system.

 

[Omhra]

thus creating another slobby user with no knowledge or understanding about his system... while consuming resources... and yet one more process that a little discipline renders unneeded...
...hopefully it can be turned off?

 

[Hielor]

thus creating another slobby user with no knowledge or understanding about his system... while consuming resources... and yet one more process that a little discipline renders unneeded...
...hopefully it can be turned off?

Um....what? I don't see how making things easier for users is a bad thing.

Plus, before you insult a "user with no knowledge or understanding of his system," you might want to make sure that you actually have a knowledge and understanding of how it works.

It's not a process. It's like a link. You've got this magical "folder" (I don't know if actually exists anywhere) "Libraries," and under it you have "Documents," "Music," "Pictures," and "Videos."

We'll take Documents as a case study. By default, Documents shows you all of the files that are in C:\Users\<username>\Documents (the traditional "My Documents" directory, which is actually named "Documents" on disk but shows up as "My Documents" in the UI for various historical reasons) and C:\Users\Public\Documents. You can add to this list, you can remove from this list, and you can change which item in the list is the "default save location" (that is, where a file you save to the "Documents" library will actually go on disk).

There's no extra process running, it's not consuming resources, and there's nothing to turn off. It just a magical "folder" that shows you the contents of multiple real folders simultaneously. You are by no means forced to use these libraries if you don't want to.

Thanks for trying, though. I was hoping this thread wouldn't turn into another thread full of baseless MS-bashing, but I guess that was too much to hope.

 

[agentgonzo]

Why are they treating the users as memoryless idiots that need to search for files and have them in one place for that?

Because that's exactly what the data suggested. If they ignored the way that the end-user used previous versions of Windows and tried to force them to be better organised, I'm sure you'd find something in that to complain about.

thus creating another slobby user with no knowledge or understanding about his system... while consuming resources... and yet one more process that a little discipline renders unneeded...

Most users aren't computer scientists and don't want to learn discipline. They want something that makes their lives easier without being evangelised to about 'the best way to do such-and-such'. If you don't like it, don't use it, but don't force your beliefs on the rest of the world.

I was hoping this thread wouldn't turn into another thread full of baseless MS-bashing, but I guess that was too much to hope.

Unfortunately, trolls inhabit every corner of the net. You won't be able to have a debate about C++ vs C# without someone evangelising about java. You can't have a sensible discussion about religion without people getting offended and the thread descending into insults and you can't mention anything about a Windows operating system without people lambasting it for doing something, not doing the same thing or pretty much anything.


Back on topic, a lot of the UI improvements mentioned in there are very handy and I've used a lot. It took me a while to get used to the shake-to-minimise, and I'm not sure that it'll be totally useful, but a nice thought.

 

[Brad]

I have Win7 beta and for my opinion it is better than vista.:lol:

Windows ME is better than Vista.... and that is saying a lot!

 

[Moonwalker]

Nah, I'm not even interested in the Windows 7 beta.

I'm not impressed of Vista. Since I'm also not impressed of Microsoft FSX (all the expensive aircraft addons also run in FS2004 and with all the scenery addons it looks almost as FSX anyway) for me there is no need to change to another Microsoft OS for many years, and possibly never. Because they closed the Aces studios and so put MSFS into the trash.

Another things is that MS operating systems become more and more boring. I'm slowly changing over to Linux (Ubuntu). I can only hope that Orbiter one day will run in Linux. Without Orbiter and MSFS, I don't need Windows at all. And without the game industry being focused on MS Windows, Windows would by dead already anyway. MS Windows XP + FS2004, and there goes Microsoft. I think in future I'll go on using X-Plane + Linux

---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:21 PM ----------

Windows ME is better than Vista....

"Repair ME" is better? Who says so?

 

[Ark]

Why are they treating the users as memoryless idiots that need to search for files and have them in one place for that?

Because the vast majority of computer users are indeed idiots who have absolutely no idea how anything works.

I say it's a stupid feature, if people can't keep track of their files that's their own bloody problem. Vista was a bloated heap of crap with a few flashy animated bits, and this is shaping up to be no different.

 

[Tachyon]

vast majority of computer users are indeed idiots who have absolutely no idea how anything works

A tad harsh .... but true.

I say it's a stupid feature, if people can't keep track of their files that's their own bloody problem.

however on this I am glad you are not the majority. Anything anyone can do to assist the 30-50 users per day I assist with minor issue is ok by me. I wouldn't have a job then, maybe. But then maybe I could concentrate on making the back end of a business's IT infastructure better and faster. You also have to take into consideration that fact that many users don't want to HAVE to think about what do to. That is why we have c-o-m-u-p-t-e-r-s, to think for us quickly.

I think that the majority of MS basing is simply because it's popular to bash the top dog (~90% market share) and root (<- pun) for the under dog.

just my 2cents worth.

 

[Artlav]

You also have to take into consideration that fact that many users don't want to HAVE to think about what do to. That is why we have c-o-m-u-p-t-e-r-s, to think for us quickly.

I always had the impression that it is vice versa - a computer just doing the work, while the user thinks of what it should do.

 

[Tachyon]

...well ok - yes you are correct and so am I. I was thinking a bit more "behind the scenes"

 

[Omhra]

All,
he he he... yes.

Hielor,
I have to know, please just tell me... come on...
Do you work for MS?
...............................

Any how...

I am currently working on a T-shirt design inspired by a dream I had, NEY, a nightmare I say!

In the scene I see myself running away from the herds of relatives, friends and friends of friends who, in twilight hold their computer boxes while repeating over and over in eerie voice.. "... Will you fix my computer..."
The same people that upon delivery of said box say "I don't do much with it" (but email and web)...
Upon inspection you find that they are ignorant.. not stupid, in any way other than not realizing their ignorance... but they have a "puter" darn it....

So, about Microsoft listening to its users... is all well and all, but the quality of the user answering the these questionnaires mean that the shear reach of the research leaves us "the techies" as the frustrated minority.



Helior, I worked for M$ for several years... come on... admit it.

 

[ar81]

During my years at the university, I made a software in BASIC and found a friend who had a compiler, so I sold a program I made that assisted people with Klee algorithm that was used on ISO 9001 standards. The only existing software was in french and it required an outdated DOS version, and an old XT-8086 to run, and it took about 30 minutes to run without visible sign of progress, and if you made a mistake when typing data you had to reboot. My program was a bit easier.

Another classmate made another software which was more visually appealing, but harder to use. We both started to sell our software. He achieved higher sales during the first year, but the next 3 years I achieved higher sales. It helped me to afford my lunches and materials I needed for university.

I learned that making things easy for customers brings higher sales.
I do not like resource consumption of Microsoft products.
I do not like when they set min specs that must be multiplied by 5 to obtain minimum performance (I mean FSX).

I do not like the fact that registry makes things messy and vulnerable and the fact that it grows fat making your machine slower in time, and the fact that it can store almost any garbage you can imagine.
But certainly they followed the approach that produced higher sales to me, in the past. But I feel Windows is not having the same quantum leap features it had 14 years ago.

MicrograFX was a company that made great software, very usable and easy, and Designer had essentially the user interface and usage of objects you have in Powerpoint. Designer came first, during the Windows 3.0 era. MicrograFX is no more. So my bet is they do not have anyone to imitate anymore.

 

[Artlav]

I wonder how much new software was made in the last decade?

Fingers may be enough to count all that comes to mind quickly:
-Google systems
-Orbiter
-Various scientific stuff running on HPC's
-Phun/Garry's mod (?)

Anyone care to add to the list? Late 1999 is the cut-off.

 

[Hielor]

Windows ME is better than Vista.... and that is saying a lot!

If you honestly feel that, then you haven't used ME and Vista on computers they work well on. That is, if you have a computer from 2000, obviously ME will be more usable than Vista.

Nah, I'm not even interested in the Windows 7 beta.

The beta has ended. RC is coming next month.

I'm not impressed of Vista. Since I'm also not impressed of Microsoft FSX (all the expensive aircraft addons also run in FS2004 and with all the scenery addons it looks almost as FSX anyway) for me there is no need to change to another Microsoft OS for many years, and possibly never. Because they closed the Aces studios and so put MSFS into the trash.

At some point, if you want to run new software/hardware, you'll need a new OS. In a few years, XP will be just as widely supported by new software/hardware as 98 is now (which is to say, not at all). It also works the other way: certain printer manufacturers are known to intentionally not make drivers for newer OSes for older printers, in order to force people to buy a new printer.

Plus, FSX does have at least one awesome advantage over FS2004--the single-player AI ATC. If you're into flying IFR missions in single-player, it adds great immersion.

Another things is that MS operating systems become more and more boring. I'm slowly changing over to Linux (Ubuntu).

I totally agree. The ability to use the vast majority of the software (especially games, the majority of which only run on Windows) is "boring." Wait, what? Plus, isn't one of the calls of linux that the OS isn't supposed to be fun and interesting, the OS is just supposed to be what runs your programs? And linux can't run the programs I want it to, so it won't work for me.

If all you want to do is e-mail and web browsing, sure Linux is fine. If you're a gamer, Windows is your only choice.

I can only hope that Orbiter one day will run in Linux. Without Orbiter and MSFS, I don't need Windows at all. And without the game industry being focused on MS Windows, Windows would by dead already anyway.

Orbiter currently runs on Windows (not Linux) for the exact same reason that large game studios don't make their games for Linux: The amount of work it takes to get it running on Linux would not be reimbursed by the sales of the game for Linux, for two main reasons:
-Linux's very low consumer market share in the gaming computer market. Very few consumers with high-end desktops run Linux on them, because Linux doesn't have software that
-Of the users who have Linux on machines that could be called "gaming" machines, I'd imagine that most of them aren't gamers--if they were, they'd be running Windows, or they have Windows available, so they'll already be getting a copy of the game for Windows (and them getting a copy for Linux instead doesn't increase the developer's revenue).

There are other reasons, but I imagine that those are the primary business considerations that developers have.

MS Windows XP + FS2004, and there goes Microsoft. I think in future I'll go on using X-Plane + Linux

MSFS and X-Plane are very different in terms of their target audience. X-Plane is good for advanced pilots who enjoy VFR flight in single player, due to its nice terrain, accurate flight model. MSFS is good for...everyone else. Want multiplayer? MSFS. Very, very large addon plane/terrain selection? Yeah, MSFS. Missions and training flights for goal-oriented people and newbies? MSFS has them, X-Plane doesn't.

X-Plane is a fantastic sandbox, but not really much more than that.

Because the vast majority of computer users are indeed idiots who have absolutely no idea how anything works.

I say it's a stupid feature, if people can't keep track of their files that's their own bloody problem. Vista was a bloated heap of crap with a few flashy animated bits, and this is shaping up to be no different.

It's not "shaping up" anymore. It's all but done, and it runs faster than Vista with a smaller memory footprint. Moreover, I'm confused as to how this feature causes bloat.

If you don't want to use the libraries, you don't have to. Most users probably won't notice the difference either way, but those that want the ability to see all of the music files on their computer (rather, all those in the folders they have specified). I imagine there are plenty of people who will enjoy this feature. Just because you personally don't like it, doesn't make it a "stupid feature."

All,
he he he... yes.

Hielor,
I have to know, please just tell me... come on...
Do you work for MS?

I have made no secret of my employer, especially on the IRC channel where they make fun of me about it all the time anyway. I don't post on threads like this in an official capacity, though, so it's irrelevant--I post as someone who's used Windows 7 every day since mid-January.

...............................

Any how...

I am currently working on a T-shirt design inspired by a dream I had, NEY, a nightmare I say!

In the scene I see myself running away from the herds of relatives, friends and friends of friends who, in twilight hold their computer boxes while repeating over and over in eerie voice.. "... Will you fix my computer..."
The same people that upon delivery of said box say "I don't do much with it" (but email and web)...
Upon inspection you find that they are ignorant.. not stupid, in any way other than not realizing their ignorance... but they have a "puter" darn it....

So, about Microsoft listening to its users... is all well and all, but the quality of the user answering the these questionnaires mean that the shear reach of the research leaves us "the techies" as the frustrated minority.

Most of this data doesn't come from questionnaires, it comes from the data collected by those who choose to opt-in to the CEIP.

Plus, I again fail to see why this feature is a bad thing for "the techies." If you don't like it, ignore it. It's that simple.

Helior, I worked for M$ for several years... come on... admit it.

I don't know what "M$" is, and I certainly don't work for a company with those initials.

I wonder how much new software was made in the last decade?

Fingers may be enough to count all that comes to mind quickly:
-Google systems
-Orbiter
-Various scientific stuff running on HPC's
-Phun/Garry's mod (?)

Anyone care to add to the list? Late 1999 is the cut-off.

Um, what? So you're saying that only those four programs are new in the last decade?

I'm sorry, have you been living under a rock? Haven't visited your local software store lately? There's a whole lot of new software coming out all the time, which is a whole lot more "new" than Orbiter.

 

[Artlav]

I'm sorry, have you been living under a rock? Haven't visited your local software store lately? There's a whole lot of new software coming out all the time, which is a whole lot more "new" than Orbiter.

Maybe.
Can you continue the list?

I don't consider "version 2.0 of program A" a new program, unless it's VERY different.
I don't consider a remake of a program (like OS-S) a new program.
I don't consider a game made on some common engine a new game.
I don't consider any version of Windows since Win95 a new OS.

Not much is left afterwards.

But, i don't have a very wide scope in consumer software, so i asked to continue the list.

 

[Brad]

If you honestly feel that, then you haven't used ME and Vista on computers they work well on. That is, if you have a computer from 2000, obviously ME will be more usable than Vista.

Your kidding right?! As one who daily supports M$, I can tell you that Vista and ME drive more calls than any other OS. ME was/is complete trash IMHO and Vista is sub-trash. When GE, one of the largest corp in the world won't upgrade to Vista, you know you have one piece of "crappy" software