BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 24d, 12h, 43m | CPU: 2% | MEM: 6192MB of 11335MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:47 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
With Windows 7's development moving so rapidly it goes without saying that soon Microsoft will get to work on their next product.
I was wondering, what sort of features would you like to see?

Personally, I'd like to see a major release, a complete overhaul like with Vista (Only not like Vista)
That, and a catchy name, Windows 7 is so cold and bland.

So yeah, what would you like to see?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:40 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Fri Mar 28, 2008 11:34 am

Posts
913
I would like to see some features from Longhorn polished and fixed, then put into 'Windows 8'


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:44 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:42 pm

Posts
632

Location
c:\tmp\*

Favourite OS
Server 2003
I would like to see the death of windows!

I think really as a product line it has run its course. It needs a major overhaul and a huge UI re-design based on the superbar principles.

No registry would be nice too.

Oh and how about a truely componentised system? Only ONE product SKU and then you select what bits you want installing during setup... ms office & various bits could be deployed this way too.

_________________
Cheapy cheap VPS and hosting for BA members!


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:42 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
hougtimo wrote:
Oh and how about a truely componentised system? Only ONE product SKU and then you select what bits you want installing during setup...

I think I once suggested something similar, I quite like the idea, though there would still have to be two versions, one for home users and one for business.

I wouldn't go with the death of the entire Windows product line, but I definatley think the NT kernel has run it's course.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:51 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:46 pm

Posts
682

Favourite OS
Windows Neptune & Longhorn
I would like to see the look of the longhorn demo! I know this won't happen, but it still looks cool! And I would like to see that explorer could also use tabs. Now i've got sometimes opened up like 9 screens (have send a feedback to microsoft about this already, hope the will do something with it!).

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:59 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am

Posts
819

Location
Malaysia
I would like Microsoft to provide an ability to sandbox any applications installed on the system and unknown applications (read:malwares) will always get sandboxed unless user ask to un-sandboxed later. Plus, they need to simplify Windows Installer architecture. Take a look at Adobe CS3/CS4 installer, always problematic, well, at least on my side. A no registry policy also a good idea, combined with sandboxing feature of course.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:17 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:04 pm

Posts
101
This might already be possible, but I'd really like the ability to store one's profile and related documents/start menu items/desktop items on a separate partition from C: and have it so if I'm dualbooting, each copy of Windows can use the same profile. Would also really help when reformatting. (Note that I mean just on the local PC and not using any sort of domain/windows server)

Would also like to natively be able to mount ISOs. Don't know why they left that out of 7. Depending on how adopted Blu-Ray is by then, being able to burn to that natively might be nice too.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:56 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
Well, the dual-boot for profiles doesn't work actually.

2000 and XP and Vista all do it another way (some minor adjustments).

Just put all you're data from my documents (point the My Documents folder to another folder wich you can use on different windows versions).

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:58 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:36 pm

Posts
82

Location
Scarborough, UK

Favourite OS
Mavericks
J.Byrne wrote:
I think I once suggested something similar, I quite like the idea, though there would still have to be two versions, one for home users and one for business.

I personally think one version would be enough. This one version contains, the equivalent to Aero, Domains and all that, if this was available for the price of Vista Home Premium then it would sell like hot-cakes.

Then say, for the enthusiast they had "Add-Ons" which you could pay for that added features like Dreamscene (Which is not necessary for most users).

(Prepares to be flamed) Apple have done it well with OSX, one version (£80), that has everything.

I think it would be more understandable for some of the people, and businesses.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:17 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:43 am

Posts
731

Favourite OS
Win10/Debian Linux
I primarily use OS X on my Mac, and currently Windows 7 on another partition to play games. Unix has survived for 40 years without the need of a registry. Settings are user-dependent, not necessarily global, which Microsoft has tried to make up in the use of NTUSER.dat registry hives. Essentially, NT wasn't designed for multi-user use - it has been modified over time to support more than a single user, albeit rather poorly. Most times you go to install a program, the installer needs administrator privileges, whereas if it were a true multi-user OS, each user could, and would be able to manage their own applications. The benefit of Unix is the fact that each user can maintain their own personal applications and settings. True multi-user support.

Windows NT's design has run its course. The design is 20 years old, and doesn't support modern security practices properly. Microsoft has added on to the design over the years, but never rid itself of the registry. The reason for the registry in the first place seems to be to keep users from exploiting the fact that each edition of the software is identical, except for additional content (files) that may ship with other editions - the exploit being the ability to tell the OS that it's something that its not (TweakNT exploited this). The registry is like a security system for Microsoft, to protect their investment, and ensure that people will purchase the higher-priced editions of their software.

---

How should Microsoft implement a registry-less NT? For one, like Unix and its derivitives, preferences and settings are user- and system- wide, depending on where the configuration file is stored. As such, with proper permissions and access controls, Microsoft could in theory replace the registry with a *nix-like system, where only they can modify the bits that make the OS the version they want it to identify itself as. In doing this, Microsoft could actually revert the NT OS design to be somewhat closer to *nix. No registry = simpler design, yet more robust user control. I think the main problem with this idea is that NTFS doesn't fully support true per-user permissions.

So then we've got to replace or redesign NTFS. Oh, and the bootloader for the OS. Even with BootMGR's newer features. it still expects a registry. It also may expect certain permissions on keys in the registry in order to boot - or not - I haven't looked into that yet. The kernel would need to be heavily modified to support the loss of the registry.

---

All in all, I believe that either Microsoft will see their faults and move on with a Windows 8 that is more *nix-like, or they will drop Windows in favor of a different OS design. It may still be called Windows, but we'll be the first people to know what it really is underneath. :P

Microsoft's reasons as for why the registry concept wasn't dropped earlier on would probably be something to do with their monetary goals, not `What's best for the customer`, or even `What's fastest/safest for the end-user`.

---

I apologize for this rant of sorts. Just a bunch of ideas that have flooded my mind when looking forward.
---

tl;dr - Microsoft has to change the design of the NT OS significantly to make it worthwhile to continue its continued development. Specifically, NTFS permissions and the registry must go.

_________________
Need disks scanned in the USA? I have a Kryoflux, and am willing to help get your disks archived! I also offer xbox and xbox 360 repair and modding services. PM me for details!


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:48 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:45 am

Posts
936

Location
New Zealand
Without a registry I won't need a registry cleaner :D as it wont be another point of bottleneck type thing.

_________________
PC Gamer and hardware plus software enthusiast (especially betas).


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:29 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:52 am

Posts
890

Location
United States

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2008 Standard
I would love to see the Windows Ultimate Extras that are currently in Vista in Windows 7 as well. I know that won't be any Windows Ultimate Extras in Windows 7, but I still want all the apps that are in Vista Ultimate to be in 7 as well

Yes, I know that sounds confusing

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:43 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:04 pm

Posts
1022

Location
The Ephemeral between existance and non-existance: AKA "being"

Favourite OS
Rhapsody, BeOS
jimmsta wrote:
Windows NT's design has run its course. The design is 20 years old, and doesn't support modern security practices properly.


That is an interesting statement, why do you say so? From my experience Mac OS is the easiest system to modify. Linux can be tough to get it at, but I have seen few systems that were completely locked down- Although I have seen many Windows systems that were.

-=-=-=-=-=
I can't see anything categorically wrong with the design of Windows - and being approximately 20 years old, the age argument is depressing (Am I out of date? :( ). Furthermore, UI changes are trivial or atleast don't signify the need for a new operating system! MS can remedy them by writing a program.

The only thing I would like to see (besides speed) is Real-Time with support for normal Windows programs. And Windows CE doesn't count...

_________________
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:03 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:03 am

Posts
1115

Location
Germany
jimmsta wrote:
Windows NT's design has run its course. The design is 20 years old, and doesn't support modern security practices properly.


sorry but this is nonsense. Please read a book about NT security (groups, account types, ACLs for objects, files, registry and so one) and don't post such wrong statements!

_________________
"Theory is when you know something, but it doesn't work. Practice is when something works, but you don't know why. Programmers combine theory and practice: Nothing works and they don't know why."


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:18 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
While I do think it's time for NT to go, Luckie is right.
Also, NT is almost 16 years old isn't it? Not 20...
It's age isn't the reason I want NT gone, UNIX is much older and still holds up, I just think Microsoft could do better.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:09 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:04 pm

Posts
1022

Location
The Ephemeral between existance and non-existance: AKA "being"

Favourite OS
Rhapsody, BeOS
J.Byrne wrote:
I just think Microsoft could do better.


How? What do you want?

_________________
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:27 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
Something that is near impossible to crash.
On Vista I average about 3 BSDs' a week, on Xp about 5.

Various causes, hardware issues, software issues, there are several "security updates" that upon installation cause Vista to infinity hang at the "Stage 3 of 3, Configuring updates: 100%" screen at logon.
Microsoft has 89,809 and NT has been around since 1993, I'm sure with all that manpower and experience behind them Microsoft can do better if they want too.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:38 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am

Posts
819

Location
Malaysia
J.Byrne wrote:
Something that is near impossible to crash.
On Vista I average about 3 BSDs' a week, on Xp about 5.

Various causes, hardware issues, software issues, there are several "security updates" that upon installation cause Vista to infinity hang at the "Stage 3 of 3, Configuring updates: 100%" screen at logon.
Microsoft has 89,809 and NT has been around since 1993, I'm sure with all that manpower and experience behind them Microsoft can do better if they want too.

Sure, first thing to do is control hardwares like Apple does. Control which hardwares that will works with Windows best. This will for sure decreased alot of BSOD percentages.

Next is to force developers to use MS-only certified development suite (read:Visual Studio) and follow application design guidelines, and when approved, it'll get signed by Microsoft. Any poorly designed softwares will not be signed and will therefore be blocked from being installed in Windows.

Even though if Microsoft really have 89,809 (nice number!) or maybe lesser since the economy turned upside down last year, not all 89,809 are working on Windows, there's so much divisions such as Office, WMC, etc.

So basically, it's not possible to get a near impossible to crash, unless you control everything. Take a look at *cough*Hackintosh*cough*, try installing on some unknown/unapproved PC hardware config and you'll see it's broken. No sound, no network, constant "Kernel Panic" etc.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:46 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
I keep forgetting the name of that thing that has no control over anyone and yet never crashes... oh, right, it's called Linux.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:45 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am

Posts
819

Location
Malaysia
J.Byrne wrote:
I keep forgetting the name of that thing that has no control over anyone and yet never crashes... oh, right, it's called Linux.

Because it's open-source? Open-source tends to get it's problems fixed faster because anyone who come up with problems and knows how to fix it can get it fixed freely without having to be a staff of a corporation and then sumbit it to the community, and you can't compare closed-source OS with open-source equivalent.

So, probably what you want is Windows to be open-sourced?

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:39 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
No... I would like Microsoft to make a better product, is that so much to ask.
If I'm going to pay $200+ for a product I would like to know that it is the best Microsoft can do.
NT is not the best they can do.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:51 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
Most of those crashes occours because of that the hardware is not 100% compatible.

Even if the manufacturer of the motherboard uses intel and other stuff that is good but when they use it on the board it isn't installed on there properly and they cause the crashes.

I had also some crashes with Vista on my new machine, but that was because the BIOS was not compatible with my the videocard, since the upgrade it has been running for about 4 months now WITHOUT and BSOD and any program freeze.

It is just a matter of hardware, if Microsoft was building it's own computers with hardware 100% compatible (or just windows is written for it) then it would not crash.

Apple uses it's own hardware and they don't crash (at least I heared/read it, I am not an Mac fan, more a microsoft fan and also some linux).

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:19 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am

Posts
819

Location
Malaysia
DjRob wrote:
It is just a matter of hardware, if Microsoft was building it's own computers with hardware 100% compatible (or just windows is written for it) then it would not crash.

Apple uses it's own hardware and they don't crash (at least I heared/read it, I am not an Mac fan, more a microsoft fan and also some linux).

That's what I'm trying to explain. Closed-source OS better coupled with selected hardwares if it want to achieve near no-crash state. Btw, what you heard was true (as my Macboy friend told me), but you still got Mac's own BSOD, known as "Kernel Panic", which sometimes caused by the system itself. Just read at TheRegister that new Mac update broke Perl.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:48 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
J.Byrne wrote:
On Vista I average about 3 BSDs' a week, on Xp about 5.


Interesting. I get less than 3 BSoDs a year, if you don't count the ones caused by me attempting to modify system files, etc.

I'm also of the opinion that Windows NT is a great core. I've never had a good experience with Linux, hardware support is too patchy and some actions that people might want to do on a regular basis (like Installing applications) are often overcomplicated (having to install some apps using a command line? screw that).

Intel and AMD/ATi seem to have generally solid and stable drivers. Others however, can be very patchy in terms of stability. You can't fault Microsoft for this though, the hardware manufacturers should work to support Windows better.

If Windows 7 has proved anything, it's that the NT Kernel still performs well, where Microsoft have struggled to get the balance right is what to include with the OS, and I think that issue has also lead to the mess of SKUs.

I think Microsoft are coming to terms that soon Windows NT must be replaced. They also know that such a huge change is really a make or break point for them, if they mess up a whole kernel, it's going to go straight to their revenue, which will only make it harder for them to reinvest money in improving the situation. If they get it just right, maintaining the perfect balance of a huge step forward with little loss of backwards compatibility, they'll be set for quite some time to come.

The biggest threat to any new kernel Microsoft decide to make it Windows NT, because Windows NT still does all that's required of it, and more. Windows NT has proved to be highly scalable and highly portable over it's lifetime. It's gone from the lowly 486s right up to the modern datacenter. There is clearly not something fundamentally wrong with the NT itself, and you'll see that most changes through NT's later life has not been to NT, but what comes with it, and that's where MS need to sort itself out. Windows 8 (which will probably be Windows NT 7.0, strangely enough) will have to take further steps into changing the UX and how the apps are bundled.

I also think the biggest problem with the many SKUs of 7 is not that there's so many, it's that there's so few differences. Most people will barely be able to tell you the difference between Home Premium, Business/Professional and Ultimate, let alone Enterprise, and that's where the problem lies. Microsoft need to only have SKUs that are noticeably different to each other, and if that means fewer, that's what they should do.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: What would you like to see in the successor to Windows 7?        Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:22 pm 
Reply with quote
I would like to see the successor to Windows 7 not exist, personally. Microsoft has been an important player in the computing industry but I maintain the opinion that their best product is Office. Their operating systems have always been very lacking in the "install-and-go" department. Software is so vast for Windows and the quality so low that searching for a specific program for your task can be mind boggling (one reason I stick to open-source software). All that said, it's not likely MS will buckle under after Win7 and not produce another OS. I would like to see MS build an open-source OS based OS from scratch that maintains compatibility.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS