Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Dear Bill Gates, features and fixes I'd like to see in next Windows

I'm sure that anyone who's used Windows has at least one pet peeve that they'd like to see fixed. As much as I like Windows (at least in its latest incarnation), I'm no exception.

What's more annoying is that some issues have been around for several versions of Windows (Office too).

OK, so let's get to it! Here's my list of things I'd like to see changed in Windows Mountain View (sorry, still can't call it what Microsoft wants to call it -psst...Windows Vista-...hurts my fingers just thinking about typing it).

1. Focus, focus focus!

The way Windows changes focus, or how it designates what is the current active window, has been an annoyance of mine for a while now.

For example, you are working on something, a Word document for instance, you need to reference a web page, so you click on the Firefox icon (or IE) in the Quick Launch bar and get back to typing your current thought stream on the Word document, when all of a sudden mid-sentence, you realize that you are now on your homepage in Firefox. Exasperated, you sigh, click back on your Word document and retype the thought stream from the point where Windows, thoughtfully, changed the active window.

Hey Microsoft, here's a hint for you in as plain english as I can make it: Never, ever, never, ever, ever, ever, never, ever, ever, ever, ever change focus from the window that I'm WORKING on until I EXPLICITY COMMAND Windows to do so!!!!

I don't CARE what your usability testing shows you, I work in specific ways and it would be MOST APPRECIATIVE if I was given the choice on how Windows handles change of focus.

2. I'm the boss!!

I'm trying to delete files, a lot of them, from the Temp directory for instance. Windows pops up an error window telling me that the file is in use and can't be deleted. It doesn't tell me the specific app that is holding the file open. It doesn't ask me if I want to delete it anyways and it doesn't give me the choice to continue the file delete with the next file. LAME!

Give me the choice, I don't care how hidden it is, as long as it's there and documented. Unless the file is a required system file, ask me if I want to disconnect the app's connection to the file and delete the file.

Let me continue the delete from the next file chosen.

Give me choice! Give me control! Give me more information! Gimme, gimme, gimme!

3. Major Tom to Ground Conrol.

An error comes up when I'm running an application. An error is in the event viewer. I'm having problems performing a specific task (such as trying to connect to console session of a Windows 2003 Server using RDP).

Where's the info in the event logs? Why are you making me click on a link to find out what the error means? Why is there nothing in the event logs at all? Why is the error not listed anywhere in the knowledge base with the same context as my error?

Windows should do a much better of job of telling the user (and an even better job of telling the admin) what's going on under the hood. What does the error mean, why is that application not starting, what's causing my inability to connect to another system's event logs.

I shouldn't have to download support tools in order to drill down to the lower levels of what's going on in Windows. It should tell me.

All error codes should translate into real english messages in the event viewer. All problems should be logged somewhere, or Windows should ask the user if they'd like the problem to be thoroughly added to the event log and Microsoft should at least let customers know that their problem is known even if there's not currently a fix.

Microsoft could even go the extra mile and ask the user if they'd like to be notified if a fix is created for their particular issue.

4. Welcome to the land of a thousand reboots.

So you install a new app, Windows asks you to reboot. You install a new driver for your printer, Windows asks you to reboot. You install a new security update, Windows asks you to reboot. You sneeze, Windows asks you to reboot. You run into a problem, so you reboot. Reboot, reboot, reboot after reboot.

I think you get the idea even if I have exaggerated the issue, but not by much. Sometimes it feels like I spend half my life waiting for systems to reboot. Perhaps it's not quite that much, but it's still too much.

Even with all the improvements that Microsoft has made in this area it's still not enough. Linux only needs to be rebooted for kernel updates (as far as I know, perhaps Martin MC Brown could shed more light on this), in other words, very very rarely.

With the amount of updates, patches and security fixes that Microsoft puts out for Windows, the reboot requirements are way too high. The only way to get ultra high reliability with Windows currently is to run it in clusters. This is simply not acceptable for small businesses that can't afford double the servers and licenses.

Because we can't afford double the hardware and software is no excuse for us not to have high levels of uptime.

These are just 4 of the issues that I have with Microsoft. To some they might seem minor, but in my line of work, I am bumping up against these problems almost every day.

Microsoft is starting to bump up against competitors in the consumer sector and business sector. In light of this, I would suggest to Microsoft and all of its employees, that good enough isn't. New features aren't enough. You have to be better than your competitors, some of whom offer their products for free, far better. You just about have to be perfect.

You have a long way to go. And Windows Vista better be the next big leap instead of the next small step.

What People Are Saying

As far as I know, the

As far as I know, the Kernels of 2003 and Vista are completely new and do not have any legacy code from 16 bit systems.

All 16 bit applications now run in an emulator as far as I know.

XP is pretty similar, but I know that with 2003 and Vista they did a complete reworking of all code, presumably to be more modular in nature, to streamline the design process and increase efficiency.

Will it ever be as good (or better than) as the *NIX flavors? I think it already is in many ways, but there's plenty of room for improvement.

Basically, from what I understand, the fundamental argument against the core of the Windows OS is that it uses database files (registry, etc.) instead of text files to house configuration data as well as to track what's going on in the system. Whereas in *NIX if you know where to look, you can see exactly what's going on with the system.

At this point, I don't think that the core of *NIX is any more reliable than the core of Windows 2003, but I do think that transparency of system operations is a bit better for the *NIX flavors. Then again the tools from SysInternals, et al. certainly bring a lot of transparency to the Windows systems as well.

I think that OSs are and

I think that OSs are and will always be "under development" softwares that have to release all kind of security fixes for it to continue working. For example, if one doesn't have a third party antivirus, forget about having your system running stable. What I really wish for is that one day Microsoft will go for a Unix technology rather than insisting in running over a DOS, which is in fact the backbone of Windows. I'm not entirely familiar with the 64bit version of Windows, because I never dug much into it, but I hope that it won't run over or depend on DOS as much as the other versions did.

Re. #2, what I hate is when

Re. #2, what I hate is when Windows detects a problem and then takes ages trying to resolve it itself rather than asking me what I want it to do. eg, you insert a diskette in drive A and it has a format problem, Windows then spends ages trying to access the disk rather than prompting me immediately about the problem and what do I want to do.

Cosmetic IE bug Can anybody

Cosmetic IE bug
Can anybody or a microsoft techie tell me. Why does a vertical scroll bar is always visible when i open a blank page of Internet Explorer.

You can download and run a

You can download and run a little package called deskpins at: http://users.forthnet.gr/pat/efotinis/programs/deskpins.html This provides a small toolbar icon from which pins may be selected and dragged to the taskbar of any application on your desktop. When pinned in this way, that application stays on top of all the others until you unpin it. Saves me lots of vexation.

#1 used to be a pet peeve of

#1 used to be a pet peeve of mine, but you can prevent it in the registry.

You might want to check out:

http://windowsxp.mvps.org/index.html

but that's not my site, so use at your own risk, etc.

I run Windows XP Pro SP2.

I run Windows XP Pro SP2. #1 still happens WAY to often for me. I will be working on Word, tell an app to open and go back to work... guess what... Windows switches focus on me. If I am not paying attention, I end up typing have of my sentences in the other app.

In some cases, I hit the enter key, and cause "something" to happen in the app that just stole focus.

#4 rarely happens anymore. Even most of the windows updates do not require a reboot.

#2 and #3 are on target.

I'm not sure what version of

I'm not sure what version of Windows you are running but problems 1 & 4, are hardly the problems they were in previous versions of Windows. Most of the time when a window has new information to display it will flash orange on the task bar, not stealing focus. Also reboots are less and less, I only find myself having to reboot half the time for Windows Updates, and rarely for new drivers.

Now, problems 2 & 3, I totally agree on. It's *SO* annoying when copying my entire mp3 collection that one file will make the whole copy stop. No indication of where I left off, why the particular file caused the copy to bomb, or if I would like to continue with the next file. That's something that needs fixing.

And, error messages, I think that's something that could use some fixing across the board, not just Windows, but applications in general. I could care less about a hex address, give me something useful.