RE: What features do you want to see in Windows Vienna / Windows 7?
Matt said:
MovGP0 said:
Common users have thousands of folders, each containing only a single link to a program, but a link to the uninstaller, manual, vendor website, update website, etc. and several subfolders with additional tool software doing the same way? Why can't there just be the program-link or no specialized application at all?
I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but I'm assuming the way that the app files are stored in Program Files and the shortcuts in the Start Menu Folder.
My personal opinion is that this can stay the way it is, but a simpler installation method would be cool, like the way that you just drag files to the app folder, or Ubuntu's app-get application library. I think that this would be a very good idea, the Ubuntu imho is the best because it's the simplest.
True, I was refering mostly to the Start-Menu-Folder here.
I prefer the way as Ubuntu makes it:
- Folders that are refering to what the app is for (office, multimedia, etc.)
- Repositories that give a list of good software.
The Repositories should better ship as XML File that gives a location of the software, a description, a download-link (including P2P links too, but in that case probably needs some reference to fitting P2P software)
Matt said:
MovGP0 said:
* Common users are using the E-Mail program for filetransfer and chatting, which is not working well. Advanced users are using multiple Messenger Applications and multiple File-Sharing-Software, which works well but is complex. Why can't there just be a single application that can handle all message types well?
I agree that's a good idea, but there are quite a few problems to it's implementation. Partly, in terms of messenger, it would most likely work only on one platform, such as Windows or Linux. But if there are more partnerships like the WLM/Yahoo messenger partnership, I think this would be something that would be good.
The General said:
I'd like to see them scrapping aero and either going back the XP look or making something that isn't so ridiculously bloated.
The implementation is a problem because there is a lack of
standards. There should be more standard for the interfaces like the ones for mutlimedia-codecs. A properly coded codec can get used from every properly implemented player.
So you can install a bulk of codecs you want to use and some players. Even you are using different codecs you keep the choise which player you prefer. I think this principle should apply to all kind of software.
Matt said:
Chaoswarrior said:
I really would hate them when they could revert to the old look,you are really old fashioned...
I would like something that would be such a big change that they couldn't compare Vienna to the older OS-es...
I agree with Chaoswarrior, that the AERO look should stay, along with fancy graphics. I think it's mainly in the core code that they should reduce the bloat.
The basic use of a computer has not changed since the
. It is time for a new approach. I even don't think that 3D Interfaces are so different. As impressive they are, they are mostly nice to look at.
Also Multitouch interfaces are hyped now. I've already tested the huge
Multi Touch Console and the iPhone (thanks to
72dpiarmy) and got very impressed, but there is still a lack of good use cases. Most use cases can be done equaly good with a normal touchscreen. There is more potential in this interface type. Imagine a
, but with two (or even more) hands at once (if you are looking the video, imagine using the 2nd hand for getting the window from the back in front or switch the music played from the player in the background).
Also, semantic technologies have the most potential to completly change the way we think about using a computer. I think this is most reasonable after reading "Chapter 2: Design Philosophy" of
Haystack's User Interface Framework: Tutorial and Reference.