To all forum users:Please use this thread to note any comments that you haveabout Windows 7. Do not use this thread for any specific question or issue that you are having - it is just for comments or feedback. For questions/issues that require an answer, createa new thread.PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS THREAD TO DISCUSS WINDOWS 7 BETA OR WINDOWS 7 RC.This thread is a continuation from Have Comments about Windows 7?(Part 1).Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner

Good: . Quick Launch Icons are accessible through shortcut keys (e.g. <FLAG>+<T> - <First letter of Link name >) . Connecting to Wi-Fi networks has become more streamlined and easy. . Bad: . Still impaired keyboard support (started with Vista): The Split bar can not be moved by using keyboard shortcuts. . The Start menu "All Programs" search function can not be handled with by using the keyboard. It's not possible to get a context menu for one of the found programs. Although it's possible to select a program in the Found Programs list using <ARROW UP>/<ARROW DOWN> keys, pressing the <CTXTMNU> key doesn't show a selected program's context menu. . While in earlier versions of Windows all personal files had been stored in sub folders of "My Documents", now all predefined personal file folders are stored directly into the user's personal folder. This makes taking backups and moving all personal files to a separate disk VERY cumbersome. . Windows Explorer starts having the focus set into the ListView panel (started with Vista). It's always an unnecessary <SHIFT>+<TAB> to get the focus to the TreeView. It's VERY unlikely that someone EVER will need to do anything in the default startup location! . The Windows Explorer TreeView doesn't scroll horizontally. Following a couple of folders in the TreeView using the keyboard cursor keys get's you lost in invisibility. . Too much space left between each of the Quick Launch and System Tray icons. An unnecessary waste of space. . It's hard to tell quickly which window is the active window if Windows Aero is turned on. The only cue is the red closing button in the right upper corner of a window, which is rather invisible for the eye's corner if a reddish background is active (having, e.g., background scheme "Landscapes" activated). The active window should be much more easy to identify without losing focus on what you're working on. . Copy dialogs don't show target folder. They currently only show the parent of the target folder... = useless. . Although I've selected "hide mouse cursor when typing on keyboard" in the Mouse control panel, the mouse cursor never gets hidden. This is VERY annoying. Clicking into an edit box (or the browser's address bar) that bloody I-beam mouse pointer always gets in the way when typing. Please fix! (I learned that this Control Panel option currently only works on the classic EDIT window class which is hardly used nowadays. This should not be a particular window class's property but a generic mouse pointer property.) . Windows Media Player doesn't minimize to the System Tray anymore. So it can't be run in the background, and so it's unnecessarily interfering <ALT>+<TAB> and <FLAG>+<TAB> sequences. . A program window's message queue receives a false initial WM_ACTIVATE message when the user presses any key after he/she has clicked the program's link and before the first window opens. The program window isn't active then but due to the false window message it believes it is. . Renaming a file in Windows Explorer doesn't update some Windows Explorer internal cache. If the user renames a file and then immediately hits the <ENTER> key to open the file with the new name, an error message pops up that the -old- file cannot be found. . . One more idea comes to my mind: When copying a number of files, Windows copies each file one after the other if the user has selected and dragged them to the target in a single operation. But what if you want to add some more files to the copy operation? Windows then would start a second, parallel, copy - slowing down the whole process significantly!! Why doesn't Windows just add the new files to the first copy operation window and why doesn't it then just copy the new files after the copy process of the first batch has finished? It would have done the same thing if the user would have selected them all right in the first place. So: Please create a copy queue for the copy/move process having new files simply being added to, so that the copy process is not going to be struck down by two simultaneous copy processes interrupting each other. Axel

Win 7 RTM is out, and an old BUG is still there.In the battery systray popup menu are only two power plans selectable. The user can't decide if he wants 3 or more displayed. He's limited with those 2.2 isnot enough. We need at least 3, as you can see in many posts which adress this issue.http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproui/thread/1bf8ee00-4962-418a-a5b8-f435be1b019bhttp://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproui/thread/cf4defe3-558a-4146-8a41-211e4ba0543fhttp://www.windows7taskforce.com/view/2181http://windows7center.com/forums/windows-7-general-discussion/3654-showing-all-power-plans-instead-2-a.htmlhttp://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=83&t=760618Funnily enough Vista displayed3 power plans, but some unworldly developer thought that 2 might be better, sadly, he was wrong, we need at least 3, even better would be if we can select what power plans we want in the popup.Do we really need third party toolshttp://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=760618&st=0&p=590876662&#entry590876662http://www.powerplan7.com/which allows us to switch between 3 power plans?I hope this time, after the final is out, you take this issue more seriousand maybe the responsible developer releases a hotfix whichallows us to view 3 or more power plans without any third party software, or just intergrate a more usable pop-up as you can see in this post:http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=760618&st=0&p=590876662&#entry590876662Waiting for response

PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS THREAD TO DISCUSS WINDOWS 7 BETA OR WINDOWS 7 RC. But please use this (**unofficial**) thread to discuss the win7 RC : **Unofficial** Have Comments about Windows 7 RC - Part 7Hello! Please reply back, promptly if possible with the results to solutions to your problem!Curious about Win7 min. system requirements?Readme: Older ATI, Intel onboard graphics, or NVIDIA graphics cards on Windows 7Windows 7 tips - JoelbX

I agree about the power plans comment above. There should at least be another one, say "presentation" or any other which we can customize to suit our own use. This is useful esp for those who work almost exclusively on laptops only, like myself. I also do not like the location of the show desktop on the far left of the task bar. It should be made easy to return the show desktop icon to the original location. As it is, I had to bring back the quick launch for the show desktop icon. This then makes the pinned shortcuts redundant as I can just easily drop stuff into the quick launch folder. The desktop icons are aligned to the left of the desktop, it is only common sense to have the show desktop icon on the left, not the far right. Another thing I really hate is the taskbar pop up thumbnail previews. Why does MS make it such a hassle for ppl to turn off certain features such as this annoying one! I've applied the extendedui trick discussed in another forum to rid myself of this pesky feature. Aside from the above, I like Win 7 so far (very impressed that it runs very well on my netbook with only 1GB of ram) and most likely will get a copy when it is available. I will try out the Enterprise RTM trial right till the very end.

I agree about the power plans comment above. There should at least be another one, say "presentation" or any other which we can customize to suit our own use. This is useful esp for those who work almost exclusively on laptops only, like myself. You can create any number of custom power plans. Under "More Power Options" you'll see a "Create a power plan" link on the left. I also do not like the location of the show desktop on the far left of the task bar. It should be made easy to return the show desktop icon to the original location. As it is, I had to bring back the quick launch for the show desktop icon. This then makes the pinned shortcuts redundant as I can just easily drop stuff into the quick launch folder. The desktop icons are aligned to the left of the desktop, it is only common sense to have the show desktop icon on the left, not the far right. You may want to use the shortcut key for show desktop (Windows + D). It is quite useful (and has been since Windows Vista). Another thing I really hate is the taskbar pop up thumbnail previews. Why does MS make it such a hassle for ppl to turn off certain features such as this annoying one! I've applied the extendedui trick discussed in another forum to rid myself of this pesky feature. Most users like this feature (including myself), which is why it is on by default. Not everyone finds it annoying. Aside from the above, I like Win 7 so far (very impressed that it runs very well on my netbook with only 1GB of ram) and most likely will get a copy when it is available. I will try out the Enterprise RTM trial right till the very end. Glad you are enjoying it!Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner

... updated and extended my above comments ...

I use Windows 7x64 RTM since about two or three weeks. I haven't used Windows Vista before, I only used Windows XP Tablet PC Edition. What I like: Taskbar: Overall I like it; it's smaller and better, while the buttons are larger, great. The preview is nice and good. Overall you did a good job. A nice addition would be an option to show the previews all the time, just as it is possible in Opera 10 with the tabs, if I increase the tab bar height I get a preview of every window all the time. Tablet Input Panel: I think that's the most useful change you've made since XP. It's such a joy to use it. The option to keep it docked on the left side, great. The perfect working gestures, good. The much better text recognition and the way it converts ink to text, perfect. Really, that's a huge improvement. Task manager: finally it became a useful tool, especially with the resource monitor What I dislike: Search: The search is fast but cumbersome to use. In XP or any other search I can easily specify which folder, what attributes, what file type, if in the content or only the file names...Now, in Win 7 the search is integrated in the Explorer, confusing and the simplest search operations are difficult to execute. To search in the content of not indexed files I have to open the Folder properties??? I don't see what files get searched currently ... All in all the search is a disaster. The search UI in XP was already worse than the older search UIs, but now, it's totally useless. It's fast, because of the better index service, but useless if I want to find a special file which isn't indexed and I don't know the exact name of, maybe only the content or other things. The search needs a complete new UI. Hibernate/Sleep mode: The configuration of this is very cumbersome. To turn on/off the hybrid mode or the hibernation at all, you must already know what you have to do, else you won't find it. The UI is, again, very confusing. Control panel: XP was already overloaded, but now it's impossible to find the correct setting on the first run. The control panel and with it all the single panels have such a poor user interface, it really hurts. To do the easiest things you have to search, search, and search. Then you find it, but you have no idea how you found it. Similar things are spread around, it's just a pain. Pen tablet right click: No option to make a hover right click. I always have to hold the pen button and then tap with the pen nib on the screen to make a right click. I have to install the Wacom drivers to enable this. Why I want a 'hovering right click'? Easier to execute and for pen flicks in programs, like Opera, which work with the right mouse button it's much easier with such a hovering right click. Explorer toolbar: Where is a tool bar? I only have a menu and then something like a tool bar. I can't customize this. With a tablet I would like to customize this semi toolbar, with buttons like delete, copy, paste, ... Now I always have to do a right click to open the popup menu, or use the menu in the semi toolbar. You integrate the ribbon interface in Office and some useless programs in Win 7, and the explorer? Why don't you add the ribbon interface there? Fully customizable, large icons, just better than the current 'solution' Explorer left panel: Again, no way to customize this. I don't need the (German version) 'Downloads', 'Zuletzt besucht','Bilder', 'Musik', 'Videos' folders, but they are there, need space and I can't remove them. Let the user customize this panel. Windows: The aero style is great, but still, as it was in Win 95/98/.../Vista there's a lot of wasted space at the top border. Have you ever used Photoshop CS4? If not, open it, you see that this empty space at the top of the window, left to the min/max/close button is useless and no one needs it. Remove it. Integrate the menu, semi toolbar or navigation row with the back/forward buttons and the address list in it. User folders: Ok, to make this more confusing isn't possible now. Now it's impossible to know where a program saves the user settings. Some save it in User, others save it in ProgramData. In users are tons of useless folders (because of compatibility issues, haha), wow, it's just such a mess. Instead of simplifying everything you made it more cluttered. Select files: I haven't found a good way to select a file, without opening it, when I activated the option to open a file with a single click. I can use the check box next to the file name to select a file, but then I have two files selected and not a single file. Finally, I think I'll keep Win 7. It's better than XP in many aspects, is faster than XP thanks to SuperFetch and has the same power efficiency. But all in all, instead of simplifying the UI you made it more complicated. It's not intuitive, neither was the UI XP had, but it's sad that you aren't able to create an easy to use UI. The really sad part is that those changes, which I mentioned and which are necessary, won't be included in Win 7. I don't know if you ever made a UI change to an already released OS. So I'll have to wait another 3 years or so for Win 8 to see this minor but important improvements, and then Win 8 has new useless features which annoy again,that's the most sad part here :(PS: I hope it's readable, the language is ok and you understand it. I appreciate the option to post this here, I hope you do the best with it.This list contains just the things which I liked most or annoyed me most, if I find more I'll post it here.

@ Fraenky:try Vista, f.e. if youkey in into the WE searchfield , WE adds an item "Suchtools" to the bar, so you get "Suchfenster"(searchwindow) and then "erweiterte Suche" (advanced search);.Its a mess what MS did with Win 7! And the taskbar, tcha (tja), I thought years ago with the apple dock, grrrr what "a kind of magic" !, to be polite. And jumplists nice but gimmick! Who needs? Ifms wants to make the code slimmer, here it can !(YES)And the WE (Vista): with some work you get it to behave not tooooo bad! For persistant thumbnails: try vista & xp virtual desktops, win+w, then t opens a free positionable live-thumb of the active window. You can size andlocate as you like, and these thumbs are always z-on-top.Edit: One point to taskbar: today (17.09.)I added Quick Launch Bar to taskbar, and it looks like in Vista. So everything (with respect to taskbar) is fine. (RC).Btw:Anybody here,who added QLB in RTM, is it still there?

I fully agree with the "Explorer left panel " item. Showing all the libraries is more or less a beginners setting. But advanced/power users don't use these folders too often, particularly not while they are in the office. Showing these in Windows Explorer TreeView should be made optional. Funny: If you don't select the "Show all folders" option in Folder Settings, you get them all but you don't get your home (user name) folder! I also agree with the "Search " item. I find it to be quite remarkable to set a search related option like "find text in files" in a generic Folder Settings property dialog. Suggestion: Add a drop-down menu button to the right of the Search icon, allowing to set search properties on the fly: ... having the checkboxes always unchecked when opening a new Windows Explorer window but remember the most recent values (date range values etc.) to be set as default on a new Windows Explorer window.

I have a small issues regarding the new calculator in windows 7. I work with both HEX and floating point calculations, and it's a little enoying that I have to keep switching between the two modes (programmer and scientific). It would be a lot easyer if you could just add a decimal point in the programmer mode while using decimal input, and do calculations with non-integer numbers. (basically just like the older calculator in scientific mode) and then possibly just drop the digits behind the decimal point when converting to hex display and/or input mode. That would make the need to switch between modes a lot frequent. Thanks...

i have a slight issue with the custom logon screen. you know how ""OEMBackground"=dword:00000001" is set to "1" by default, well every so often this property resets iteself to "0" automatically. microsoft really needs to fix this issue. i really hate having to reset the property to get my custom logon screen back.[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Authentication\LogonUI\Background]"OEMBackground"=dword:00000001

i like really like the fact that i can have a custom welcome screen in Windows 7, so much in fact that i think there should be an option for it in "Personalization" applet in the "Control Panel" on the left with the list of the applications including "change desktop items", "Change mouse pointers", and "Change your account picture" so in the end it should be its own option called "Change the appearence of the welcome screen". Then when its opened, it should open its own "Control Panel" applet that will allow you to change the appearence of the welcome screen. in my opinion it would be a lot easition that using a registery entry to do this and possibly messing up your computer in the proccess....[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Authentication\LogonUI\Background]"OEMBackground"=dword:00000001

Translation of Windows 7 into German is partially awkward: Control Panel > Devices and Printers: "Display Settings" has become "Einstellungen anzeigen" (= "Show Settings") Internet Explorer 8: Security Zone and Advanced settings translations are cryptic as ever: "ActiveX-Steuerelemente ausfhren, die fr Scripting sicher sind" "Run ActiveX controls which are safe to scripten". "Verwendung des Suchfensters fr Websites aktivieren" "Enable utilization of search window for websites". In Tab Settings, one of the options to choose from to select what happens when a new tabbed page opens became just "[show] The new tab page" ("Die neue Registerkartenseite" ).. An intriguingly simple option, isn't it? (Original: "The N ew T ab page")

Found it to be a waste of time to go through the process of migsetup.exe if one is the sole user of the computer with only one profile. It did not copy my CS2 Photoshop as well as myriad of other programs I use. It only copied obscure settings that are not difficult to reenact. Had I known this prior to migrating from XP to Win 7, I would have just opted for a clean install in the first place. This is not a complaint, I just wish all the tutorials had made this clear in the beginning as I wasted half a day with the expectation that all compatible programs would automatically copy over. Now, I have to reinstall them all anyway.

TASKBAR RIGHT-CLICK MENU DEFINITELY NEEDS AN AUTO-HIDE OPTIONS JUST LIKE TASK MANAGER. ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS WITH MINI AND ULTRA-MOBILE LAPTOPS AND VERY SMALL SCREENI DON'T WANNA GO THROUGH 5 SCREENS TO ENABLE THIS OPTION. HUGE TASKBAR TAKES A LOT OF SCREEN REAL-ESTATE AND THERE SHOULD BE AN EASY AUTO-HIDING OPTIONS JUST A RIGHT-CLICK AWAY. VERY IMPORTANT!! THANX ;-) GOOD LUCK TO WIN 7.

TASKBAR RIGHT-CLICK MENU DEFINITELY NEEDS AN AUTO-HIDE OPTIONS JUST LIKE TASK MANAGER. ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS WITH MINI AND ULTRA-MOBILE LAPTOPS AND VERY SMALL SCREEN HUGE TASKBAR TAKES A LOT OF SCREEN REAL-ESTATE AND THERE SHOULD BE AN EASY AUTO-HIDING OPTIONS JUST A CLICK AWAY. VERY IMPORTANT!! THANX ;-) GOOD LUCK TO WIN 7. Right click taskbar, select properties, check auto-hide taskbar in taskbar properties.(if you have a really small screen, maybe try checking use small icons too...)That sounds like quick access to it there, but I see your point... Hello! Please reply back, promptly if possible with the results to solutions to your problem!Curious about Win7 min. system requirements?Readme: Older ATI, Intel onboard graphics, or NVIDIA graphics cards on Windows 7**Unofficial** Have Comments about Windows 7 RC - Part 7Windows 7 tips- JoelbX

@ BetterTodaySorry compatriot, "Einstellungen anzeigen" is correct translationof "Display Settings" !

As Sanmartin said a time ago I have to say it again: after a short time the Windows Registry is full of useless entries. When you use ANY Windows version for a while you have a slower start almost every day.I suggest a Registry Cleaner as a Windows tool.

@karlx Nope... Select this context menu item and you'll find the Display Properties dialog. So the correct translation would have been "Anzeige", like in Control Panel, where the .cpl is called that way. ;) Display has been used here as a noun, not a verb.

Thx DrGerry for the reminder. But I must add that integrating a registry cleaner to stop this well-known bloating of the registry is only a half-way solution, if any. My experiences with those tools - as different they may be, CCleaner f.e. does a relatively good job - is that they are not recommendable for any "mom and dad" user. You can so easily create problems you never thought of if you incidentally delete any entry you shouldn't have deleted that you need some knowledge about what you are doing in this "cleansing". And the moreknowledge you need, the more useless is a program that promises to do all for you in a semi-automated process. So far, I would prefer that the registry's organization itself were better. It can't be so difficult to separate any changes made from program installations from a protected area that can only be modified by the system, to put only one example. My idea would be more to throw away the concept of an all-integrating registry in favor of a compound of specialized and not-interfering "sub-registries" or what you'll call that.Mobile AMD64 3000+, VIA Apollo K8T800 chipset, 1 G RAM, ATIRadeonMobility 9700, 20x DVDRW, C:XPSP3 (55G),D:WIN7 (25G),F:DATA (250G)

Games Explorer is junk and even worse than Vista. What the heck is the point of this GUI ____? There is no Add and shortcut is bull to say the least. Here's what I was hoping you would improve in Vista. Give me a real Add option for god sakes. One where I can select the ESRB, the support site, the rating, the exe etc. It's my PC! I should be able to do what I want. Add shortcut simply add some dumb icon I can't change, no details or anything, It's useless. I want to add games from 1997 and put my own cool game art for it. Is there a law against that? This gui is nothing but bloat at it's current stage and I hope MS wakes up one day and fixes this. I know I'm just some insignificant pos in the big picture but I hope someone see's the sense here. My Games Explorer is all messed up now too, it's not even adding recent games. All this because I tried to do what you couldn't. :( If you want to separate digitally signed files, then throw a icon on games that are digitally signed. To me, I couldn't give a rat's behind if it's signed. I just want my games in Games Explorer. Cheers Tom

@ Better TodayAgreed, I thought you had a problem with respect to the verbs show and display, and not whether display is a noun or a verb in this case!Display is "anzeigen" and "Anzeige" too!

Thx DrGerry for the reminder. But I must add that integrating a registry cleaner to stop this well-known bloating of the registry is only a half-way solution, if any. My experiences with those tools - as different they may be, CCleaner f.e. does a relatively good job - is that they are not recommendable for any "mom and dad" user. You can so easily create problems you never thought of if you incidentally delete any entry you shouldn't have deleted that you need some knowledge about what you are doing in this "cleansing". And the moreknowledge you need, the more useless is a program that promises to do all for you in a semi-automated process. So far, I would prefer that the registry's organization itself were better. It can't be so difficult to separate any changes made from program installations from a protected area that can only be modified by the system, to put only one example. My idea would be more to throw away the concept of an all-integrating registry in favor of a compound of specialized and not-interfering "sub-registries" or what you'll call that. Mobile AMD64 3000+, VIA Apollo K8T800 chipset, 1 G RAM, ATIRadeonMobility 9700, 20x DVDRW, C:XPSP3 (55G),D:WIN7 (25G),F:DATA (250G) I agree. However, I think Microsoft can do a safe integrated tool to simply clean the registry keys "pointing to nothing" and a few features like this. And maybe a "professional" option for advanced users.

Frankly I think the benefits of cleaning the registry is largely placebo. The registry is so big that even if you go through the trouble of deleting a long list of items, it hardly makes a dent. OTOH, delete the wrong thing and some program somewhere will malfunction at some point. A more serious problem is that MS keeps coming up with new places where a program may put its data, making migration to another system an enormous pain. In the beginning was the .ini file. Copy that and you're good to go. Then came the registry. Then the various special folders. In win7, we have the app's own dir \windows \windows\system(32) registry programdata user\<name>\appdata\ local/locallow/roaming take your pick and just to mess with your head, the "documents" inside user\<name> is not the same as the "documents" inside libraries. you also have stuff like documents and settings kept for backward compatibility, and it's unclear how they relate to the new scheme. it's a mess.

Does anyone remember the days when all the settings for, say, Display came up in one Dialog Box with tabs for each part of the display. Each setting being there showing just the keywords. All the optionsvisible andconcise. Easy to look at and understand and easy to talk someone thru making changes over the phone... Now we have a heavily fragmented mess. Everything is a sentence, talking about it, making it difficult to understand. You get dialog boxes come up with one tab! You get a sprinkling of settings... perhaps one or two, on a full screen page. With lots of fluffy discussion about it, making everything unclear. Then you get to the power settings! All hidden away in a contracted tree, hiding every option and choice so well (At lease the tree has lines and plus/minuses unlike windows explorer now!) All this started with Vista, which i skipped, for all the normal reasons W7 is going to be an absolute nightmare to support, trying to talk someone thru changing settings is such a headache! What were they thinking of? With W8, they need to sit down, and put everything into logical groups and put in nice simple dialog boxes. They could also filter out the niggly settings like virtual memory settings, that took 20 mouse clicks to get to... A minor niggle compared to this diabolical mess. Take a look at OS X (I did for the first time the other day!) (and Ubuntu too!) and look at it's control panel! It's great! It's exactly how windows used to be and how it should be now! Simple well grouped tabbed dialog boxes.

What's with these fading arrows? This is a BUG right? The whole point of the arrows, or what more usefully used to be plus/minuses is to show us that a folder has sub-folders. So that at a glance we can see where we are or where we might want to drag stuff, etc, etc. Now we have arrows... fair enough, but they fade as soon as the mouse moves away, leaving us with no idea what's got sub-folders or not. Anyone tried dragging and dropping some files to the tree? Hover over the tree and the arrows fail to show... That's an awful bug. It's all these subtle cues that help us do our job quicker, helps make it more user friendly. And now they've changed it just to make it look different and all flashy, ignoring why those features have come about. These trees with lines and plus/minuses exist in almost all operating systems, even in other parts of W7, because the are logical and work. I can live with the arrows, but it's diabolical that they fade. The fading bug must be fixed. They must never fade.

virtual memory settings, that took 20 mouse clicks to get to... Settings like that are uncommonly and infrequently used, and mostly not used at all by most users, so why would they be in plain sight? It's pretty reasonable to put the "newbie" settings in the front (easy to find and access), but "pro" and rarely used settings somewhere else, deeper. And BTW it's seven not twenty ;) Regards, Kristaps. P.S.: Epic shoop is epic.

I agree. This really bugs me too.

@Kristaps Just because a feature is not commonly used by the common ignorant idiot does not mean MS has to go to such lengths to hideit. Even running a search for "virtual memory settings" takes too long to get to said area. It's an issue of organization, not one of regularity. Minor Problem: Somewhere, I must have clicked something bad, because now Windows Explorer opens EVERY new directory in a new window. Seeing as there are plenty of new directories to sift through, that's a lot of windows. Now I have to choose to clutter up my desktop with shortcuts to my commonly used folders, or open a ****ton of windows. When I change the options and properties to alter this, there is no effect. Mind numbingly annoying. MAJOR Problem, and the only one that makes me not want 7 anymore: There is STILL a huge memory leak with the services process. The other day, I had OpenOffice, WMP, Chrome, and iTunes [forsyncingto the iPod] open, and there were EIGHTEEN instances of svchost running. Even with Firewall and Anti-Virals, that's an ***load of memory, regardless of what the little resource meter says. WHEN WILL MS FIX THIS MEMORY LEAK? I DO love thefunctionalityof the utility gadgets, such as the resource meter, clock, and weather.

@Rich I fully agree. Although I like the little explanations here and there. But it's like you've said: IE advanced settings, Windows Explorer settings, Visual Studio code formatting settings, Power Plan settings.. These all show tiny, tiny windows, not even wide enough to fit some options' text! Why is the user required to scroll and scroll and scroll... and to open all of these TreeView nodes? Suggestion: Maximize the window! Expand all TreeView nodes. Create flow layout areas to distribute parts the TreeView options therein so at any time with any available window size there are always as many options visible as possible:

@Oskamunda So you went to Windows Explorer settings and unchecked "Launch new process to open folder windows"? I don't know why but that one, too, used to open new Explorer windows when I double-clicked on a folder node in the ListView panel of Windows Explorer ...

To fix your folder problem, open Folder Options and click the 1st radio button (you currently have selected the 2nd) in the 1st group . That'll fix it. Launching new process just improves stability if something crashes, since only the folder process crashes, not the entire explorer shell. Regards, Kristaps. P.S.: Epic shoop is epic.

A really annoyance has the Clear Type mode, I already had this 'problem' in Windows XP Tablet Edition and it's still there in Windows 7.A tablet user is able to rotate the display, this means, for each rotation I need different Clear Type settings, because the pixel order changes.In primary landscape mode I need RGB, in secondary landscape I have to change it to BGR, sadly it does not change this automatically, I always have to change this manually in the Clear Type settings.It doesn't even save different settings for portrait and landscape mode.So please, add a selection in which I can select and change the cleartype settings for each orientation sparately.RE the GUI and usability:I also agree with Oskamunda, just because not every user needs some settings MS does not have to hide them so that no one is able to find them.

just because not every user needs some settings MS does not have to hide them so that no one is able to find them. So what do you suggest? Maybe an epically huge list of all available settings on the system? No.Regards, Kristaps. P.S.: Epic shoop is epic.

@Kristaps That already exists ... It's called ... THE REGISTRY , ' , , ' , ; '; ' , ,

The registry? Are we on the same page here? The registry itself is nothing goo, and it is not suitable for standard setting changing. Can you now quickly tell me - where to find those virtual memory settings in the registry?Regards, Kristaps. P.S.: Epic shoop is epic.

That's been a joke :) But, in fact, the Registry IS "an epically huge list of all available settings on the system". Just like you've said ;) And, just like you said, it's not to maintain. Despite the fact that it does provide a sense of structure.

Yes, I chuckled when I saw your post.But some of the settings are extreemly hard to find. They put them as unicode inREG_BINARY values so that a search won't find them.

I am confounded by Microsoft inability to (Get it right). I am disappointed that there is no direct upgrade path from Windows XP to Windows 7. You are forcing us to have to follow your lead and purchase the latest and greatest Operating System. You would at least think that you would make this migration as smooth as possible. Having to redo a whole operating system and manual reinstall games and software application that we have gathered in the life time of your OS product Windows XP is ludicrous. What even more ridiculous is we are going to have to pay for the privilege. If I am going to have to start from scratch I might as well install one of the many open source linux operating systems - Ubuntu - Mandriva - etc and experience a new reality. Yes they have there own peculiar operating system faults but I do not have to pay for the privileged of contracting them. I can even test drive the os from DVD before committing myself to the installation process. Fundamentally, Microsoft needs to rethink its impact on the end user and make this process as easy and as simple as possible. If you are not going to invest the time and effort in making sure your former OS's are upgradable then continue the support for the older Operating systems like Windows XP. Windows XP - rocks Long live Windows XP.

About the registry, I don't know if it is the responsable of the slow starts, but for me is the prime suspect.I still think Microsoft can provide a tool for cleaning the registry entries when we uninstall a probgram from the control panel. More: it can work automaticly (is this word correct? ????)

MAJOR Problem, and the only one that makes me not want 7 anymore: There is STILL a huge memory leak with the services process. The other day, I had OpenOffice, WMP, Chrome, and iTunes [forsyncingto the iPod] open, and there were EIGHTEEN instances of svchost running. Even with Firewall and Anti-Virals, that's an ***load of memory, regardless of what the little resource meter says.Where's the huge memory leak? I don't see one on my PC and it looks like you haven't discovered one either. Starting with Windows Vista, Microsoft decided it was best for reliability and security if they bucketed service based on integrity levels and priority. Of course, that means more host processes are present but does not indicate or constitute a memory leak.---Teeny-tiny UI related feedback: Launching some Control Panel item from the Start Menu ("Turn windows features on or off", "View advanced system settings") results in a UAC prompt that is out of focus if the user has UAC set to not dim the screen. Sticky Note's shadows have a tendency of disappearing from time to time. Has the stocks gadget been removed from the RTM?---Re: the registryI've found cleaning the registry to be somewhere between useless and dangerous but never becoming useful. Clean it all you want but generally problems originate and are solved elsewhere.

For your ClearType screen rotation issue, check this out: http://www.dragonseye.com/blog/archives/327-ClearType-Rotator-0.02.htmlAnonymuos

For your ClearType screen rotation issue, check this out: http://www.dragonseye.com/blog/archives/327-ClearType-Rotator-0.02.html Thank you, this solves my problem.So it should be even easier to add the features of this little tool to the operating system, so we don't have to use some thrid party software. Thank you.

Hello MS, allow me some comments to windows explorer. - At least since vista, i have the feeling that explorer setup in the concern of displaying files is not really stored. i come again and again across big symbols in explorer even set it up to show details AND apply to all dozens of times. - this seems to be new with windows 7: if you are in the right pane of explorer, the left navigation plane does not follows to the directory selected right. this is (a great) step back because it hides useful information. today, we have huge directory trees so having information about where we are currently is really essential. perhaps there is a setting to (RE-) enable this feature, if not, please MS, give us this feature back. - cmd window in XP, you could install powertoys in order to make it possible to open a cmd window in the current selected directory via context menu. as far as i know, this was not possible with vista and it seems, as well not possible in windows7. however, opening a cmd window in current selected windows directory is a job you sometimes (install, build, etc.) have to do very often. could you please provide such a feature with coming updates ? - when having more than 1 cmd window opened, they are grouped in taskbar. unfortunately, you can't distinguish between them because they all have the same titles in listivew of taskbar: the location of cmd.exe and not the directory where cmd is executed. could you please change this ? thank you for windows 7

Re: the registryI've found cleaning the registry to be somewhere between useless and dangerous but never becoming useful. Clean it all you want but generally problems originate and are solved elsewhere. Maybe. Why every Windows version becames slower as times go by? If it is not the registry, what is the responsable? Of course there are programs that installs services and other things that starts with windows, I know this, but I done the trial: I have installed a clean Windows, installed many programs with no start-issues and windows become slower to start, specially if I uninstall programs. I think this a registry-issue.

@chinaski: if you are in the right pane of explorer, the left navigation plane does not follows to the directory selected right.You can change this in the folder and search options!http://www.7tutorials.com/how-improve-windows-explorer-using-folder-options

Chinaski, to add cmd here add the following to the registry: Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shell\CmdHere] @="Open Command &Prompt Here" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Directory\shell\CmdHere\command] @="cmd /k cd /d %1" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Drive\shell\CmdHere] @="Open Command &Prompt Here" [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Drive\shell\CmdHere\command] @="cmd /k cd /d %1"

@chinaski I'd like to add that vice versa the right pane doesn't follow the left selection. So the user always has to hit enter for each folder to browse when browsing folders in the (left) TreeView pane. Hence, I'd like to suggest to also add an option to Windows Explorer to auto-show a folder's contents when it's been selected for more than half a second, just like it did before Vista.

hello karlx, thank you. fine, this works. explorer is something essential. you need it permanently;thus it is important to make it a very smooth gear.

BetterToday : one click on a folder in the left pane doesnt expand it on the right ??hello chinaski, thats what many people try to tell MS!

@karlx I'm mainly using the keyboard. Browsing the left pane with the keyboard doesn't trigger anything on the right. I'm trying to avoid fiddling around with a mouse (which would slow down my work significantly by requiring me to leave the keyboard, search the mouse, search the mouse pointer, move the mouse pointer, finally clicking somewhere near the target if I'm using a touchpad)... I prefer to use keyboard shortcuts, executing the same action in a fraction of a second.

Hello, need to agree Franky001 at least concerning explorer search. if i want to do searches for *.lib or *.myfilter, you now need some steps more in order to do this. basically, you have one more dialog (which is sized to small and not resizeable) in this procedure. this dialog allows to select more than 1 location search is applied to. good idea, but in most cases overhelmed, thus just more clicks than necessary. so my suggestion: let the search work like before. on the left pane, we have a folder selected. apply search to this folders, evaluate wild cards. if someone needs search extended to more folder, he can use custom setup.

have another explorer issue: say you have an explorer window opened and you are in directory A and you scroll down. then change to directory B. if you now go back to A, scrollbar is resetted. why not just leave scrollpositions ?

Well, I really dont wanted to keep repeating myself (and others), but, since Windows Explorer is the subject here lately, lets say again: Windows 7 is very very good. BUT, Windows Explorer is the most stupid, terrible, limited, annoying piece of code introduced in windows since Vista.

Warel, win 7 would be better if theyd not kicked off classic start menu! I used the new one in Vista too for some weeks, but I went back to classic style.The new one is good for adding programs to the QLB, "Superbar" in Vista, Win 7 respectively. In classic style in the search item you can search for files and folders. One click and WE starts with the option advanced search! I WANT TO HAVE THE CHOICE, which I use!All in all I think Vista the best pcos. (not only MS os)

Yes, I dont like the fact that the new start menu is confined to a little space and I have to scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll and scroll again if I want to find a program using my mouse. Of course I know I can use the keyboard and type the program name, but doing this, I have to: leave mouse, go back to keyboard, type the name (sometimes users dont know the name, they just get used to an nice icon), hit enter, leave the keyboard again, go back to mouse. So, yes, I agree the new menu have room from nice improvement, but for me, Windows Explorer is still the most annoying thing in Windows. We dont even file sizes / free space in the status bar anymore. To know the sum of sizes from 15+ files I have to click "Show more details" it is just plain stupid and unnecessary.

In Vista WE you get the sum of sizes of more than 15 files without clicking "more details". So im"worse"ment instead of improvement with win 7!

Yes, you are right. Vistas WE is less worse than 7s (It is not that dificult, if you stop to think, once 7s WE is almost 100% terrible). But none of them beat the XP Windows Explorer, a very good tool, it was.

And how exactly is Vista's or even XP's Explorer better? I'm curious. (Apart from the "more details" thing, which is very WTF-ish)Regards, Kristaps. P.S.: Epic shoop is epic.

Kristaps, this is easy! Take a look on what I already posted before (many times): A) In xp, the information provided by the status bar is much more useful than the one I have now, be it in the status bar or in the Details Pane. If Im exploring the contents of one folder, xp provides me the number of itens in that folder, the total file size (sum of all sizes in the folder) and the "location" if the files are stored in my computer or in a network. NOW, all I have is the total number of itens. So, XP statusbar, with one single line, provides me 3 times more info than The new pane in 7, who took 3 or more lines, by default. I agree if I select one single file the details pane info is amazing, but I really miss the total file size info in the bar. We dont even have an option to put it in the status bar (hidden by default). So, status bar is just useless now. There is no way to work with large amount of data if I always need to select all files just to check if they will, lets say, fit in a removable midia, or in another partition, or so on. The file size is so basic information, takes so little space and is so useful, that I cant even imagine WHY it was left out of the bar! Its not asking much, to, at least, put a selection, avaible by right click, like "Show file sizes". Worse yet, if I need to know the file sizes of more than 15 files, I have to click "Show more details". and if I select one more or de-select one of them, I need to click it again. And again and again, everytime the selection changes. Why cant a modern operational system calculate this in a milisecound? Wait. a system from a decade ago (XP) could do that. The real question is: why WINDOWS 7 cant do it? I already read its removed because of the new way libraries work, putting multiple folder together. Ok, I can understand it, but not accept it.If Im inside a library, and its soooooooo hard to code something to show the file sizes in that specific place, just remove file sizes in the LIBRARY, not in almost every place of the new explorer. Or, just add a option to put the file sizes back, for the users who use it. B) There is no more "up" button. We have breadcumb now, ok, but what if I WANT the up button? Is really that hard to make a option to put it back, if many users want it? C) Toolbar in explorer can no longer be customizable. If I dont want the "Burn" button, I cant remove it. If I want to put copy / past icons there, for easier use, I cant. Its the way it is, like it or not, the user cant change it. D) When working with multiple files in xp, I could past a lot of files in a folder, having them in the end of file list, work with them, and organize them the way I want. After having all set, I just hit F5 and all files are organizated. Now, explorer autosort the files. If I put a group of files in a folder with other files, they just get "sorted" and its much harder to find the files all over the old ones. And, again, there is no way to disable this "feature" that I dont want. E) If I select multiple file types, like a doc and a txt or xls, I cant open all of them. The option is missing. I could do it in XP. F) Worse yet, there is no way to change permissions or security options for more than one file. We need to set it one at a time. In xp, it was possible and easy. G) Users can not move / organize files freely in a folder anymore. I never used this, and I dont like it, but I know there are people who use it, and they can not anymore. Its a feature lost, so, even if I dont use it, goes to the list. H) In xp, when I start a move or copy operation, a dialog appears and I can see what Im doing. Now, a dialog that appears dont provide the basic info, like file names beeing moved. I need to click to "show more". Why do I have to click it always? Why this dialog cant remember the way it was in the last use and keep it that way? Why I need (again) to click "SHOW IT TO ME" so I can see something that was always there? I) Filmstrip view is gone. J) List view now have a strange behavior. If the file name in the last column in a list can not fit the screen, all columns change position to the left, to let the user see the full name. BUT, it just disrupts the workflow and a file that was right under the mouse now is in the left column. (I made an image about this issue, it can be viewed here: http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/5135/explorerexample.jpg Other users posted many other things too, like the user Anonymous, who posted, among other things: - Dotted lines cannot be turned on unlike Vista in the navigation pane, also it doesn't auto expand the clicked folder and auto collapse the previous folder with one-click. - Users want back advanced file type functionality back. I can't create secondary user actions/set default action, customize file *type* icon, MIME type, can't even delete defined file types, can't show or hide extension for only particular file types. - Standard actions like Cut/Copy/Paste/Delete require more than 2 clicks for mouse users (Organize menu instead of toolbar) - I thought menus was passe so where's the consistency here? Countless users are screaming for customizable toolbar buttons with icons instead of text. - Can't set folder thumbnails using Folders.jpg. - Rename or new folder creation also autosorts assuming you won't be doing any more action on that same item again. Several times, quickly pressing the New folder button and hitting Enter has given me the error message "Can't find new folder" because it has been autosorted And, I agree with the user barth2k, that said: STOP DUMBING WINDOWS EXPLORER DOWN. Oh, Sorry, I forgot to say: Look at Wikipedia, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_removed_in_Windows_7#Windows_Explorer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_removed_from_Windows_Vista#Windows_Explorer Most (if not all) of what is there is a regression from XP.

I think, with win 8 your wish may be fulfilled: STOP DUMBING WINDOWS EXPLORER DOWN.

Well, I really dont wanted to keep repeating myself (and others), but, since Windows Explorer is the subject here lately, lets say again: Windows 7 is very very good. BUT, Windows Explorer is the most stupid, terrible, limited, annoying piece of code introduced in windows since Vista. Repeating myself too, but what else could we do... +1

I thought menus was passe What?? Why? I'm using menus for my whole GUI life! I've never been using a toolbar and I'll never will. I need to read what I can do with an object. I don't want to play "guess the icon" and I don't want to slowly hover across all possible toolbar buttons to find out what I can do, I want immediate information right at hand. Hey, I'm working with that bloody thing!

I want both , menus and toolbars! The combination increases productivity (for me).

Yes, absolutely.

Windows teamyou have to understand that Windows Explorer should be a full-featured powerful tool with total choice of options, customizability and ability to turn features on/off like IE or WMP. You can't strip away all features to simplify stuff and make like an accessory similar to Paint or Notepad and say "Hey this is all. You can use third party file managers". Imagine if MS stripped down WMP12 or IE8. This is the FILE MANAGER DAMNIT!We use this to work withour entire data on the HDD. Don't oversimplify and dumb it down. You are currently making Windows Explorer like Windows Live Movie Maker.Edit: Over time I've noticed more degradations/dumbing down in Windows Explorer, I'd like to reiterate some major issues again. Is the Windows shell team even listening?- Icons of16-bit programs are not extracted by Explorer and therefore not displayed.- Display simple folder view (One click auto expand and auto collapse folders)is gone completely? WTF- The lack of ability to set permissions on multiple selected files really really hurts.- Shell extensions for columns in details view won't ever work because IColumnProvideris removed- Alt+Enter to view properties doesn't work in the left tree view.- Auto sorting is extremely extremely annoying.- There's no icon overlaid for Shared files anymore, so it's impossibleto identify files being sharedwhen browsing theshell namespace.- Status bar size, free disk space and "Show more details"nonsense is the No.1 absolutely No.1 critical issue. Please fix it by SP1 *without fail*. Also show total size like XPwhen no items are selected.- Please allow users to decide whether to turn on/off Auto Arrange and Align to Grid and such and other removed options/decisions you took for us. Remember *user in control* design principle for Windows 7?

Totally agreed, sumone. Windows explorer is THE major FAIL of Windows 7. It is not as near as good XPs one. And, if Microsoft want to convince people to let XP go and upgrade to 7, it should be better, have MORE features. But, Windows Explorer, just have much less features. It cant even do the SAME as xp did. I already showed Windows 7 for lots of friends. Tree of them, already asked me why Explorer is so stupid now. They prefer XP, just because of it.

windows 7 taskbar buttons seem like they were put together in a haste 3 options: Always Combine, hide labels combine when taskbar is full never combine my only question is why? honestly these should be more of a radio box layout like so: Combine: Always (x) When Full() Never() Labels: Show(x), hide() this gives users to pick the way that their taskbar is laid out, personally i want an always combine, show labels option i do not understand why it was done in the dropbox manner and not the simple way i just outlined? if anything it would frustrate users when they know their are more possibilitys but simply can not set those other possibility's

liquidwater : this is one of MS´s many secrets. In Vista there are registry hacks so that you can combine as you like. BUT they do not work in win 7! Win 7 is also with respect to taskbar an "imworsement" !

XP already offers combining while showing labels of windows. The Windows 7 taskbar is a dumbed down version with some eye-candy and "coolness" (Aero Peek) added.Anonymuos

liquidwater : this is one of MS´s many secrets. In Vista there are registry hacks so that you can combine as you like. BUT they do not work in win 7! Win 7 is also with respect to taskbar an "imworsement" ! LOL!Like I've said all along, Windows 7 is like Vista--only worse.

1) Can it be made to have Windows Explorer work like this and by default open @ C:\ without expanding the tree instead of opening in "Libraries"? http://home.exetel.com.au/franpa/Windows%20Explorer%203.gif It's an animated GIF with 2 frames, changes every 7 seconds. The first frame being how I think Windows Explorer should appear when opening it and the 2nd frame showing how I think "Desktop" should work. updated picture, the order of the frames was wrong. Also I just realized I am asking a question in a thread that says not to... maybe take my question as a statement of how it should work instead of as a question? ;)

I carried out an in-place upgrade from Vista to Windows 7. Under Games, only a few were shown. So, I disabled Games (Control Panel > Programs > Turn Windows Features on or off). Subsequently I rebooted, enabled Games again, et voilà, all Games were there as they were previously under Vista.

1) Associate WAV files with Windows Media Player, now try double clicking a WAV file quickly repeatedly to see a prompt saying it can't open the file. You can't switch songs quickly. 2) Occasionally when using the button to view the desktop (show desktop?) Windows plays multiple chimes at once. 3) Full Duplex recording is missing from Windows Live Messenger 9 under Vista and Windows 7. Can do it under XP last I checked. 4) the width of the adjustment bar when resizing the width of the left frame of Windows Explorer and Open File dialog boxes is too narrow making it pretty hard to click and resize, revert it back to the width present in XP's Windows Explorer etc. please. 5) the arrows in the left frame of Windows Explorer that indicate if there is a sub folder or not, vanish if you left click a vacant area in the right frame. Under this scenario dragging a folder from the right frame to the left frame does not make the arrows reappear. This is just a better detail of what was already mentioned by another user. 6) BAT files, where are they stored when Pinned? a search in the registry and in Windows Explorer and the Start Menu yield no shortcuts or anything for them. Other files are stored properly and can be found @ C:\Users\%user%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\User Pinned 7) the SET PATH variable seems broken? (this ones hard to explain and/or grasp what I'm talking about) I use the following in a BAT file in conjunction with a game. the BAT file is either pinned or a shortcut to it is on the desktop and works fine until I launch the BAT from Windows Explorer. After launching the BAT directly from Windows Explorer the pinned/desktop shortcut will no longer function correctly until I restart the computer which resets the environment variable. The pinned/desktop shortcut fails to perform various commands after using the BAT file via Windows Explorer, for example Taskill and Wormkit.exe fail because the files aren't found due to the PATH not being set right. (Descriptions for each command in order) [1] This command should store my current environment in a new BAT file [2] kill all instances of Explorer.exe [3] change the PATH [4] Launch the game [5] pause, waiting for user input [6] upon recieving user input, start a new instance of Explorer.exe [7] launch the BAT that was originally created with the first command which should restore the original environment variables keeping my system running like it was just turned on. @echo on PATH > "E:\Worms Armageddon\Path.bat" taskkill /f /IM explorer.exe SET PATH="E:\Worms Armageddon\" wormkit.exe pause start explorer.exe Path.bat I assume there is a permission issue or something not being set right when using the PATH command and it fucks everything up?

+1. Same issue here, please re-enable the decimal point when in decimal input in programmer mode. As much as the calculator has been improved in Windows 7, it is actually made worse to use as I can no longer enter decimal numbers with a decimal point when in the "programmer" mode (could easily do this in the previous calculator in scientific mode which also contained hex support on F5). Now you have to switch modes AND from Decimal to Hex when needed, this can also lead to errors when typing in decimal point numbers and not realising what mode you're in.

The interface design of the overwrite files and overwrite folders is inconsistent and contary to basic interface design, i.e. it is not consistent through similar operations. Note this is the same as in Vista. Folders: When overwriting a folder, a dialog is displayed which consists of image and text descriptions of the source and destination folders. To confirm the operation a standard "YES" button is displayed at the bottom of the dialog. Files: When overwriting a file, a dialog is displayed which consists of image and text descriptions of the source and destination files (the same so far). But to confirm the operation there is no "YES" button, now the "image and text description" is an oversized button.

Could you elaborate on how that will make a difference? the START command shouldn't affect later commands :/ edit: Downloading files from the internet, the files are placed illogically on the desktop instead of from top-down, left-to-right. It is ____ annoying when this happens, but it could be just Firefox being retarded and creating 2! files on your desktop per download? another thing, you have to manually refresh your desktop to see changes sometimes.

@Franpa: Do you intend for start explorer.exe to still be using the path (E:) you previously assigned? I doubt explorer.exe will be found there. It is too late to restore the environment with path.bat after executing start . And actually, that placement of that final line seems pointless since the environment is restored upon exit. If you're trying to do something slick that I am not seeing, type help pushd and help popd (and likewise for start and cmd) . Just trying to be helpful, not critical. I will delete both these posts after awhile. no need to delete your posts, thank you for pointing out that mistake. I still think there is something fishy going on with BAT files though. Is the SET PATH command a temporary thing? I thought it affected all future instances of the Command Prompt? edit: if I reverse the order of the last 2 lines in the BAT file then Explorer.exe fails to launch. calling another BAT files negates any further commands in the original BAT file which is why it is positioned last. Any commands moved after the "path.bat" part won't be executed. You can test it yourself in a very easy BAT file like below. The Pause command won't work. @echo on PATH > "C:\Path.bat" SET PATH="C:\" Path.bat pause

@Franpa_999,They seem to have screwed up command line switches too (/n, /e work differently) but fortunately "Explorer.exe /root,C:\" works but that horrible annoying navigation/left pane bug makes the navigation pane scroll half way down but at least it selects C:\.Anonymuos

Aren't we slowly but surely diverging from the original topic here..? ;)

I think one of the 30 odd updates fixed it for me, initially the below didn't work right which is why I was resorting to such complex methods. I kept getting compleaints about invalid path or some ____ when it was valid. It's been a while since I looked into this BAT issue properly so my memory was probably fuzzy. I'm not a DOS pro, but I do know my way around to install, run and browse locations/programs from DOS @echo on taskkill /f /IM explorer.exe "E:\Worms Armageddon\wormkit.exe" pause start explorer.exe

1. When you hold the mouse over the date/time-area, there should be a pop-up with the calendar-sheet of the current month. Similar to the widget, but for the quick look, what day is this day, what day is this date, etc. Without having to use the widget. 2. You should see, if a taskbar icon has only window or multiple.

1. A single click on the clock does just that.2. It already does that, doesn't it?Doc

Please see: Windows 7 in action: Do more with the taskbar and Jump ListsCarey Frisch

Just wanted to report an experience that's surely not helpful for anyone except the developers who should, from time to time, face reality. Last week, I had to undergo some surgery at a hospital and took the chance to look at their IT equipment (hospitals are that boring). No, you don't have to guess. All machines are running Windows XP Prof and some hospital management software obviously built for Windows 95/98. If you ask me, a heavy sophisticated software that includes nearly all I can think of in this area (from account management, treatment/medication control to viewing radiographs, patient's spreadsheets, occupancy planning, etc.etc.). Will they change to Windows 7? I've changed with joy, Kylie is happy, but - will they change? You understand, neither security (very high level of network supervision) nor ease-of-use is really their concern, only the fear to loose their super-customized software in exchange for a newer, surely expensive version that will not work at 100% from the beginning (not good in such an environment). I doubt that XP mode is a real answer to those problems (if only because the equipment apparently also isn't an "IT enthusiast" one, with hardware virtualization, etc.). And I doubt that any of the improvements of Windows 7 will impress them more than a completely warranted compatibility with their trusted ecosystem. You get my point? Don't forget the basics (an OS is a tool to run other software, not a stand-alone game) and please, don't merge your job with that of your marketing eggheads. "Wow!" and "useful!" are not always the same.Mobile AMD64 3000+, VIA Apollo K8T800 chipset, 1 G RAM, ATIRadeonMobility 9700, 20x DVDRW, C:XPSP3 (55G),D:WIN7 (25G),F:DATA (250G)

I noticed that, since a recent update from Windows Update, whenever I open a folder in Windows Explorer using the keyboard by using <RIGHT ARROW> on a folder in the TreeView in the left pane, the TreeView pane always scolls upwards until this folder becomes that last one to be visible. (This only happens when this particular folder has a white triangle left to it, which becomes black after pressing the <RIGHT ARROW> button because its sub folders become visible.) Who came up with THIS idea??? Come on, this must be a bug, right? Why isn't TreeView's ViewPort kept just right where it was before? Until Windows Vista came up, users could most easily scroll the TreeView ViewPort manually by using <CTRL>+<ANY ARROW> key combination. Please, restore this formerly simple manual mechanism. KISS!!

you cannot grasp the (in?)finite wisdom of ms programmers! (I not, too).And I cannot grasp why so many are greedy for w7, well done ms pr!

Is the Pointy Hair Man from Marketing in charge of the Windows 7 interface? Where's Wally when you need rapid change deceleration? Look I got W7 to test since they are killing off XP. Nothing like planned obsolescence to sell product. The W7 RC x64 I am testing is nice and has a lot of performance advantages. But my chief complaint is INTERFACE . Why reinvent the wheel. The wheel would roll before, but now ? I do not want to waste time, money, and brain cells training myself and others with this counter intuitive interface . MSFT has tweaked and tuned the GUI forever, and it always worked... until Vista... There will be responses citing me as backward or staid because I do not like CHANGE. I embrace RATIONAL change, especially when it is MORE PRODUCTIVE. But change for the sake of change is called "Style." Style often adversely sacrifices function. Just ask Dilbert! Is this interface a quantum leap? I will believe that when Mac users start to switch to PC's. People that buy licenses VOTE with money and tell their friends... Give CUSTOMERS the option of interface... (Here's an novel idea... design software that makes customers more productive and happy!) Spend a little more time with customers and less with the marketing crowd. History is replete with clay footed behemoths. I hope MSFT starts valuing customer input.

Hi there.After reading on some forums about problems users have with the RTM version of WIndows 7 and most of those problems are related to nVidia hardware ( hard drives nit detected, network issues or very long time for the installation - 3-20 hours ), and most of the computers in my company have nVidia based motherboards, I've decided to quit the RC install and try the RTM build.In the last 3 weeks I've installed 3 times, different versions of the RTM build, and yes, it seems it have issues with nVidia hardware, wich I did'n found in the RC build. I cannot confirm all of the other users problems, but those are mines:- Installation was ok, 20 minutes only - but slower than 16 minutes the RC.- Network issue - this I can confirm - trying to transfer large files ( 1Gb or more ) gives me the computer slowing down, and finnaly irresponsive. It start transfer at about 7Mb/s ( it's a gigabyte network !!!! ), and in about 10 seconds slow down to 2 Mb/s. The worst is that it takes all the computer ressources and make him irresponsive - If I try to move the mouse it has a 20 seconds lag. I can make it responsive again only after unplug the computer from network. I've used the nVidia onboard network conector. I've found a kind of workaround, by using Total Commander in old way copying mode and ading a big cache to use. The speed remains at 2 Mb/s but the lag is in this way of les than 2 seconds. Did not test on RC, but in XP there are no such issues.- Instability - the biggest issue I have. From time to time, the program I use becames unresponsive - this includes also installers using Windows Installer. I can continue to work for a while, but if I try to start Task Manager I completely lose control of the computer - nothing responds. This happened to all 3 RTM installations.I've run Task Manager in permanence to see the resources used when programs becames unresponsive and the processor use does not go up to 6% and memory up to 800 Mb. It's happened when tried to install drivers ( just after fresh Windows installation ), to uninstall software, playing movies in WMP or loading images in Corel PhotoPaint. An solution is to press the power button and wait 5-10 minutes for the windows to close. Or pres Reset if it takes longer. I've checked the logs in Troubleshoot sections, but does not offer any clue - it records just the program or the part of it who freeze. The beta and RC were fine with same programs/drivers installed.This kind of instability looks very similar to an HDD failure ( lose of an HDD during Windows is operate ), just it's not a HDD Failure, as the HDD can be accesed. Also there is no virus - test were made in controled environment.- Boot time - RTM is slower than RC. As a fresh install or after installing Office and Microsoft Security Essentials. Just that after installing those 2 programs it takes a lot to boot. 65 seconds. On same computer and hdd XP boots in 50 seconds and Vista in 45 !!! Weird.Tested on a MCP51 nVidia based motherboard ( 430+6150 chipsets ) with an AMD X2 3800+ and 2 Seagate 320 Gb 7200 SATA2 HDD, 2 Gb of DDR400 Ram.

I hope many of professional users read the post of Christi-M! Then they will not "updown"grade!Another subject, includes Vista: I recommend ms to forget about "kernel patch guard" for the 64 bit systems! Leave security to the PROFESSIONALS und do not complicate their job by the so called guard! Do you really think that hackers wait(ed) for the interfaces you offered the security companies?

Using Windows 7 does exasperate me sometimes.Because I had to deal a lot with the power plans in the last time, because they really don't work satisfactorily, I just came to the conclusion that MS has no UI designer. Only sick 'developer' who have no idea about user friendly interfaces.Win 7 explorer is a mess and not useable, neither on a desktop nor on a tablet, Win 7 control panel is a mess, cluttered and a mix of XP and Vista which results in a chaos, a mix of new windows/intergrated dialogs, the search is a joke in Win 7, not useable, and so are many other dialogs or setting just awful and difficult to use and change.Or as a recent example the power plans. If I open the advanced setting for the power plan I get something like an ancient treeview to change the settings. I don't know who designed this, but please, fire this guy or teach him how to make a useable interface. Why don't you just use a listbox/treeview control with a three column layout, in the first column you have the title, the second column with the setting for DC, the third column with the setting for AC. No, you use an ancient standard treeview.What I want to say:Windows 7 is a nice OS, fast, stable, has fancy effects but way worse GUI and usability than XP.Microsoft really needs to hire people dedicated for the GUI. I see it in Win 7 that the GUI is ____ (don't tell me you like the explorer or control panel in Win 7) and I see it in other programs, just like OneNote 2010, which, with the new ribbon inteface is useless on a tablet.I really appreciate changes, the GUI of XP or Office is outdated and something new is necessary, however, you make things worse at the moment.

For your ClearType screen rotation issue, check this out: http://www.dragonseye.com/blog/archives/327-ClearType-Rotator-0.02.html Anonymuos I said that this solves my problem, sadly not, because the program doesn't work properly. Sometimes it does not work at all, sometimes it runs fine, the other time it does not go to system tray, ...It's just a pity that Windows does not include such a feature by default. They promote Clear Type and want that people use it on their tablets, so it's their job to take care that the Clear Type works.

a lot of people think Vista is a good product done in by bad reviews, but somebody went through the trouble of rounding up major reviews of Vista and found the reviews mostly positive. For example, Mossberg of WSJ expected Vista to be installed on most machines eventually (he was right, only it'll be called windows 7 or 8). so really, Vista was done in by bad user experience and word of mouth. Then things snowballed and even when it improved with the service packs Vista couldn't shake the bad rap. there's a lesson here somewhere.

Vista was a poor OS.MS announced a lot of new features with their Longhorn, but somehow crossed a lot of the highly anticipated features out for Vista, like WinFS or other features the public already saw in some Longhorn videos and dreamed from. Also Vista was released while a lot of manufactures hadn't proper drivers and software finished, which resulted in many incompatibilities. It's also a fact that it consumed more RAM and was, in the beginning, noticeable slower than XP.So all in all it looked like a striped down Longhorn, a XP with a newer UI, an annoying UAC, and with a lot of incompatibilities.Now MS released Win 7 which runs fine, because it uses the same drivers Vista uses, because software was made compatible for Vista and thus Win 7, too. So now Win 7 seems to be a much better OS because everything works, whereas it's just a small upgrade to Vista, similar to Win 98SE.I never really used Vista, but now use Win 7 as my primary OS. And to be honest, the differences between Win 7 and XP aren't huge, rather small, so I don't want to imagine how negligible small the differences between Vista and Win 7 must be.It's kind of sad to see that Win 7 still hasn't brought any new revolutionary things with it. I read that many interesting stuff about MS and future operting systems, but Win 7 contains nothing of it.

@ Fraenky001 : Vista is definitely NOT poor. On the contrary, it´s ms best, most flexible os, I prefer it even the well known linux dist suse, kubuntuand so on!Be happy that ms with w7 still not introduced winfs: the poor winexplorer programmers, they would be lost!Cristi-M would not agree to your opinion that in win 7 everything works.Annoying UAC in Vista? You never really used Vista - your words! And with win7 they downgraded UAC with respect to security! Seehttp://www.pretentiousname.com/misc/win7_uac_whitelist2.html

@karlx:Sorry, I said Vista was a poor OS. Now, after the majority of drivers and software works it's probably almost as good as Vista SP2. However, a big problem also was, that MS presented a lot of nice features in Longhorn or in their articles about the XP successor which we then didn't saw in Vista, thus it also always had/has a touch of a striped down OS.And ok, everything does not work on Win 7, also on my PC does not everything work that good and I don't like everything in Win 7, I even think they made a lot of things worse, but it runs much better out of the box than Vista did when it got released. Now Vista runs fine, too, but that's not the point, in the past it didn't, and I don't say that it's only the fault of MS or Vista.As you said, they downgraded UAC in Win 7. And each time I had to deal with Vista or when I use it in a Virtual PC I kind of think it's just annoying sometimes, which isn't the case in Win 7.

From I have read in these various forums MS seems to encourage to go out and buy the latest hardware without considering that most users will not have the resources to afford to do just that. I am on a fixed income and cannot afford to replace the computers we use now. They are Dells that are about 4 years old now. I was testing Win7 Ultimate RC on mine (Dell 4700) and it was working fine until an unasked for update from MS caused it to be very unstable. I have ordered Win 7 Pro as a student and now am concerned that I have made a serious mistake in doing so. The Windows 7 compatability test indicated that my Dell will be OK for Win7, but I am really wondering if what MS has posted is just a lot of hype to get people to buy Win7 and then find that to have it work properly they have buy a new computer. David Fry if (typeof(lpcurruser) == 'undefined') lpcurruser = ''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt') && document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value != '') { lpcurruser = document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value = ''; } if (typeof(lpcurrpass) == 'undefined') lpcurrpass=''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt') && document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value != '') { lpcurrpass = document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value = ''; } var lploc=1;var lponlyfill=null;if (typeof(onForgetMe) == 'function') { try { onForgetMe(0); } catch (lp_e) { } }lpcurruser = ''; lpcurrpass = ''; if (typeof(lpcurruser) == 'undefined') lpcurruser = ''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt') && document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value != '') { lpcurruser = document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value = ''; } if (typeof(lpcurrpass) == 'undefined') lpcurrpass=''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt') && document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value != '') { lpcurrpass = document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value = ''; } var lploc=1;var lponlyfill=null;if (typeof(onForgetMe) == 'function') { try { onForgetMe(0); } catch (lp_e) { } }lpcurruser = ''; lpcurrpass = ''; if (typeof(lpcurruser) == 'undefined') lpcurruser = ''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt') && document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value != '') { lpcurruser = document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value = ''; } if (typeof(lpcurrpass) == 'undefined') lpcurrpass=''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt') && document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value != '') { lpcurrpass = document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value = ''; } var lploc=1;var lponlyfill=null;if (typeof(onForgetMe) == 'function') { try { onForgetMe(0); } catch (lp_e) { } }lpcurruser = ''; lpcurrpass = ''; if (typeof(lpcurruser) == 'undefined') lpcurruser = ''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt') && document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value != '') { lpcurruser = document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurruserelt').value = ''; } if (typeof(lpcurrpass) == 'undefined') lpcurrpass=''; if (document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt') && document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value != '') { lpcurrpass = document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value; document.getElementById('lpcurrpasselt').value = ''; } var lploc=1;var lponlyfill=null;if (typeof(onForgetMe) == 'function') { try { onForgetMe(0); } catch (lp_e) { } }lpcurruser = ''; lpcurrpass = '';

My computer is also 4 years old and win7 RC runs fine on it, haven't had any problems with it... To really throw a wrench in your opinion, win7 RC runs OK on a 9 year old Pentium 3 that doesn't meet MS's min. system requirements (minus Aero and all that since Intel never made Vista graphics drivers for the onbaord graphics)Hello! Please reply back, promptly if possible with the results to solutions to your problem!- JoelbXJoelbX's favorite threads | Skydrive | Cool 'gadget' programs: Download or Visit websitesStuff for win7 launch party hosts

It's all well and good that every version of Windows has show file sizes. Why doesn't Windows 7 be different and show FOLDER sizes as well? When one's backing up a drive or partition it would be nice to tell at a glance if everything copied over.Fr Elise - Support the Heart & Breast Cancer Foundations.

We have to live with a sad fact: win expl is a little bit underdeveloped! No matter which ms os!But as a workaround : mark the folders you want to copy and hit alt+return, or rightclick. If only one folder, hover over it and you see the size.(at least in vista)Otherwise : dopus 9.5

It's OK, but I don't like advertising of non-free software ;)

If I knew a very good freeware filemanager I wouldn´t advertise a non free! But you thought, if 2 days no input here then at least a comment of what you do not like outside w7! ;-) .BTW: again back to highly celebrated taskbar: it would be logical not to group previews if the elements of taskbar themselves are not grouped.MS have a look at nextstart, there you can learn how to design (sorry DrGerry, this is also not freeware). :-)The new socalled superbar of w7 is neither fish nor fowl, not reasoned out !Perhaps ms holds something back to celebrate with w8 some more "revolution".

I did a lot of research and I have found very slim pickin's for a UEFI board to boot > 2TB. So far I have found one, and I posted it on my forum. I am still looking for more options.Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Whatever I need a new web server, the old IBM 300GL has a 137GB disk limit, for my chess site as the hard disk finally bit the dust. The Windows box is a RaidMax Smilodon chassis, Asus M2NBP-VM CSM motherboard, AMD 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, ATI x600, over 1TB storage, Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Signature Edition.

I have been with Windows since DOS, and although I really do think W7 is the best so far; I am switching to MAC purely because of the rip-off attitude from Microsoft. Windows 7 should be a Vista service pack to restore the trust lost.

I dont think I am too OCD. I consider myself more computer savy than most users. Within two days of trying out Windows 7 for actual use the following things have changed in a way that completely alienated or confused me and potentially many other users for reasons unbeknownst to me.1) QuickLaunch : Put it back in the default options. NOW. There is no reason to leave "desktop" as a toolbar option but not quiclaunch. Its fine to disable it by default, its not fine to remove it completely for the average user to have to recreate and find a place to put a bunch of shortcuts for no reason or lose your shorcut after an upgrade because you're not savy enought to know the actual path to it (%appdata%\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch)2) WMP Toolbar: Why. Why remove this. This was the best and only redeming feature that kept users using it. Aside from the obvious 2 top reasons why people dont use WMP a) Media play list editing is horrendus and non intuitive. b) Why in god's name did anyone think it was a good idea to restrict WMP to only have one instance. Especially in the media heavy usage of today, being able to open multiple video files just makes sense. Removing the toolbar functionality, made WMP LOSE HALF IT'S FUNCTION as a minimal player. The new theme/skin gimmick of minimizing by switching to "Now Playing" was a fairly good step forward, removing the toolbar was a few miles worth of steps backward. Note you can hover your mouse over the taskbar icon and you will be able to select previous track, pause/play, next track however this implimentation causes a delay, the popup window is huge, theres no audio control so you can turn down the volume only for the player, and theres no longer the small video window for movies and visualizations. Put these back in.3) System Tray : The tray worked exactly as it should. It now consumes more space and requires more aukward movement to use the apps in the tray (for instance removing a usb device used to take 1 click to expand the tray (most ppl dont need to) 2 click on the icon, move down to select your device, it now requires a click, opens a bloated big menu of icons in a square, manuever to your icon, click, maneuver your icon from that position depending on the new option menu that arises depending on how clustered it is to the right side of your screen). While this annoyance isn't UI breaking, again there should be an option to use it in it's old form. I'll let it slide as something to adjust.4) MSN Messenger : this may be an application issue. When you close the MSN window to minimize it to tray, it stays in your task bar. EXITING is not intuitive. You used to be able to exit it from the tray icon. Current at default clicking the options->file->close or "X" only closes the window. Everything you try to do to exit it results in a 'close window' however when you right click on the icon on the taskbar and select "Close Window" it exits. WHAT? Current fix is to set the program to run under vista compatability mode.From above, 2 things required user tweaking, the other 2 completely out of our control.

Viewing Control Panel via Windows Explorer doesn't honour that folders view setting. It always lists items by category instead of how I want it to (small/large icons).

3) WMP: can't have WMP remember how to display time remaining. I want to have it show time Elapsed/total time yet every time WMP is open it reverts to only Time Elapsed.

I have to agree with couple of reviews I've seen, of that Windows 7 is truly a new OS. "Just as renovated as what Windows 98 was". Which that is the truth of the marvelous OS. The only complaint, I 'sorta of agree with, is that the Help files of Windows 7 does not really help anyone. (least of people who are not computer savvy). LOL Why not renovate the help manager of Windows? Most people only disliked Vista, because of needing to learn everything all over again. Which the only real trouble is the unfamiliar look; once they get acquainted with the functionality, they finally understand how much better the new OS is. Which help files could be implemented by a better/intuitive help application. Implementing the help files, in a form of applied dynamic application, would really help everyone get accustomed to Windows 7. Walking threw features that were commonly used in XP, showing where the features are located in Windows 7, or just letting the user select a series of problems to fix somthing; would simply help many people adjust to all the new features that Windows 7 has to offer. Windows 7 is a great new operating system.

Hi. I've posted last week about the troubles I've had using nVidia based motherboards. I've made more test and it seems th problems are in the RTM drivers. I've installed the latest nForce drivers from nvidia, EVEN IF it does not support my chipset ( !!! ) and the problems with unresponsive applications seems to dissapear. Most likely the problems belongs to IDE/SATA drivers ( have they changet from RC to RTM so much ? ). Must make tests again for the neworking speed and freeze problems.

See post about dissapearing desktop icons:http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itprogeneral/thread/ada5d392-2af7-43c3-9191-08baf63f0098This is a bug and needs fixing; we found the causing program, but thisneeds to be solved!If not solved, this will annoya lot of users when 7 is released to the general public, more complaints will follow starting Sunday October 25th. - http://www.mybrain.nl/ -

Often the Text courser indicator (the | thing) when typing, is broken into 2 halves in Windows Live Messenger. it shows the top half, bottom half, top half etc.

All bug reports for Vista/W7 Betawere clearly ignored:* UAC can still pop up behind things, making it impossible to interact with the desktop. It's impossible to imagine how you could release this still doing it.* If I type rege on the search part of the start menu I can run 'rege.exe' (doesn't exist) but not regedit.exe. I assume the search function is still completely broken since it is the same technology.* All control panel icons have been moved AGAIN, and there are now FOUR sections to a control panel window. One day you retards will realise that one was enough.* Task manager can still ignore requests to kill a process, and still comes up in a non-administrator mode. (Because obviously I wouldn't want to administer the tasks on my computer, just the ones I can already see on my desktop...?)Aaron Oxford - Remember you paid money for this!

Hi,your complaints seem a bit random - you consider them "showstoppers", really? - but anyway:* UAC can still pop up behind things, that's true and a bit irritating. You must get usedto look at the taskbar where a highlighted icon for a needed response is shown. Ok, that could be done better.* That you can run "rege.exe" if it doesn't exist, is not reproduceable. If you type "regedit", you can run "regedit.exe" from the search bar. I'm not sure what's completely broken here.* I've customized the control panel view to the most classic one, and it looks like ever. Can't get your problem.* Your task manager's behavior is again enigmatic to me. Perhaps you should specify a task you wanted to kill and were denied to do so.Get me right. I won't say all is perfect as it is. But to describe Windows 7 as a "completely broken" OS made by "retards", is a bit too much, don't you think?Mobile AMD64 3000+, VIA Apollo K8T800 chipset, 1 G RAM, ATIRadeonMobility 9700, 20x DVDRW, C:XPSP3 (55G),D:WIN7 (25G),F:DATA (250G)

All bug reports for Vista/W7 Betawere clearly ignored: * UAC can still pop up behind things, making it impossible to interact with the desktop. It's impossible to imagine how you could release this still doing it. * If I type rege on the search part of the start menu I can run 'rege.exe' (doesn't exist) but not regedit.exe. I assume the search function is still completely broken since it is the same technology. * All control panel icons have been moved AGAIN, and there are now FOUR sections to a control panel window. One day you retards will realise that one was enough. * Task manager can still ignore requests to kill a process, and still comes up in a non-administrator mode. (Because obviously I wouldn't want to administer the tasks on my computer, just the ones I can already see on my desktop...?) Aaron Oxford - Remember you paid money for this! My UAC doesn't pop up anymore for administrators thanks to the ability to automatically elevate permissions...so this is a non-issue for me. And I wouldn't want a non-administrator making changes...Nothing broken there... I haven't had any troubles with the Search feature on the Start menu...Why would you honestly want to have the Search option for Regedit...so the inexperienced user can go into the registry and mess it all up...There is a method to the madness here. The search option works best with Complete filenames, or partials of document, picture and video files. Control panel still has the large icon view...which simply puts everything into icons much like Windows 95, 98, ME, XP and Vista had...what is the problem here? Yea...Task Manager can ignore requests to shut down a required process. Task Manager can be used by non administrators to stop a program that that user has opened...and that only that user is using at the time. If you want to see processes from all other users...there is an option for that....again no problem here it is a security feature. Now...since you seem to think that the Developers at Microsoft are "retards" I challenge you to fix the problem yourself, if not, maybe you should stop trying to insult people that have spent long hours creating an OS that is pretty darn good but not perfect for everybody. Your gripes basically boil down to User Error...not OS error.

I hate saying it, but for me Windows Explorer doesn't work better in Windows 7. It feels like a step backwards. While it is certainly more focused and less cluttered, the sad fact is that none of my workflows have actually improved using the new Explorer. Besides improved searching, there are really no new features that improve the way I work with files; but there are new annoyances that make my life harder. While I only have one feature suggestion, I do have a list of Windows Explorer annoyances. Maybe, just maybe, someone at Microsoft who matters actually reads this forum and can get these into a service pack. Fingers crossed. Click To Rename - This may sound trivial, but if you've ever actually watched someone (anyone in fact) use a computer then you too cannot count the number of times they've clicked a file to do something with it but everything goes wrong because they are automaticaly put into rename mode. Just because I click a file doesn't mean I want to rename it. Should be optional. Auto-Refresh - May not be annoying for some people, but when you work with hundreds of files with new files being created then this is not annoying, it's downright painful. Another Mac Finder feature that infected Explorer. Seriously guys, Finder sucks and so does auto-refresh. Let me turn this off if I want. Hilighted item is not the selected item - Even though you've used the keyboard to navigate the folder tree on the left, when you press delete you're going to delete a different folder than the one you navigated to. Ouch. Be ready to stay late tonight. Expanding folders move to bottom of the list - This one actually sounds more like an bug than a design flaw. Sometimes when you drag a file to a collapsed folder in the tree on the left, when it expands it also scrolls so that expanded folder is at the very bottom of the list, hiding all of the folders it just expanded to show you. Page Down leaves you blind to what's coming - I know it's been like this forever, but it's annoying. When I page down I would like the selection to be at the top of the next page so I don't have to navigate blindly. People hit PgDn because they are navigating downward. And when you hit the page down key, you're probably going to continue using the keyboard to navigate to some item; But you can't see those items because you're already at the bottom of a page. I constantly find myself hitting page down twice, then page up to get to a place where I can scroll down to what I want. Over and over and over I'm doing - PgDn PgDn PgUp. It seems silly. There has to be a better way. My onlysuggestion - I do the same things over and over, everyone does. I know there are macros recorders where you record actions, but it would be seriosly helpful if Explorer could recognize the repetitive tasks I performand offer to do them automatically, smartly and correctly. That would be helpful, and seriously welcome.

Well... we have Windows 7 now. Maybe Microsoft is waiting for every user in this forums to ask 7 thousand times to fix explorer before starting with it. Ok, seriously now. When are they going to listen? Im tired of seeing / replying threads about explorer annoyances. Please, can someone tell us why explorer is so terrible now, and why they refuse to fix and even comment about it? And, let me make MY list of annoyances: A) In xp, the information provided by the status bar is much more useful than the one I have now, be it in the status bar or in the Details Pane. If Im exploring the contents of one folder, xp provides me the number of itens in that folder, the total file size (sum of all sizes in the folder) and the "location" if the files are stored in my computer or in a network. NOW, all I have is the total number of itens. So, XP statusbar, with one single line, provides me 3 times more info than The new pane in 7, who took 3 or more lines, by default. I agree if I select one single file the details pane info is amazing, but I really miss the total file size info in the bar. We dont even have an option to put it in the status bar (hidden by default). So, status bar is just useless now. There is no way to work with large amount of data if I always need to select all files just to check if they will, lets say, fit in a removable midia, or in another partition, or so on. The file size is so basic information, takes so little space and is so useful, that I cant even imagine WHY it was left out of the bar! Its not asking much, to, at least, put a selection, avaible by right click, like "Show file sizes". Worse yet, if I need to know the file sizes of more than 15 files, I have to click "Show more details". and if I select one more or de-select one of them, I need to click it again. And again and again, everytime the selection changes. Why cant a modern operational system calculate this in a milisecound? Wait. a system from a decade ago (XP) could do that. The real question is: why WINDOWS 7 cant do it? I already read its removed because of the new way libraries work, putting multiple folder together. Ok, I can understand it, but not accept it.If Im inside a library, and its soooooooo hard to code something to show the file sizes in that specific place, just remove file sizes in the LIBRARY, not in almost every place of the new explorer. Or, just add a option to put the file sizes back, for the users who use it. B) There is no more "up" button. We have breadcumb now, ok, but what if I WANT the up button? Is really that hard to make a option to put it back, if many users want it? C) Toolbar in explorer can no longer be customizable. If I dont want the "Burn" button, I cant remove it. If I want to put copy / past icons there, for easier use, I cant. Its the way it is, like it or not, the user cant change it. D) When working with multiple files in xp, I could past a lot of files in a folder, having them in the end of file list, work with them, and organize them the way I want. After having all set, I just hit F5 and all files are organizated. Now, explorer autosort the files. If I put a group of files in a folder with other files, they just get "sorted" and its much harder to find the files all over the old ones. And, again, there is no way to disable this "feature" that I dont want. E) If I select multiple file types, like a doc and a txt or xls, I cant open all of them. The option is missing. I could do it in XP. F) Worse yet, there is no way to change permissions or security options for more than one file. We need to set it one at a time. In xp, it was possible and easy. G) Users can not move / organize files freely in a folder anymore. I never used this, and I dont like it, but I know there are people who use it, and they can not anymore. Its a feature lost, so, even if I dont use it, goes to the list. H) In xp, when I start a move or copy operation, a dialog appears and I can see what Im doing. Now, a dialog that appears dont provide the basic info, like file names beeing moved. I need to click to "show more". Why do I have to click it always? Why this dialog cant remember the way it was in the last use and keep it that way? Why I need (again) to click "SHOW IT TO ME" so I can see something that was always there? I) Filmstrip view is gone. J) List view now have a strange behavior. If the file name in the last column in a list can not fit the screen, all columns change position to the left, to let the user see the full name. BUT, it just disrupts the workflow and a file that was right under the mouse now is in the left column. (I made an image about this issue, it can be viewed here: http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/5135/explorerexample.jpg Other users posted many other things too, like the user Anonymous, who posted, among other things: - Dotted lines cannot be turned on unlike Vista in the navigation pane, also it doesn't auto expand the clicked folder and auto collapse the previous folder with one-click. - Users want back advanced file type functionality back. I can't create secondary user actions/set default action, customize file *type* icon, MIME type, can't even delete defined file types, can't show or hide extension for only particular file types. - Standard actions like Cut/Copy/Paste/Delete require more than 2 clicks for mouse users (Organize menu instead of toolbar) - I thought menus was passe so where's the consistency here? Countless users are screaming for customizable toolbar buttons with icons instead of text. - Can't set folder thumbnails using Folders.jpg. - Rename or new folder creation also autosorts assuming you won't be doing any more action on that same item again. Several times, quickly pressing the New folder button and hitting Enter has given me the error message "Can't find new folder" because it has been autosorted And, I agree with the user barth2k, that said: STOP DUMBING WINDOWS EXPLORER DOWN. Oh, Sorry, I forgot to say: Look at Wikipedia, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_removed_in_Windows_7#Windows_Explorer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_removed_from_Windows_Vista#Windows_Explorer Most (if not all) of what is there is a regression from XP.

I agree! I think he got it right on point, naming the thread "Windows Explorer annoyances". And the text composition is very good too. Maybe we can continue in here the thread - http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproui/thread/54b42003-9448-4306-b6df-f0463ebd7afb - (locked, by the way) started by Noel Carboni about the same annoyances.

Wow, I was surprised to see so many negative comments about the new OS. I have used both the Beta and RC versions on a test machine and had a few bugs, but nothing major. I have been running RTM x64 since it was released and the only issue I have is with the Control Panel not being able to go to "Classic" view. After a day or two, I got it figured out so it is not a big deal now. Personally, I like everything about the new OS and I have had none of the issues others have reported. True, I am running RTM x64 Ultimate on a new PC I built at the same time RTM was released, but I have tried the other flavors of the RTM on other test machines of older equipment with out any problems. I am a little sad that Movie Maker is gone from the OS too, but maybe they will fix that with a future service pack.For those of you that want to tweak Win7 a little more than you have been able to and maybe fix some issues that some of you may be experiencing, you should try this really cool power toy form a third party that works extremely well. It is compatible with Win7 and it is freeware. It is called Ultimate Windows Tweaker v2.0 and can be found here... http://www.thewindowsclub.com/ultimate-windows-tweaker-v2-a-tweak-ui-for-windows-7-vista . It works for both x86 and x64 bit platforms and adds some functionality that may be missing with the OS. I used it to "tweak" my installation of Win7, so that may be part of why mine is running so well.

1) Excellent observations, the Total File Size when selecting multiple objects has been fixed since RTM. It does show the total file size in the information pane along the bottom when selecting multiple files, but still requires you click "show more info" when selecting 15 or more files. 2) I miss the "auto arrange" function for desktop icons :( please re-implement it like it was in XP, ME, 98se and 98! 3) I have yet to experience a UAC prompt being placed behind the desktop in the RTM, it did do it a lot in Vista and the Windows 7 beta, but I mentioned it a million times and it seems to have been fixed since RC. 4) Accessing Control Panel via Windows Explorer results in Control Panel reverting to Category View instead of remembering the users selection (namely Large Icons) 5) I can't get the Taskbar search to launch rege.exe Keep in mind I have installed all the 30 odd updates that have already leaked for Windows 7 RTM. Keep up the great suggestions/complaints everyone! Several parts of Windows 7 are a step back from Windows XP, ME, 98se, 98 and 95c.

4) Accessing Control Panel via Windows Explorer results in Control Panel reverting to Category View instead of remembering the users selection (namely Large Icons) This bevaviour is implemented in Windows since Windows 95. Amazing... And more amazing is that after all these years you seem to be the first one to finally mention it!But I fully agree: One folder handler should not be able to alter the other handlers' view settings. => Voted as helpful.

In at least Windows XP, no matter how Control Panel is accessed, the folder view setting for it is honored properly, If you set it up like this, http://www.onlinecomputertips.com/images/cp.jpg then it will always open like that. It does not revert for any reason back to http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/power_mgt/winXP_control_panel.jpg. My Computer, Windows Explorer and Control Panel are all the exact same program, just different default views. In Windows 95, 98, 98se, me probably 2000 and XP it would work properly like I noted in the above paragraph

4) Accessing Control Panel via Windows Explorer results in Control Panel reverting to Category View instead of remembering the users selection (namely Large Icons) I can't even see my control panel in a "regular" explorer window in Windows 7.Even though it is shown on the desktop, if I go up to the desktop in explorer, there is no control panel.I'm sure it's something I did to the registry or something.P.S. Workaround: If control panel doesn't open as a menu even though that is selected in properties\customize, chose "display as a link" and apply that setting. Then reopen properties\customize and set it back to "display as a menu".

@ Warel "STOP DUMBING WINDOWS EXPLORER DOWN."Be not unfair to ms! They spent a preview button in the menu-tool bar, you no more have to go via "Organize" . ;-)

@ Warel "STOP DUMBING WINDOWS EXPLORER DOWN." Be not unfair to ms! They spent a preview button in the menu-tool bar, you no more have to go via "Organize" . ;-) Hey! I give them credit! That way they can save loooooots of space in the "Organize" to fill it with very lesser used commands, like copy and paste.... no one use them, of course! ;D

Too many clicks In previous versions of Windows, I have been able to "drag and drop" the My Computer icon (or any other) to the top or sides of the desktop and convert it into a toolbar. The toolbar could be set "always on top" or "autohide". I found this a very convenient way to have instant access to ALL my drives with NO clicks . As new drives are attached, they appear in the toolbar. When disconnected , they are immediately removed. Windows 7 does not appear to have this functionality. Is there any way to recreate a My Computer toolbar at the top of the Desktop in Windows 7? Rocketdock, gadgets and similar programs do not provide the same functionality. Why make our lives more complicated?? It seems like the question asked most often is: "Why perform an operation with zero or one click when 2, 3 or 4 will do?" If there is no workaround for this, there will be a lot of unhappy campers when Windows 7 goes public. While the superbar is nice, but it gets awfully crowded awfully fast. Anything accessed through the Start menu takes far too many clicks. Programs installed for "all users" may not appear in the menu of programs installed for a single user -- necessitating backing up and even more clicks. Windows Classic It seems the folks in Redmond are insisting that all experienced users will ultimately be forced to convert to all new organizational schemes whether they want to or not. The Classic start menu (an option in Vista) is no longer available. The QuickLaunch is not a readily available option. At least we can still recreate the Classic Control Panel (I'll never be able to find some of the right settings if forced to access them though a Categories menu). Libraries While forcing organization upon new users, for those of use who have accumulated a vast hierarchy logic trees to organize our files & folders, they are relatively useless. HomeGroup Again, for new users this may be a simpler method to set up sharing, but personally, I would rather have the flexibility and security of having both a username + password required to access my shared devices/information than a random password alone. I'll be sticking with the traditional method of setting up shares.

Microsoft failed todayto provide technical support, answers or even a quick email to say 'we're working on it andwe'll let you know when there is a solution'.I am referring to the issues raised in theses threads surrounding theWindows 7 Professionalx64 Upgrade from Digital River- http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproinstall/thread/62675a69-2a19-4695-8c8d-8a83be589708, http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproinstall/thread/62675a69-2a19-4695-8c8d-8a83be589708.Like most of you I'am exhausted from this fiasco today and to be perfectly blunt there has been thousands of hours of people's life wasted due to it. Microsoft's entire staff was obviously dedicated to promotional events today rather then providingtechnical support. Microsoft and Digital River have treated us as guinea pigs and as the experimenters, leaving it up to us tofind a solution to the problem they created. Microsoft is a disgraceful company. That's the way I feel today.I'll be writing to them shortly to express my disgust and disappointment,if you echo my sentimentsand would like your username to be included ona list of people who agree, please drop a quickcomment in this thread. I hope a number of employees of Microsoft read this also and can provide an explanation.

Count me in. MS clearly doesn't care about us, the customers. They have their money for the Win7 upgrades, and apparently couldn't give less of a ____ if we have our product or not.

Put me down. I'm a Mac guy and have XP boot camped and since I'm a student and the $29 price point was easy to swallow instead of the over priced $120+ like most software, (Office, Adobe), I'd figure I'd give Windows another shot. Wrong. Can't even supply a basic .iso. I'm upset. Be appreciated for M$ to give us a dang .iso or atleast our money back or some of it back for this smishmashortion. Why couldn't they just send out vouchers so we can just buy it at a store for $29?

The below message was just posted in this thread -http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7install/thread/aedb1245-f8f9-42ec-9a0c-1aa932363bbbAll it took was 22 hours and angry, disparaging remarks about the company for them to tell us what they should have in the first place. :DI'm relieved, but still pissed off about the 5-6 hourswasted today trawling forums, experimenting and having to repeatedly searchfor some kind of update on what was happening from Microsoft/Digital River. Many people will try in vain for hours before they discover the post below.The response provided by microsoft here is barely adequate, a widespread email to those who purchased this particlar editionshould have been the first thing they did. I will of course still be sending this letter.Alex*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************Hello Everyone, I wanted to drop a quick post in this thread and let everyone know we are still here and the issue is still being investigated. I understand how all of you are very excited to start using Windows 7 and are very frustrated (I'm sure this isthe understatement of the day)with your experience today. Unfortunately I dont have an estimate as to when the issue will be fixed but it is not being ignored. Please check the thread linked below, as we get updates they will be posted there. http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7install/thread/cb679e27-f2e6-4cd5-b708-a4992cec5a9d In a nutshell - we are still here and it will get fixed.*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

I am with you on this! I wasted hours on this issue and will also send both Microsoft and Digital River a nasty gram. I will never purchase anything through DR again.

The offer from Digital River clearly states: "There is no difference between the Windows 7 software you will install from the online store versus in retail stores. " (My bold)You serious, guys? You mean all those folk who wander back from the shops are going to have to use command prompts, download commands, etc, just to get thier software to work???Why no .iso supplied? Why did nobody check the 64 bit download would run on 32 bit.... Yeah, sure, I can go through all the palaver to get this up... but why the ____ should I? Or any of you lot out there either!Microsoft: You have screwed up royally. Even if Digital River was at fault (and I'm not convinced they were, why didn't MS check the downloads, and get DR to correct the problem within minutes!IDIOTS!!!!

I've spent hours on the phone and on the internet trying to figure this out and it's still not working a day later.

Why does everyone still believe that it's only those who are trying to download the 64 on a 32 computer. It's everyone! IDIOTS!!!

I adjusted my "short time format" in "change number, date, time format" setting and the taskbar clock is ignoring it :| Also, with the pinning nonsense in the task bar I can no longer drag things onto program icons there to open them, something I used all the time with an editor in my quick launch.

@Goaliegeek I'm in the same boat as you. The Snow Leopard upgrade was SO MUCH easier. Pop in the disc and go. No serial numbers, no activation ____. It just upgraded. Puppetworx - Add me to the list of p.o.'d users! I will definitely not buy anything from Digital River again.

I have to defend the price, but the way the product was delivered was unnacceptable. I finally got mine working just because I had an RC version and wasable to do some tweaking. but down the road if my computer goes down, I'm screwed!! i purchased Office 2007 about a month ago and it works, but I don't care much for the exe. file it came in. But for the price like I said I will put up with that. But these two Windows7 downloads I purchased are truly unnacceptable. They need to give a couple of CD's or my money back. I am going to give them a couple of days to get their **** together then I will weigh in with them. 30 days from now if one of my computers goes down, I am SOL!

Count me in. This whole process has been insulting.

I'm in too, this has been frustrating and infuriating. Microsoft has not bothered to help at all, they've just passed the buck and said "it's digital river's problem, not ours" People have been left on hold for hours and have been hung up on by rude and unhelpful microsoft staff. Digital river have been completely silent on the matter. All it would have taken is for them to upload a .iso and bam, problem solved within half an hour. Instead here we are 2 days later and still no fix. And NO, "compiling a .iso using the command line" is NOT a fix. It's difficult enough for me to do, would be a complete nightmare to figure out for people who aren't very tech-savvy.. most people don't even know what an .iso file is, never mind hacking the contents of a folder into one. Anyway, this story is now making the rounds on all the tech sites, I hope they get all the bad publicity they deserve. Why microsoft decided to pick such a poor partner as digitalriver for their most important release in a decade I have no idea.. that company has a long history of messing things up.

I purchased the Digital River student discount version and discovered I could only download the 32bit version with it. So be it. When I tried to install it said a 64 bit OS cannot be upgraded to a 32 bit OS. So why on Earth would Digital River only provide Student downloads with the 32 bit version? Now who knows how long it will take them to respond to my emails or how they can possibly offer me a similar deal to get the 64 bit instead as I do not want to do a Custom Installation.

I have installed the trial version on an Asus EEE 8G. Some comments:Obviously, the screen size on the 8G is too small to run VGA, so the dialog boxes are often too big to display the button choices. Ubuntu has this same problem, but at least in Ubuntu you can work around this by moving the dialog box. However, the amount of wasted space on the dialog boxes is really annoying, since there is often considerable empty space between the prompt and the buttons needed to accept or cancel. Scroll bars or a scrolling desktop shouldn't have been too hard to implement, similar to IE or other web browsers, but if the dialog boxes were designed more compactly, this would be unnecessary.It seems that everyone assumes that the Program Directory would always be on C:, since there seem to be a few bugs from both Windows 7 and OpenOffice regarding a default program directory that is on an H: drive. OpenOffice (obviously not an MS problem) sets up the start menu settings incorrectly, setting the start location correctly, but setting the program to be in the C:\Program Files instead of the H:\Program Files. However, when Windows 7 issues the option to find the program, and the user browses for the .exe and sets it to the H: drive, Windows 7 still reports that the file is not found and doesn't start the program, nor change the startup icon's properties.Most annoying is the install program refusing to install Windows 7 on a USB or Firewire drive. I have a nifty 100GB portable HD that would be a terrific locale for Windows 7, but I'm forced to install W7 to the tiny 8GB SSD. Since Ubuntu runs fine on a USB drive, this is a big negative for me. USB drives are here to stay. Get with the program Microsoft!Otherwise, looks likea nice followup to Vista. I was not one of those who hated Vista, as I upgraded my regular desktop to Vista and have been living with its little quirks for over a year and a half with few complaints, but this seems a little snappier, and certainly seems to boot quite a bit faster.Nice job.

I have installed the trial version on an Asus EEE 8G. Some comments: Obviously, the screen size on the 8G is too small to run VGA, so the dialog boxes are often too big to display the button choices. Ubuntu has this same problem, but at least in Ubuntu you can work around this by moving the dialog box. However, the amount of wasted space on the dialog boxes is really annoying, since there is often considerable empty space between the prompt and the buttons needed to accept or cancel. Scroll bars or a scrolling desktop shouldn't have been too hard to implement, similar to IE or other web browsers, but if the dialog boxes were designed more compactly, this would be unnecessary. It seems that everyone assumes that the Program Directory would always be on C:, since there seem to be a few bugs from both Windows 7 and OpenOffice regarding a default program directory that is on an H: drive. OpenOffice (obviously not an MS problem) sets up the start menu settings incorrectly, setting the start location correctly, but setting the program to be in the C:\Program Files instead of the H:\Program Files. However, when Windows 7 issues the option to find the program, and the user browses for the .exe and sets it to the H: drive, Windows 7 still reports that the file is not found and doesn't start the program, nor change the startup icon's properties. Most annoying is the install program refusing to install Windows 7 on a USB or Firewire drive. I have a nifty 100GB portable HD that would be a terrific locale for Windows 7, but I'm forced to install W7 to the tiny 8GB SSD. Since Ubuntu runs fine on a USB drive, this is a big negative for me. USB drives are here to stay. Get with the program Microsoft! Otherwise, looks likea nice followup to Vista. I was not one of those who hated Vista, as I upgraded my regular desktop to Vista and have been living with its little quirks for over a year and a half with few complaints, but this seems a little snappier, and certainly seems to boot quite a bit faster. Nice job. That machine is far from suitable for Windows 7. Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM motherboard, AMD 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, ATI x600, 320GB storage with 160GB for backups, Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Signature Edition.

Hello all, I've drafted the letter that I will send to Microsoft. As promised I will include the names of those who have posted above this post, however I'd suggest you send a letter yourself so you can provide details for Microsoft to respond to you with. I have not sent my letter yet. The letter is posted below anyone who wants to can send it to Microsoft and edit it as you see fit. Best of luck with your respective installs and experience with Windows 7 from here on. Alex ************************************************************************************ Dear Microsoft, Thousands of people have had problems unpacking the files and creating the image file from their Windows 7 download from Digital River. I personally spent over eight hours (or a complete working day) trawling forums, experimenting and continually checking for word from Microsoft on this issue. Microsoft told customers to contact Digital River for 'support' with this issue and Digital River told customers to contact Microsoft for 'technical assistance'. The result was customers making little too no progress despite hours of effort. For most people the experience was like a cruel experiment by Microsoft and Digital River. Customers were treated as if guinea pigs and left to find a workable solution on their own to the problems created by your untested software. It was frankly a disgraceful act of negligence and non-concern on the behalf of Microsoft and Digital River. The only response you gave was buried in a thread within an internet forum which the buyers of this particlar product were not even linked to. If we wanted to find out why the product was not working we had to find out through our own efforts. For many it took hours to simply find the post and get some idea of what Microsoft's position was. That is unacceptable. Is email so hard Microsoft? Couldn't you have sent us all a quick email simply stating - 'There is a known issue a number of customers are experiencing with Windows 7 downloads from Digital River. We are working to put a fix in place and will contact you again to let you know when it is resolved. Thankyou for your patience.' It took me about 30 seconds to type that. You didn't have the time really? Or the courtesy? Alternately, perhaps the problem could have been prevented entirely by providing a DVD image file and an MD5 checksum to customers in the first place; this is an extremely common and successful method of software distribuition. Certainly once the planned method became a widespread issue for thousands and thousands of individuals this could have been provided, this too would have taken next to no time. I'm writing this letter on the 23rd of October 2009 - the day after launch - I feel exhausted, angry and disgusted despite my shiny new operating system which I was fortunate enough to get working. Countless people feel the same thing and it is a direct result of your inaction and ignorance towards your own customers. In fact there are many people having the same issues today and will end October 23rd feeling the same as I do now. Do you not feel ashamed? The reality is that your negligence to inform people, let alone provide a direct solution, has cost thousands of hours of people's lives and you show no outward concern about it. I would like to know how you intend to recompense me - and the thousands of others in the same position - for the time and energy of ours you have needlessly wasted. Sincerely

In Computer (i.e., Windows Explorer), when you are at the top level, there are (at least on my computer) groups for "Hard Disks", "Devices with Removable Storage" and "Network Location". It would be nice if I could rearrange the sequence so that the order would be"Hard Disks", "Network Location" and then "Devices with Removable Storage".I have a number of number of removable devices installed on this computer, most of which I seldom use. I use the mapped drives far more often. So, for me at least, it would be far moreconvenient to have "Network Location" above the removable devices.And yes, I know I can collapse and expand the various sections. But, if I keep the removable devices section expanded, the network locations are off the screen and I need to scroll to access them. And if I keep the removable devices sectioncollapsed, then I need to expand it everytime I do need to select a removable device, and then collapse it later.My first feedback,Richard

@Jimgolf My plans are to install Windows 7 on a portable USB drive, too. Just to occasionally install games on that installation without interfering with my normal installation. Until your post I believed this wouldn't be a problem. ...is it?

Here's some comments, in somewhat random order: *Overall, MUCH better than Vista, which is the first MS OS I completely skipped! (I'm using Win 7 x64 RTM) *Issues: +Sometimes full screen apps hang and won't allow visibility to other windows. Even when I switch to another window, I find the "not responding" window comes to the forefront. This stops me from doing ANYTHING until I either manage to kill the app or get it to finish and close. VMWare does this to me at least weekly, but there have been other apps. I NEVER had such an issue in XP, though I have seen similar behavior on my Vista machine at work. +I had used the file-based backup program to backup everything in my user profile each week for the past month. Last week, I needed to restore a corrupt Firefox profile and I went through the restore process. Each file in the Firefox profile simply logged a message saying "not restoring" with NO explanation of why not. I cannot trust the backups now. +I definitely see the "End Task" failing more and programs simply refusing to close. +Device Stage is currently USELESS. I'm still waiting to see any hardware manufacturers support it. +I hate that the "eject" icon for removable devices hidden in the "up arrow" group. IF I am still supposed to eject devices this way, it's crazy that it's so hidden. +I had to hunt for screen saver settings +I had to use Google to figure out how to turn off the on-screen keyboard after I accidentally turned it on. It kept starting up on each reboot. +I hate that the network icon in the notification area no longer flashes to show network activity. I've been told there are gadgets to provide this, but MS should make such a gadget then. How hard is it to give USERS some choice on this one? Is Microsoft hoping to become more like Apple? +Pinning documents on the start menu exhibit strange behavior if you ever open a document of the same name from another location. I pinned a budget spreadsheet to my Start Menu (c:\users\bgood\documents\budget.xls". Later, I needed to refer to a backup copy which I opened from a USB drive. My pinned document then changed to "E:\budget.xls" without ever telling me. +Moving the entire "\Users" structure doesn't fully work like in XP. In XP, I moved the whole "Documents and Settings" with a single line in an unattend file. Win 7 doesn't fully support this. Worse, I tried to simply relocate several shell folders by using Windows Explorer, properties, "location" tab and changing the location. I allowed Win 7 to move the whole folder. Great, except none of MS Office recognized the move! Outlook could not find the PSTs. Once I re-pointed it, I had to manually adjust ALL my rules, which broke. I had to redo my spam filter. None of my recent documents could be found. And I found loads of registry keys that still had c:\users\bgood\documents rather than d:. In fact, only PaperPort 11 handled the move without incident. Is it too much to ask that making this "move" of special folder would be automatically handled by the OS? At least for Microsoft-developed applications? Please? Ideally, setup should allow me to chose the location of the user profiles at least to any non-removable drive. +The image-based backups can only store a single image at a given location. Would it be so hard to support numbering the images? And the image-based restore requires that I *type* the full path to the file, without giving me a "browse" button like I've had since Drive Image in 1994. The image-based backup in Windows Home Server has "browse", so why not Win 7? +Still no multi-desktops? +No DVD codec except in the most expensive versions? Still?

UnlessI am missing something on the MS website offering "deals" for W7, the upgrade prices from Vista stink (especially for Ultimate)!! I have participaed in the beta testing and the RC, and now this is whatI/we get? If these were the prices for XP only, these would be reasonable. But after having paid for the rushed-to-market trouble-proned Vista prioduct, I/we should not be expected to pay these prices for what we should have gotten origionally (I had upgraded two computers from XP to Vista).Therefore,I will NOT reward Microsoft by moving to W7 any time soon. The W7 product looks good- unfortunatey the company selling it looks bad as always.

@ Bgood2: The image-based backups can only store a single image at a given location.Youre wrong: you see just one folder, but inside can be more than one image. You can see the list at restoring, not by number but by date.Much better than vista?Here youre wrong too. Up to now I cannot understand the opinion that vista is no good! And win 7 much better?. See the many remarks on startmenu and taskbar regression from vista to win7.

Hi allWouldnt it be nice if Microsoft helped us the Developers once in a while giving us a discount on Windows7 pro and Ultimate as a sign of a thanks for reporting back little problems that we find with the Beta software packages.It would be nice if you guys could think of the little guys once in a while.All the bestPaul R Butcherplease reply if you do or do not think so on this forum or direct to me at paulrbutcher@msn.comThankyou

Having played with the RC's, and now the RTM, I'm going to have to give kudo's to Microsoft on Windows7. I tried Vista several times. The last, I actually made it nearly 6 weeks before I yanked the disk out. I believe that install is still sitting on my desk somewhere. This time around, though; I have found Windows 7 to be a pleasure to use, and performance significantly better on my admittedly ancient hardware. The install was also one of the easiest I've seen yet, and the only hardware I had to go find drivers for were an PCTEL modem, and my Mobility Radeon 9000. Everything else was either found initially, or after the first windows update. I will say this - I miss the classic start button menu. Yes, I know it's been around since '95; but I liked it better than the "new" interface. I'll get used to it, the same way I got used to the ribbon in Office 2007.

Also miss the classic startmenu, especially as turning off recently-used items just leaves you with a 'broken' startmenu with huge gaps in it. Been doing some pre-rollout tests, and was pleased to see that virtually all of the software we use worked without any obvious problems. One area is a major hurdle, though, and that is remote management and helpdesk support. We use a VNC-based system for this, and the issue here is they way in which UAE and the logon process now work on an inaccessible separate desktop. The effect of this is that if UAE kicks-in, or the screen is locked, then the remote-access session is abruptly terminated and cannot be reestablished. Since you cannot predict every circumstance in which UAE will kick-in, this is a bit like walking through a minefield. Click the wrong icon, and you are instantly cut-off from the computer, and need to phone someone onsite to go manually fix it. The effect is that we must disable UAE on all desktops, and leave the desktop unlocked on 2008 server, which has the same issue. Securitywise this is a foot-shooting situation, as it leaves computers insecure which would otherwise have been secure. I know that the VNC guys have done some extensive work on this issue, without success. They say that the problem is due to the way these security-features are implemented, not with VNC itself.

"+I hate that the network icon in the notification area no longer flashes to show network activity. I've been told there are gadgets to provide this, but MS should make such a gadget then. How hard is it to give USERS some choice on this one? Is Microsoft hoping to become more like Apple?" After all the responces about this dureing the beta testing iam suprised that MS failed to add this to the Final build. I do not want some stupid Desktop Gadget to tell me if there is network activity. 1000's if not millions if people across the internet have made threads on forums and on here to where ms only officaly look for feedback have requested that the activity icons be replaced. they have them on the propities of the network card so it wouldent have been rocket science for ms to add it to the system tray. prehaps we could have this back in the form of an update or SP1 is it to much to ask? i dont think so and nor do your customers MS.

Application Data folders -endless recursion. Another issue I could add is that of endless-loops occurring when accessing any user's AppData folder. This problem affects a very wide range of software, both commandline and GUI. I'm guessing it's got something to do with the NTFS junction-points in this folder. Possibly one such has accidentally been made recursive or re-entrant. The effect is analogous to microphone 'howl-round.' The path repeatedly appends itself to itself, getting longer and longer until something bugs-out. Example of setting permissions with SetACL: INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data\Appl ication Data> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data\Appl ication Data\Application Data> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data\Appl ication Data\Application Data\Application Data> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data\Appl ication Data\Application Data\Application Data\Application Data> INFO: Processing ACL of: <\\?\C:\Users\test1\AppData\Local\Application Data\Appl ication Data\Application Data\Application Data\Application Data\Application Data ... and so on until it bugs-out several pages later. The problem is not specific to SetACL, it affects a very wide range of utility software. Nor is it new, Vista suffered from it. I'd just hoped it might have been fixed in Seven, but seemingly no.

I thought I would take advantage of this deal for students. 29.99. Well, I should have known that for a cheap price I was only going to set myself up for anger and frustration. I purchased with DigitalRiver (http://windows7.digitalriver.com/store/mswpus/en_US/DisplayHomePage) I will admit, I downloaded Pro when I needed Home Prem. My fault, yes. It's been 24 hours and no response from them. I then get alerted about another transaction that went through with Digital River. So now I have two transactions, one for 30.36 and the other for 36.53. When I only authorized the 36.53 one. Once again, there is NO way to contact these people. I finally used an email that was listed inside my student e-mail. This is horrible service! I was very excited to use Win 7 but this company is ruining my view on all of it and I don't even want to be bothered by it. I just wanted to upgrade to Win 7. Not have to deal with all this!!

One issue I mentioned earlier was that all the MyPictures, MyMusic, MyVideos, MyAnything... folders are not sub folders of the Documents folder. (see first posting in this thread) Now, I usually move the C:\Users\{me}\Documents folder to the D: drive to have an easy time if the system needs re-installation. (The drag & drop feature automatically updates the Registry then.) As I mentioned in my first list of negative Windows 7 issues, it's unnecessarily hard to do this in Windows 7 because it isn't sufficient to just move the Documents folder to D:. No, I have to move the MyPictures, MyMusic, MyVideos, MyAnything... folders as well. Manually... Each of them... Mentioned that, I now tried to move the C:\Users\Public folder to D: as well for the same reason. I was expecting that'd be fine this time because all the public OurPictures, OurMusic, OurVideos, OurAnything... folders were kept therein. But no! It's not possible to move the Public root folder to anywhere ! Instead as with the private folders, the user needs to move each and every sub folder manually... Time-consuming and tediously. Please, MS... re-organize these folders into using one single parent folder containing all user-related sub folders/documents. Just like with the Public root folder. E.g."C:\Users\{me}\Documents","C:\Users\{me}\Documents\MyPictures","C:\Users\{me}\Documents\MyMusic","C:\Users\{me}\Documents\MyVideos" ... provide the infrastructure to automatically update all necessary registry entries when moving such root folder. Just like you did until Windows XP. Provide this infrastructure for the Public root folder as well.

I'm somewhat lost as to the love of Windows 7 and the hate that was aimed at Vista. Vista run perfectly for me and so does Windows 7. I miss some of the beauty (bling) of Vista but performance always wins out for me ans Windows 7 seems snappier as it is cut down to run on old hardware.I'm just glad everyone's on board this time with SE7EN! I believe it might be partly due to some realization of missed revenue with Vista.

BetterToday :Why do you use these folders? Everybody who uses these is beyond help. For all of my images, documents aso I created an extra foldersystem on a nonsystem drive, and users\blabla ARE system folders.LegolasX2: +1.9 (you did not mention classic start menu and customizability of taskbar in vista which are missing in w7, therefore 0.1 minus;-) )

@karlx: I don't understand your reply. Public folders are provided and supported by the OS. Much effert has been put by MS into handling these folders using the Library Folders set of functionality. They are used to easily share private files among computers in a small network. So, why should I tend to ignore them and create my own file hierarchy instead? Why should I manually try to replicate a functionality that's already present? Why should I want to configure each and every application I install to redirect its default user file directory to some other directory AFTER it has first installed its personal user file sub folder into the standard special folders? Plus, you must have misread my posting. It is in fact about creating/maintaining my own folder hierarchy. But I want to do this with continued Windows 7 special folder support. I re-create my installations on all my computers on a regular basis. Plus I create virtual machines about every two or three weeks. Thus, a streamlined configuration and customization functionality in Windows 7 is vital to me like to many administrators.

because of MS ingenious programming art ! Where there ever no problems with these special folders ? What about changing os, other "MY" folders, other structures you have to adjust? Nem baj egal, I never liked them.

The Version info in Windows 7 Enterprise still shows 6.1 (build 7600) when viewed by running "winver".

It's for backwards compatibility and the the reason why you can run some applications that haven't been updated for Win7. It's 6.1 because Win7 supports all of Vista's functions, and even more. Many applications check for Windows version number to decide whether to enable some features (like transparency and whatnot). If it needs transparency, which is supported in Vista and Win7, it can just check for major version number >= 6, which applies to both Vista and Win7. If it needs, for example, Win7's new taskbar functions, which are not there in Vista, it can check for major version 6 and minor 1, which applies only to Win7, not Vista. It's pretty simple, actually, and a wise decision.Regards, Kristaps.

I've been running Windows 7 Ultimate for four days and am loving it. Sure, I had the usual issues with drivers, but I've got everything working perfectly now, and have to give Kudos to the MS dev team on what is, in my opinion at least, the best Windows ever. There are so many nice improvements over Win XP pro (my last OS, I did not use Vista), some very small, but makes working/playing a smoother experience. I am extremely happy that just about all of my apps run fine in 7. Of course utilities like Diskeeper 2008 had to be upgraded. I fully understand that. But my old Adobe Photoshop 7 runs perfectly. Migrating from XP pro, I am not having any trouble. I find the interface more intuitive than any previous. I guess I should mention that I am getting faster boot-up and faster app loading than I did in XP. And one really nice thing; During install, I didn't have to go searching for the RAID drivers. For XP I had to insert a floppy diskette. I have been a Firefox user for several years, but I tried IE8 anyway. It's much better than the previous versions, but after a few days working with it, I went back to Firefox V3.5. It's a matter of personal preference, that's all. I'm wondering with Windows 7 such a major change, what will be the next Windows? Will it be able to read my mind? I really can't think of anything that I would want. Keep up the good work MS! Thank you. FW

Before mswill read your mind, many of the guys here would be happy , if ms read and listened to the many justified complaints!

Well Microsoft, you suck.I can understand the attraction with live mail for people with maybe 2 or 3 accounts. But consider this. I have about 15 accounts set up.Only 4 are actually read from POP3 mailboxes. Only 4 accounts are enabled to read from their mailboxes. The others exist because of the number of domain names I lease. My server is trained to funnel all the various email addresses into 3 of the 4 mailboxes I read from. The 4th being an old dialup account I keep purely for it's 'spam me if you want' address used to sign up to various things .. such as this.So when I need to reply as a specific address based on one of the domain names, I choose it appropriately when replying. So you understand that it's so I can 'reply as' a different sender so that I don't give away a different email address. I have a need for this; nothing illegal, purely how it works.But in live mail, I suddenly have a swag of accounts listed EACH with it's own inbox. Give me a break .. you think I don't know how to manage email? If I need to direct incoming emails, then that's what rules and folders are for.Even though only 4 are enabled for reading from their mailbox, it still puts all those accounts in the window. Gee .. I never knew I had those accounts.Can you imagine working in an office that had 15 in trays on one desk. How about a business with 15 post office boxes. Can you seemy point? The inbox is the point of management .. folders are the point of storage/sorting etc.Emails that were imported in kept their folder structure. No worries. But when I start live mail, it decides to expand all the folders, which number at least 70. Imagine starting windows explorer and it expanded every folder ... that'd ____ you off after a while right? You'd be feeling a bit insulted that MS have decided that you're not capable of using a computer and needed their blind force assistance.Well I looked everywhere for options to alter it's behaviour and decided that uninstalling it was the only way to get relief.It's about time MS sold a true professional version that didn't have all the 'friendly' dumb ____ user features. After 20 something years of computing as a career, I'm not ready to be 'trained' on how to manage MY computer.Only solution now is to write my own windows mail like client. Or I could always do the Windows Mail copy from Vista trick. Either way, Live Mail is a FAIL.<unchecking 'Alert me'>

It's for backwards compatibility and the the reason why you can run some applications that haven't been updated for Win7. It's 6.1 because Win7 supports all of Vista's functions, and even more. Many applications check for Windows version number to decide whether to enable some features (like transparency and whatnot). If it needs transparency, which is supported in Vista and Win7, it can just check for major version number >= 6, which applies to both Vista and Win7. If it needs, for example, Win7's new taskbar functions, which are not there in Vista, it can check for major version 6 and minor 1, which applies only to Win7, not Vista. It's pretty simple, actually, and a wise decision. And - with all due respect - a stupid explanation: >=6 includes 7, you know? ;)

Try Outlook 2007 with Business Contact ManagerCarey Frisch

It's for backwards compatibility and the the reason why you can run some applications that haven't been updated for Win7. It's 6.1 because Win7 supports all of Vista's functions, and even more.Many applications check for Windows version number to decide whether to enable some features (like transparency and whatnot). If it needs transparency, which is supported in Vista and Win7, it can just check for major version number >= 6, which applies to both Vista and Win7. If it needs, for example, Win7's new taskbar functions, which are not there in Vista, it can check for major version 6 and minor 1, which applies only to Win7, not Vista.It's pretty simple, actually, and a wise decision. And - with all due respect - a stupid explanation:>=6 includes 7, you know? ;) Kristaps is right in his explanation, but he should have written =6.For more have a look athttp://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx

It's for backwards compatibility and the the reason why you can run some applications that haven't been updated for Win7. It's 6.1 because Win7 supports all of Vista's functions, and even more. Many applications check for Windows version number to decide whether to enable some features (like transparency and whatnot). If it needs transparency, which is supported in Vista and Win7, it can just check for major version number >= 6, which applies to both Vista and Win7. If it needs, for example, Win7's new taskbar functions, which are not there in Vista, it can check for major version 6 and minor 1, which applies only to Win7, not Vista. It's pretty simple, actually, and a wise decision. Regards, Kristaps. I think people might be more convinced by this argument if it was just once backed up with some example of a program that works fine (and utilizes features of Windows ver 6) but refuses or fails to operate on Windows ver 7.

try aeroshake for vista on win 7 and tell what happens

I've got acquainted now with the new Start menu. Instead of arranging and renaming my Start menu items to reach each programm quickly by keyboard (which I always did in Classic view), I now just type the first few characters of a program name to start it (e.g. "wo" for Microsoft Word, or "pain" for MS Paint). But... It is not possible to give a personal sorting order for the programs found. So the result of entering a program name fragment is indeterminated, it's depending on the computer I'm working on and the software installed. Two examples: If I type "read" at computer #1, Adobe Reader will open. Typing "read" on computer #2 instead might open some ReadMe file, which is linked to in the Start menu - although Adobe Reader is installed on that machine as well. I've installed the CorelDRAW suite on one of my computers. Typing "pain" on this machine will open Corel PHOTO-PAINT while typing the same at computer #2, MS Paint will open. MS Paint is available on both machines. I'm typing quite fast (approx. 10 keys per second). I type these abbreviations plus <ENTER> without reading. I expect to get the same results giving the same input. So I'd like to suggest to add some kind of user defined sorting to the Start menu search results. I don't have any clue which practical kind of sorting algorithm should be applied here... Perhaps some scoring attribute might be added to each Start menu entry. Scoring might be set by having the user sort a search query's found items. Found entries might then be sorted using their current score plus additionally sorting by installation date (both configurable ascending or descending)... As I said, I don't know... Anything nifty...

I kinda like the idea, and I it is painful to quickly write something, slam ENTER and get completely the wrong program :D How about just sorting the found programs by usage popularity (most used first) or by time last used (most recently used first), or some witty combination of both? :) Of course we're just talking here, since MS won't introduce any new features. They didn't listen to Beta/RC testers (apart from fixing some small bugs) and they most definitely won't listen to anyone since Win7 is already out.Regards, Kristaps.

Windows 7 monitors how often you launch programs and sort's it based off that. When I first installed Windows 7 typing "Word" into the Start Menu would list "Wordpad" first, after awhile "Microsoft Office Word 2007" appeared first because I entered a period where I used it more often. After that period had expired and I started using Wordpad more often "Wordpad" became the first application in the list.Typing "read" on computer #2 instead might open some ReadMe file, which is linked to in the Start menu - although Adobe Reader is installed on that machine as well.This shouldn't be happening. Windows 7 sorts programs, files contained within libraries, and other files into separate groups with "Programs" being the first. The only reason for this to happen would be that Adobe Reader is installed but you haveno Start Menu shortcut (or your username Start Menu folder contains a hidden shortcut where the correspodning all users shortcut is).+Device Stage is currently USELESS. I'm still waiting to see any hardware manufacturers support it.And if people start supporting it then everything is A-OK. They got a number of manufacturers to support the interface from the get go and it will probably expand some in the future, I'm not sure what you want from Microsoft.Is anyone experiencing a bug where Windows Explorer the Zune Software (not WMP, it's fine)do not cover the taskbar when fullscreen mode is entered?

I use a modest range of program all time, browsers, my development tools and the like. I keep then pinned to the taskbar. One click access I like as its fast. Now if only my PC was faster to keep up with the demands of Windows 7 and a hardcore user. I use my machine heavily. I like Windows 7, it is productive and I like productivity. I have the Ultimate = Enterprise and I can say this, I would deploy it, its ready for work.Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

Is anyone experiencing a bug where Windows Explorer the Zune Software (not WMP, it's fine)do not cover the taskbar when fullscreen mode is entered? <sarcasm> Impossible, this is the 7th version of Windows, they know how to draw at a given location on the screen by now. </sarcasm>Aaron Oxford - Remember you paid money for this!

Windows 7 monitors how often you launch programs and sort's it based off that. When I first installed Windows 7 typing "Word" into the Start Menu would list "Wordpad" first, after awhile "Microsoft Office Word 2007" appeared first because I entered a period where I used it more often. After that period had expired and I started using Wordpad more often "Wordpad" became the first application in the list. I see... Are you sure? Well, however I believe it might be better to have a fixed, user defined sorting. This way I could make sure MS Paint is always "pain", <ENTER> whereas Corel PHOTO-PAINT is always something like "pain", <Down Arrow>, <ENTER> @Vegan Fanatic: I have two or three quick launch links as well, but 10's the limit for quick-start by keyboard. And it's positively more than 10 programs I'm using on a regular basis. And it's quicker for me to write a couple of characters plus <ENTER> than twisting my fingers to accomplish that <FLAG>+<n> combination.

Application Data folders -endless recursion: A little more investigation reveals that this behavior is actually by design, and yes, at least one of the NTFS junctions refers back to itself, creating an endless loop for any directory-search routine which enters it. The developers have tried to prevent endless-loops by setting Deny/Everyone permissions to reading the junction's contents, but it's self-evident that this is a flawed solution. Some software is able to bypass this restriction and get itself into an endless loop anyway. Other software sees the junction points as folders and creates same-named empty folders on the target drive. This would seem to raise some very perplexing questions about the ability of users to backup their own data, and the ability of network admins to manage or transfer userprofiles under such a regime. Since many XP-based sites backup data or transfer profiles using a NAS box or USB drive, and most of these are non-NTFS disks, it will not be possible to maintain these junction-points inside the backup unless special, exotic backup-formats are used. The issue with exotic formats is, and always has been, the difficulty of establishing confidence in the backup. Plain, readable backups are a FAR better insurance. When a user changes seat, we typically transfer the profile via a USB disk or server share. I see major issues arising with both methods thanks to this new structure, and considerable time, cost and problems in resolving them. The other profile issue, well-known, is that you cannot merge Vista/7 computers with an XP network with roaming profiles, because the profiles are incompatible. This has already prompted us to take Vista out of one such site. I was aware of these issues on Vista, but didn't seek a resolution as we'd already decided we were never going to deploy Vista. We do want to deploy Seven, and while it seems a very good OS in other respects, I see this issue as a major obstacle to doing so. Too late now I guess, but oh what a pity this awful arrangement was retained from Vista. It really would have been better, IMHO if Seven had ditched this craziness and reverted to the standard 2k/XP profile structure. Or even just accepted that only properly-written XP software -which correctly references special folders by their registry key- would work on Seven. This would have allowed the new structure, but without the craziness of re-entrant junctions.

because of MS ingenious programming art ! Where there ever no problems with these special folders ? What about changing os, other "MY" folders, other structures you have to adjust? Nem baj egal, I never liked them. I've never understood how anyone could use the default 'special folder' structure to produce any kind of workable filing-system. If I build a website, I need the images to be in the same tree as the documents, not somewhere else entirely. If a client provides me with a tender consisting of an .xls, an .avi and some .jpegs, do I split these into separate "My" folders, and thus have to find them all again next time I look-at the job? Or do I make a folder called "New Job" and put the lot in there? I know which makes sense to me. Since the days of DOS, files have had extensions which identify their function. So, why must we put only one type of file in a given folder? Why not (as most people do anyway) group files as to their purpose, or under the project they belong-to?

Just by way of feedback to anybody thinking of upgrading, I am very disappointed with Windows 7 performance and features. With all the hype I was expecting something more. It turned out to be a very slightly improved Vista. At least for the Professional (vista & W7) versions. My install update hung at 62% (apparently common according to other reports on the web). You would think with all think with all the testing talked about the summer this would not happen. Worse when it backtracked to restore Vista my Microsoft Office was crapped up. Asked for a reinstall of that. What a pain! In the end (hours later), I had to do clean install. Took two days to reconstruct everything! Tracking down all kinds of serial numbers etc. It really boots up no faster than Vista. Admittedly I have a Quad CPU. About the only thing I benefit from is that sleep mode now works. Was unreliable on Vista/Gigabyte board.The final disappointment came when I tried out the Virtual XP. I have a Chinese EPROP programmer (TOP2004) which works fine on an old XP box here but would not work with under Vista. Well id did not work in the so called virtual XP window either. Looks for a USP device driver even though it is in the Windows\System32 folder etc.All in all I feel the thing is a much hyped rip-off. The various magazine writers and Bloggers over the summer must have been paid off by Microsoft!Be warned!

It works well for personal files. Family pictures go in a subdirectory under under Pictures, all my music goes in Music, etc. Of course some files, usually work or project related, do require more targeted structuring but that doesn't mean known folders don't or can't work well. It's just segregation of work and non-work related files, usually.

I use a server to share files at home, Linux seems to be a good home server that seems to be able to a lot of me. Its more useful than I originally believed. Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

@derosnec : How comehttp://store.microsoft.com/search.aspx?tsq=vistaonly returnsWin7 editions?Because windows7 is vista sp3, an expensive service pack, but a service pack ! As long as there are enough people who agree to this kind of business, why should ms change business policy?

Ok, finished to play with RTM. And yes, as I've already say it works fine after installing latest nVidia drivers. No more freezes like with included W7 drivers.But... sorry. This is not for me.Why ? Well, 7 is better than Vista, definitelly, in what concerns speed and compatibility. But is far worst than XP in the same points.Copying 1.4 Gb file ( Windows AIK )from one disc to an other gives me average speed of 48 Mb/s and a max of 52 Mb/s in 7, average of 40 Mb/s and max of 45 Mb/s in Vista SP2 AND average of 68 Mb/s and max 75Mb/s in XP SP3. On same hardware !!!Ok, I accept it comes with some usewfull things like Aero Preview, Peek and some other things, but has removed almost allI've found usewfullin XP. Sorry again, but I have to learn again about how to use an OS each time tou put an OS on the market because is more easy for you guys to made it ? No way. So still Xp for me, even if I was able to add to it almost all those things you offer in Vista and 7 - same look, transparency, peak, shadows and others, and I have the Menu tha way I can find easily the files, the explorer is not chuncky and so on.If you really want to make an OS users will like, take the old Xp, and add the Vista Media Center ( more user friendly and better looking than 7 MC ), Vista effects, 7 Peak and other functional stuff, DirectX 11,and you're ready. And definitelly keep the Menu of XP.

If you really want to make an OS users will like, take the old Xp, and add the Vista Media Center ( more user friendly and better looking than 7 MC ), Vista effects, 7 Peak and other functional stuff, DirectX 11,and you're ready. And definitelly keep the Menu of XP.There is not much left to be said. MS you understand ? At least NOW ?

I think it would be a really good update if, when using snap to compare two windows side-by-side, you could resize the windows because sometimes one window needs to be bigger than the other. I want to be able to grab the middle of the two windows and have them resized (horizontally) by moving them left or right. So instead of it being 50/50 it could be 60/40...etc. and the two windows will still be snapped together while the resizing is happening. I think this would be a very usefully update to this user-friendly OS.

@ millerchill : http://www.ntwind.com/software/windowspace.html

Originally posted as this question . I've just upgrade two systems from Windows Vista SP2 to Windows 7 (both Ultimate). On both systems, I have symlinks throughout the system for various purposes, and on both systems, symbolic links were removed as part of the installation. Not all symbolic links were removed. Symbolic links in the root seem to be untouched. Additionally, some symbolic links in folders not created by Windows were untouched (e.g. c:\vms\MyVM\Backup.vmdk). However, it appears all symbolic links were removed from the following directories and their children: - C:\Users - C:\Program Files - C:\Program Files (x86) - C:\ProgramData No mention was made during the upgrade advisor of symlinks being removed. Neither was any indication left of which symlinks were removed. Therefore, I'm left to just see what breaks, track it down, and replace the symlinks. Here are some examples of the symlinks that were removed mklink /d "c:\Program Files\svn" "c:\Program Files\SlikSVN" mklink /d c:\ProgramData\Certificates C:\Users\jaraco\config\Certificates mklink /d c:\Users\jaraco\Public C:\Users\Public mklink "c:\Program Files (x86)\OpenVPN\config\COMPANY.ovpn" "c:\Users\jaraco\config\MACHINE\Open VPN\COMPANY.ovpn" mklink /d "c:\Program Files\Java\jdk" "C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.6.0_16" mklink /d c:\Users\jaraco\.m2\repository "C:\mnt\el scorcho\repository" mklink /d C:\Users\jaraco\videos\rips D:\rips It would be nice for Windows to at least inform the user that they will be deleted and report on what symlinks are affected (even a text file on the desktop indicating "deleted symlinks" with the location and target).

What I see is the wide diversity of opinions. There are people who wants things that others hate. My conclusion after a few months with the beta versions (I don't buy the final yet) is:- W7 could be the best Windows till now.- The Windows Explorer could be much better. I hope in W8, W9... W100?- The network configuration still remains as one of the worst points of windows. More: I think in W7 is worst than in XP.- Windows is too expensive.

... - The Windows Explorer could be much better. I hope in W8, W9... W100? ... In my opinion, Windows Explorer could be less worse. Because it is far from beeing good. Much, much improvement is needed to it start beeing just "ok" again.

I just purchased a new computerless than a year ago with Vista and now there is anotheroperating system. Sadly, I don't understand why we have to update software so often. I don't have the money to buy software and then in a year or less, there is something else that everyone is using. Sad thing too, it that once a new product is out, other programs don't support it or have the same components. Guess I'll just have to use "old stuff" forever. If you're a home owner and you have to purchase everything yourself, it's difficult to keep running and current and safe.. Wish there was something that would stay around awhile. I know it's progress, but sometimes, it gets a little ridiculous. TV's last seveal more years than computers;so do cars.Whynot computers.I wish I was still working---then at least I would have access to a comptuter without the hassle of trying to keep it running and current. Justcall your boss and tell them your computer is "down". Then they have to pay for it.Such is life....and technology, I guess.And if I'm in the wrong forum again, I'll blame it on my computer. It did it!!

There's an annoying problem with Windows Explorer Address bar: If you click the icon next to the bread crumb control in order to retrieve the full path of the current directory and if you just slide the pointer one single pixel aside while having the mouse button pressed, a link to the current directory is added to the current directory's content. I very often accidentally move the mouse a little bit when I'm clicking some mouse button... and it's even worse when I'm using my laptop's touchpad. The address bar control should not act as a D&D target to itself. Across Windows Explorer processes it's alright, but not within the same Windows Explorer. Instead, it should always switch to displaying the current directory's path then.

add me to the list puppetworx...thanks again MICROSHAFT

...- The Windows Explorer could be much better. I hope in W8, W9... W100?... In my opinion, Windows Explorer could be less worse. Because it is far from beeing good. Much, much improvement is needed to it start beeing just "ok" again. I was ironic ;)

I would like to comment on windows 7, but digital river will not respond to my 30+ emails for the iso link...thank you very little

Where is my classic start menu? I hate having to sit here and scroll down thru the menu to access program directories for all my installed files. I understand that the general public used to turn the classic start menu into a giant mess of installed files, but for an advanced user like me an organized start menu was very effective and faster than the "new" setup.BRING IT BACK NOW.

Hi. Have you noticed a textbox with a magnifying glass in the bottom of the start menu? Yeah, that's search and it basically eliminates the need to manually browse the Start Menu, no matter how advanced or organized you are. You can find your files, programs and whatnot only by typing few letters. Try it out ;)Regards, Kristaps.

The Windows Media Player 12 Track Title Editing window strongly needs improvement (The one that opens after "Search Album Information" > "Edit" has been selected). The text boxes provided to enter a track title are far too short! Just 20 characters or so fit into these tiny text boxes! I suggest to resize their widths to the actual window width. Why is the track number given in a text box, being able to retrieve focus? This way the user always has to hit <TAB> twice to reach the next title! Plus, if typing blindly, sometimes by mistake, and completely unrecognized, typing yields just nothing because the bloody track number text box has reached the focus! I suggest to replace the track number text boxes with static text fields. If edits have been made to any text box, leaving the editing window using the [back] button or by hitting the <BACK> or <ESC> key should raise a confirmation dialog. I've just lost about 80 track titles or so accidentally because the window just closed as the track number field accidentally had the focus while I was hitting the <BACK> key!!! Please MS, improve this slipshod interface. I'm just saving my sound effects CDs to hard disk, with 99 tracks each. And this editing window is making me nuts!

@ janeelp : they will NOT bring it back , why should they ? As long there is such a stupid hype for win 7, they think theyve done right.There is one reason to change from xp to vista: uac, so you need not do your normal business as admin. Another reason may be (for eye candies loving users)the live previews, but these you can simulate with additional free software on xp.Other gimmicks like aerosnap aeroshake and peek also exist for xp, even a "superbar", which imho is better than mss.A second important reason to leave xp may be the need for a 64 bit os.But for users who have already vista installed -----> no reason to downgrade to win 7.Only those who MUST have jumplists and ONE button for started and non-started tasks there is only one os from ms : win7.

Hi, Although I am very happy with Windows 7, there are a couple of things that are very annoying.I cannot understand why they have not been solved since there have been a lot of remarks about them during the beta.1. Windows calculator : no possibility to make it stay on top of other windows.2. Snipping tool : No possibility to catch scrolling pages (eg. web pages, MS Word pages).3. Windows Exporer : the toolbar cannot be customized.4. The button for "Shut down/Swith user/Log off/Lock/Restart/Sleep" is way too small and hence difficult to handle.5. Windows does not fully support scanners that do not have a WIA driver. My scanner has a TWAIN driver only and it is very badly supported in Windows 7.Regards Picsoe

Look people, if the UAC is a problem, you can turn it off and it will never pester you again. Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

Look people, if the UAC is a problem, you can turn it off and it will never pester you again. Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64. And then the old programming string "Hello world" gets a meaning of its own!Vote -4

Once upon a time I ran Win 7 beat and then win RC1. They both worked great I was looking to running the real deal. Well I spent hard earned money for the real deal. IT SUCKS. NONE of the release software from the mfgs especial HP work at all. HP can not build ____. I have several programs that worked great in beta and RC1. Those programs don't work at all in WIN 7 MONEY I PAID for version. As I write this I'm doing it from Win XP. I guess I will be running XP for the next 20 years or get a MAC. I'm dun with MicroASS. The have fucked me out of the last dollar the will ever get. Now if my rants gets me banned from this site so be it. Regards Mike in OKC

The new notification area (tray) applet is great; I like how I can more or less pin different notification icons into the tray area and leave the less-commonly used ones in a separate container. The problem I have is: this new UI behaves poorly when "focus follows mouse" (also knows as xmouse or "active window tracking") is enabled. I suspect the answer will be that Microsoft no longer supports the "active window tracking" feature. Nevertheless, I wanted to make the team aware of the difficulty of the new interface with "focus follows mouse" enabled. When one with "focus follows mouse" enabled clicks the arrow to expand the hidden notification icons, a window with the hidden icons is created ("hidden icon window"), but it is created approximately 30 pixels above the mouse cursor. If the user then slowly moves the cursor toward the "hidden icon window", the focus is transferred to the taskbar or to the desktop, and the "hidden icon window" disappears. If the user moves the cursor quickly toward the "hidden icon window" (quickly enough that no mouse events trigger the "focus follows mouse" for other windows), then focus remains on the "hidden icon window", and actions can be performed (such as clicking customize, or interacting with the icons). I'll suggest a possible fix for this undesirable behavior. The developers of this UI could improve its behavior by creating an invisible window behind the "hidden icon window" in order to capture mouse events that would otherwise trigger the "hidden icon window" to close. This invisible window would probably extend below the visible "hidden icon window", probably to a few pixels below the mouse cursor when it was clicked. Some alternate solutions exist as well: 1) Have the "hidden icon window" fade out (like Outlook notifications), so that if the mouse moves over it within a short period of time, it stays visible. 2) Monitor different events to determine when to close. Maybe it's possible to monitor for a mouse-down event in another window or require an explicit Esc key press. 3) Make the icon that triggers the appearance of the "hidden icon window" a toggle button, so one could toggle the visibility of the "hidden icon window" and it wouldn't attempt to close the window on changed focus. 4) Query the SPI_GETACTIVEWINDOWTRACKING using SystemParametersInfoW to determine if "focus follows mouse" is enabled, and if so, disable it while the "hidden icon window" is displayed. Actually, the more I think about it, the last solution might be the best. It will make the UI behave slighly unexpectedly for xmouse users but will have zero impact for those who don't (the majority). I very much appreciate Microsoft's support of "focus follows mouse" in the past. It's one of the reasons I refuse to switch to MacOS (xmouse behavior is strictly unsupported and kludgy at best in MacOS X). I'll put up with UI quirks in my applications with respect to xmouse, but I'd very much like Explorer to behave well with it enabled. Thanks for Windows 7. I've been a strong advocate and supporter (even of the less popular Vista). If I can do anything more to help resolve this issue, please feel free to contact me directly.

Hi Picsoe, Regarding to the 1-4, I will fortward these comments to our feedback team. Regarding to the scanner driver, please understand that it is hardware manufacturers responsibility to develop device drivers for their hardware devices to work with Windows 7. Microsoft doesnt have much information about their product. We are not best resource to address the problem. Given the situation, I suggest you contact manufacturer to push them release drivers for Windows 7. Thanks again.

Hi Robinson,Thanks for forwarding my suggestions to the feedback team although I am afraid that nothing will be done to make the necessary changes now that the code has been froozen. A missed opportunity during the beta ?About the scanner :It is a Canon scanner type LiDE 500F.It works very well with it's own TWAIN software and also with Office 2003 on Windows 7 but :- I am told that a WIA driver is needed ifI want to do something with it in the Control Panel- It is not detected by "Windows Fax & Scan"- It is not detected by "Windows Live Photo Gallery & Movie Maker"The problem is that MS-programs sometimes support TWAIN drivers and sometimes they don't.This is very unconsistent and not MS-worthy !Regards Picsoe

Gosh Picsoe. Do yourself a favor. Get yourself a new scanner!I have a wireless+usb HP printer/scanner/aio that hardly cost more than a carton of smokes. It even does 4800 dpi, I think.Best of all, it has a new driver that's sturdy as a snowflake. :)) And why would I be that stupid ?I am not going to pay for a new scanner because ofan inconsistency in Windows for which I paid as well !!!!On top of all, my scanner is taken up in Microsoft's list of compatible hardware. Regards Picsoe

Have you noticed a textbox with a magnifying glass in the bottom of the start menu? Yeah, that's search and it basically eliminates the need to manually browse the Start Menu, no matter how advanced or organized you are. You can find your files, programs and whatnot only by typing few letters. Try it out ;) Well, I suppose that the interface should be more easy to use, not more complicated.Using one hand to navigate through an Tree Menu with folders opening when cursor is on them is better, than use the mouse to pop-up the search and then starting to use keyboard - just too many movements WITH BOTH HANDS for one job.More - the Search never worked well since XP - in order to use it corectly I have to stop indexing, and use the Old Search Way. If not I can receive other program than the one I wan, or open an other document, or worst - saying there is no such program or document because it was so recent it was not indexed.As an other ideea , I see the future with a interface requiring less movement, more gesture oriented, than typing oriented. If possible to completely quit the keyboard, and even mouse and replacing them with hand movement recognition ant touch panels.Also using the SEARCH for programs or documents instead of TREE navigation is extremelly dificult in other 2 situations - people with handicaps and Tablet PC's. On a tablet PC it was more easy to navigate with the finger through a Tree Menu in Xp than now in 7. Using the Finger in the small programs windows is difficult, and SEARCH os very hard to do - need tot open the virtual keyboard - to many movements.Separately - I have an other trouble/bug? with 7. When closing , from about a week it gives me "The Black Screen of Waiting" - the screen sauing that I have to wait for a program to close, and stays like that for a minute or two. But in 2 from 3 cases there is no program mentioned. Nothing. Nada. And in 1 of 3 cases is the Host Task Manager. There are no software instalation maded in the last 2 weeks - since I've let only Windows Update to work.

But wait there's more! Tired of Wordpad and Word appearing when you type word into the Start Menu search box? You can actually (gasp) rename programs in the start menu so there's no ambiguity whatsoever. Simply rename Microsoft Office Word to Werd Microsoft Office Word. Now whenever you type werd, you get what you want. You can use wpad for wordpad, msp for paint. The possibilities are endless with Windows 7! All of this for the low low price of... well it depends on where who you are, where and when you buy it. That to me is the most annoying part about any Microsoft product (especially points) - knowing someone paid far less than I did for the same product.

1) The divider between the left and right panes of Windows Explorer needs to be made more sensitive and easier to click and drag left/right. at the moment the size is so thin it is hard to place the mouse over it to resize it. 2) Classic Start Menu, if we're meant to use the Search feature instead, why even bother giving us the All Programs feature of the Start Menu? 3) Various actions give various concoctions of Windows Sound Events, like ctrl-alt-delete, or the "Show Desktop" buttons. 4) when a window wants your attention, it will flash orange on the Taskbar then stay static orange. When you give focus to that program/window the Taskbar item will no longer be orange. However if you are quick at changing windows then the Taskbar item will revert to a static orange which is very ____ annoying. Happens tons with Live MSN Messenger windows. 5) Windows Photo Viewer has a very noticeable brown tint to the border around pictures and may even affect the image itself. When closing the Window or switching between photos the border flickers briefly to the correct blue colour you see everywhere else like in the left pane in Control Panel items. 6) Enabling Classic Context Menu's for when Right Clicking a Taskbar item (instead of crappy Jump Lists), results in an inability to close Windows Live Messenger via the right click context menu. You can close the Contacts List and all chat windows, but right clicking the Windows Live Messenger taskbar item results in the Contacts List opening again :/ Chossing "close" from the context menu doesn't prompt you that you are trying to exit Live Messenger either so yeah, no way to exit it, at least if you have it set to minimize on close.

After all this years using windows, the only reliable way I found so far to prevent windows to steal focus is the TweakUI option to fix it. BUT, it is not available to windows vista or Windows 7. So, many, many, maaaaaaaaaaaaany, did I said MANY? times, im doing something, and a pop up steal the focus. It is annoying. If Im typing something in the window I am working at the moment, the chances are that I never see the pop up, since it jump in my front, and in 90% of the cases, a simple touch in the space bar is enough to make it disapear. In fact, if Im gaming in full screen and a pop up jumps, like a friend sending a message, or something, there is a big chance of the game just minimizing to show me the message. The problem is, there is still LOTS of games that just CRASH when it happens. Why cant I have a option in Windows to check, like: "PREVENT APPLICATIONS TO STEAL FOCUS, NO MATTER WHAT". It would be a improvement over xp. Now, it is a regression.

If ms really listened to its customers as they claim, and if they know how xp is appreciated, why for heavens sake they did not use xp as a base, and just extended the functionality? Instead they behaved maximal stupid and removed which very many users want(ed) to have. Especially that the big boss Steveis mathematician afaik it is the more incomprehensible that he didnt tell the programming and designguys and girls:friends not this way! So I have theimpression that it was just marketing shouting that ms listens.But ms will come off its high horse,particularly aslinux especially Ubuntu is becoming more and more professional (thanks Mark Shuttleworth) with really innovative interesting ideas and features!

Hi let me first say this is not a question but a comment. I was testing all the test versions of windows 7 was ok. Then i was at computor store and seen windows 7 on a new computor. My first thought was this is not windows 7 this is still windows vista. My first thought was why buye windows 7 to get vista again. They sure didnt do much to make it look any different. I wont waste my money om a copy cat of vista thats what windows 7 is a copy cat of vista. This new windows 7 will got give mac or linux or even the new google operating system any challange. From what i have seen of windows 7 people wont change over to that. If you allready running windows vista why would you even bother to get windows 7 when it looks exactly like vista. Were was the createtivity when they made this. It could have looked different. I think windows 7 is going to be like vista another big mistake. If i was a mac distrubutor i would be happy to see windows 7 now sence it will not cause any compitition. From what i have seen of windows 7 i an not impressed with it at all i will stick with linux or mac. If this is the best microsoft can do then i will not buy another windows pc again. windows XP was the best operating system that microsoft brought out after XP now its all downhill for microsoft. in closing all i can say is that microsoft has pushed to towards Mac os X i have 3 windows pc at home all with linux on then and now after seeing the new windows 7 i will stick with my linux. or buy mac

In addition to Warel words, and as I said a time ago, anytime you hit double-click on an image or movie (as in an example) the folder-window mantains the focus and the image viewer or the Windows Media open behind the window, what is really absurd.

If ms really listened to its customers as they claim, and if they know how xp is appreciated, why for heavens sake they did not use xp as a base, and just extended the functionality? Instead they behaved maximal stupid and removed which very many users want(ed) to have. Especially that the big boss Steveis mathematician afaik it is the more incomprehensible that he didnt tell the programming and designguys and girls:friends not this way! So I have theimpression that it was just marketing shouting that ms listens.But ms will come off its high horse,particularly aslinux especially Ubuntu is becoming more and more professional (thanks Mark Shuttleworth) with really innovative interesting ideas and features! Maybe, but I installed Ubuntu Studio and unistalled it because I have no programs to work professionally with movies and audio. So, Linux is very good for nerds, but I prefer Windows. More: I use Opera, in Windows I upgrade the navigator directly. In Ubuntu I need to uninstall the older version first using a console and typing obscure code like sudo -x getthehellouttahere or something like this, before install the upgrade. So usefull and easy for common people.....More: when I uninstalled it the ponit to the boot selector remains but not the applicationso I needed to reinstall my XP (I have one XP partition just in case) in order to use the PC and W7. Thanks, but I had enought Linux for decades.

I think the Windows Experience Index should give an average of total scores rather than the lowest score. I also think Windows Mail should be in Windows 7, and I prefer the Control panel layout of Vista to Windows 7.

derosnec, fanatic : relax ;-),consider the context!

maybe ms is not that souvereign?. My context just was that ms WILL comeoff its high horse (not listening to its customers adequately)because others become- not are now- more and more professional + userfriendly (no more cryptics needed for normal users).Derosnec, do not feel bothered or tackled with myforegoing post!

You want to discuss about Linux or promote it ?Then do it elsewhere - this is a Windows support forum.Regards Picsoe

I haven't experienced any window focus stealing in Windows 7 here, I have installed various leaked Windows Updates though so maybe one of them fixed it. I would bet most of the leaked updates are reserved for Service Pack 1.

ms fan. Im sure that you can read, do it carefully. Then you understand what I mean. And be not FAN-BLINDED.Sometimes ms needs support and motivation to MAKE windows better, not just to tell how much it listens ---- and does not in many points

You want to discuss about ...?Then do it elsewhere - this is a Windows support forum. Regards Picsoe I want to discuss new scanners. You mean Windows compatible scanners I presume ?Regards Picsoe

Ok so my idea for a new Windows 7 feature goes like this:Click and hold the title bar on any window, drag it towards the location you want it to be but add momentum andthenrelease (simular action to throwing rocks in Black& Whitegame).so now the window has momentum it will move in the direction you released it in, if it gets to a 'Aero Snap' point then that event to snap is fired, you can get quickly arrange windows by combining AeroGlide & Aero Snap.Reasons to implement this:- less mouse movement involved in moving windows- less time spent getting the windows to snap points- it will look awesome!so what doyouthink?just wire some $$$ to my bankaccount and the idea is yours ;)btw, great job on Windows 7, the step to Vista was good, the leap to Windows 7 is incredible

Ok so my idea for a new Windows 7 feature goes like this:Click and hold the title bar on any window, drag it towards the location you want it to be but add momentum andthenrelease (simular action to throwing rocks in Black& Whitegame).so now the window has momentum it will move in the direction you released it in, if it gets to a 'Aero Snap' point then that event to snap is fired, you can get quickly arrange windows by combining AeroGlide& Aero Snap.Reasons to implement this:- less mouse movement involved in moving windows- less time spent getting the windows to snap points- it will look awesome!so what doyouthink?just wire some $$$ to my bankaccount and the idea is yours ;)btw, great job on Windows 7, the step to Vista was good, the leap to Windows 7 is incredible

There would be many users unhappy, because there would be more snapping than intended! With each fast window moving!How you would differentiate?With special key+leftclick? I do not know your black&whiteBtw: some nice new features in win7, tudos to ms! But to many negligences and thoughtlessnesses and not listenings over the years!

I think I missed something. What I try to say is I don't agree whit the people who promote Linux as it was the universal panacea. I used several OS since 1978 (including the TRS-80 made for Microsoft for Radio Shack :D, very similar to MS-DOS) and the CP/M, the DOS of course, and Windows since the Windows 1 for PC XT :O. I used Unix, Mac OS, Linux, and today, my election is Windows 7. Even when I have a lot of critics, specially on Windows Explorer.End of OSs discussion for me, and thanks.

I have been using Windows 7, first the RC and now the RTM, for several months and I have to say that I am tremendiously impressed. Windows 7 is by far the best OS ever released by Microsoft. While there is a little bit of a learning curve, everything in Windows 7 just works well. My PC runs faster than ever, the OS is very stable, 7MC is GREAT. I just wanted to say, well done!Mark

I am so tired of discovering more dumbing downs in the new Explorer and adding stuff to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_7 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_Vista. Why does MS not show a commitment to acknowledging and fixing such a horribly degraded component as the shell/Explorer?

Hi sumone, dont worry be happy (like Mark L). What do you want, win 7 is stable and fast(writes Mark Laris). All you need is stableness! What about a dull we, STABLE AND --- is we really fast?? Doesnt matter ;-)

I have a number of partitions on my computer, which include: 1.) An XP partition 2.) A Windows 7 partition 3.) A partition where my data files live. From within Windows 7 I run the defragmenter on the data partition, and it told me there was 0% fragmentation. I then run the same test from within XP, and the analyser revealed great swathes of red. In fact there was more red than blue or green. They cannot both be right, can they?

The Windows Vista and 7 defragmenter doesn't defragment down to 0%, apparently there isn't a big enough penalty to leaving some fragmentation to warrent full defragmentation.

I hate W7 - Bitterly regret upgrading from XP.I want the old quick launch back and why does it now take twice as long to do anything because as well as clicking ok to am i sure i also have to click continue when it asks if i have permission even though i am the sole user/administrator - and owner - i mean this is paranoia gone mad. The joke is even on friends PCs where I am not even an administrator if I click continue it allows me to do whatever so why bother asking?

why does it now take twice as long to do anything because as well as clicking ok to am i sure i also have to click continue when it asks if i have permission even though i am the sole user/administrator - and owner - i mean this is paranoia gone mad.Then turn down or even off UAC. Problem solved.The joke is even on friends PCs where I am not even an administrator if I click continue it allows me to do whatever so why bother asking?If he used a standard user account UAC would ask for a password and not just a nod of approval.

From within Windows 7 I run the defragmenter on the data partition, and it told me there was 0% fragmentation. I then run the same test from within XP, and the analyser revealed great swathes of red. In fact there was more red than blue or green. They cannot both be right, can they? This thread isn't supposed to be for 'questions', but that'n merits explanation.Both Vista and Windows 7 have a regularly scheduled defrag tool which, if left alone, will keep drive fragmentation well under control and at a level which does NOT impact on performance in any way whatsoever!For both those OS versions, however, the tool does not 100% defragment. Instead, it defragments files down to the point where file fragments are no smaller than a specified size. Further defragmentation beyond that point only has an "on paper" impact rather than a"real world" impact.If you run the XP defrag tool on the drivfe afterwards, though, it'll report large areas of 'red'. That is because the files which are now made up of several large fragments, rather than many small fragments, will be reported as 'entirely' fragmented. It's especially noticeable when the files involved are very large files. The XP defrag tool's graphical interface makes it appear that the drive is heavily fragmented, when in fact it's not detrimentally fragmented at all.Use a decent quality third-party 'professional quality' defrag tool to analyse/report, rather than the XP one, and you'll receive a favourable report regarding the condition of the drive.

Both Vista and Windows 7 have a regularly scheduled defrag tool which, if left alone, will keep drive fragmentation well under control and at a level which does NOT impact on performance in any way whatsoever! So I suspect this is why the copy/move is soooooo slow.

By default the defragmenter runs at 1 AM each Wednesday. I leave my machine on all the time, so I do not notice it. I noticed my web server was slow to boot, then I realized its own disk checker was active after 26 boots. Best is to let the tools run and then run when they want to.Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: IBM PC 300GL, Pentium III 667, Linux Server, has a 137GB disk limit, making it useless for upgrading my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

The great thing about this particular forum is that it encouragescreativelyauthoritative interpretation of that which is anecdotally official, confirmed by recital of that which is undemonstrably empirical.It is this that educates and persuades us to levitate to the next platform of computing. If that was a response to my post regarding defragmentation, then:Undemonstrable empirically?What the?Try this:* On a machine with defrag left scheduled as per default install, use a tool such as Fragger to create a 'test environment' of a heavily fragmented drive.* Use a professional quality defrag tool to analyze and report. (My tool of choice/preference is PerfectDisk Professional. * Rather than performing defragmentation with that tool, continue to use the machine in normal, everyday usage for a week or two. (The scheduled defrag operation by default runs once per week, as a low-priority task, and can take quite a while to complete on a heavily fragmented system. It should be given opportunity to complete, in such circumstance.)* Use the professional quality tool to again analyze and report. compare results obtained.If that post indeed did relate to the one I made then it was a rather snide snipe, and erroneous to boot!

SIMPLE MUST-HAVE WINDOWS FIXES! If you have multiple windows of one program open, you can't minimize by clicking onto the task bar. - You can if you don't have multiple windows open, you should be able to if you have multiple windows open. As a long time XP user, its a big annoyance and usually when i browse the internet i just open everything in tabs now, just so i wouldn't have to remember to click in the corner. If you move an "open" pinned item over other pinned items, it will stay in that "moved" position once closed. What i mean is that if you have multiple pinned items open, and i want to move one just so i can have a more "comfortable" reach to the pinned item, it will mess up its initial position. It is annoying for example when you have multiple pinned items and you want to move a firefox/internet explorer windows closer to the right side, but then its out of position once closed. =[ You should only be able to move the pinned item position when all apps (that are pinned) are closed. Sticky notes isn't customizable and it doesn't "minimize" to the "notification area" I literally downloaded another program to have nice sticky notes that don't take up my taskbar for no reason at all. I love the similicity of the program, but not being able to change the color or font, plus not being able to place it in the "notification" area? That's a pretty pathetic design if you ask me when it comes to a program as large as Windows. P.S. i know these are like little things, but its design and functionality, and thats quite important. I really can't wait till i start college and learn programming fully, so i could really focus on these kinds of design flaws.

I've just bought an eSata drive because the Windows installer states that "the configuration or installation of local drives using USB or IEEE 1394 connections is not supported". It doesn't state that eSata won't work! For me as a contractor it's necessary to create test environments on the fly any time. Virtualization doesn't solve all scenarios that may occur, particularly if USB or other hardware support is involved. I strongly suggest that Windows should be bootable using USB, IEEE 1394, eSata and any other possible connection providing bootable drives. I might add that now I've got an eSata drive I don't actually need... Great...

Snip tool improvements: Works great, but still lacks some basic features which results in me still having to use 3rd-party software for basic annotation and screen clipping. Would like to see the following, as all screen capture/clip software seems to include it: 1. Upload to FTP server 2. The ability to type and move text on top of the image. 3. A few additional basic annotation tools, such as arrows. Thank you.

Snip tool improvements: Works great, but still lacks some basic features which results in me still having to use 3rd-party software for basic annotation and screen clipping. Would like to see the following, as all screen capture/clip software seems to include it: 1. Upload to FTP server 2. The ability to type and move text on top of the image. 3. A few additional basic annotation tools, such as arrows. Thank you. FTP is not smart enough for a clipboard cut and paste class technology. Editing an image is in the province of sophisticated software. Arrows are available with most graphics packages, and can be used as desired. Vote if answered or helpful, I am running for Office (joke)! IT/Developer, Windows/Linux/Mainframe Server: P4-2GHz, Linux Server, need IDE/SATA disks for my chess site Workstation: Asus M2NBP-VM CSM, Athlon64 X2 4200+ 65W CPU, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA 8600GT, 320GB + 160G backup, Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

[quote]If you move an "open" pinned item over other pinned items, it will stay in that "moved" position once closed. What i mean is that if you have multiple pinned items open, and i want to move one just so i can have a more "comfortable" reach to the pinned item, it will mess up its initial position. It is annoying for example when you have multiple pinned items and you want to move a firefox/internet explorer windows closer to the right side, but then its out of position once closed. =[ You should only be able to move the pinned item position when all apps (that are pinned) are closed.[/quote] Yes, rearrangement of windows on the taskbar without affecting pinned shortcuts would be nice. [quote]why does it now take twice as long to do anything because as well as clicking ok to am i sure i also have to click continue when it asks if i have permission even though i am the sole user/administrator - and owner - i mean this is paranoia gone mad. [/quote] Do you know the purpose of the 2nd and 3rd highest settings for UAC? The 3rd highest setting will display a prompt when something wants to install, this prevents things installing that you don't want or are unaware of (some websites like to install things without consent for instance). The 2nd highest setting is the same but will overlay a semi-transparent System controlled desktop with the UAC prompt, the purpose of this is that 1) it is obvious if there is a fake UAC prompt as everything needs to be dimmed, including taskbar for it to be legit. 2) If you're prompted simultaneously by 2 prompts, the fake one will be dimmed and lack interactivity.

[quote]If you move an "open" pinned item over other pinned items, it will stay in that "moved" position once closed. What i mean is that if you have multiple pinned items open, and i want to move one just so i can have a more "comfortable" reach to the pinned item, it will mess up its initial position. It is annoying for example when you have multiple pinned items and you want to move a firefox/internet explorer windows closer to the right side, but then its out of position once closed. =[ You should only be able to move the pinned item position when all apps (that are pinned) are closed.[/quote] Yes, rearrangement of windows on the taskbar without affecting pinned shortcuts would be nice. [quote]why does it now take twice as long to do anything because as well as clicking ok to am i sure i also have to click continue when it asks if i have permission even though i am the sole user/administrator - and owner - i mean this is paranoia gone mad. [/quote] Do you know the purpose of the 2nd and 3rd highest settings for UAC? The 3rd highest setting will display a prompt when something wants to install, this prevents things installing that you don't want or are unaware of (some websites like to install things without consent for instance). The 2nd highest setting is the same but will overlay a semi-transparent System controlled desktop with the UAC prompt, the purpose of this is that 1) it is obvious if there is a fake UAC prompt as everything needs to be dimmed, including taskbar for it to be legit. 2) If you're prompted simultaneously by 2 prompts, the fake one will be dimmed and lack interactivity. ---------- The Disk Defragmenter is likely still based on Diskeeper technology, is likely a much newer version then that of XP and Vista's.

yes i totally agree, i am on a pension & only bought my puter this year, there is no way we should have to pay for win7 after having so much trouble with a very 'unfinished' vista. bill gates has a lot to answer for,

I'm confused about the empiric comprobations on actual computers. I mean: today you have a slooooooooooow computer, tomorrow your computer (I mean: PC or MAC) is fast andyou have done anything.Anyway, I'm not sure about the speed changes with defragmentation (despite I think the computer must be faste, theoretically) but what I see is a better and faster response when I use tools like Register First Aid, but some members of this forums said that the inconsistencies in the register not affect the Windows behavior.We all blame Microsft because of the changes we reclaim but they don't do. However, we can't agreed with ANY of the changes we reclaim, so....(As you can see, english is not my first language, so, I'm sorry if I'm a little confused)

This operating system seems a waste of time and money, seems more of a slight upgrade of vista although vista works this 7 has issues, issues that microsoft cant be bothered to deal with and give pathetic solutions such as deleting internet cache, maybe microsoft with all that money you can hire some real tech support and not offshore tech support eh Rolling back to vista and il return 7 on the basis of being buggy and support being utterly useless

This operating system seems a waste of time and money, seems more of a slight upgrade of vista although vista works this 7 has issues, issues that microsoft cant be bothered to deal with and give pathetic solutions such as deleting internet cache, maybe microsoft with all that money you can hire some real tech support and not offshore tech support ehRolling back to vista and il return 7 on the basis of being buggy and support being utterly useless I'm sorry but, are you sure you have tried Windows 7? I never used a better OS even when I loved W31 SE, W98 and, of course, Win XP.I only receive one blue screen and it was my fault. I tried software not compatible with Vista but compatible with W7 (?). The same with older hardware. And is notoriosly faster and a better memory manager than any other windows. So, are you sure you are talking about Windows 7? Or I'm usin a Special Edition made only for me? :DSaid this, I must insistthe Windows Explorer is still the W7 Achilles' heel; we have talked about WE a lot in this threads. The networking manager is the Window's heel from ever, but I founded worse in W7 with some rigid definitions. But I still prefer W7 over any other OS.

Said this, I must insistthe Windows Explorer is still the W7 Achilles' heel; we have talked about WE a lot in this threads. The networking manager is the Window's heel from ever, but I founded worse in W7 with some rigid definitions. But I still prefer W7 over any other OS. i think i might have to disagree with you on the networking center. I like how they improved the networking system in Windows Vista and Windows 7, but still i think it could be a little more organized. and you are right Windows explorer is Windows 7's Achilles' heel. it was great just the way it was in Windows 2000 and XP. there was no need for microsoft to remove any features, because i only found a few things removed and then other things just completely changed. but at least they fixed the issue with Aero where it hogs all of your systems resources...what i think microsoft should do and i think many would agree with me is too bring back some Windows explorer features from the old days that were in XP. like for one, when you were in the root of a folder it showed you a pie graph of how much disk space you had used up on the hard drive and how much you had left...another Windows explorer features that i would like added back in is the folder customization feature. it would be nice to have that feature again. but for when they add it back into Windows 7, i think they should change it. not only should they have it at the folder level like they had it in Windows explorer, but they should also have an option for it in the "personalize" applet in the control panel. for the control panal applet option, it will create a system template that will apply your folder customization options to all the folders on the PC and they will appear on any use flash drive or CD/DVD that youview with your PC. this optionshould be able to be saved with the Windows theme if microsoft accepts my idea.then the Windows explorer option as always will be a folder by folder option that only create a theme template for the indiviaule folder in the same way that it did in Windows 2000 and it will lye on top of the system theme temple. the folder theme templates will also be able to be applied to flash drives CDs, DVDs, and other portible devices and not just ducument folders on your PC. this way your flash drives can be customized the way you want as well.

Pardon me whilst I vent a wee bit...But, 1st... I, also, will state Vista gets treated unfairly. It is a good OS & I can say that w/ an appreciation that came well before it was released. @ that time I was the Founding Pres. of the IT Pro UG here in Calgary; together w/ the Pres. of the Dev UG we did an event pre-release called Energise IT. Here we conducted hands-on labs for Vista migration and introduced the upcoming OS. Included was a live feed from Toronto of the chief engineer responsible for the underlying kernels in Vista. Prior to this I had been beta testing Vista Builds for a number of months. It all meant having an insight to Vista that many didn't @ least not so far in advance. Ergo there was a grateful understanding of the features, performance & especially security enhancements of Vista. After living through the weak-points of XP this was a technological step forward. After 98, I liked XP & really had no troubles w/ it... but I was a bit computer savy. I liked Vista even better & a lot of that (attitude) because of knowing what was under-the-covers.Then the ____ started to hit the fan... & life for an IT consultant became a bit rough. The Vista/Microsoft bashing began. The rumors, hearsay & negative hype & press; ppl refusing it, saying how horrid it was (they'd never touched it, mind you). "Do we migrate or not, cus we've heard?" Fair enough, now, w/ Windows 7, we can look @ Vista & many bones of contention have been addressed and addressed well!! Wonderful improvements & changes. An absolute winner of an OS! However, as was said, Vista is good enough to have begat Windows 7. But, here's the heart of it that I do not want to see get thrown @ Windows 7 & it suffer the same misguided editorials as Vista....Do not blame the OS for what is not its fault. (& don't get me started on HP) It was pathetic, disgusting, irritating & very frustrating when 3rd Parties lagged. Sure, UAC, bulky & slow, whatever else was supposed to be so terrible about Vista but, the biggest root-problem & ripple-causing issue was the 3rd Parties not being on pace.Yes, Windows 7 has done a lot to help compatibility concerns which, is great and all well & good. But w/ all the effort there has been & over a lengthy timeframe there is no excuse for 3rd Parties to be late. It is rediculous, outrageous & problem-causing that any of the IT Community Partners not be in sync w/ the new OS by the time of its release! Especially things like HP, Sony and other substancial names. May the public's mind & perceptions not be lead astray again.Do not blame the OS for what is not its fault.Thanks for listening.Drew - MS Partner / MS Beta Tester / Pres. Computer Issues

I was told by Moderator Andy Song that I might wana link my complaint about Digital River to this thread. Original Link: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itprogeneral/thread/91c7e445-c008-4488-9d38-375874a939a4 On October 24th I took advantage of that windows seven student discount thing thinking it was a good deal. My internet connection is slow and doing the whole ISO thing seemed like a lot of work, so I wanted to play it safe and order the disc along with it. I had read several post from people on here a couple days about receiving emails saying their discs had been shipped. It was nearly a week later so I sent an email asking about the status of mine. I received what was probably a copy and pasted thing from somewhere on their website telling me the arrival time for your order is 7-14 days and to contact them if it is not here by then. Ok, thats nice, but I wasn't asking about arrival time, I asked about shipping and if my item had shipped yet. Again I get the same email signed by a different person. This continued on for about 4 emails no matter how many time I clarified it, so on the 5th email I had to get a little nasty and type in capital letters. about how I was asking for SHIPPING! and how it had to ship in order for it to arrive in the 7-14 days I've gotten told about 4 times then. I get another email saying my disc had been shipped on October 24th and if it wasn't there in 7-14 days to contact them. Now there are two things wrong with that: 1. The 24th was the SAME day I ordered it, which sounded kind of ridiculous to me, as I order many things online and they NEVER ship the same day I order them. 2. It says on their website things ordered on Saturday or Sunday will be shipped the following Monday, the 24th was a Saturday. I stated both of those things in my next email and again got the same message emailed back to me. Keep in mind at this point all my emails are being signed by a different person, and as to if they're actually getting read fully is debatable. So I decided to wait the 7-14 days out. On November 7th it was the 14th day, no disc yet. I emailed them again and told them I was told that my disc supposedly shipped on October 24th and to contact you if it was not here in 7-14 days, today is the 14th day and it was not here. I get an email AGAIN stating what day I ordered it, when it was shipped and that it should be here on November 12th. Finally! my damn disc will be here, this crisis should be over now right? Nope! Last night I get an email saying my disc has been shipped. What the heck! You've been telling me in like 12 emails now that it was shipped on the On October 24th! So I emailed them this morning, I got pretty nasty again and told them how I was told SEVERAL times that it had shipped on October 24th and was also told that it should be on here November 12th! The next email I get just says that it was shipped yesterday and should be here on November 24th. Ok, I'm fed up with this! I thought I was getting a good deal by getting it for really cheap, but I would had gladly payed over a 100 bucks for this damned thing at a store if I knew I was gona have to deal with this and wait a WHOLE MONTH after I ordered the thing assuming I wasn't lied too again this time. I can't file a complaint through the Better Business Bureau because they won't do anything unless it involved me loosing money in some way. I'm having problems finding somewhere on Microsoft's site to report or complain about this. Any help would be appreciated.

I'm more confused now than ever. Do I get it or don't I? I was excited about getting it; now, I'm not so sure. Who knows?Of course when Vista came out, no one liked it either...so why is this any different?I'm just tired ofupgrading all the time!(I hate being confused all the time!!)

This operating system seems a waste of time and money, seems more of a slight upgrade of vista although vista works this 7 has issues, issues that microsoft cant be bothered to deal with and give pathetic solutions such as deleting internet cache, maybe microsoft with all that money you can hire some real tech support and not offshore tech support eh Rolling back to vista and il return 7 on the basis of being buggy and support being utterly useless I'm sorry but, are you sure you have tried Windows 7? I never used a better OS even when I loved W31 SE, W98 and, of course, Win XP. I only receive one blue screen and it was my fault. I tried software not compatible with Vista but compatible with W7 (?). The same with older hardware. And is notoriosly faster and a better memory manager than any other windows. So, are you sure you are talking about Windows 7? Or I'm usin a Special Edition made only for me? :D Said this, I must insistthe Windows Explorer is still the W7 Achilles' heel; we have talked about WE a lot in this threads. The networking manager is the Window's heel from ever, but I founded worse in W7 with some rigid definitions. But I still prefer W7 over any other OS. Well either that or i have a rebranded OS.. oh wait windows 7 is just vista with a few tweaks and a different GUI not to mention you can get the GUI for vista of 7 anyway to be honest this core 2 quad performance is the same on vista and 7 only difference is that vista works, people only hated vista because they were installing terrible hardware on a new operating system

I would like to request that support for horizontal and vertical span mode be added to the WDDM so that graphics card companies can provide this feature. This is available in XP and I can't move to Windows 7 on my work computer without it. There has been some back and forth about whose responsible for this being removed, but I would appreciate it if Microsoft could work with ATI and NVidia to make sure that they can provide this functionality in their drivers. (I have a hard time imagining that both ATI and NVidia would be the ones dropping this mode, as their market is based on advanced graphics users) Please note that this is not the same as "Extending" my desktop to a second monitor. Instead, it makes the Windows OS think that there is only one monitor with a resolution spanning all available monitors. There has been some indication in the answers forum that it is assumed that this is only a mode used for gaming, but in my job I need this mode to work efficiently with Office, Visual Studio, etc. I use 2 monitors and like to use both. For instance, I like having Word span my 2 monitors so I can see 4 pages at once. If I open word and hit maximize with span mode, it opens across all monitors (what I want). Without span mode it will maximize only to one monitor. I did a bit of a study and found that without span mode, I waste a little under 15 minutes PER DAY resizing screens. Unfortunately this is a deal breaker for me and I have to stay with XP. David Kuehner MSDN Subscriber Developer for 35 years

This operating system seems a waste of time and money, seems more of a slight upgrade of vista although vista works this 7 has issues, issues that microsoft cant be bothered to deal with and give pathetic solutions such as deleting internet cache, maybe microsoft with all that money you can hire some real tech support and not offshore tech support ehRolling back to vista and il return 7 on the basis of being buggy and support being utterly useless I'm sorry but, are you sure you have tried Windows 7? I never used a better OS even when I loved W31 SE, W98 and, of course, Win XP.I only receive one blue screen and it was my fault. I tried software not compatible with Vista but compatible with W7 (?). The same with older hardware. And is notoriosly faster and a better memory manager than any other windows. So, are you sure you are talking about Windows 7? Or I'm usin a Special Edition made only for me? :DSaid this, I must insistthe Windows Explorer is still the W7 Achilles' heel; we have talked about WE a lot in this threads. The networking manager is the Window's heel from ever, but I founded worse in W7 with some rigid definitions. But I still prefer W7 over any other OS. Well either that or i have a rebranded OS.. oh wait windows 7 is just vista with a few tweaks and a different GUI not to mention you can get the GUI for vista of 7 anyway to be honest this core 2 quad performance is the same on vista and 7 only difference is that vista works, people only hated vista because they were installing terrible hardware on a new operating system OK. I agree with most of your concepts, but I'm using W7 from the fisrt beta version and I have a terrible hardware :D wich can't carry on Vista ;)@Steven Wabik:i think i might have to disagree with you on the networking center. I like how they improved the networking system in Windows Vista and Windows 7, but still i think it could be a little more organized.I don't agree. With W98Se and XP you plug a cable on a PC - switch - PC and everithing goes well even with different OSs (of course, never at the first intent, you must turn off everything, go dinner or sleep and the next day everithing works :D) I tried the same with every W7 version and never worked. I mean: My XP PC can read and write files on my W7 PC and can navigate internet using the W7 as a server, but the W7 PC can see the sahred folders on the XP PC but can't never access it. There are a few threads on this in the forum, but the problem is still here.

I only receive one blue screen and it was my fault. A bluescreen is never your fault, even if you are a programmer. A bluescreen is your fault if: a) you wrote the Windows kernel or b) you wrote one of your device drivers. Given Win7 only allows you to install drivers that MS has signed, the conclusion once again is that only Microsoft could get away with selling you something they have been developing for 20 years that still doesn't work like it should have on day 1.They have your money, and you have this forum. Can you see how that works?

It takes a fair bit to confuse me, and I won't join the party until they release the first service pack. This is the (only) time Microsoft updates their OSes to fix bugs and change annoying features. See what Win7 SP1 is like and if you still see 700 people on one forum saying how bad it is, don't give them your money.They have your money, and you have this forum. Can you see how that works?

It takes a fair bit to confuse me, and I won't join the party until they release the first service pack. This is the (only) time Microsoft updates their OSes to fix bugs and change annoying features. See what Win7 SP1 is like and if you still see 700 people on one forum saying how bad it is, don't give them your money. They have your money, and you have this forum. Can you see how that works? I got my copy of Win 7 Ultimate absolutely free (unless you want to include bus fare to NYC from NJ ($6.80 total) by attending one of the MS Windows 7 launch events. FW

I got my copy of Win 7 Ultimate absolutely free (unless you want to include bus fare to NYC from NJ ($6.80 total) by attending one of the MS Windows 7 launch events. FW So what you're saying is even when you get it for free you pay more than it costs to produce? :-pThey have your money, and you have this forum. Can you see how that works?

That travel can cost U$S 1500 to me :lol:

I got my copy of Win 7 Ultimate absolutely free (unless you want to include bus fare to NYC from NJ ($6.80 total) by attending one of the MS Windows 7 launch events.FW So what you're saying is even when you get it for free you pay more than it costs to produce? :-p They have your money, and you have this forum. Can you see how that works? i got my copy for free the same way.

it's really is not a very good movie editor i have download some dreamscenes and i wanted to change them from left to right to right to left because my windows is in hebrew and ho and behold you can rotate 90 degrees left or right but no mirror or any other way and not a lot of options any way which meanthat i would to find a non microsoft software to edit microsoft movie files thanks again for your briliant intelect microsoft.:)

Hello,I have been using Windows 7 beta and RC 32 bits from day 1.The RC version was perfectly stable - I never had a problem whatsoever.I have done a clean install of Windows 7 RTM as soon as it became available.With clean install I mean :- Clean install of Windows 7 RTM with hard disk format and all.- The same machine as the RC version - no hardware changes whatsoever.- The same software that was installed on the RC machine was installed again on the RTM machine - nothing less, nothing more.And the result is not very pleasant :- My RTM machine suffers from Windows Explorer hang-ups now and then.- My RTM machine suffers from Internet Explorer hang-ups now and then.My machine completely blocks in these cases and only a hard reboot (powerbutton) helps me to restart the machine.Another issue (with the Notification Area) has most probably something in common with the Windows Explorer problem mentioned above is the following:Everything was OK when I first started my newly created RTM machine.After a while the following happened when I go to the Customize Notification Screen:Several programs in there got the wrong icon to their left side - and there is no way to reppair this.Result of all this : I am pretty disappointed with Windows 7 RTM 32 bits and I went back to my RC version because this is still a beauty. Regards Picsoe

I read Quick launch will be discontinued in future Windows, WHY? I love it and there are so many articles on forums and blogs on how to enable it in windows 7, there's a reason, People want it! Why not give people what they want? So how to I get Microsoft to listen to this?

Watch the video: Windows 7 in action: do more with the taskbar and Jump ListsCarey Frisch

Thats a hammer! MS, create a little patch to cancel the time limitation of RC! What a shame! You downgrade even from rc to rtm , congratulations! Whom were you replying to? It is not clear, what with those deleted posts and merging and all.My post was one of the ones deleted, apparently because I agreed with Piscoe and proposed his post as an answer in its original thread.

Brian Borg : I replied to Microsoft "Ex" Fan. BTW, the first post of mine that ms deleted. Sometimes it cannot bear hard but justified critics.But thanks that you cited my comment.

Looks like we have all been censored, not just derosneC.

Well, I must say that all this censorship almost makes me reassured. For a moment, I tought MS would accept and face reality about the sh** user experience we got from testing Win7. After reading this thread (before, and after pruning), I have confirmation of how they work. Seriously, guys from MS, MVP or whatever, WHY don't you ever listen to your custommers ? WTF is wrong in this ? You're supposed to improve the product, and for that, you have to suit the NEEDS of people... not sell them what suits YOUR needs, coz they just dont care about that...

Hello,I have been using Windows 7 beta and RC 32 bits from day 1.The RC version was perfectly stable - I never had a problem whatsoever.I have done a clean install of Windows 7 RTM as soon as it became available.With clean install I mean :- Clean install of Windows 7 RTM with hard disk format and all.- The same machine as the RC version - no hardware changes whatsoever.- The same software that was installed on the RC machine was installed again on the RTM machine - nothing less, nothing more.And the result is not very pleasant :- My RTM machine suffers from Windows Explorer hang-ups now and then.- My RTM machine suffers from Internet Explorer hang-ups now and then.My machine completely blocks in these cases and only a hard reboot (powerbutton) helps me to restart the machine. Regards Picsoe Check one of my older posts - same issue - fixed by installing mainboard chipset drivers - the ones in RTM are broken compared with beta or RC. At least for nVidia chipset - my case.2 "new" bugs founded:1 - my USB stick - if I use an USB stick when I press Safely Remove , after about 10 sec it says it cannot be removed. Even if it's empty. No viruses, or other software installed than few weeks before starting the problem. No matter what USB stick I use.2 - I have THE SAME PROBLEM AS IN VISTA with Windows Fax & Scan - reported since Vista beta - does not recognize my Cannon Lide 60 scanner. But I can use it in any other software installed except Windows Fax & Scan. It says there is no scanner installed.And BTW - I think someone should start a new topic for 7 RTM -this one loads very hard in IE8 and has a lot of lag when writing.

Be assured, ms WILL learn, maybe they have to go the rough way as IBMdid some years ago. ms will also get off its high horse.

Here's a few, been trying to use Win 7 for 1 day now If I have notepad open and I right click on it on the taskbar I can no longer hit the "c" key to close the window, now I have to move my mouse and click on more stuff. You can no longer navigate to folders in explorer with your arrow keys and have their contents show up. Now you have to navigate and select enter or click on them... More Mouse Needed == Less Power Now if I select a file and hit Alt-F M, the rename selection is only for the file, not the extension Try to rename a shortcut on the start-menu. Now you have to navigate through dialogs and tabs. Try to pin a process to the start menu, customize its command line and rename the shortcut. Now try to do that same process again with a different command line... good luck Pin something to your start-menu, right click on it say properties > general > location results with something like C:\Users\userx\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\User Pinned\StartMenu Are you kidding me?? "Roaming..? Internet Explorer..?" What does IE have to do with shortcuts on my start menu and why are they roaming? What genius! Try to understand how to customize your start-menu, give up, search for all instances of start menu on your disc, there are lots, given that ms doesn't even show you all of them and 1/2 of them are inaccessible anyway. Nicely organized guys. It's always more bloat and more complexity.

Thread continued here.Windows Client IT Pro Audience Manager for Web Forums, Windows Client Forum Owner