So, what are you looking forward to in windows 8?

[BD2003]

Win 7 has been with us for over a year now, and the rumblings are beginning about the next iteration. Curious what features and improvements everyone wants and/or expects from the next version?

I certainly want and expect an app store, and leaked slides seem to confirm it's happening. I'd really like there to be a centralized repository to secure apps, unified updating, and most importantly - high standards. That's one of the best things about the iOS app store - they really do enforce a minimum level of quality, and with all the work they've put into silverlight and WPF, Itd be great if they can finally cut back on some of the legacy and actually see the APIs they created actually get used. I'd naturally also hope for the same consumer friendly downward price pressure.

And as much as I want that to happen, I fully expect them to screw it up. They'll probably have zero standards, the apps will cost too much, and it'll be an entirely user unfriendly experience like every other app store initiative they've ever had. I just don't think they "get it", and it'll end up like the heap of garbage and amateur hour their widget catalog is.

Aside from that, I'd like to see a new theme, the glass theme they've had since vista is getting a little old. In general, I'd like to see some more eye candy - I've got a monster CPU and GPU just sitting idle most of the time, yet the puny SoC in my iPhone has better scrolling and generally just a smoother UI than my desktop. It's crazy.

I'd also really like to see improved font rendering....os x just has better text. Sure it's not as sharp as cleartype, and they can quote whatever readability studies they want, but I want os x font smoothing in my windows. Chances of this happening are slim to none I'm sure.

But still, there's no too many ways I can think of that they can really improve on win 7, but that's their job, not mine.

 

[jamesmcuk]

Hmmm I think an App Store is a bad idea for the generally tech savvy who can steer clear of dodgy software. Bigger problems are created when you use centralised and controlled apps such as monopolies and price fixing ( although this goes on anyway) Apple is a prime example of a control freak business and thats why I binned my iphone off and got a HTC with Android (its so much better). You only need to look at Itunes music prices vs Legalsounds music prices to see what a closed market brings.

But to your original question I would like to see a sensible price for domestic use of around £30-40 UK maybe even less while business which takes advantage of far more of the functionality of windows pays the same.

 

[bruceb]

I will stick with my XP for now and maybe move onto Win 7 when I must. Not interested in helping Mr.Gates getting any richer than he is.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

I would hope for better virtualization support / app virtualization and thin client support as well as better remote desktop features.

Also, a central way to update software that you have installed would be HUGE. manual updating sometimes is so time consuming. At least there should be something that can tell you when things are out of date.

Multiple desktops support out of the box

An automatic backup system option like crashplan with de-duplication

I'm sure this is already in the works - better integration with windows live/cloud services

 

[lord_emperor]

Nothing.

There is nothing I can't do in Windows 7 that isn't available as free software already.

I would say the same about Windows XP except the 64-bit version is known to be junk.

And in truth I was fine with Vista, all the bad press it got was due to hardware manufacturers failing at drivers, if M$ had released some Vista/XP hybrid before Vista to take the heat the Vista release would have been as smooth as Windows 7 was thanks to forcing hardware manufacturers to implement proper drivers.

 

[BD2003]

Hmmm I think an App Store is a bad idea for the generally tech savvy who can steer clear of dodgy software. Bigger problems are created when you use centralised and controlled apps such as monopolies and price fixing ( although this goes on anyway) Apple is a prime example of a control freak business and thats why I binned my iphone off and got a HTC with Android (its so much better). You only need to look at Itunes music prices vs Legalsounds music prices to see what a closed market brings.

But to your original question I would like to see a sensible price for domestic use of around £30-40 UK maybe even less while business which takes advantage of far more of the functionality of windows pays the same.

Well, this is still windows we're talking about. No question you won't have to use an app store if you didn't want to.

 

[HeXen]

1. I expect them spend millions marketing small improvements that don't really exceed anything that 3rd party doesnt have already....like Aero peak or Aero Snap...C'mon, those are such lame little novelties that do not really do much of anything worth an upgrade.

2. I expect Explorer to remain as a very generic and non customizable file browser without even so much as an addition of Tabs much less anything else.
I also expect 90% of all Windows vista/7 menus and applications to remain exactly the same and i'll still be replacing Notepad with Notpad ++ or Jarte. Paint will be the same and i'll still need Paint.net or GIMP. just to do what i consider basic things.

3. I expect their "App store" to go the way of "games for windows" and deliver nothing more than what we already have. A half assed job of trying a standard without setting a real standard.

4. I expect Cloud computing to be there, some way , some how. to get us used to the idea so that Windows 9 will be all cloud only so they can keep legit users more in control.

5. I expect the "Aero desktop enviro" to not be nearly as customizable as KDE or Gnome. I also don't expect any more eye candy and functionality even remotely close to Compiz Fusion. Also, no doubt that we will continue to rely on 3rd party and hacks just to change how the taskbar looks.

6. I expect 90% of its built in apps to be useless as most people will have to download 3rd party codecs and software to do what they really want to do without such lame restrictions.

7. I expect we'll still need AV software right off the bat. The crappy registry will still exist and continue with the fun corruptions that so easily ensue, the search function will still be slower and less functional than freeware apps such as "everything" and there will not be a DX12.

8. I expect it will be a faster booting Windows 7 with some mild features that they could technically have implemented into W7 if they really wanted to. Linux commuinity will copy those small features only to continue to be a more solid, yet misunderstood OS with no real gaming support.

 

[Tom]

I'd like a version of Windows that I can run Windows apps on.

And a way to view the files on my computer the way I want to view them.

 

[jrocks84]

I would hope for better virtualization support / app virtualization and thin client support as well as better remote desktop features.

Also, a central way to update software that you have installed would be HUGE. manual updating sometimes is so time consuming. At least there should be something that can tell you when things are out of date.

Multiple desktops support out of the box

An automatic backup system option like crashplan with de-duplication

I'm sure this is already in the works - better integration with windows live/cloud services

I totally agree with everything, especially the central updater. I find people complain more about updating now than most other things, and I too would like it to be quicker. One of my friends was wondering why he kept getting viruses, so I went over to his house to check and he was running Adobe Reader 7, Flash 9, an outdated Firefox, and basically most programs he had were outdated at least one major version.

 

[Nothinman]

I'd mainly just like more modularity and a real package management system. Windows Server Core was a step in the right direction, but not nearly enough. A central place, like aptitude on Linux, where I can install, remove and update everything would be huge.

I certainly want and expect an app store, and leaked slides seem to confirm it's happening. I'd really like there to be a centralized repository to secure apps, unified updating, and most importantly - high standards.

I'll agree with unified updating, but that could be done now with Automatic Updates. All they'd have to do is extend it so that it can poll multiple sites and give 3rd parties an API to register their site. An app store isn't required for that and will just add to the confusion since it'll just be one more way to add/remove apps.

An app store makes sense on mobile devices because of the other restrictions imposed on them, but it doesn't make much sense for a full blown PC. And it'll likely mean we'll now have things being updated via AU, manually by the app's annoying scheduler and via the app store. Yay for unnecessary redundancy.

But to your original question I would like to see a sensible price for domestic use of around £30-40 UK maybe even less while business which takes advantage of far more of the functionality of windows pays the same.

Why? $200 for something that you'll use for at least 3 years is too much? That's ~$5/mo across 3 years...

6. I expect 90% of its built in apps to be useless as most people will have to download 3rd party codecs and software to do what they really want to do without such lame restrictions.

Sadly, they have to be that way. If they made them better they'd get another antitrust lawsuit thrown at them.

7. I expect we'll still need AV software right off the bat. The crappy registry will still exist and continue with the fun corruptions that so easily ensue, the search function will still be slower and less functional than freeware apps such as "everything" and there will not be a DX12.

Of course you'll want A/V software, things are getting worse instead of better. Worms and other types of malicious programs are being developed for smart phones now too so pretty soon you'll need one there as well.

And the registry itself isn't bad, it's just their implementation that sucks. For real integration an OS needs a central registry of settings so that apps can easily query system settings, handlers, etc and register themselves to handle certain things. MS just made it way too hard to fix when it breaks.

I totally agree with everything, especially the central updater. I find people complain more about updating now than most other things, and I too would like it to be quicker. One of my friends was wondering why he kept getting viruses, so I went over to his house to check and he was running Adobe Reader 7, Flash 9, an outdated Firefox, and basically most programs he had were outdated at least one major version.

All of those apps bug you about updates automatically, so he's either ignoring them or disabled the updating. Both of which point the finger at him.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Honestly I'm completely happy with Windows 7. I probably won't upgrade for a while.

 

[corkyg]

A direct upgrade path from XP. Can't do it to 7. But, it is possible to up XP to Vista - then Vista to 7. Sometimes a clean install is such a huge task that it becomes daunting.

 

[Modelworks]

I can't see anything in windows 8 that I want. Not a single feature. All I see is more bloat being added and nothing that improves the core of the OS. It seems like it is just integrating applications more into the OS which is not what I want. I want MS to give me an OS not a bunch of applications that have the OS as a common theme.

 

[BD2003]

I've always thought it strange that they didn't allow third parties into automatic updates, because the way updates are handle in windows is a ridiculous mess. Every app has it's own method.

I think the key for the app store to be successful and meaningful is that it draws a line in the sand about things like updates. Want to make it into the store? Then the only way to install, handle updates etc is through the store, and the rest needs to go or it doesn't make the cut. They have a chance to start fresh in many ways with something like this, but starting fresh has never been windows' style.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

Yes, faster bootup is needed for Sure!!

 

[Chiefcrowe]

Well one possibility is that he is running as a non admin user account so in that case, some programs won't prompt or let you run the updates.

All of those apps bug you about updates automatically, so he's either ignoring them or disabled the updating. Both of which point the finger at him.

 

[BD2003]

Yes, faster bootup is needed for Sure!!

Honestly that's one of the things I think they don't really need to improve on. In 2011 no one should be rebooting except when required to, the rest of the time you should be suspending/hibernating.

And primarily this is a hardware issue anyway...boots are super quick with a solid state drive.

It seems like the only meaningful way they can speed the boot is to just load up less, and seeing how they're targeting SoCs now, they'd better be dead serious about being lightweight.

 

[Nothinman]

Well one possibility is that he is running as a non admin user account so in that case, some programs won't prompt or let you run the updates.

It's possible, but unlikely because it's not the default in any Windows OS and if he were thinking about security enough to run in a limited account you'd think he'd be cognizant about updating his 3rd party apps periodically as well.

 

[spikespiegal]

Curious what features and improvements everyone wants and/or expects from the next version?

How about Windows 8 running as fast as Windows 2000 Server does as a desktop within it's memory scope? Seriously, I work all day on Server 2003, Server 2008, Vista, XP, Win 7, Citrix performance tuning, etc. My spare dual core box at home running 2K Server runs like a Ferrari in comparison. Christ, my EVO navigates faster than Server 2008 does on eight effing cores with 32gig loaded.

I realize of course Microsoft has to increase the number system ticks it devotes towards the Ring (0) {Do_nothing} loop with each new OS to increase new computer sales of course. Still, I keep hoping somebody at MS will step forward much like Intel did when they admitted the P4 was dead architecture and always was inferiour to the P3 and say 'oops, we screwed up. It really is slower and the fanboys are on crack'.

If we look at the hdrdware resources Win7 requires to run faster than NT4 and continue with the curve Win 8 will likely require 8 cores, 12gig of RAM, and a GPU capable of rendering Avatar in real time.

 

[Anteaus]

A direct upgrade path from XP. Can't do it to 7. But, it is possible to up XP to Vista - then Vista to 7. Sometimes a clean install is such a huge task that it becomes daunting.

My opinion is on the flipside of this. I think it was a mistake to ever offer direct upgrades in the first place. Clean installs are a relatively simple process for people who are familar with it, and IMO upgrade paths nurture a path to continued incompetance. There are people that have been using their PCs for many years yet still lack even a basic understanding of how everything works due to the hand holding that has been going on. Maybe forcing clean installs won't solve that particular problem, but I think there are many who would succesful educate themselves.

I'm not implying that you yourself don't know how to do it, just that it creates a broader problem. Convience is not always the right answer, and in this case if you have a succesful upgrade then it works, but the more likely scenerio will be some sort of incompatibilty problems with drivers or software down the line. My .02.

 

[HeXen]

Sadly, they have to be that way. If they made them better they'd get another antitrust lawsuit thrown at them.

of course, but what i'm saying is they do not need to include any...rather a repository of sorts, app store, whatever...where your offered a choice.
Natural language all on its own, is over a gigabyte and many never use it but done via a repo for apps/users that require it makes more sense...sure space is cheap but not for SSD's and its all just more stuff that a hacker trys to exploit. Maybe i'm oldschool Dos way of thinking, but i think an OS should just be an OS and the apps should be available by choice.

Honestly that's one of the things I think they don't really need to improve on. In 2011 no one should be rebooting except when required to, the rest of the time you should be suspending/hibernating.

And primarily this is a hardware issue anyway...boots are super quick with a solid state drive.

It seems like the only meaningful way they can speed the boot is to just load up less, and seeing how they're targeting SoCs now, they'd better be dead serious about being lightweight.

you don't dual boot obviously.
well hibernate/suspend doesn't always work, though in my experience it seems to be Mobo related. My last Asus mobo with latest bios, both hibernate and suspend would not function correctly but did when i got my current MSI . Hibernate didnt resume, suspend would no suspend and always go back to desktop....not to mention hibernate is fairly slow anyway, even with SSD.
Lets not forget this is also Windows, unlike Linux, it seems you can only hiber/sus for so many times till something does not work as it should or it gets slow. my g/f experiences this about once per month, i have gone a solid year or longer without a reboot in Linux before

Also, lets not forget MS announced Arm support in W8...we can't have W7 bootup time in a Tablet with Tegra 2 in it. My gaming rig with C300 SSD takes 33 seconds/ 17 to desktop...at its best average. MS's goal is 10 seconds and tablets need to be instant on.

 

[Anteaus]

I've always thought it strange that they didn't allow third parties into automatic updates, because the way updates are handle in windows is a ridiculous mess. Every app has it's own method.

I think the key for the app store to be successful and meaningful is that it draws a line in the sand about things like updates. Want to make it into the store? Then the only way to install, handle updates etc is through the store, and the rest needs to go or it doesn't make the cut. They have a chance to start fresh in many ways with something like this, but starting fresh has never been windows' style.

I think its a liability issue. MS is responsible for everything that is passed through the Update applet and if a 3rd party screws up an update MS will still get bad PR over it. It might seem like a good idea, but I prefer a minimalist approach here.

 

[Nothinman]

My opinion is on the flipside of this. I think it was a mistake to ever offer direct upgrades in the first place. Clean installs are a relatively simple process for people who are familar with it, and IMO upgrade paths nurture a path to continued incompetance. There are people that have been using their PCs for many years yet still lack even a basic understanding of how everything works due to the hand holding that has been going on. Maybe forcing clean installs won't solve that particular problem, but I think there are many who would succesful educate themselves.

I'm not implying that you yourself don't know how to do it, just that it creates a broader problem. Convience is not always the right answer, and in this case if you have a succesful upgrade then it works, but the more likely scenerio will be some sort of incompatibilty problems with drivers or software down the line. My .02.

Clean installs are a huge PITA. It takes days for me to reinstall and configure everything for work whenever I get a new laptop or have to reload for some reason. Not offering an upgrade option would be an incredible stupid idea. My home Linux installation is like 6yrs old and I have no plans or reason to redo it any time soon. If anything MS needs to make it more seamless so that upgrades "just work".

I think its a liability issue. MS is responsible for everything that is passed through the Update applet and if a 3rd party screws up an update MS will still get bad PR over it. It might seem like a good idea, but I prefer a minimalist approach here.

MS already pushes out 3rd party updates for drivers so they're already responsible for 3rd party code. Allowing software developers to register repositories wouldn't make MS any more responsible and it would remove the need for every application to handle updates itself. I hate the fact that Flash, Java, Chrome, etc all have their own update mechanisms and daemons. It's a retarded duplication of work.

 

[Anteaus]

Clean installs are a huge PITA. It takes days for me to reinstall and configure everything for work whenever I get a new laptop or have to reload for some reason. Not offering an upgrade option would be an incredible stupid idea. My home Linux installation is like 6yrs old and I have no plans or reason to redo it any time soon. If anything MS needs to make it more seamless so that upgrades "just work".


.

Windows installation is already ridiculously easy. It isn't like linux where you get a sandbox that takes time to customize. Assuming you have drivers and available service packs loaded, you can have Windows 7 installed, drivers loaded, and your favorite office productivity suite installed in less than 2 hours. Updating can take a bit longer. You're not "redoing" anything, since this is the first install of a particular Windows version, and it should not be considered an extension of the previous.

I'll agree that installing various work software can take a lot longer, and the answer to this is a drive image after you've done it once. If your going from one major release to another, your bound to have problems with at least a portion of your software so the "Windows Upgrade Installer" route is usually never done in a professional environment, at least not in my experience.

As to your six year old linux environment, no one is talking about redoing it. We are primarily talking about moving from one major OS release to another. Fortunately for you, assuming you have the knowledge you can upgrade pretty much every facet of linux independently, so once you get an established system, upgrading something like the kernel can be done without upsetting things too much.

If you want to trust an upgrade installer, thats on you. As a linux user, I would have thought that you would be more hesitant to trust an upgrade installer. I enjoy Windows, but I don't trust MS with the decision making in regards to what drivers to keep, which to remove, and how to deal with software that becomes unstable...often times in ways that are mysterious.

Maintaining a proper image backup after the fact is how you prevent having to "redo" anything, and that goes with any OS.

 

[Nothinman]

Windows installation is already ridiculously easy. It isn't like linux where you get a sandbox that takes time to customize. Assuming you have drivers and available service packs loaded, you can have Windows 7 installed, drivers loaded, and your favorite office productivity suite installed in less than 2 hours. Updating can take a bit longer. You're not "redoing" anything, since this is the first install of a particular Windows version, and it should not be considered an extension of the previous.

Those are pretty big assumptions because they're rarely true. Right now Win7 is pretty good about drivers because it's new, in 6mo or so it won't have it and you'll be downloading drivers onto USB sticks on other machines again.

I'll agree that installing various work software can take a lot longer, and the answer to this is a drive image after you've done it once. If your going from one major release to another, your bound to have problems with at least a portion of your software so the "Windows Upgrade Installer" route is usually never done in a professional environment, at least not in my experience.

And this is the rub. Installing Office, our internal apps, SSMS, VPN client, etc all take time and sometimes multiple reboots per app. And then after that WU still start asking you about updates for the new MS stuff you installed so now you wait for that and reboot a dozen more times. It's a lengthy painful process.

As to your six year old linux environment, no one is talking about redoing it. We are primarily talking about moving from one major OS release to another. Fortunately for you, assuming you have the knowledge you can upgrade pretty much every facet of linux independently, so once you get an established system, upgrading something like the kernel can be done without upsetting things too much.

I don't have to think about anything, Debian supports upgrades well so I don't have to do anything but tell it to go ahead. Personally, I run sid so I do more frequent smaller upgrades but I still can't remember the last time I had an issue. Probably the XFree86->Xorg transition because that was a pretty big change and was mostly nVidia's fault since I was using their non-free driver.

If you want to trust an upgrade installer, thats on you. As a linux user, I would have thought that you would be more hesitant to trust an upgrade installer. I enjoy Windows, but I don't trust MS with the decision making in regards to what drivers to keep, which to remove, and how to deal with software that becomes unstable...often times in ways that are mysterious.

Not at all. Debian has made in-place upgrades a requirement for ever release that I can remember. Occasionally their's a caveat in the release notes when something huge happens, but it's usually a simple fix after the upgrade.

I couldn't give a shit which drivers are used on either system as long as they work. And with Windows even if you use the drivers in WU, they're made by the hardware manufacturer so you're getting the same shitty driver either way.

Maintaining a proper image backup after the fact is how you prevent having to "redo" anything, and that goes with any OS.

Which is completely irrelevant with regards to upgrades. That image won't do me any good when I need to move to Win8.