Things i *dont* like in W7...

[flexy]

1) StartMenu.... PUULEEASSEEEE....

2) taskbar, some icons are barely visible. (I have Aero/Glass off and i am running a "classic" theme, call me weird...) Eg. icons for "Live Mail" are not very prominent on my LCD.

3) Windows Live Mail: needs some minor cosmetic changes...font should be "more bold" for unread messages.

4) Icons not shown when moved??? <---- bug?

 

[blackangst1]

I used to gripe about lack of a classic type menu, but what I found is Win7 is intuitive enough, I dont need it. For example, I( prefer to be able to see hidden folders. In classic menu it meant going through the control panel, folder iptions, etc. With Win 7 I just tapped the win key, and typed "hidden" and there it was. Also, at least in Vista, to get to UAC same thing. 3 or 4 (5?) mouse clicks through the menu to turn it on and off. With Win 7 I just typed UAC and there it was. I would suggest trying tapping the win key, and type whatever you want to do. You might be suprised how much you can do that way, and its much faster than navigating through several menus.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

My biggest gripe is the taskbar icons are colorless. Am I missing something?

 

[Snapster]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
My biggest gripe is the taskbar icons are colorless. Am I missing something?

System tray or taskbar? The system tray default windows ones are white (volume, wireless, battery, customise alerts etc) all other icons are in full colour.

 

[Snapster]

Originally posted by: flexy
1) StartMenu.... PUULEEASSEEEE....

2) taskbar, some icons are barely visible. (I have Aero/Glass off and i am running a "classic" theme, call me weird...) Eg. icons for "Live Mail" are not very prominent on my LCD.

3) Windows Live Mail: needs some minor cosmetic changes...font should be "more bold" for unread messages.

4) Icons not shown when moved??? <---- bug?

Are the icons more visible with Aero on for you? I've not tried any classic mode emulation yet so I cannot compare. Windows Live Mail is not a core component of Windows 7 and is available on XP and Vista in the same format. Please report bugs too

 

[nitromullet]

I'm not a huge fan of the loss of Quicklaunch, but I am trying to get used to the new taskbar. There are ways of restoring Quicklaunch functionality to make the taskbar work exactly as it has in the last few versions of Windows, so I can always revert back. I'm trying to see the benefit of the new approach though. So far it feels like change for the sake of change.

 

[Snapster]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I'm not a huge fan of the loss of Quicklaunch, but I am trying to get used to the new taskbar. There are ways of restoring Quicklaunch functionality to make the taskbar work exactly as it has in the last few versions of Windows, so I can always revert back. I'm trying to see the benefit of the new approach though. So far it feels like change for the sake of change.

I takes a little while before it feels useful. Once you have opened plenty of word docs, project files etc having them in the jumplist menu is pretty easy way to get access to any MRU item (assuming the application supports it).

 

[ViRGE]

1) You can no longer move a window slightly off-screen upwards so that the title bar is barely visible. There are times where I want the title bar out of the way (particularly with games) and I can no longer do this. It's a lot like Mac OS X in the respect that now you have this bar at the top of the screen that won't go away. The reason for this appears to be that MS added a behavior so that moving a windowed application to the top automatically maximizes it.

2) Things that are no longer opaque. Apparently people didn't like being able to see things (or not being able to see through things), so now title bars and the taskbar are pretty damn transparent. I can't say I enjoy having to pay close attention to something in order to avoid looking through it.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Snapster

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I'm not a huge fan of the loss of Quicklaunch, but I am trying to get used to the new taskbar. There are ways of restoring Quicklaunch functionality to make the taskbar work exactly as it has in the last few versions of Windows, so I can always revert back. I'm trying to see the benefit of the new approach though. So far it feels like change for the sake of change.

I takes a little while before it feels useful. Once you have opened plenty of word docs, project files etc having them in the jumplist menu is pretty easy way to get access to any MRU item (assuming the application supports it).

The jumplist does seem like it could be useful, but the jumplist is more of an additional feature. It really doesn't seem to have anything to do with the removal of Quicklaunch, as the two are not mutually exclusive.

My main issue is that by combining Quicklaunch with active window functionality is that now it requires additional clicks to open multiple instances of the same app. If your app supports it, Ctrl+N will open a new window or you can right-click on the active window button and click the app's icon. With quicklaunch it's one button click on the app's icon.

Plus, if you choose the "Never Combine" option, the taskbar really just gets jumbled looking. I've been using Windows just fine for years with the knowledge that Quicklaunch is on the left, and active windows are on the right. Now, they are all mixed together.

Alternately, using the "Always Combine, hide labels" option gives you a very clean, but overall not very functional taskbar that requires you to mouse over or click an an active window button to select which instance of the app you want o focus. ...again, more clicks to do something we've done with one click for years.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
1) You can no longer move a window slightly off-screen upwards so that the title bar is barely visible. There are times where I want the title bar out of the way (particularly with games) and I can no longer do this. It's a lot like Mac OS X in the respect that now you have this bar at the top of the screen that won't go away. The reason for this appears to be that MS added a behavior so that moving a windowed application to the top automatically maximizes it.

2) Things that are no longer opaque. Apparently people didn't like being able to see things (or not being able to see through things), so now title bars and the taskbar are pretty damn transparent. I can't say I enjoy having to pay close attention to something in order to avoid looking through it.

Transparency levels are completely adjustable, and can even be disabled while still using Aero.

right-click desktop->Personalize->Window Color

 

[4537256]

I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

I think they fined tuned it for low spec PCs rather then those with decent systems ,think I'll stick with Vista and SP2 when it arrives,just got to wait now for Win8.

 

[KeypoX]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Snapster

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I'm not a huge fan of the loss of Quicklaunch, but I am trying to get used to the new taskbar. There are ways of restoring Quicklaunch functionality to make the taskbar work exactly as it has in the last few versions of Windows, so I can always revert back. I'm trying to see the benefit of the new approach though. So far it feels like change for the sake of change.

I takes a little while before it feels useful. Once you have opened plenty of word docs, project files etc having them in the jumplist menu is pretty easy way to get access to any MRU item (assuming the application supports it).

The jumplist does seem like it could be useful, but the jumplist is more of an additional feature. It really doesn't seem to have anything to do with the removal of Quicklaunch, as the two are not mutually exclusive.

My main issue is that by combining Quicklaunch with active window functionality is that now it requires additional clicks to open multiple instances of the same app. If your app supports it, Ctrl+N will open a new window or you can right-click on the active window button and click the app's icon. With quicklaunch it's one button click on the app's icon.

Plus, if you choose the "Never Combine" option, the taskbar really just gets jumbled looking. I've been using Windows just fine for years with the knowledge that Quicklaunch is on the left, and active windows are on the right. Now, they are all mixed together.

Alternately, using the "Always Combine, hide labels" option gives you a very clean, but overall not very functional taskbar that requires you to mouse over or click an an active window button to select which instance of the app you want o focus. ...again, more clicks to do something we've done with one click for years.

It seems now that the beta is public many people are feeling the same way! Thank god i hope they can fix some of these problems.

 

[KeypoX]

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

I think they fined tuned it for low spec PCs rather then those with decent systems ,think I'll stick with Vista and SP2 when it arrives,just got to wait now for Win8.

SP2 is in beta too. Can be downloaded from Microsoft.

 

[CrystalBay]

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

Yes , I really agree with you here . It feels like it should have been Vista SP2 all along..

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

I think they fined tuned it for low spec PCs rather then those with decent systems ,think I'll stick with Vista and SP2 when it arrives,just got to wait now for Win8.

I agree with both of these points, but...

1) It could (and should) have been done in a service pack, but I'm pretty sure that MS wants to get away from the Vista moniker, as is has a taint to it.

2) You could stick with a previous version of Windows, but the latest version always gets all the love from hardware/applications companies. This is especially important for gamers who often run high end video hardware and apps that require support from vendors to run optimally. With XP, Vista 32 bit, Vista 64-bit, Win7 32-bit, and Win7 64-bit all competing for development resources, vendors will have to compromise.

The best solution IMO, would be for MS to offer reduced pricing on Win 7 for anyone who bought Vista Ultimate or Home retail. Although, I imagine this is just wishful thinking.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: ViRGE
1) You can no longer move a window slightly off-screen upwards so that the title bar is barely visible. There are times where I want the title bar out of the way (particularly with games) and I can no longer do this. It's a lot like Mac OS X in the respect that now you have this bar at the top of the screen that won't go away. The reason for this appears to be that MS added a behavior so that moving a windowed application to the top automatically maximizes it.

2) Things that are no longer opaque. Apparently people didn't like being able to see things (or not being able to see through things), so now title bars and the taskbar are pretty damn transparent. I can't say I enjoy having to pay close attention to something in order to avoid looking through it.

Transparency levels are completely adjustable, and can even be disabled while still using Aero.

right-click desktop->Personalize->Window Color

That's overall transparency. That doesn't change the transparency of just those two items. I like the rest of my stuff semi-transparent, just not the title bars and taskbar.

 

[chusteczka]

For my use, the "back" button in any window is too small. I would prefer it larger or to have another method to return to the previous page.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

I think they fined tuned it for low spec PCs rather then those with decent systems ,think I'll stick with Vista and SP2 when it arrives,just got to wait now for Win8.

I agree with both of these points, but...

1) It could (and should) have been done in a service pack, but I'm pretty sure that MS wants to get away from the Vista moniker, as is has a taint to it.

2) You could stick with a previous version of Windows, but the latest version always gets all the love from hardware/applications companies. This is especially important for gamers who often run high end video hardware and apps that require support from vendors to run optimally. With XP, Vista 32 bit, Vista 64-bit, Win7 32-bit, and Win7 64-bit all competing for development resources, vendors will have to compromise.

The best solution IMO, would be for MS to offer reduced pricing on Win 7 for anyone who bought Vista Ultimate or Home retail. Although, I imagine this is just wishful thinking.

Theyve always offered an upgrade verson for much, much less than the real thing.

Theres at least as much more here over vista as there was in XP over Win2k.

I dont see this should have been a service pack though - its not like these are bugfixes over vista. If you want a fixed vista (not that its really still broken), wait for vista sp2.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: ViRGE
1) You can no longer move a window slightly off-screen upwards so that the title bar is barely visible. There are times where I want the title bar out of the way (particularly with games) and I can no longer do this. It's a lot like Mac OS X in the respect that now you have this bar at the top of the screen that won't go away. The reason for this appears to be that MS added a behavior so that moving a windowed application to the top automatically maximizes it.

2) Things that are no longer opaque. Apparently people didn't like being able to see things (or not being able to see through things), so now title bars and the taskbar are pretty damn transparent. I can't say I enjoy having to pay close attention to something in order to avoid looking through it.

Transparency levels are completely adjustable, and can even be disabled while still using Aero.

right-click desktop->Personalize->Window Color

That's overall transparency. That doesn't change the transparency of just those two items. I like the rest of my stuff semi-transparent, just not the title bars and taskbar.

I'm not sure I follow you... What else is transparent other than the window borders and taskbar? Are you saying that you want the window borders to be transparent with an opaque title bar at the top?

As far as interface appearance goes, I wish they would color match the non-transparent parts of applications to the transparent parts. No matter what color I select for the transparent parts, the non-transparent parts are always light lavender/blueish. This annoyed me about Vista as well.

 

[ViRGE]

When a window is maximized under Vista, the title bar is opaque; and when it's a normal window it's mostly transparent (technically Vista lays a bit of white immediately under the text for better contrast). Whereas in W7 it's transparent in all cases.

As for the taskbar, it's transparent under W7, it's mostly opaque under Vista.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
When a window is maximized under Vista, the title bar is opaque; and when it's a normal window it's mostly transparent (technically Vista lays a bit of white immediately under the text for better contrast). Whereas in W7 it's transparent in all cases.

As for the taskbar, it's transparent under W7, it's mostly opaque under Vista.

I see what are saying. I actually booted into Vista a little while ago, and I had forgotten that the taskbar and windows were different from each other. The taskbar is tinted black (pretty dark), while the window borders are more "frosty" looking than W7. There is a little bit of shading around the text in the title bar on W7, but it is not as high contrast as it in Vista.

I personally like this aspect of W7 better, but I can see where you are coming from with this. MS really should let you set the opacity level of the taskbar, window border, and title bar independently if you'd like to do that. Then we could all be happy.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
I used to gripe about lack of a classic type menu, but what I found is Win7 is intuitive enough, I dont need it. For example, I( prefer to be able to see hidden folders. In classic menu it meant going through the control panel, folder iptions, etc. With Win 7 I just tapped the win key, and typed "hidden" and there it was. Also, at least in Vista, to get to UAC same thing. 3 or 4 (5?) mouse clicks through the menu to turn it on and off. With Win 7 I just typed UAC and there it was. I would suggest trying tapping the win key, and type whatever you want to do. You might be suprised how much you can do that way, and its much faster than navigating through several menus.

:thumbsup:

The winkey and search bar on the start menu is your friend.

 

[soonerproud]

I have to agree with nitromullet on the multiple instances issue. Hopefully this is something that can be addressed before the RC goes public.

Another thing I hate is if you need to run a pinned item as admin, you now have a added click because you first have to navigate the jump list and then right click again on the item in the jump list to access the option. This should be a option in the jump list for every pinned application.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: 4537256
I dont like the fact that they want people like me to pay a likely ~$200 + for what could've been done in a SP. They fixed a broken Vista, plain and simple. I stupidly paid $399 for Ultimate on day 1 release and shouldnt have to pay again for another thats just fixed what they screwed up.

Sure its a better Vista, but its still a platform to use Apps on, and paying that cash to do what i'm already doing in Vista is ignorant waste of money.

Nobody is forcing you to upgrade.