7 things Windows 7 has to do to win me back

By Oli on Wednesday, 30th January 2008. More information. Comments.

As I keep harking on, I moved to Linux. I'm happy and things are getting a lot more routine for me. I've been seeing a lot of fake screenshots this week for Windows 7 and it made me think what I would need from the next version of Windows to migrate back.

Fake Windows 7 Logo

While I realise Microsoft could probably live without my business, Linux really does hold the floor for desktop progress over the next few years, with MS and Apple both sitting it out until late-2009/2010. In that time, there are going to be three or four major Ubuntu releases, all upping the tempo of Linux in the desktop role. MS does have the most marketshare but it has fallen into last place in terms of features, stability and performance.

Faked Win7 screenshot

On a personal note, when I've seen these fake Windows pictures (example right), I have to admit part of me would hop back to Vista, XP or even Win2k in a heartbeat. Linux does still have issues, and being the config-prodder that I am with the perverse hardware that I have, I run into issues and undoubtedly spend a few hours here and there hacking around. You didn't have that choice in Windows. It either worked or didn't and you had to accept that and just get on with things. But the vast majority of my psyche loves the freedom of Linux, loves the community spirit and the overwhelming scent of progress each time I download updates — rather than Windows' asthmatic excuse for a restart.

So what could Windows do to regain my trust and custom?

1. Divorce the media companies — Dump DRM

DRM is always a hot topic but I'm not citing it here just because it's fashionable. I used Vista for just under a year and know how much the whole system lags as a result of MS taking XP and wrapping its around a cattle-prod that fires when something isn't perfect.

The argument for keeping trusted-system-DRM was to keep content providers happy, presumably to get their contracts from the big media firms at lower rates... But why should I be punished if I'm not using that media? Hell, why is every user expected to illegally copy any media they put in their computer? It doesn't make sense. Get rid of it and we can talk.

2. Software repositories

Ubuntu's repo is epic

If you're a Windows user, you might not be familiar with the Linux way of downloading, installing and upgrading software. On many distributions, you can use one tool (graphical or command-line — your choice) to download your software from your distribution's servers and install it automatically. Additionally, all your installed programs are checked for updates each day and if any are available, they're downloaded and installed in the same fashion. It's absolutely epic.

In Windows, unless it has auto-updates built into the particular software, you install something and it lingers until you go and check the website on your own. This is bad. This is how desktop users get hacked open — they'll install something like Winamp, a few months later somebody will find an exploit for the old version and before you know it, that user's PC is sending out spam and all sorts of other crap.

You might say that this would cost MS millions, but they could make money by allowing software vendors to sell software through their repository (a bit like Steam for applications). Centralised software distribution is too powerful a feature not to use. MS should definitely adopt it.

3. Introduce a flexible filesystem (with modules)

Admittedly this isn't for the average user but in Linux, I enjoy a very flexible filesystem arrangement. I have disks, sftp servers and samba shares mounted all over my system, where I like. I have a directory in my home folder that is actually on my Linux server on the other side of the planet, making it oh-so-easy to upload images to the blog.

Windows has a stagnant, device-orientated filesystem that just doesn't cut it (for me). It works but it's a pain in the rear end when you can't treat any filesytem like any other. It needs (nice) symbolic linking, the ability to mount a samba (that's Windows File Share to Windows users) under your home directory as a normal folder.

Additionally, Microsoft need to add modules (and allow for third party modules) to allow reading and writing to a lot more partition types. I now have no NTFS drives. My USB and flash media are FAT32 but all my hard disks are ext2 or ext3 and there's no way in hell that I'm going to convert everything back, again.

4. Simplify purchase and upgrades with just one desktop SKU

So many different names for the same rubbish!

Windows 2000 only had a "professional" desktop varient. XP brought with it an additional "home" Stock Keeping Unit (SKU). Vista multiplied like a nasty bacterium, spawning endless variants, bringing few differences but with massive price differences. Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, Enterprise and Ultimate. There's also a super-basic version doing the rounds in the developing world.

I see the marketing rationale — "ultimate" sounds a billion and five times better than "basic" — but it's just infuriating when you want the business edition and you also have the cheek to want the media centre functionality? Yeah, you have to buy another Vista license (in the guise of a full upgrade package) — originally £170/$350 but now just £120/$245. Bargain!

And, hey, you could also drop the price a little too. There are other revenue schemes that you could exploit in order to drive your seat cost down. Think of your users for once, Microsoft. Put everything in one package like Linux and OSX.

5. Overhaul its standard utilities

I know the job of Calculator and Notepad are basic, but that doesn't mean that the Windows 95 version was perfect. Most of the standard "applications" that ship with Windows are dated and are rarely used in serious circumstances, rather replaced with better tools.

In Linux, the best tool is chosen for the job and if it doesn't keep up with the competition, it's replaced. Microsoft needs to spend less time mucking around making Texas-Hold-Em games for Ultimate users and improve the apps that everybody has to use at some point.

6. Rip out the registry

Get rid of the registry

The Windows registry is one of Windows' largest single point of failure. In short, if it breaks, your computer is broken. As Jeff Atwood wrote a few months ago:

That's why every single registry editing tip you'll ever find starts with a big fat screaming disclaimer about how you can break your computer with regedit.

Its main purpose is to centralise settings for both Windows and all the installed applications. The problem with this: it's idiotic. Why would you want to separate your user-files from your config files? You wouldn't — it's only like this because Vista, like XP, like 2000, like all the other nt versions, is still woefully dependant on the single-user designs from earlier Windows times.

Jeff also points out that the registry isn't self-cleaning (probably a good thing) and you end up with piles and piles of crap building up. You can resort to registry cleaners but they can sometimes do damage.

The silly thing is, there is a user-space file-registry in Vista — but it's dependant on application creators on implementing it. Microsoft should just rip out the reg, perhaps with a redirector (relocating faux entries to and from file) for legacy support.

7. Better multi-monitor support

Support for multiple monitors is there, and has been since Win2k but you can't have more than one taskbar (ie. one for the other screens). You do, however, have the lucky opportunity to purchase UltraMon.

Don't get me wrong: it's an excellent piece of software but the problem it solves shouldn't exist in the first place. It's also not as good as a proper taskbar. This isn't an issue in Linux.

In conclusion... Microsoft have had years to seriously innovate on the desktop. Some would argue that XP was that big step but 2000->XP was a tiny jump in functionality, security and stability compared to Win98->2000. For the sake of the Windows brand, Windows 7 needs to kick ass; otherwise it's going to end up dying off as people find that there are already better operating systems out there.

How much of this is essential to win back my allegiance? Certainly the first four (combined) would woo me a little but if it was still let down by poor apps and the same buggy registry that's been floating around since 1995, I'd stick with Linux.

Grav

Written by Oli on Wednesday, 30 January 2008. Tagged with windows 7, linux, windows. Read 10103 times. If you liked it, please give it a digg.

1 to 10 of 24 < 1 2 3 >
#1 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
My only real criticism of this article is that Windows software is not "required" to use the Windows registry, just as Linux software is not "required" to store its configuration information in the /etc directory. Yes, the entire registry is stored in just a handful of files, that when corrupted, can cause the OS to stop functioning - but putting a bad entry in a number of /etc files can also cause system level problems in the *NIX environment. I'm pretty sure most "how to tweak your Linux box" tutorials will also say "make a backup of this file before modifying it." Its general good practice when directly editing configuration files through any other method than an OEM GUI. It is also just as easy to recover a Windows system with a broken registry as it is to recover a Linux box with a misconfigured /etc file... other than that, I totally agree :)
#2 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
I agree with some of the things. I don't agree with what you say about the registry and multi-monitor support. I think Windows does a whole lot better support for monitors and not breaking the OS. I can combine those two things into one Linux problem. In linux, most people have to edit the xorg.conf file to support multi-monitors. If you put a wrong character linux can't load xwindows. You go to ask for help and there is 1000 different ways to do it and most of them don't help you. In my expirience Linux breaks a lot easier by editing one file. No matter how much I poke around in Windows it always boots up.
#3 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
Too bad your current o/s doesn't include a spell checker...
#4 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
Look, windows is not linux. You know that. You can't really expect windows to improve by becoming linux. Just use linux if you want that. While these things are applicable for you, they're not for everyone. And that's really the point ... windows tries to do everything for everyone, which is why it fails. It's not because it's not linux.

Oh, and multi-monitor support on linux is atrocious. I have no idea where you got your facts for point #7 from, but I have dual-monitor rigs at work and at home. While the windows implementation may be less feature rich than what i can do with multi-monitors and proper window managers, the linux version of multiple-monitors is horribly bug-ridden and idiosyncratic. As another user commented above, at least with windows, unless somethings is REALLY boofed, at least I know i'll be able to get a graphical shell.
#5 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
>Oh, and multi-monitor support on linux is atrocious.


It's awesome.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5211181872022800093&q=multihead+compiz&total=3&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

You can even have multi local user with multiple keyboard/mouse on one box.


http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html
#6 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
>Oh, and multi-monitor support on linux is atrocious.
It's awesome.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5211181872022800093&q=multihead+compiz&total=3&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2
You can even have multi local user with multiple keyboard/mouse on one box.
http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html


You didn't pay attention to my comment. I know multi-monitor support on linux is great ... when it works well at all. But I have never seen it be anything except buggy and inconsistent.

Eyecandy and snazzy looking transitions and window effects are NOT multi-monitor support. It's just eye-candy. Useless for getting work done. What i'm talking about is consistent window placement, sane window snapping, sensible maximizing/fullscreening, correct placement of child dialogues with their parents ... something that linux has never gotten correct 100% of the time.

Cool GL window effects, compositing and alpha-blending, while pretty, don't help you get work done, and just waste your time.
#7 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
Oh, for Pete's sake, just get a Mac. Run Linux, XP, OS X, or -- if you're feeling particularly masochistic -- Vista (they all work natively -- no emulation!).

With Mac OS, you've immediately fixed at least six of the seven issues you're currently experiencing: software repositories are web-based and include thousands of free apps, the filesystem is flexible, only one desktop SKU (okay, so there's a family pack, but it's the same exact product with five licenses instead of one), the standard utilities include just about everything you'd ever need for basic usage, there's no registry, and multi-monitor support is excellent.
#8 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
Windows 7 will come with the 7 deadly sins.
1- Lust for being Apple
2- Gluttony for taking all the memory and system resources;
3- Greed for taking more bucks for less power;
4- Sloth - too bloated to do something;
5- User's Wrath when it crashes;
6- Envy of Mac OS X;
7- Pride of being the worst OS in the world.
#9 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
Lander, I'm sensing some serious misreading going on. For starters, the whole point of this article is that Oli is not "currently experiencing" these issues because he's using Linux now - they're things Microsoft needs to fix if they want to make him a Windows guy again.

You're also missing his point about software repositories. "In Windows, unless it has auto-updates built into the particular software, you install something and it lingers until you go and check the website on your own. This is bad." By your logic, Lander, Windows also has a "software repository": Download.com. But none of these "software repositories" approach the Linux way of doing things: Downloading, installing, and updating are all handled by operating system tools in a single unified glory.

From what I've observed on this website, Oli's already feeling pretty nasty towards the Apple crowd (which makes me sad, because Mac OS X really is a beautifully designed operating system...), and I'd step carefully to avoid giving him more reasons. Read carefully and put more thought into your answers than "Use Apple stuff for everything".
Cross me and be thagomized.
#10 /* 7 months, 1 day ago */
The essential problem with the Mac OS X vs Windows vs Linux debate comes down to one single thing--the majority of computer users. Mac users are by in large, computer enthusiasts, though there are exceptions. Linux users are absolutely enthusiasts and typically IT professionals who know what they are doing. Windows was designed for the everyone, but is especially aimed at your average user who doesn't use even 1/3 of a computer's capabilities. Which brings me to my next point. Windows is the way it is because it is extremely easy to use, and for the most part holds your hand--exactly what most computer-illiterate people need/want.

I have worked in IT for 15 years, mostly in support, but also in many other areas. In every case I've had to interface with regular end users in some way both in the work environment and for friends, family, neighbors, etc. I've found that most people can't even master simple copy & paste, let alone the skills necessary to successfully install and run Linux. Spyware and viruses run rampant because users don't know enough about their computer to protect themselves. Phishing scams are still successful. The average person just doesn't really want to learn about their computer--they just want to use it to get something done without having to think about it or spend a lot of time doing it. Some resent having to user a computer, some are terrified of them, some are convinced computers are just a passing fad, and some just can't successfully operate any technology--the 12:00 flashers of the world.

In my time as a Help Desk analyst over the years, I noticed that the vast majority of calls were for password resets, how to do something absurdly simple like copy & paste, attach a file to an e-mail, how to create a new folder, how to map a network drive, etc.--all things that are brain-dead simple in Windows. Do you really think Linux is going to be any easier for these people to use or will really make them more productive? Microsoft is simply creating a product that caters to this type of user, which happens to be the majority, at least in my experience.

As an IT guy, I support mostly Windows, so I use it daily. I also use Linux. I haven't yet tried Mac OS X, though I want to. That said, there's a lot about Windows I don't like. There's a lot about Linux I don't like, but I work around them both. Microsoft caters to the majority, and the majority are ignorant. Not necessarily stupid per se, just lacking knowledge and/or the impetus to acquire knowledge. Use what you like, but realize that if you can and do use Linux, you're already more saavy than 2/3 of the computer users in the US alone.

Now if Microsoft should be vilified for anything, it's Internet Explorer's appalling lack of support for CSS, but that's a rant for another time.
1 to 10 of 24 < 1 2 3 >

Don't just sit there like a lemon! Reply!

Got something to say? Now's the time to share it with the author and everybody else that reads this posting! Lemons need not apply.

edtBOX - xHTML: yes - bbcode:no
Home | Advertise | About | Contact | Legal © Oli Warner 2001—2007 Proud 9rules member