Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

QOTD: What Would You Remove/Add to Win 7?

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 101 comments

Windows is the undisputed king of operating systems. That's no secret. But Windows is also the center of a lot of criticism.

Windows is the undisputed king of operating systems. That's no secret. But Windows is also the center of a lot of criticism.

Over the years, Windows has grown in size. The Windows that exists today, is no doubt, superior to Windows of years ago. However, there are things that I am hoping Microsoft will deploy in Windows 7 when it ships, such as the ability to remove Windows features that you don't want.

The web browser is also the center of controversy for Microsoft. However, it's good that there's one that ships with Windows so you can actually go online after an install and grab all your usual updates, applications, and tools.

The question of the day is: What would you remove from or add to Windows if you were in charge of it at Microsoft?

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 12 Hide
    avanarius , April 9, 2009 12:35 AM
    I never liked the way windows organized multiple programs with multiple users enabled on the Start Menu. For example, if you live in a household with 4 people who use the same computer, I often find programs get lost amongst users depending on who installs what.

    To relieve this problem, All Programs list should always be "All the programs on the computer" and in this list, there should be a check box to hide all the programs that aren't yours, or to only show your programs. To add to this, it might also be useful to add an avatar beside the program to show who installed what.

    Also get rid of the stupid readme files, and uninstall.exe's in the all programs list. This list should ONLY have the program executable file.
Other Comments
  • 2 Hide
    drrich2 , April 9, 2009 12:22 AM
    I'd like the features of the shareware app. 'Startup Cop Pro.' to make it much easier to selectively deactivate startup programs in Windows. Before I learned of this program and accessed it through PC Magazine's site (which required a paid membership to download), I tried using Window's Vista Home Premium's control panel tools, and found them unintuitive and underpowered. So, that would be the big thing for me.

    Richard.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 9, 2009 12:22 AM
    IE n WMP
    never use them anyway
  • Display all 101 comments.
  • 1 Hide
    tester3000 , April 9, 2009 12:23 AM
    I wouldn't want to add anything to the OS. I like to install and customize stuff later.
  • 6 Hide
    Anonymous , April 9, 2009 12:27 AM
    On a standard system put a limit to applications that can start on startup. Allow it to be changed in configurations but limiting this right off the bat would keep people who arent computer savvy from installing 20 things that start on startup since they most likely would never go into config and look to change it.

    Too often to I go to friends houses or even their parents listening to them talking about how slow their computer is running or how long it takes to boot only to find so much trash running in the background, things they don't use at all and have no clue how to disable.

    The whole MSN experience as well. Make it an option to install.
  • -2 Hide
    cadder , April 9, 2009 12:33 AM
    1. I would somehow integrate Explorer more into the OS and less as a separate program. So if you receive an attachment by email, you navigate to where you want to save it and save it, then when you open your word processor it automatically comes up with the same folder to open the file, then say you want to email the edited file to someone else you open the email program and it automatically opens right where the file is stored. Some days I seem to spend half my day clicking down the file tree over and over to essentially the same place.

    2. I would simplify networking. Plug machine A into machine B and they automatically connect.
  • 12 Hide
    avanarius , April 9, 2009 12:35 AM
    I never liked the way windows organized multiple programs with multiple users enabled on the Start Menu. For example, if you live in a household with 4 people who use the same computer, I often find programs get lost amongst users depending on who installs what.

    To relieve this problem, All Programs list should always be "All the programs on the computer" and in this list, there should be a check box to hide all the programs that aren't yours, or to only show your programs. To add to this, it might also be useful to add an avatar beside the program to show who installed what.

    Also get rid of the stupid readme files, and uninstall.exe's in the all programs list. This list should ONLY have the program executable file.
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , April 9, 2009 12:41 AM
    I agree to what has been said before. Creating a user freindly startup option would be very nice. Most slow computers just need to stop many of the things running at the startup that so many people don't know about.
  • 0 Hide
    avanarius , April 9, 2009 12:41 AM
    I always found it hard to manage multiple programs amongst multiple users in the start menu. The start menu with the all programs list should always have "All the programs" installed on the computer (no hidden crap). To add to this, there should be a check box to hide / unhide all programs that aren't yours. You could also add an avatar beside the program to show who installed it.

    Additionally, get rid of the stupid readme files and uninstall.exe's in the start menu. Only a shortcut to the programs executable file should belong in the start menu.
  • 0 Hide
    deltatux , April 9, 2009 12:53 AM
    I'd add a complete UNIX core with Windows backwards compatibility.

    deltatux
  • 0 Hide
    marsax73 , April 9, 2009 12:57 AM
    If they could just make it work as efficient as XP, then that's all I care about. Vista took a ridiculous amount of resources. I don't mind the GUI (almost identical to Vista). I do agree with others here...allow the user to decide what to install -- IE, Media Player, etc.
  • 3 Hide
    jeverson , April 9, 2009 1:23 AM
    Honestly... I just want a base kernel. I don't want my OS to eat up a significant chunk of my hard drive. I just want a base OS that I can load my drivers and software onto without having to uninstall or disable anything to get the performance I want. Before all you Linux fan boys start chiming in. I mostly use my PC for gaming so Linux is not really an option even with WINE. I also want 64bit compatibility so I can utilize all my memory and not have to worry about page files.


    Who am I kidding.!? It's not like MS is ever going to listen to us. They will continue to monopolize the OS market and don't really care what people or businesses want. They feel they can just tell everyone what to do and how to do it and charge us our first born for it.
  • 8 Hide
    dirtykid , April 9, 2009 1:25 AM
    IE isn't going away any time soon: there are to many web enabled applications that work only with IE of activeX that it is impossible to pull the plug on it. However, offering up safari, firefox, chrome, and opera as additional options wouldn't hurt.

    It would also be nice to get a better description of what's running already, Vista is listing 13 svchost running right now, XP usually had 3 to 9, why? no clue...

    A better process explorer would be nice in hunting down files that are mysteriously in use when they shouldn't be, rather than getting an 'access denied' message, explaining what is actually using the file would save some panic...

    An easy way to modify the alpha channel in Aero would be nice, presently it only really lets you choose a colour.
  • -1 Hide
    lucuis , April 9, 2009 1:27 AM
    I hate the new default taskbar, i have it disabled, and re-enabled the quick launch bar. I'd prefer it if the Quick Launch bar was enabled by default like before. I feel as if the new quick launch thing was done in an effort to change the ui so that ppl would think it is greatly and awesomely different. When, imo, in reality it cumbersome.

    I also don't care for the Libraries feature. I've never really used it, but there's really no need for it imo. It's just another feature added to confuse new users. BUT this is my first impression, i may end up using it down the road and like it, who knows.

    I haven't found an option to remove/disable the quick desktop peek thing that resides in the corner of my taskbar. I don't use desktop icons and have no use for this feature, i'd like to be able to turn it off. Mainly so i don't have that little rectangle in the corner ><

    A Standard DOS interface for really old games would be awesome. It's easily done with a DOS emulator like DOSbox but it'd be nice to have stock.

    The ability to uninstall the stock unzipping program so it can be replaced with an after-install one like WinRAR. That'd be sweet.

    Other then those things and the obvious early driver support, i am very pleased with the way Windows 7 is right now.

    Noticeably fewer running Processes under normal use. 45 processes vs Vista's 64-bit 76 processes (55 processes after tweaking).



  • -2 Hide
    Humans think , April 9, 2009 1:28 AM
    REMOVE:
    Good ideas from the unix like systems: Registry (i don't know if it exists in windows 7 but it shouldn't), limit applications footprint, startup program control (like many have stated), MSN experience (should be optional), Iexplore, wmp (uninstallable)

    KEEP:

    Vast hardware support, Maximum hardware utilization, Terminal Services, Windows sharing compatible with samba.

    ADD:

    Ideas from the Macs: expose, one of the reasons I mainly use Mac OS X (plus speed and responsiveness of course), and sth like preview.

    Extend multi-core support and cuda-like technologies on OS level.

    Security and need for third party antivirus/antispyware software that raises total cost of use for high-security systems.
  • 0 Hide
    randomizer , April 9, 2009 1:31 AM
    Guys, just buy a copy of the EU-regulated "N" editions of Windows and WMP/WMM don't even come with it, let alone coming with the ability to be removed.
  • 1 Hide
    echdskech , April 9, 2009 1:32 AM
    I'd add the option to customize what features/programs to include at install time the way Anaconda in Linux does. I would personally use that to NOT install EVERYTHING not security related (firewall, uac, etc) like IE, WMP, Messenger, win games, etc.

    I have the Win7 x64 beta installed. Even if it is much faster and responsive than Vista, what isn't? I think it can still be faster and smaller. 14GB for a "bare" OS? really?

    Even if I installed gnome and kde and all the productivity, multimedia, development apps and all the king's men on my Fedora laptop, I still won't break 10GB.
  • 1 Hide
    ethaniel , April 9, 2009 1:34 AM
    Removing like "custom installation"? Internet Explorer, Media Center, Media Player, all "Live services" integration, Tablet Support, printer and video drivers, speech support, phone modem support, Windows Defender, the defragmenter, Help files, sample sounds and images, Wordpad, Paint, CD/DVD/Blu-ray burning support, zip file support aaaaaand... any kind of DRM present. Just hoping we'll have a "vLite" version for Windows 7...
  • 3 Hide
    kato128 , April 9, 2009 1:41 AM
    I wish they'd add a task bar for each secondary screen like what ultramon gives you. Have been using ultramon for years but you really shouldn't need a 3rd party prog for this functionality.
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , April 9, 2009 1:44 AM
    Two games that each made game of the year for the PC will not work on Vista. Age of Mythology and 1701 A.D. were games of the year in 2003 and 2006. Hopefully, Windows 7 will allow them to work. If not, consider me an avid and eternal XP fan.
  • -4 Hide
    DJ898 , April 9, 2009 1:51 AM
    Question: why does everyone complain about the size of the install? Except maybe if your using a very low end netbook, you should have tons of hard drive space. I mean with 1 TB drives going for $99 , why does it matter if an OS takes 1.4% of the hard drive space?
Display more comments