Windows Explorer in Windows 7 | The Coffeehouse

rhm

Apart from making the "Navigation pane" even more convoluted (multiple treeviews or one treeview with multiple roots?), Windows Explorer seems exactly the same in Win7 as in Vista.

What is wrong with the shell team? Did they seriously think they'd done a good job with Explorer in Vista and saw no need to change it?

Wasted space - The whole title bar area is wasted. OK, the title bar doesn't do anything useful in most apps, but it's completely blank except for the windows buttons in Explorer. The 'fat window frames' style of Vista/7 doesn't help either.
The toolbar - Mostly blank in Vista, in Win7 it's acquired a bunch of new options that I don't care about while the ones I do care about are hidden in a dropdown. Of course none of this is configurable.
There is an option to enable the menu all the time, but by god does it look ugly. No wonder they wanted to hide it by default.
No horizontal scrollbar in the tree view - Seriously? I'd like to have been in the meeting where they came up with that one. They must have been pretty high that day.
No lines in the treeview - yeh, I know the lines are a bit 'Windows 95', but they work. Now in large trees it's hard to tell what depth you're at without scrolling to the higher level nodes. Oh, which you can't do with selecting the node because the auto-scroll thing that moves the pane horizontally in the absence of the horizontal scrollbar doesn't know what you want to look at without you clicking on it.
The main files pane - this deserves a list all of its own....
Explorer detects (based on the majority of file types or some other guesswork) what 'type' of folder you're in: music files, photos, other. It maintains different settings for each type. If you're old-school like me and you want all folders to use the details view and show the normal columns like file size and date, instead of meta-data that isn't even filled in (couldn't it detect that instead of showing a screen full of empty columns?), you're stuffed. Setting a folder up how you want it and then going to folder options and hitting the button to "make them all look like this" isn't going to work. Every time you go into a folder containing media files it's going to look different.
No intelligence about when to show the navigation pane and when not to - Used to be (prior to Vista), when you double-clicked to open things like Recycle bin or folders on your desktop, you'd get a view without the navigation pane. This doesn't seem to happen any more - if you have it in your main Explorer window you'll get it everywhere.
No quick way to change the navigation pane mode - Even when XP introduced the useless mode when it showed some buttons on the left instead of the treeview, you had a button on the toolbar to switch between useless mode and treeview. Now not only are those options on a dropdown, they're sub-options on a drop-down while the toolbar in Vista is mostly blank and in Win7 is full of stuff you'll never use.
No "Up folder" button in the toolbar. Which brings me onto the location bar....
The location bar can be used to move up a folder, but because you have to click on a different place depending on it's contents, it's not nearly as convenient as the old "Up folder" button. It has the very marginal utility of being able to move up more than one folder at a time, but since it's so visually flabby you can't move up an arbitrary number of levels because usually the whole path isn't visible.
The arrow between the sections in the location bar allow you to navigate without using the treeview. Why though? As a means of navigation it is inferior in every way. And duplicative.
Clicking on the background makes the location bar revert back to a textbox so you can type a path in. Great... except when you're trying to click on the last of the triangles and the whole design of the location bar changes - I bet that confuses the hell out of the computer neophytes that the dumbed down Vista is Explorer is supposed to appeal to. Oh, and you have to click somewhere else in the window to get out of text edit mode; but not anywhere, clicking in the title-bar won't help, it has to be somewhere else that can accept keyboard focus.
The location bar drop-down shares it's history with IE if you have IE8 installed on Vista. This is a VERY VERY bad idea. I can't emphasize enough how misguided and pointless this is. Doesn't seem to do this on Win7, although maybe I haven't played with it enough yet.

Gosh, I thought this list was going to be much longer than that.

What bugs me most about Explorer is that the occasional or non-techy users that the Vista style Explorer design is meant to cater for hardly ever use Explorer and yet people like me who spend half their day finding and moving files about in Explorer windows get something that's far less useable than the Windows 98 style explorer that was used up until Vista. AND WIN7 FIXED NOTHING.

I would really love it if Channel 9 could get someone from the shell team on camera to explain why on earth Windows Explorer is the way it is in Vista/7. I don't expect them to go through my list of complaints or anything, I just want some answer to whether they really thought this was all a good idea or did it all come out of a focus group (full of hairdressers) or something.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

Just a question: is this a list compiled during the free public beta testing or are you just figuring this out now?

sushovande
Smiley Face Sharp

Firstly, I thought your points were all well explained and to the point, and I have personally experienced many of them, and would love them to be fixed as soon as possible. But I take exception to a few of them:

The location bar can be used to move up a folder, but because you have to click on a different place depending on it's contents...

Actually, this has been improved over Vista. In Vista, if the current folder name was long enough, the parent folder button was not even visible, but they made the parent folder visible in 7. I actually like the fact that the address bar behaves like a breadcrumb, and I do not miss the up button. Backspace (or a fourth button on my mouse) helps a lot, though (i know it goes back, not up, but I do want to go back most of the time).

The arrow between the sections in the location bar allow you to navigate without using the treeview. Why though? As a means of navigation it is inferior in every way. And duplicative.

To this, I take serious exception. I love this feature, it is a great time saver when I am investigating a bunch of folders under the same folder. Lets me quickly jump from subfolder 'a' to a peer subfolder.

Clicking on the background makes the location bar revert back to a textbox so you can type a path in.

Well, maybe I am a keyboard junkie.. but I always ALT+D to get keyboard focus and ESC to get back to breadcrumb.

CKurt
while( ( !succeed=try() ) ) { }

You have some valid points, but I'm sure I can make a list that long about the Windows Explorer in Windows Xp too.

What i learn from your list is that you don't like change or innovation. Some stuff (like the breadcrum bar) is a real vast improvement over Xp in many users point of view.

Also I would like to give you the hint to right click on an empty place in the three view menu and check those two boxes. They make the menu behave way more like Xp.

jon_potter
jon

There are plenty of other file managers around Big Smile

LeoDavidson

Using Explorer to manage files is like using MSPaint to edit photos. Smiley

I'm glad Explorer is getting worse and worse; it'll push more people to investigate the alternatives and discover what they've been missing for all these years.

rhm

In reply to PaoloM

#Aug 11th @ 2:57 PM

I didn't beta-test Win7 no. Do you think Microsoft is going to change the whole design of Explorer because I gave negative feedback? Besides, I'm not so much complaining about this stuff being wrong in Win7 as I am complaining that it's (almost) exactly the same as Vista.

I'm having trouble reconciling the positivity around Win7 (as contrasted with Vista) when so far all the things I hate about Vista are almost exactly the same. I'm seeing it as a textbook example of Groupthink: the groupthink when Vista was released was that Windows was basically done by the time XPSP2 came out and Microsoft was trying to sell everyone on a pointless redesign that wasn't ready to be released. The groupthink now is: gee, we're feeling like XP is on it's last legs and Windows 7 is supposed to be loads better than that horrible Vista. In reality Vista wasn't nearly as bad as people said it was (but didn't offer nearly enough reasons to upgrade given driver incompatibilities and other teething troubles) and Win7 isn't nearly as much of an improvement on Vista as the popular opinion seems to think.

ZippyV
Fired Up

"The location bar drop-down shares it's history with IE if you have IE8 installed on Vista. This is a VERY VERY bad idea. I can't emphasize enough how misguided and pointless this is. Doesn't seem to do this on Win7, although maybe I haven't played with it enough yet."

This is something I complained about too here on C9 but apparantly Microsoft thinks this is a good thing.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Whilst I agree with the spirit of your rants, here's my response:

You can bring the Up button back for $5
You don't need a horizontal scrollbar in the sidebar anymore, just moving your cursor from one side to the other causes it to move around for you
I belive it might be possible to bring back the window title and tree view lines by sending window messages; but I haven't researched this

I have my own gripes relating to the Search in explorer in Vista and Win7. It seems focused to deal with documents and other "human" files; it's useless as a sysadmin tool to grep through files that don't have an associated PersistentHandler (aka IFilter) or are in non-indexed locations.

rhm

In reply to W3bbo

#Aug 11th @ 3:48 PM

Oh God, yes, the search useability fail.

You want to search for something so you type the word(s) into the search box, you get no results. Then you realise that you had a subfolder selected in the treeview. The search has been restricted to the currently selected folder (and subfolders). This is something you rarely want to do - you usually search the whole machine and then narrow it down if you've found too many results. Usability law #whatever: make the most common action the easiest to get to.
Worse, you realise you want the root folder of the drive (or just Desktop) selected before you search so you click on that. BAM! Your search term is gone. On Vista you have to type it all over again. On Win7 at least they implemented a history dropdown (although there's no dropdown arrow, you have to know that it's there).

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to rhm

#Aug 11th @ 4:00 PM

Uh, in my experience I always want to search the currently open directory, not the whole system, that takes too long.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to rhm

#Aug 11th @ 4:00 PM

You want to search for something so you type the word(s) into the search box, you get no results. Then you realise that you had a subfolder selected in the treeview. The search has been restricted to the currently selected folder (and subfolders). This is something you rarely want to do - you usually search the whole machine and then narrow it down if you've found too many results. Usability law #whatever: make the most common action the easiest to get to.

Start menu -> type. It doesn't get easier than that.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to rhm

#Aug 11th @ 3:17 PM

I didn't beta-test Win7 no.

I see...

Do you think Microsoft is going to change the whole design of Explorer because I gave negative feedback?

Of course not! How in $DEITY's name do you think 100% of decisions are made during development of an operating system? By throwing darts on a non stick surface, that's how!

Seriously. You are afraid of change. You don't even want to put in the effort to improve the tools you use daily, as bitching is evidently easier. You have some valid points that - if you brought them up six month ago - WOULD HAVE CHANGED THE DESIGN OF EXPLORER.

Now you get what other customers thought was important for them. Not ok with you? Too bad.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to PaoloM

#Aug 11th @ 4:29 PM

I couldn't submit my feedback 6 months ago, I wasn't a legit beta tester user. By the time the public beta hit I knew it was too late for any GUI changes. Explorer's folder GUI hasn't changed one iota since the 6000 series builds.

rhm

In reply to PaoloM

#Aug 11th @ 4:29 PM

No significant changes are made once the open beta starts.

As for getting what other customers think is important for them (thus implying that my complaints are peculiar just to me): Clearly nobody gave any input to the Explorer in Win7 (or the shell team didn't listen to any of the comments made about Vista) because it's almost exactly the same.

You'd have us believe that Microsoft really listens to users and if we don't get great software it's somehow our fault. Is that really realistic? While Microsoft does take some feedback into account, it's a fantasy to expect that anyone other that people on the Windows team get any say in the detailed design of the Windows UI. Also, you are playing the game that politicians like to play where they state that it's a democracy and if you don't vote then it's your fault what happens. Whether we give feedback or not, we, as customers of Microsoft, still have the right to complain about faults in the design of their products.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to rhm

#Aug 11th @ 4:34 PM

Everything you say there is true except having a "right" to complain. You don't Smiley

kettch

In reply to rhm

#Aug 11th @ 4:34 PM

There's a big difference between faults in the product and differences in user preferences. If Microsoft gets a sample group of their target demographic (which isn't the same as the C9 demographic) and they don't have any problem with the product, then what should they do? Should they expend potentially enormous resources to satisfy the preferences of less than a percentage point of users?

CannotResolveSymbol
{insert caption here}

In reply to W3bbo

#Aug 11th @ 4:31 PM

++

How was I supposed to give feedback on Windows 7 six months ago? I was not in the Win7 technical beta; I didn't have access to any builds of Windows 7 during a time period when any feedback I gave could have actually made a difference.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to kettch

#Aug 11th @ 4:50 PM

The problem with focus group testing is that "regular users" often don't know or realise what they want. Often they're sycophants for just being there (what with the free food and expenses you get paid) and daren't say anything too critical to their hosts.

Microsoft Bob, Clippy, the XP search Dog, and the big bright green start button are all cases of where the "ooh shiney" stupor of regular users lets down people who feel more intimately 'connected' with their machines (i.e. us).

Windows has gotten too complicated for a "one size fits all" solution anymore, we're at risk of our experience being dumbed-down no end to satisfy the lowest common denominator. I'm not advocating a dual system either, but Microsoft should make more concessions for those who feel very strongly about UI elements that impact on sysadmin work and heavy "non-human" work.

Developers are Microsoft's lifeblood, so why is it I need to use VS's Find-in-Files feature when XP's search did it fine the first time?

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to PaoloM

#Aug 11th @ 4:29 PM

I'm not "afraid of change". Change can be good, but it can also be bad. I'm afraid of change for the worse, which the Vista explorer seems to be.

I loved changing from the 9x explorer to the XP one, now I could have the folder sidebar everywhere at the same time as search, no need for separate programs (My Computer vs. Windows Explorer vs. Find Files and Folders).

I'm also in favour of IE8's UI which (after some minor tweaking) completely removes the need for the menubar since the alternative tools provide access to all the common features. Windows Explorer does not provide this.

I'm also in favour of the Office Ribbon over the toolbars (granted, there are implementation issues I have, but that's irrelevant because I'm in favour of the ribbon in principle).

Vista and Win7's explorer is a setback; Microsoft just got it lucky there isn't the outrage Apple's got over their Finder since 2001.

SlackmasterK
I write my OWN blogging engines

I do miss having the folder name in the title bar. Sometimes the fully-qualified path doesn't fit in the address bar, but I want to have both visible so I can see who it is, but I can also alt-d and start typing a new path.

I do miss being able to disable Explorer Bars (classic mode). I wish I could do the same in Aero. They've always been utterly useless.

I do miss the space this bar takes up (Name?):

Useless.

I do miss the space I lose via this 32px picture of a drive at the bottom of the window. Useless.

Most of this useless fluff doesn't even qualify as eye candy.

What's next, Microsoft? Explorer Ribbons?

rhm said:
I would really love it if Channel 9 could get someone from the shell team on camera to explain why on earth Windows Explorer is the way it is in Vista/7. I don't expect them to go through my list of complaints or anything, I just want some answer to whether they really thought this was all a good idea or did it all come out of a focus group (full of hairdressers) or something.

Focus groups. IMHO they provide bad feedback to Microsoft, combined with Microsoft likely enterprets on the wrong level of abstraction (See also "Microsoft Reality Distortion Field"). Experts are users too!