Coffeehouse Thread

160 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Windows 7 Ideas

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    jamie

    i wonder if there will be a new site (like vista had) about the UI

    ...and hopefully sooner (before its too late to have input) than later


    I cant help but think - wouldnt it be amazing if someone actually working on 7 (ahem) could post in this thread, say how silly all our little ideas are, post their own ideas, have a real dialoge..

    not just fans posting fake things into the ether...

    oh well.  at least its FUN Smiley

  • User profile image
    Bas

    Here's another thing: I just wanted to send a picture to somebody on messenger. I have no idea where I left that picture: the photo import wizard handles all that stuff for me. I can find it immediately in Photo Gallery, but.. you can't use Photo Gallery as the 'browse file' dialog for Messenger file transfers. I should just be able to drag the photo from Gallery to the messenger window to transfer it. Or to Calendar to add it to an appointment. Or... et cetera. Stop making me navigate through my directory structure. This isn't the 90's anymore.

    jamie wrote:
    I cant help but think - wouldnt it be amazing if someone actually working on 7 (ahem) could post in this thread, say how silly all our little ideas are, post their own ideas, have a real dialoge..

    not just fans posting fake things into the ether...


    Legally probably impossible, but still, QFT.

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    jamie wrote:
    I cant help but think - wouldnt it be amazing if someone actually working on 7 (ahem) could post in this thread, say how silly all our little ideas are, post their own ideas, have a real dialoge..

    Trust me, it's really hard to stay quiet Smiley

    It will come a day (hopefully pretty soon) when we will be able to talk to you all about Win7. My team owns pretty cool stuff, but more on the infrastructure/plumbing side than the UI side, I do, however, have regular talks with UX peoples.

    Wait just a bit more...

    Funny Pictures

  • User profile image
    jamie

    am i close..at all? ...or way off? Smiley

  • User profile image
    GoddersUK

    PaoloM wrote:
    My team owns pretty cool stuff,


    Like the teapot UI paten

    Linkage

  • User profile image
    jamie

    3D / 2D switch


    somehow this needs to go somewhere.  For example - you cant have the 3d fly in desktop - if there are gadgets open - and icons on desktop.

    so there would need to be 2 modes? (3 if you count support mode)

    not sure where to put it... or how to list it

    ?

    edit:   maybe if you double click the desktop - the gadgets and icons disappear - and it gets activated...  and if you dont move your mouse for a few seconds - the normal desktop comes back.. not sure

  • User profile image
    jamie

    re 2d/3d mode..

    i think that double click could work..

    currently - go double click on your desktop.

    nothing happens.

    imagine if - when you did that - the icons and gadgets and taskbar  faded out ( within a second) and the - fly in 3d mode - was there. (with the search box and the other new ideas...

    want to exit?  double click.  ( 1 second / icons and gadgets and taskbar come back)


    ...i want that NOW!  Smiley

  • User profile image
    jamie

    same for ie8...   double click a webpage (currently) nothing happens.

    do so in ie8 - switch to 3d mode. 

    (as for what that looks like... give me time. ha)


    edit:  you know the half hour iphone demo?  well the windows 7 demo could be 3 minutes.

    hi - to use the new windows - double click the desktop or browser window to switch to 3d mode.  to exit 3d mode - double click the desktop or browser window.

    its ONE new thing to learn - but would offer so much in return..  Smiley

    (note to self: transversing 3d to 2d space - check)

  • User profile image
    glebd

    I think most of you are missing the point. As I read your suggestions (except maybe for one that suggested rewriting from scratch), the expression "polishing the turd" comes to mind. If Microsoft doesn't rewrite the whole thing and gets rid of all the compatibility crud (perhaps by virtualising it), Windows is doomed. Think about it: Vista code base is 40% bigger that XP code base (an unconfirmed quote from somewhere online) -- there is no way you can turn this to an advantage! There is a good article somewhere on the nets comparing Vista to dBASE IV (hint: compatibility killed it). The problem is, though, that at the moment compatibility is all that Windows has. If people had to choose between, say,  Windows-2010-Without-Backward-Compatibility and other OS, they'd probably keep running XP forever (in enterprise) or switch to Mac or Linux (at home). Make your own conclusions.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    glebd wrote:

    [If Microsoft doesn't] get rid of all the compatibility crud [then] Windows is doomed.

    If people had to choose between Windows-Without-Backward-Compatibility they'd probably keep running XP forever


    Maybe I'm going senile here, but why must they get rid of a feature without which their new product would fail? That seems counter productive to say the least.

  • User profile image
    LaBomba

    jamie wrote:
    re 2d/3d mode..

    i think that double click could work..

    currently - go double click on your desktop.

    nothing happens.

    imagine if - when you did that - the icons and gadgets and taskbar  faded out ( within a second) and the - fly in 3d mode - was there. (with the search box and the other new ideas...

    want to exit?  double click.  ( 1 second / icons and gadgets and taskbar come back)


    ...i want that NOW! 



    Nice idea, but how would you make it discoverable?

  • User profile image
    Xaero_​Vincent

    Why do you guys assume Microsoft will alter the UI in 7?

    Vista already introduces a different UI concept from it's predecessors.

    Microsoft can't just go and radically alter the interface every release. End-users, especially buisnesses, expect conformity and a common interface with a minimal learning curve.

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    glebd wrote:
    If Microsoft doesn't rewrite the whole thing and gets rid of all the compatibility crud (perhaps by virtualising it), Windows is doomed.



    Well , yea, imo , .NET is the first step in getting to a position where they can stop caring about backwards compatibility so much, because the application layer will be virtualized

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    Personally I don't think the UI should change much in Seven, I also don't see Windows being dumped in favour of a new kernel.. it doesn't make sense..

    I don't think Windows is destined to fail at all if it doesn't change, they just need to work on releasing more often and keeping Windows pruned..

    The virtualization idea is just one of those things we get attracted to as developers because it looks really clean and a good way to detach from legacy problems.. but it doesn't make sense for the OS to move like this.. the OS needs to provide a better platform for developers, adding features in, more than anything in the next versions of Windows, I want improvements to .NET, and all the foundation systems they introduced with .net 3 fx (whatever it's called!).

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    stevo_ wrote:
    

    Personally I don't think the UI should change much in Seven, I also don't see Windows being dumped in favour of a new kernel.. it doesn't make sense..

    I don't think Windows is destined to fail at all if it doesn't change, they just need to work on releasing more often and keeping Windows pruned..

    The virtualization idea is just one of those things we get attracted to as developers because it looks really clean and a good way to detach from legacy problems.. but it doesn't make sense for the OS to move like this.. the OS needs to provide a better platform for developers, adding features in, more than anything in the next versions of Windows, I want improvements to .NET, and all the foundation systems they introduced with .net 3 fx (whatever it's called!).



    You don't think running legacy stuff under virtualisation would allow them to move forward without being hampered by backwards compatibility?

    Serious question. I always thought this was why folk were so keen on it.


  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Ray6 wrote:
    
    You don't think running legacy stuff under virtualisation would allow them to move forward without being hampered by backwards compatibility?

    Serious question. I always thought this was why folk were so keen on it.


    Virtualization has it's place for this (particularly in the server arena), but it is by no means a panacea. Virtualized OS's don't provide an entirely seamless environment so they can't possibly cover every scenario in an entirely desirable fashion.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    Massif wrote:
    
    Gah! Apostrophe madness! (Neither "its" in that context, nor do the plural of Abbreviations, (I believe, I'm prepared to be wrong on that) require an apostrophe.)


    Quite so. It's one of the things that irritates me, since it's often misused because of its confusing mannerisms; the possessive has no apostrophe.

    Abbreviations also don't have appostrophes unless it's a possessive.

    Example:

    I saw ITS's car yesterday. Its color was red. It's a nice one IMO. ITS's got a new job working at some bank, and there's another chap there called ITS. The two ITSs will be staying there. It's gonna be madness with all those apostrophes. It's quite confusing because of the apostrophe laws. Its subtle complexities are often misunderstood. It's a pity.

  • User profile image
    Massif

    AndyC wrote:
    
    Ray6 wrote:
    
    You don't think running legacy stuff under virtualisation would allow them to move forward without being hampered by backwards compatibility?

    Serious question. I always thought this was why folk were so keen on it.


    Virtualization has it's place for this (particularly in the server arena), but it is by no means a panacea. Virtualized OS's don't provide an entirely seamless environment so they can't possibly cover every scenario in an entirely desirable fashion.


    Gah! Apostrophe madness! (Neither "its" in that context, nor do the plural of Abbreviations, (I believe, I'm prepared to be wrong on that) require an apostrophe.)

    I'm sure it's entirely possible to do virtualisation seamlessly (or as seamlessly as anyone would care). Granted you couldn't do it right now with current virtualised OSs; but there's no reason a "parallels" like solution sharing the same main file system couldn't be built into 7 to provide a "seams so small you can hardly see them" virtualised legacy layer.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.