Gallery

What you want from Windows 7

Posted on 14 Oct 2008 at 11:10

Find out what PC Pro readers want to see in the forthcoming version of Windows.

Both chastened and chastised for failing to deliver on some of what it promised for Vista (WinFS anyone?), Microsoft is playing its cards closer to its chest for Windows 7. So with a largely blank canvas to work with, we asked PC Pro readers what you wanted to see in Windows 7, via our blog (www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs). And you responded with a barrage of things you did - and definitely didn't - want from the operating system.

64-bit only

One of the few nuggets Microsoft has let slip about Windows 7 so far is that the OS is expected to work on any hardware capable of running Vista. This means there'll be 32- and 64-bit versions, as with XP and Vista.

However, 75% of readers who responded felt Microsoft was making a mistake propping up 32-bit systems. "It should be 64-bit only - we need to move things forward, and a max of 4GB RAM isn't enough," argued Rob. "You can buy graphics cards with 2GB now, so two cards would take you up to the max and you'd still need system memory. 64-bit hardware has been out a long time, the only thing holding it back is a lack of drivers, as most companies stick with writing 32-bit ones. This would all change if the OS was 64-bit only."

"It would be crazy to have both 32-bit and 64-bit versions when most recent PCs and laptops are 64-bit," agreed TC. "Those still running older systems can use their XP/2000/Linux OS," he added.

Julian Cox suggested a sensible compromise, claiming Windows 7 should be "64-bit, but with full backward compatibility through virtualisation to an XP/Vista-compatible 32-bit environment, with full access to such useful things as graphics cards. How else will I be able to play my old games?" he asked.

Others aren't so sure that cutting adrift the 32-bit lifeboat is warranted. "Hardware at the moment isn't worth a 64-bit OS," argued Sam C. "It should be an option - not compulsory."

Keep it simple

No-one, as the old saying goes, likes a smart arse. And there are plenty of PC Pro readers who think Windows deserves to be brought down a peg or two. "I want an OS that does what I tell it to do, instead of trying to be clever, and has networking that connects every time, without needing hours crawling through scattered dialog boxes trying to find out why it can't see the machine in the next room," said David, who was merely warming to his theme. "Most of all, I don't want to see those infuriating messages that tell me I 'might not have permission' to do something: I own the hardware, I have licensed software, I own the thing body and soul, I can toss it in the bin if I want. Why can't Microsoft recognise that?"

And while Microsoft is still paying off the legal bills for bundling various applications with Windows over the years, it doesn't appear to be doing it many favours with our bloatware-bashing readers. "Strip out all the built-in apps and let us choose what we want," suggested Nick, with a glint in his old blue eyes before suggesting: "Microsoft, let me do things my way."

Others believe Microsoft should be a bit smarter when deciding which apps are pre-loaded. "I want an OS that is lean and mean, not bloatware," says Peter. "Maybe Windows 7 could have some of the nanny features of Vista, but turned off by default for the self-install end user. Major PC makers could always turn it on in their machines for the mass market."

Component parts

Microsoft has suggested Windows 7 will be more componentised than previous versions, hopefully allowing users to pick and choose the modules that they wish to install. The suggestion has gone down well with the PC Pro faithful, who are crying out for more control at the point of installation.