10 things Longhorn needs - one in particular

By Derek Sooman on April 6, 2005, 4:11 PM
Here's a quote from an article from Wincustomize.com on 10 features that Longhorn needs. This certainly seems to sum up what, in my humble opinion, would really make Longhorn a good Windows OS.

Stop bloating with needless bundling. Every new version of Windows throws in some half-assed imitation of third party software. While we can all appreciate having a "free" version of ZIP or uxtheme or movie maker, it damages third party software development. I'd rather think that when I BUY my copy of Windows that the work was put into features that only the OS vendor could do. Especially since Microsoft rarely puts any effort to let third parties expand on what they bundle (like adding RAR support to the compressed folders for example). There are some features only the OS vendor can really do. I'd rather see resources put there.

It would be so nice to see a new version of Windows that had actually concentrated on making the OS a more secure, stable environment which was a more pleasant experience to use. Let's hope that we don't instead just get the same old stuff with some bits and pieces thrown in to try and put Norton, Mozilla or other innovative companies out of business. Let's have a stable and secure OS instead. What do you think?




User Comments: 7

Got something to say? Post a comment
Electrick Gypsy said:
Here Here.I agree with those comments completely.
Phantasm66 said:
As far as all of this Windows XP stuff is concerned, whilst games and multimedia are going well, there's all too often I want to throw this 3.0GhzPentium42GBRAM4xSATAHDD machine out of the window(s), if you pardon the expression. I wish Windows was much simpler, and easier. Almost like a framework. Instead what we have now is this bloated, ugly thing tries to do everything and fails.
Nic said:
I agree with some of the things in the article, but not all. In particular the bundling of small basic utilities/apps seems like a good thing to me. The fact that these *extras' are basic means that they won't kill off other vendors supplying much better versions of these utilities/apps while allowing large numbers of users to benefit by not have to spend a further $20.00 or more (per small basic app) to aquire these separately. Why would anyone wish to pay the same amount for, say 10 small useful add-ons, as they pay for a complete OS (with basic add-ons)? I'm all for Microsoft adding in features as then I can decide if I want them installed or not. If smaller companies wish to sell users their add-ons, then these need to be good. This benefits consumers. Also, as regards adding support for CSS 2 into IE, I believe that is on the cards, though from what I've heard, CSS 2 doesn't fully comply with all the web standards so it isn't totally Microsoft's fault for not including support sooner. As it stands they'll probably only support the bits that don't break any existing standards, so some users are still likely to complain.
Nic said:
As regards making windows smaller, faster, and less bloated, there are numerous *tweaks* posted on various sites that will take you through how to do this. The performance improvement can be staggering. However, just look at how Apple users talk about all the fancy features they have in OS-X and you'll soon reach the conclusion that many users actually want the bloatware, but without the performance hit. Apples OS is even less responsive than windows when all its features are active. Only a faster computer allows users to have all these things and still have a responsive OS, and this is simply technology moving forward. If you want games to run fast, then you need a fast graphics adapter, and no one complains about having better graphics in games, even if it does mean that they'll need to fork out for a new faster card. Without adding features, there would be no reason for users to upgrade and no money would be made. Capitalism would end. Hooray...
smtkr said:
I like having some of the bundled apps (i.e. disk defragmenter, notepad, IE, and mplayer2, to name a few). I would not like to pay 20 USD to buy these separate.
johnsonlam said:
Agree. Microsoft need to concentrate their effort on the:1) Reliability2) Speed (Fewer junk codes)3) Keep It Simple Stupid (K.I.S.S.)My friend once very angry to find that the M$ SDK have some FALSE information that let him spent a lot of time debugging. And he's now changing to Linux.Just waiting the Penguin to be more friendly and strong, don't expect the steel Windows give me warm.
bwchato said:
I wish Microsoft would concentrate on making Windows more reliable,faster,and smaller.I don't like the idea of all the software that they imbed into the operating system.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.