^I agree. Fixing taskbar clutter is a good thing.

1/19/2009 11:04:18 AM

What's the point of using parenthesis when you're going to use them in every sentence?

You're making it seem as though clicking twice is, difficulty wise, on par with trying to get a hole-in-one twice in a row.

[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 11:41 AM. Reason : .]

1/19/2009 11:40:41 AM

It found the drivers for my bluetooth adapter no problem and connecting to my stereo headset was super easy. However, there is a noticable delay in audio when using it. Is this just me or has anyone else tried it?

1/19/2009 12:25:15 PM

I'd just like my f'in bluetooth mouse to work

gr

1/19/2009 2:03:15 PM

anyone know of a fix for the bug where it hangs trying to run a performance rating test in vmware? it crashes during the media decoding part

I know its dumb to trying to test performance in vmware, but its currently stuck at 1 so i can't use any AMAZING 3D GRAPHICS AERO SHIT.

1/19/2009 2:06:03 PM

Mine would do that when it was in the docking station... Out of the docking station it worked just fine.

Seems finicky though.

1/19/2009 2:07:08 PM

aaand got my mouse working. not sure which thing did it.. i forced it to use a generic bluetooth driver then went back to the correct one, restarted into OSX, removed the mouse from everything in there then went back to windows and it installed fine. makes no sense that removing it in OSX would do anything to me but whatever, it works now

1/19/2009 2:17:47 PM

Ok guys, let's all bow to quagmire, who studied "environmental technology". Sorry my 3rd link didn't work for you quaggie, it was a copy and paste error.

Quote :

"your links are a joke...two of them are general links to organizations (and one of those doesn't even link anywhere...do you KNOW how to use the internet?)...you're talking completely out of your ass...when you have something to offer OTHER than your opinion"

You fool, I linked you to the IEEE and ACM research portals, and gave you the terminology so that you could go research WHY YOU ARE WRONG. It's not free research, so I can't go googling everything to put in your lap. Yes I know how to use the internet, apparently you got lost along the way somewhere.

Your rants are just proof positive that I will always have a secure job market, with so many people like yourself who "think" they understand good usability and research.

Quote :

"because of this MASSIVE flaw in your argument, you can't POSSIBLY speak to what improves MY efficiency..."

See it's easy to claim you are special when you let no one else see your data. Good job following the cold fusion guys: "It works I promise, but I can't let you see it". But you are right, I don't care, so its not worth posting.

Quote :

"you are such an obnoxious fanboy and you don't even realize (or you do, and are content to walk around with your eyes closed)"

Right, that's why I own, and I am typing from, a Mac mini, alongside my iPhone. I'm hardly a MS fanboy, remember your comment about MASSIVE flawed assumptions? Might want to apply that to yourself.

Quote :

"all i've said as a blanket statement is that increasing the number of steps in a given process cannot possibly increase the efficiency of that single process (and as such, the more that single process is engaged in, the more inefficient the overall process becomes)...and until you can provide evidence that INCREASING the amount of time it takes to perform a certain task actually speeds up the task (a complete and utter contradiction, i hope you'll agree)"

example 1 for your first assertion: Find a file. There are 200,000,000 files. Folders do not exist. They are in a single flat location. Adding folders and logically organizing those files adds STEPPED NAVIGATION to the process. Which, in the worst case, is slower to find the first X files displayed, because they used to be at the root, but are now organized. In the average and best cases it is far more efficient to organize your files with folders.

Your second statement is flawed, because adding steps != increasing time. More steps MAY take more time in a given task, but that is causation, not correlation.

Quote :

"in which, by your same stupid logic, i could say that people want a quicklaunch more than they want to group similar items...let's ignore, for the moment, that both of these options are turned on by default in all recent windows versions, so it represents those who are lazy or don't know how to change it as much as it represents those people who actually LIKE and USE both of those features"

If you had taken the time to read the article, instead of just looking at the picture and replying on it, you would see that the picture you just posted even moreso invalidates your argument.

The whole point of that image is showing that PEOPLE DO NOT CHANGE THE DEFAULT OPTIONS. And as a result, it's better to just get the default correct for the common case, and not put the option in. Which has been part of your argument the whole time "just give me the option", which again shows you are extreme outlier and have very little to add to the conversation.

Quote :

"you are, of course, taking an EXTREME view and intentionally (and stupidly) twisting my words around...i am noting a SINGLE AND SPECIFIC INSTANCE...my suggestions are perfectly valid, even if you (and everyone else in the entire world, for all i care) disagree with me...it would take VERY little effort for them to include the OPTION (even if it's not the default) to let people customize their OS experience (i mean, come on...they're just rebadging vista here, not starting from the ground up...so how hard would it be to leave IN the features and then simply turn them off by default?)"

You are also taking an EXTREME VIEW and intentionally ignoring our common case scenarios. You are talking about a completely trivial task, where the "option" to change it's behavior is not trivial to implement and is not at all worth the MILLISECONDS of time you spend carrying out the task. You have NO CONCEPT of how much effort it would take to add the option. The ability to customize an OS on the front-end has very limited returns (as evidenced by the image YOU posted). And this is not a Vista rebadge, although I could see how someone with an environmental technology degree might get confused.

1/19/2009 4:50:02 PM

i really wish i was a mod right now

1/19/2009 4:55:30 PM

Quote :

"anyone know of a fix for the bug where it hangs trying to run a performance rating test in vmware? it crashes during the media decoding part I know its dumb to trying to test performance in vmware, but its currently stuck at 1 so i can't use any AMAZING 3D GRAPHICS AERO SHIT."

This is just a guess, but Aero on Win7 requires a DX10 (DX9?) capable video card. And I would wager that the VM video driver doesn't support it, so that may be your problem.

1/19/2009 4:58:28 PM

Quote :

"And as a result, it's better to just get the default correct for the common case, and not put the option in."

Ignoring the other facets of this argument between you two... how/why is it better to not bother putting an option in, just because the default is what people tend to stick to? It's not hurting the 95% who don't know/care to change, but it IS alienating the 5-10% or so that do...

Personally I have no problem with MS setting various things as the default since I can just change them later, but if the auto-hide option were removed (as you seem to be proposing in that post, since the majority never change it), or I couldn't turn off the "group similar buttons" option, I'd probably quit using windows due to annoying bullshit and lack of options.


Edit: I could understand not including some cumbersome add-on that is used by <1% of people, that's just unnecessary... but what you said here makes it sound like you're in favor of sweepingly eliminating any/all options on the basis that most people won't bother changing it.

[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM. Reason : .]

1/19/2009 5:30:47 PM

My point is, all of quagmire's statements and assertions are made in an imaginary vacuum. You have to think about the context and environment as well, which he repeatedly ignores. You can't have every option in the world AND have a perfect user experience. There are points where you have to make trade-offs of efficiency and resources to delivery the best possible thing, given the time and resource constraints you have. I'm not advocating removing ALL flexibility from the operating system. I'm saying, lets be smart about what customization options really deliver VALUE for the customer.

To answer your question directly, adding options is expensive. The more on/off options you add to an environment, the bigger the matrix is for testing and stability. And the reality is that the overwhelming majority of people do not set options, they use whatever the default it (this extends beyond software as well). So if it takes X amount of time to put in the option that 1% of people will use, why would Microsoft put that time toward something 90% of people will use instead (for instance, rewriting Windows Explorer?).

[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 5:52 PM. Reason : .]

1/19/2009 5:51:30 PM

I have a lot of the same complaints as quagmire.

Quote :

"Plain and simply, you aren't part of the optimized audience. You are an EXTREME outlier in how you use the OS, and my guess is (and just purely speculation) that your work style is self-imposed, not system-imposed. I doubt very very seriously that you actually NEED those 18 windows constantly opened, rather you just don't "clean as you go"."

That's just piss fucking poor design. You don't design something for the masses and then tell everyone else tough shit. You separate functionality from interface and have an adjustable/modular interface. I detest wasted space and I have 10-15 windows open all the time. If it wasn't for tabbed browsing, I'd have a hundred or so. The computer is a tool that works for me. If my performance isn't hindered by my usage style (running out of resources) why the hell would I waste time "tidying up" just so the interface can keep up. That's a design shortcoming. We're talking basic extendability and OOP here. Keep the functionality, display it however the user chooses. Yeah sure you can bring in the marketecture of how the cost of developing a more optimized UI isn't an efficient use of programming resources since so many are cockblocked into using the OS that even if they have gripes they still have to use it, but that doesn't help your case. Don't forget which party is here to help the other.
Other than the system tray and explorer related UI changes (from xp), I love 7.

1/20/2009 10:31:33 AM

So it's stupid to design a product to attract as many customers as possible?

1/20/2009 10:43:36 AM

that's clearly not as many as possible if they're knowingly snubbing some. as many as possible would be the current implementation with a "disable" or "classic" option

1/20/2009 10:48:52 AM

Not necessarily. Design trade-offs would naturally favor the masses, and snub anybody whose preference is expensive to implement while offering little sales opportunity.

1/20/2009 10:58:11 AM

well first of all, it can't be that expensive to do since what we are talking about is the simple difference between Vista & Windows 7, clearly they already have it worked out, we're just talking about a simple checkbox here to switch from classic (vista) to new (windows 7) taskbar. obviously we are all in favor of having options.

[Edited on January 20, 2009 at 11:06 AM. Reason : .]

1/20/2009 11:06:04 AM

That's true, maybe it is simple. Maybe it's not. We have no idea what they changed between vista and win7 that might make that easy or hard. Of course even if it is simple, they may choose to force Win7 users towards the interface they plan on switching to for future releases. How long would you expect them to carry the Win95-like start menu/task bar forward?

[Edited on January 20, 2009 at 11:09 AM. Reason : .]

1/20/2009 11:09:09 AM

yea, kinda like they how they forced the hand with the ribbon UI, although i think 99% like it after getting used to it.

1/20/2009 11:43:16 AM

I mean for all we know they re-wrote the entire thing from the ground up.

1/20/2009 12:42:11 PM

Quote :

"That's just piss fucking poor design. You don't design something for the masses and then tell everyone else tough shit. "

Actually, that's exactly what you do if you want to be a successful business. And good design represents being as inclusive as possible. If you want a shell that supports your own work style, go build one or find another one.

Quote :

"I detest wasted space and I have 10-15 windows open all the time."

Windows yes, how many applications? Win7 is designed to handle the 10-15 window, 5-7 application bucket, which it sounds like you probably fall within the range of.

1/20/2009 1:46:41 PM

currently;
active sync
ventrilo
thunderbird
firefox3
aim
IE (certain pages that only work properly in it - internal stuff)
winamp
eclipse
zion edit
tv tuner
task manager (or a better performance calc)
vmware infrastructure client
vmware server 1.x
utorrent/abc client

That's normal for work. At home I have 5-7 apps running. Those apps above total 18 windows at the moment.

[Edited on January 20, 2009 at 2:50 PM. Reason : ventrilo is because I'm working from home. you can usually replace that with a pdf or some doc]

1/20/2009 2:44:19 PM

i like the new taskbar, although i made it ungroup when space is available

and i love being able to hover over the ie and see a preview of all of my open tabs

1/20/2009 4:20:31 PM

eh, don't like the task bar grouping shit..although I can def see how some people will.

i do like the search in the start menu. hitting the start key on keyboard, typing word, or photoshop or remote for remote desktop or whatever and hitting enter and it working exactly how it should is awesome.

i think vista had the same feature but i don't remember

1/20/2009 6:21:54 PM

^ it does. that's one of my favorite things in vista

1/20/2009 6:22:44 PM

yeah I used to use launchy in XP, and the vista/win7 start menu search has replaced that for me

1/20/2009 6:24:29 PM

Quote :

"^ it does. that's one of my favorite things in vista "

cool. yea, i use windows button+R and know enough run commands to get into most programs but the start menu thing is easier for some..

1/20/2009 6:26:50 PM

Quote :

"You don't design something for the masses and then tell everyone else tough shit."

yeah, to follow up on Noen's comments - ever heard of The Long Tail? It can be applied to a lot of situations, and selling products like software is one of them. After a certain point, it costs a company more to gain customers by adding options/features (and testing) than it does to cut those features and ignore those customers. Any good business will do this, whether they make software, computers, furniture, or office supplies. For example, every time Apple comes out with anything, the blogs and forums explode with "why didn't they do _____" and "nobody will buy this if it doesn't do ____", but take a look at their quarterlies and see if Apple really needs to be concerned with catering to the vocal minority.

1/20/2009 6:38:16 PM

Quote :

"yeah I used to use launchy in XP, and the vista/win7 start menu search has replaced that for me"

I still use launchy in vista. Works really well for custom searches for any website after you insert the proper search format into launchy. For example to search rotten tomatoes i'll just type "rotten - tab - movie".

1/20/2009 6:47:46 PM

^^depends on the feature, but yea, generally speaking i can understand that... i mean you don't want to delete a feature that the masses love either, b/c then you'd be alienating the majority of your audience.

[Edited on January 20, 2009 at 7:00 PM. Reason : .]

1/20/2009 6:59:56 PM

Quote :

"and i love being able to hover over the ie and see a preview of all of my open tabs"

i assume firefox will follow suit?

1/21/2009 2:55:03 PM

sure hope so

1/21/2009 3:01:29 PM

^^ the api is already open and available in the Win7 SDK, so I imagine FireFox will add the hooks pretty quickly

1/21/2009 6:36:30 PM

AV Betas for Windows 7
http://www.kaspersky.com/windows7
http://www.avg.com/special-download-antivirus-for-windows-7-mssc
http://www.symantec.com/norton/beta/register.jsp?pvid=n3603beta

1/21/2009 8:50:49 PM

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/dock-and-windows-7-taskbar.ars/1
Paradigms lost: The Windows 7 Taskbar versus the OS X Dock

1/22/2009 10:34:32 AM

^Good article

1/22/2009 12:34:24 PM

^^It's very well reasoned and researched articles like the one you posted that make me love and respect Ars

1/22/2009 5:40:40 PM

anyone else think the index is slightly off?

Processor: 6.4 = E8400
Memory: 5.5 = DDR2-1066
Graphics: 7.9 = 9800GX2
Gaming Graphics: 6.0 = 9800GX2
Primary hard disk: 5.9 = WD Velociraptor 10,000rpm 300GB

i mean for crying out loud i have one of the highest performing desktop hard drives and a dual-gpu graphics card!

btw, FULL RESTART, from clicking the restart button to fully operational desktop = 1:00min., shutdown was probably only 10 seconds

[Edited on January 23, 2009 at 12:56 AM. Reason : .]

1/23/2009 12:51:59 AM

NOD32 64bit is working fine for me.

1/23/2009 2:17:51 AM

^^ lol, my e6750 @ 3.33 got a 6.5, my ddr2 800 @ 833 got a 5.9, my old ass G80 GTS got a 6.0 in gaming graphics, and my partitioned WD 640 got a 5.9. Pretty sure the HD index is upper bounded by solid state performance.

[Edited on January 23, 2009 at 3:26 AM. Reason : .]

1/23/2009 3:25:16 AM

Memory: 5.5 = DDR2-1066


would be higher with more memory - how much do you have?

1/23/2009 10:59:16 AM

are 4gb dimms of ddr2 cheap yet?

1/23/2009 11:03:47 AM

I have 4x1 gigs. I bet somehow latency is factored in more than bandwidth.

1/23/2009 12:49:19 PM

Quote :

"would be higher with more memory - how much do you have?"

i'm thinking the same thing, it's 2x1gb

i'm thinking graphics is looking for SLI, hdd's are looking for RAID or SSD's. i can't figure it out.

1/23/2009 1:19:54 PM

Anyone else having a problem with their desktop icons going missing? It really tripped me out the first time it happened. I have to right click on the desktop and put the checkmark into View->Show Desktop Icons and THEN refresh the screen for my icons to show up. It happens after a reboot, but not every time, I'd say 1 out of every 2-3 reboots. It's happened on the 32 bit leaked version and also on the 64-bit version too. I googled and it looks like I'm not the only one, but no one seems to know what causes it.

1/23/2009 5:34:57 PM

any way to adjust the transparency of just the taskbar? i keep thinking my windows are not maximized

1/24/2009 1:49:59 PM

Processor: 6.4 = E6400 @ 3.01GHz
Memory: 5.9 = 4x1GB DDR2-1066 (Forgot what it's OC'd to)
Graphics: 7.9 = 8800GTS @ 600MHz/1030MHz
Gaming Graphics: 6.0 = 8800GTS @ 600MHz/1030MHz
Primary hard disk: 5.9 = WD Raptor 10,000rpm 36GB

1/24/2009 2:10:47 PM

I've had some very strange things with files disappearing when i save to network drives. trying to figure out more detail so i can submit it. most cases there is a .tmp file in the directory, i change it to whatever the right extension is and it opens right up and all my stuff is there..but the original file name is completely gone. i haven't lost anything so far but still a bit scary sometimes..

ideas?

1/24/2009 2:22:32 PM

^^exactly my point, how an 8800GTS can have the same numbers as a dual-gpu 9800GX2 is beyond me, then again, i've never understood the index numbers.

[Edited on January 24, 2009 at 5:04 PM. Reason : .]

1/24/2009 5:03:01 PM

Yeah I posted because I was pretty much in complete agreement.

With vista, I always wondered what was out there that scored better than my 10k raptor (albeit it's old as balls)

1/24/2009 8:34:04 PM