What improvements do you want Microsoft to make to Windows?

I voted for security which means more than anti-virus protection but encompases protection against malware of all sorts, most of all in IE.

Lately its been difficult to sort out spyware, adware, viruses in the sense that they all seem to affect not only security, but performance as well.

Regards - Charles

 

I picked speed and reliability because I'm sick of the instability and crashes. No more BSODs, GPFs, IPFs, freezeups, etc. I'm sick of that garbage! MS needs to test and retest their stuff before it's released. XP is more stable than previous versions, but isn't perfect. If Linux can be crash-free, so can Windows, if MS just weren't so ding-dong lazy!

 

If Linux can be crash-free

Feel free to start a new thread if you'd like to discuss the inaccuracy of this claim.

I also voted speed and reliability. I always wanted to be a lumberjack.

 

Speed & reliability here too.

Mainly - all the others can be helped along with a few 3rd party apps but this one is mostly down to the code and M$ are the ones who tweak their own code.

As to the Linux bit - I read a good article the past day or so about some head-to-head testing ofa lab Windows Server network and Linux Server network. They had a bunch of net admins trying to keep things running when glitches were thrown in. Windows admins on the windows part and Linux admins on the Linux part to level the playing field as much as possible.

Close but Windows seemed to get fixed a little faster and be a little less prone to having a problem cause really widespread outages.

I have to admit to being a little surprised. I am only familiar with business networks running on Windows but from what I'd read I thought Linux was a little more bullet proof. I think the only area where it was a clear winner was with web servers.

 

Also chose "Speed and Reliability" due to the wording of the question, "What improvements do you want Microsoft to make to Windows ". If they choose to keep branching out into security and virus areas, let this be kept as a separate entity/enterprise, optional to an individual's choice. Don't taint the option by hanging the "loss or full site access of Microsoft support" based on the use of said same.

 

Ditto to Tony's comments.

Johanna

 

Speed/reliability, more reliability first. Speed is up to CPU.
Actually, what bugs me the most is the way the folders "My Music, My Books, etc "
keep appearing automatically. Wish MS would stop trying to make decisions for me
and drop these folders. I would much prefer to maintain my own music, books, etc
and place them where i want them, not where MS decides they should be located.

savagcl

 

Microsoft needs to have Windows:

-Not need so much RAM! I remember when 98 and photoshop fit on 128 and ran smoothly!
-Give users an system optimization guide, how to turn off fancy screensavers, delete malware as today, computers with less GHz aren't the cause for sluggishness, it's users' system getting clogged up.
-Get rid of the My Music, my documents, my .............. they are simply annoying.
-Make a slightly modified version: "New Users" where they make default settings, keep security high, have HELPFUL hints about what to do, and keep it as simple and error-prone as possible.
-Keep the registry reliable. I have erronously corrupted my registry numerous times installing average well coded programs like MS Anti-Spyware.
-Make internet and LAN easier to set up and more reliable. One day your speeding a file across your network and the next you get a "Network has limited or no connectitivity.
-Support OEM versions of Windows! My idea is that as long as the OEM didn't do anything too radical to windows, then microsoft should support it!
-Provide search tools as so many users download searchbars.............infecting their system with the latest piece of malware.
-Get rid of the theme! It's ugly wastes CPU cycles and is marketing MSN (thank goodness for classic view).
-Give realistic system requirements! Windows XP isn't going to run very smoothly on 128MB of RAM. If an OEM makes and ultra-low end box, make windows say it's underpowered and may be slower. Also, you really need DSL to download all those windows updates.
-Encourage users to put a password for their administrative account and use their limited account normally! This in comination with lack of firewalls and windows vunerabilities led to buffer overflows.
-Product activation does not work! For the casual user who but his/her copy of MS software legally, it is a nusiance, for those pirates out there, they've already cracked it!

Now since windows for consumers is using a modified NT kernel, it's not so crash prone so most of the time it's user error like download viruses off P2P networks or maybe a el cheapo computer can't play Doom 3 at ultra settings! Microsoft need to have setup tell the user what their computer is capable of and what it can't! Even windows 9x could be stable with some user responsibility.

 

Had to vote security, and like Charles, feel that also encompasses malware/adware/spyware. Windows is already fast and reliable. It's poorly written third party apps, incorrect drivers, less than adequate/faulty hardware, infections, etc., that slow it down and create crashes, in most cases.

 

Speed & reliability in my opinion.

If its not reliable, it's a waste of space!

The whole wish list has to be built on a reliable platform.

I hated spending my time trying to figure whether it was I or the OS that was responsible for the Blue Screen.

 

When looking at test results like this, it is always good to know who sponsored the test. These have been known to be weighted to favor one party.

Reliability is pretty good with XP. I vote for security.

DRD

 

Speed & Reliability.
I do have one pet peeve that is not covered. I would like OE to treat incoming mail in as FIFO instead of LIFO. What I mean by this is if I get a lot of mail the last one received is the one highlighted not the first one. So I wind up reading my mail from the newest to the oldest. I would like to read from oldest to newest which I can do manually but if they changed LIFO to FIFO it would be automatic.

 

Poll

I have the temerity to comment here only because most (all) of the comments are from heavy hitters, & I think the doofus contingent needs to be heard. I voted for speed/reliability because it includes reliability, not because of speed. The reliability improvements should assist us doofi in troubleshooting the odd, not necessarily BSOD problems (in XP even I have never in about two years had a BSOD). I have a bunch; they may be corrupt dll's (how to find out?); they differ for different apps; I probably caused them; MS troubleshooter wizards don't seem to help; the errors can be tolerated; vigorous sweeps by multiple ant-spyware apps turn up nothing. Until a way is found for doofi to understand administrative function and not fear the registry, my ideal will not be attained. The XP books I have seen either spend 90% of the text on trivia that are self-evident or seem oriented to intranet IS administrators.

 

I vote security.

Smart use of existing 3rd party apps (AV, FW, spycleaners) work well, but in these bad-hacker days more is better.

Stability is great -- i've only BSOD'd when OCing, even my inane attempts with 3DBlender can't bring it down.

Speed - no complaints, a fast machine with lottsa' mem is my answer.

a Better Search of files, favorites, and the contents of those dreaded add-on 3rd party apps would be my 2nd choice. Yes, the do-everything-with-no-hangups OS, which XP is pretty durned good at. Reduce the aptly named "fluff ".

 

Tony, a suggestion for searching, try using the Google Desktop Search.Once its loaded and indexed, you would be able to search the contents of your computer as fast as you can search on Google.

Amust-have for people who store a lot of data on their computer but dont always remember where what was kept.