Talk:Features new to Windows 7/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Features new to Windows 7. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

screen shots

I'm currently running windows 7 6801, if there is any feature in this article that needs a screen shot but doesn't have one let me know and I'll get one for it. Redekopmark (talk) 04:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Windows PowerShell Integrated Scripting Environment (Graphical Command Shell) Thanks! Ghettoblaster (talk) 22:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I beleive this is it, I don't know how to use it so I left the input part blank Redekopmark (talk) 06:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Why not demo the Libraries and Federated Search too? Libraries can be demo-ed by - may be - grouping the files by containing folder and then taking a screen shot. --soum ^talk 05:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Please save your screenshots in PNG format. JPEG distorts screenshots. - Josh (talk | contribs) 16:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Josh. It's me, Jasper again. You forget that all the screenshots (and Redokopmark) should specify which build they are using, so there won't be any conflicts as new features are added.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Taskbar

"Windows can still be ungrouped just like in other versions of Windows." This is supported by the reference link in which the speaker mentions that windows can still be ungrouped.Dark88 (talk) 23:35, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Images

I've looked all over he place and can't seem to find out how to upload images. The images I've uploaded apparently will be deleted in a week or so. I've tried making sure to use the proper forms but it's not working. If someone can help me, I'd appreciate it if the following images could be used in this article:

Device Stage: http://howto.wired.com/mediawiki/images/Devicestage.png
Jump List: http://howto.wired.com/mediawiki/images/Jumplists.png or http://media.arstechnica.com/images/windows7/Windows%20Media%20Player%20JumpList.png
Peek: http://howto.wired.com/mediawiki/images/PeekAfter.jpg or http://media.arstechnica.com/images/windows7/Peek%20-%20After.png

Most of the images are located in these two links: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081028-first-look-at-windows-7.html or http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/PDC_2008:_The_7_Coolest_New_Features_in_Windows_7

Also, why was the Jump List image removed? That is a Windows 7 feature and it shows exactly what was being talked about in the Taskbar section.Dark88 (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Be sure to read and follow these guidelines: Wikipedia:Uploading images and Wikipedia:Image use policy. Ghettoblaster (talk) 00:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I gave those links a look. I believe I got the images to upload correctly now. I also used the WMP Jump List rather than the Jump List from the Start Menu as it seemed more appropriate. Dark88 (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that in the Windows 7 RC, the Windows Powershell ISE UI has been updated to be a little more bright. Can someone update it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.136.41 (talk) 18:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Marketing text

The "Multicore CPU support" section is very light on details, reading more like advertising. dtfinch (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

A very good point. I've removed the section. Warren -talk- 18:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Basically a similar editorial comment about the section on Boot Performance, however the problem there is that it doesn't actually say anything substantive about Windows 7. It just mentions that there were lots of slow boot problems with Vista (for about 2/3 of the machines), but it doesn't actually say anything substantive even about the expectations for Windows 7. My own experience is that most XP machines boot quite slowly, and the problem gets worse as the machine ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanen (talk • contribs) 04:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Title of the Article grammatically correct?

Shouldn't the title be "Features new in Windows 7" instead of "Windows new to Windows 7"? Abc123xyzlaw (talk) 07:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Both variations are grammatically correct. That said, "new to" has the implication that a feature, capability or concept may have existed before its introduction in a particular release of Windows (as is the case with certain Windows Media Center and Powershell features, for example). Saying "new in" may give the impression that a particular feature, capability or concept has been seem for the first time in Windows 7. Either way it's still fairly ambiguous, and there's no really clear reasoning for one name over another, except perhaps for inertia -- quite a number of people link to Features new to Windows Vista from other places on the Internet so we shouldn't disrupt that without a good reason.

Other possibilities: "Features of Windows 7" would be wrong because it leaves the impression that the article would describe all of Windows 7's features. Something like "Features new to Microsoft Windows as of Windows 7" might be more pedantically correct but that'd be kind of silly. "New features in Windows 7" might be an option, but starting an article name with the word "New" when the article describes "features" is a bit unusual as far as standard naming patterns go. Warren -talk- 09:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced References

Reference number [6] points to an engadget article wich does not name at any time the maxium number of logical procesors supported by the SO. I would like someone to post the correct source of this information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VanisherX (talk • contribs) 00:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Press release

The article bears too much resemblance to a press release

.

Zubenzenubi (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Windows 7 Action Center.png

The image File:Windows 7 Action Center.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

User Mode Scheduler

The new User mode scheduling framework should at least get a mention, me thinks :-P --soumyasch 17:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

does windows 7 support softwares that doesn't work in vista but work in XP? like Autocad 2000 etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.115.205 (talk) 11:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Is part of this an ad?

"Performance improvements are about more than speed. For example, your laptop battery lasts longer with power-saving features, such as adaptive display brightness, which dims the display if you haven't used your PC for a while."

How do you know I have a laptop? This section doesn't sound like an encyclopedia article to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fogus (talk • contribs) 05:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Windows XP Mode

The blog announcing this feature is quite clear: "Windows XP Mode which is a virtual Windows XP environment running under Windows Virtual PC". In other words, this a virtual machine not an application compatibility shim like we have today under Vista and XP. Nor is it Microsoft Application Virtualization, which does not fix appcompat problems (except for LUA bugs where apps want write access to a system location). Socrates2008 (Talk) 05:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, apparently I forgot to add that Virtual PC is a Microsoft implementation of a type-2 hypervisor i.e. if Win7 includes Virtual PC (vendor-specific), then Win7 by definition includes a hypervisor (generic). I trust this will stop my edit from being reverted on the grounds that it uses the generic term "hypervisor". If not, then kindly discuss here rather than edit warring further. Thank you Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Win7 includes an hypervisor. The VPC hypervisor is installed when XP Mode is installed (I think XP Mode will have a private build of virtual pc, the regular virtual pc package will probably be needed to install separately). --soum^talk 15:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, agree. Socrates2008 (Talk) 23:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

There was something wrong with how XP Mode was described; it isn't a VM feature. Nor is it a hypervisor, not even a virtual machine. its an OS running inside a VM. Both hypervisor and VM are "services" that forms one of the building blocks of XP Mode; XP Mode is the client of those services, not the services in themselves.

Plus there isn't any application compatibility layer, the app is running natively on top of the guest OS; even from the Windows 7 perspective, theres no appcompat layer because the app ain't running on Win7. XP Mode is just VPC 7 + one hardcoded VM + RemoteApp Server and App Publish packager on XP side + published app listener on 7 side. --soum^talk 13:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I had that level of detail available to me when I originally added it to the article; now that we have more sources to draw from, we can be more accurate. I'm sure it'll also get a lot easier when the thing gets released shortly.... Warren -talk- 13:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I still have one question - does it qualify as a Win7 feature? --soum^talk 13:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

No. - Josh (talk | contribs) 20:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Then why is its description here? --soum^talk 01:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Because someone put it there without thinking? - Josh (talk | contribs) 02:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(de-indent) Microsoft is saying, "as part of the upcoming Windows 7 Release Candidate milestone, Microsoft will release a beta version of Windows XP Mode, which allows users of Windows 7 Professional and above to launch many older Windows XP productivity applications directly from their Windows 7 desktop". How do we interpret this? That XP Mode is a part of the Win7 RC release cycle? Or that XPM is a part of Win 7 RC? --soum^talk 02:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, umm, Josh, I don't understand how you could argue that "Windows XP Mode" is not a feature of Windows 7 -- you have to purchase specific editions of Windows 7 to gain access to it, and Microsoft is marketing it as such. Saying that Windows XP Mode is not a Windows 7 feature would be like saying that Windows Ultimate Extras isn't a feature of Windows Vista. Warren -talk- 12:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Hold'em, that BitLocker enhancement, etc. are not features of Windows Vista. Neither is Service Pack 1 or Service Pack 2. The Windows Ultimate Extras functionality, the ability to download Windows Ultimate Extras, is. Windows XP Mode is an add-on, just like any service pack. Such add-ons get their own sections in the main article; they do not go in features sections/articles. - Josh (talk | contribs) 18:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Does XP Mode require a CPU which supports virtualisation, like AMD-V or Intel Virtualisation? If so, might be noteworthy to put in the article. 203.91.84.7 (talk) 00:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

No, but the Virtual PC 2010 hypervisor that it's built on does. (This is a change from Virtual PC 2007, which was a purely software-based hypervisor.) Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Bluetooth audio

Paul Thurrot says its gone. Anyone heard anything? --soum^talk 15:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

WTF. Probably by SP1 but for now it appears to be gone. "vendors of Bluetooth audio devices must now provide their own drivers". - xpclient ^Talk 16:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

System Repair Disc

Windows 7 adds the ability to make a system repair disc. See number eight on this list: http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=738 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.184.137 (talk) 04:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Magnifier

Magnifier is updated with a new interface offering three views: Full screen, Lens and Docked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngyikp (talk • contribs) 10:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Homegroup

No mention about Homegroups? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.38.186 (talk) 16:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

WBF need an independent article, as....

it seems to have a broad content

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+Windows+Biometric+Framework&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

AND

It may include the aspects discussed in the following page

http://maincc.hufs.ac.kr/~argus/no343/t_c2.htm

--222.67.208.51 (talk) 07:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Core OS?

Why is AVCHD, PBDA, ~~"Trusted Installer"~~ and Internet Information Services parts of the core operating system? Is the OS kernel rewritten to accomodate these seemingly peripheral services? "Core OS changes" should refer to whether the algoritms or data structures perused by the kernel and some central modules for the OS (such as file system) are reimplemented to accomodate for performance improvements. The currrent section Core operating system doesn't verify that these seemingly peripheral changes actually entails such Core OS changes. ... said: Rursus (^mbork³) 11:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Too much technical details, maybe?

in a .library-ms file that

Are details like these really appropriate for an encyclopedia article? --Xerces8 (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Math Panel

Isn't the (truly wonderful!) math input panel (%CommonProgramFiles%\Microsoft Shared\Ink\mip.exe) new to Windows 7? --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 21:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

SSD Section

I think we can further improve on the new SSD support features in the section Features new to Windows 7 # Solid state drives. There are a number of articles covering this in pretty good detail.

If I get a chance I will come back to do this myself after I complete other updates I have in process on the Storage articles. § Music Sorter § (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

IExecuteCommand

Hi.

I propose we delete the prose about IExecuteCommand because this piece of text prevents the article from ever becoming a Good Article. (See WP:GACR for requirements). For one thing, most of Wikipedia audience would not understand what IExecuteCommand is from the current prose. For another thing, it is a subtle change in the internals of Windows which interests a minority of software developers; normal users would not take notice of it.

Regards,

Fleet Command (talk) 17:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Support: I think this article is mainly for consumers, not people who use the command line 24/7.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Question? How, specifically, is it holding it back from a good article? Eomund (talk) 05:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
It prevents Criterion 1a (see WP:GACR) from being cleared in the review. Basically, everyone who reads a portion of the article should have a fairly good idea what it is talking about. Text should not make one skip a section because it is "technical mumbo jumbo I wouldn't understand". WP:DUE often become an important factor here. Perhaps there are other items in the article that fit this case but I cannot easily spot any. (That's partly my fault: I understand them all! That's way we have GA reviews.) Fleet Command (talk) 06:16, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Support: Not every change is a 'feature.' Eomund (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Support rephrase/simplify If you could rephrase this into something readable, that would be excellent. Perhaps, write that windows 7 "introduces features to simplify context menu extensions". Then link it to the source on IExecuteCommand. Gsonnenf (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC).
- Yeah, I thought about that too. Such a sentence would fit the bill for being WP:WEASEL which is not good. Fleet Command (talk) 02:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  - I think it would be ok, weasel is usually applied to content with NPOV issues. The source says it simplifies the context menu extensions so we're just making a summary. I don't think we'll find any sources claiming that it complicates it, but if we do we can change the statement.Gsonnenf (talk) 14:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
    - "Usually" is a dangerous word. And NPOV is exactly the problem here. The source is a Microsoft engineer who inevitably thinks what Microsoft do is great (or else he can't publish it in a Microsoft blog). Elaborating on this would be undue. Fleet Command (talk) 19:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
      - I don't mean to be argumentative here, but Microsoft created the thing to simplify the context menu problem which is fixing a problem they created. If there is a published apposing point of view then I can certainly see addressing POV. But please see the following policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ § Lack of neutrality as an excuse to delete Anyway we could do the following, "introduces features designed to simplify context menu extensions." We can simply assert it was designed to do so which is a statement of intent. Lets hope for windows developer they succeeded :P. Gsonnenf (talk) 05:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
        Do not worry, we are supposed to discuss. Anyway, the original problem still stands: A normal person still asks himself what IExecuteCommand is, how it simplifies things and how it affects him. Eventually, by reading this, his knowledge will not change a bit. WP:GACR prohibits such texts. Fleet Command (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Simplified Nobody Ent 03:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- The original problem is not yet addressed: A layman reading this still wonders what IExecuteCommand is, how it simplifies things and how it affects him. Fleet Command (talk) 06:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  - If this 'thing' is a programming interface, does it really come under the 'Miscellaneous shell enhancements' section anyway? --Topperfalkon (talk) 23:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
    - Hmm... Good question. I wouldn't know. Maybe because it is related to programming aspects of shell development? Fleet Command (talk) 07:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
      - I've tried to explain in layman terms the capabilities and purpose for which the API can be used, hope this will satisfy WP:GACR. I used Gsonnenf's "designed to simplify" wording to avoid Weasel words. Diego (talk) 13:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
        Well, obviously there is no consensus for deletion. Not that I am satisfied but Wikipedia is a bit of tit for tat. So, I'm closing the case. Fleet Command (talk) 07:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
        I think you have consensus to delete most of it. I think the entire bullet can be replaced by something like "[Windows 7 shell] introduces a new API designed to simplify context menu extensions.[x]" Most general programmers will have a good idea of what that means. If they want details they can look at the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsonnenf (talk • contribs) 08:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, i've fixed this content.Gsonnenf (talk) 08:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Speech...?

The article mentions that Windows 7 introduced advancements in the Speech Recognition technology in Windows Vista, but it doesn't mention how this is the case... (67.58.241.6 (talk) 03:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC))