What do you expect from Windows 9?

[Deleted]

Ok, so Windows 8 is upon us and everyone coming from a PC background pretty much agrees that it is terrible (despite some solid "under the hud" improvements").

But then I wonder, what do people actually expect from a new Windows nowadays? Microsoft is in a precarious situation where they can only pull off a very limited amount of innovation without annoying somebody, somewhere.

So looking forward, what features do you expect from a Windows 9, from a PC user PoV (obviously).

Some things I can think of:
1. UI designed to be used with keyboard and mouse first and foremost.
2. No more 32-bit support
3. Optimized for SSD usage
4. Almost instant boot
5. UEFI requirement, no more BIOS support

But honestly, I really can't think of many features I'd be looking for on Windows. Most of the improvements would need to be of technical nature, not so much a matter of presentation.

[Evil Inside]

Something like win 7 but better, and actually made for desktops in mind, not tablets. Every second Microsoft OS is crap, for example, win98, win me/2000(shit), xp really good, vista shit, win 7 good, win 8 shit(IMO) so I'm expecting win 9 to be good :P

Edit: That wasnt really a clear answer I know, all in all basically I'd love them to expand on win 7, with extra bells and whistles obviously.

[reohh]

Something like win 7 but better, and actually made for desktops in mind, not tablets. Every second Microsoft OS is crap, for example, win98, win me/2000(shit), xp really good, vista shit, win 7 good, win 8 shit(IMO) so I'm expecting win 9 to be good :P

Its because every second OS they try to radically change everything, then the next one is fixed and its awesome.

On topic: I expect Windows 9 to be a more desktop oriented version of Windows 8

[vesseblah]

1. UI designed to be used with keyboard and mouse first and foremost.

It is already. If you're talking about Metro integration, they'll probably fix the co-existence of metro and regular desktop in SP1 of Win8.

2. No more 32-bit support

Not gonna happen. Very low power computers like tablets and netbooks will remain 32bit.

3. Optimized for SSD usage

Already done in Win7.

4. Almost instant boot

Already done in Win8.

5. UEFI requirement, no more BIOS support

Doubt it. It's too soon to ditch the support for today's hardware in next version. UEFI is not widely spread enough yet.



What they should do is complete WinFS. It makes whole lot more sense now with the cloud integration.

[Leo-Kun]

I'm using Mac OSX Mountain Lion, so I don't have any idea, but some people said that it will be very cool
Very much better than windows 8

[Deleted]

Pretty much what vesseblah said. I'm using Win8 right now and so far love the new Metro start menu and Charms bar. Sometimes when I see somebody writing stuff like "OMFG METRO SUCKS LEAVE PC MASTER RACE ALONE" I wonder if that person actually tried Windows 8.

Regarding what I'd like to see in new Windows - a good Desktop environment like Gnome or KDE on Linux. You know, stuff like multiple desktops, window manager with docking, tiling, etc etc. That's the one thing I really like in Linux as a user. Maybe a good media player with media library functions, like iTunes (but not THAT slow and dumb).
More apps in Store would also be a good idea. though that's out of Microsoft hands I suppose.

[BicycleMafioso]

I don't expect anything out of it, since it will either likely be a hotted-up Win8 or not exist at all.

If it does exist, it will be more close to the Windows 8 than Windows 7.

[Orlong]

I dont know why they even made Windows 8, there is nothing wrong with Windows 7 and I cant think of any new features I or any other home user would need that Windows 7 doesn't have. Until we need PCs that need more RAM than Windows 7 can use or we need a 128 bit OS which will be a looooong time, there is no reason to switch except for stupid people that cant figure out to click on an icon to launch their web browser or email or cant figure out how to type www.facebook.com in the address bar, in which case, they have no business owning a PC.

[vesseblah]

I dont know why they even made Windows 8,

For the same reason Apple releases new OSX yearly. To sell more stuff.

there is nothing wrong with Windows 7 and I cant think of any new features I or any other home user would need that Windows 7 doesn't have.

There's nothing wrong with 7, but there is a crapton of desktop/explorer performance upgrades in 8 which even though aren't strictly speaking needed, are still nice. Starting from the fact that it runs about twice as fast on my old laptop as Win7 does, with nearly instant startup and shutdown using hibernate.

[Orlong]

For the same reason Apple releases new OSX yearly. To sell more stuff.

Guess people should stop being sheeple then and stop buying the stuff that they made for no other reason than to make something to sell

There's nothing wrong with 7, but there is a crapton of desktop/explorer performance upgrades in 8 which even though aren't strictly speaking needed, are still nice. Starting from the fact that it runs about twice as fast on my old laptop as Win7 does, with nearly instant startup and shutdown using hibernate.

Most if not all of those under the hood things that increase performance could probably have been added to Windows 7 in a Service Pack, rather than write a new OS for morons that dont know how to use a PC and need a Fisher Price My First PC.

In addition to making Windows 8 for ignoramuses that dont know how to use a PC, they took away a lot of the advanced user features and force you to use the crappy Metro interface. There used to be a registry hack to use use the standard windows UI but they even removed that so there is absolutely NO WAY to get rid of Metro

[Perderder]

A Windows Logo

[Djinni]

Instant boot.... that's pretty much fixed with Win8 already on HDD's and I can only assume is no longer a concern with a SSD.

I don't really expect Microsoft to put the PC user ahead of the rest of the much more rapidly growing markets but it would be nice for it to be optimised for each individual platform it becomes available on rather than feeling like its been tacked on. (I guess much like Vessblah keeps saying about how metro and the the desktop should be better integrated rather than run as completely separate entities)
I would like to see some better integration of file and folder sharing both with and without passwords... I have not to this date been able to effectively share folders over a windows based network without needing a password on a previously non-password protected computer.
I'd also like to see some improvements made to the compatibility options, somethings I have found on Win8 just don't run which used to in Win7 even when in compatibility mode. (same is true for Win7 and WinXP)
Better and further integration of PowerShell I run a minecraft server but as yet have been unable to run it in powershell by default as I use a reboot loop in my batchfile.
A more "Mac like" approach to devices and printers, I want at least a generic driver which is able to perform a basic print task without me having to download a 50mb file from the printer manufacturer when all I need to do is quickly print off a 2 page document in a rush.
Better support for bluetooth devices, currently it still feels like something tacked on as something which got forgotten about until 2 mins before release.

I personally actually have very little negative to say about Win8 Metro is as customizable as I need it to be and overall I am very happy with pretty much all the improvements made in Win8 over Win7. (I wouldn't mind the CPU speed value in performance/taskmanager to show the actual current/maximum speed rather than the default speed.)

[inux94]

Something like win 7 but better, and actually made for desktops in mind, not tablets. Every second Microsoft OS is crap, for example, win98, win me/2000(shit), xp really good, vista shit, win 7 good, win 8 shit(IMO) so I'm expecting win 9 to be good :P

Edit: That wasnt really a clear answer I know, all in all basically I'd love them to expand on win 7, with extra bells and whistles obviously.

Sorry to break your bubble, but Vista is actually decent.

[Elenion]

Personally, I want an easy option to lock window size, position as well as resetting position and size. I am pretty picky about that kind of stuff.
Windows 7's auto resizing when you drag to the edge is kind of neat but not quite enough.

[Ofire]

I played with windows 8 for a couple hours, and to be honest, unless they improve the desktop version and re-instate the start menu into the desktop version, I cannot be assed with using windows 8 for daily use. Granted for touch tablets and phones it may be awesome.

[vesseblah]

Every second Microsoft OS is crap, for example, win98, win me/2000(shit), xp really good, vista shit, win 7 good, win 8 shit(IMO) so I'm expecting win 9 to be good :P

People still believe that shit after it's been disproved million times in the other Win8 threads here?

Win98 was shit
98SE good
WinME was shit
Win2k was great in office use, SP3 added DirectX support which made 2k the best gaming OS until XP-SP2
WinXP was totally useless garbage until SP1, and performed worse in gaming than 2k until SP2
Vista was slow and unstable until SP1 which made it just as good as Win7
Windows 7 was actually first release ever that worked without any service packs.

If I had to draw any trends from this, I'd say Win8 will be better than 7 in all aspects after SP1 comes out.

[Dhrizzle]

Most if not all of those under the hood things that increase performance could probably have been added to Windows 7 in a Service Pack, rather than write a new OS for morons that dont know how to use a PC and need a Fisher Price My First PC.

Hate to break it to you but every Microsoft OS from Win95 onwards has been made for computer illiterate morons, and XP still holds the award for OS most likely to have been designed by Fisher Price.

Dunno what they actually did under the hood, but the changes to 8 seem a lot more dramatic than the change from Vista > 7.

In addition to making Windows 8 for ignoramuses that dont know how to use a PC, they took away a lot of the advanced user features and force you to use the crappy Metro interface. There used to be a registry hack to use use the standard windows UI but they even removed that so there is absolutely NO WAY to get rid of Metro

What advanced use features have been removed, and what is forcing you to use the Metro interface?


Back on-topic, what I really want to see for Windows 9 is the ability to make your icons any size with a second image for their selected state.

[Deleted]

It is already. If you're talking about Metro integration, they'll probably fix the co-existence of metro and regular desktop in SP1 of Win8.



Not gonna happen. Very low power computers like tablets and netbooks will remain 32bit.



Already done in Win7.



Already done in Win8.



Doubt it. It's too soon to ditch the support for today's hardware in next version. UEFI is not widely spread enough yet.



What they should do is complete WinFS. It makes whole lot more sense now with the cloud integration.

Ahm, I doubt most of your answers.

1. Metro was clearly not designed for Desktop users. It's cumbersome and click-intensive to use. The parallel existence is part of the problem but I doubt that's something they'll fix.

2. I think you're wrong on that one. AMD introduced x64 architecture over a decade ago and every modern chips supports 64-bit software I'm sure. That's including ARM chips as well as Tegra and all other mobile chips. 32/64-bit software has existed parallel since Windows Vista in...2007 iirc. Even longer if you account for WinXp - 64. 32 -bit has run its course. Even software manufacturers have caught up now. It's time to let it die.

3. SSDs weren't even a mainstream product when Windows 7 went live, let alone while it was developed. They've only really started hitting main-stream in 2011 and 2012. Only because Win 7 works well on an SSD, doesn't mean it's optimized for it. There's a lot more potential to be had when assuming SSDs will replace HDDs as OS storage devices. I mean Windows entire file-structure is based on HDD usage, not SSD.

4. I use Win 8 on a daily basis and while booting is fast, it's far from instant.

5. UEFI has been replacing BIOS in Macs for years and even on PCs since about 2010. Since Win 9 shouldn't be expected before 2015, I see no reason to keep supporting such an outdated system.

There's really no reason as to why a new Windows needs to run on a 6 year old machine. Most Windows copies are sold with newly purchased computers. Only a fraction of customers actually upgrade and only a fraction of those would look to upgrade a 6+ year old system.

PS: WinFS never was an independent file-system and much of its tech has been incorporated into Win 7 and beyond.

[vesseblah]

1. Metro was clearly not designed for Desktop users. It's cumbersome and click-intensive to use. The parallel existence is part of the problem but I doubt that's something they'll fix.

Of course not. It was designed to be all-purpose OS. The sales of desktops have gone steadily down for years now while laptops have gone up. And now tablets and smartphones are eating the laptop market too. Microsoft is doing the only smart move they can, which is creating whole Windows ecosystem that covers desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. No amount of crying from people who refuse to accept change is going to turn it back unless by some miracle desktop sales doubles in next year.

2. I think you're wrong on that one. AMD introduced x64 architecture over a decade ago and every modern chips supports 64-bit software I'm sure. That's including ARM chips as well as Tegra and all other mobile chips.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Whole Intel Atom line used in netbooks is purely 32bit processors (some models are 64bit capable by design but it's disabled for of Win7SE license reasons that limit the netbook capabilities), ARM Cortex8 was the first processor of that line available in 64bit variety but most smartphones and cheap-ass tablets still use ARM7 which is 32bit processor.

Only because Win 7 works well on an SSD, doesn't mean it's optimized for it.

TRIM and automatic disabling of defragmenting comes to mind first. Win7 was written from day 1 to use SSDs efficiently.

4. I use Win 8 on a daily basis and while booting is fast, it's far from instant.

It's faster booting my laptop from 2006 using Win8 than my Android 4 tablet using dualcore ARM9 and Tegra2 graphics, or my Android 2.2 phone. Sure it's not instant, but it's already damn fast.

5. UEFI has been replacing BIOS in Macs for years and even on PCs since about 2010.

Nope. Sandy Bridge motherboards was when UEFI really came into PCs, and that's less than two years ago. Still most AMD motherboards use BIOS.

Since Win 9 shouldn't be expected before 2015, I see no reason to keep supporting such an outdated system.

There's really no reason as to why a new Windows needs to run on a 6 year old machine. Most Windows copies are sold with newly purchased computers. Only a fraction of customers actually upgrade and only a fraction of those would look to upgrade a 6+ year old system.

You are thinking from the perspective of a PC gamer who upgrades system frequently. WinXP is still supported after 11 years because big corporations actually use hardware that old.

And again referring to my laptop from 2006... 32bit Windows 8 works on it straight out of the box, supporting every piece of hardware in it. And it works faster than WinXP or Win7 on it.

PS: WinFS never was an independent file-system and much of its tech has been incorporated into Win 7 and beyond.

Parts of it, not the design philosophy which was actually the revolutionary thing, ie. removing the links between data and programs.

[demonskies]

I will probably be flogged but I dont mind the Windows 8 setup. I wouldnt put it on my main desktop but for my media laptop its really not that bad. Not only that once you get used to navigation its really not all bad lol. But for the sake of the question. I think maybe making a cross between 7/8 for 9 would be a good start kinda how 7 had the utility of xp but the new sleeker look of vista. So maybe a feature that you could run the metro or a full desktop with start bar. Making some QoL changes in 9 would be nice to to how the metro works.