Why Vista means “GetaMac”: The problems with Windows that Vista isn’t going to fix.

So RC1 is out for those who didn’t know (or care). Release Candidate 1 is generally considered a version that is close to being the final product. I remember when I installed Windows .net RC1 all those years ago. They also released Windows .net RC2. Eventually it turned into Windows 2003 Server, and they really didn’t change anything, just a few bug fixes and the name change. So in THEORY this version of Vista won’t have any drastic changes before it escapes into the public. Which is disappointing because I was really looking forward to WinFS.

I had been meaning to write a small rant about some issues I wanted fixed with windows. The main reason I didn’t, was up till now, I hadn’t tried Vista . It felt kind of stupid to rant about the older version. Though I was positive that none of those problems were going to be fixed, I would feel pretty foolish if they had already been fixed while I was bitching.

Lets start with something so stupid I can’t believe this wasn’t fixed in oh say Windows 98. Say you want to use a background picture that isn’t the same aspect ratio as your monitor, but you’d like to have it fill the screen. So you click on “Fit to screen” if you’ve tried this before, you know that it then looks like 3 different kinds of crap. Why is there no option to scale a picture up, while keeping the same aspect ratio?

Now in Vista , they did fix half of this problem. When you use a bigger image than your desktop resolution, it scales the image DOWN correctly to fit your main screen (now even when you tile the images!). But there is still no option to scale an image UP while keeping the same aspect. You can either stretch it out to fill the screen, center it, or tile it. Unless of course you want to turn on “active desktop” and write an html page to stretch it out manually (Yes grandma, make sure you remember your closing tags) Lets not even get into having multiple monitors, suffice to say, Windows doesn’t care what resolution your other monitors are, just the main one. Unless of course you use 3^rd party drivers or software to control it. With Vista , I actually couldn’t even use Nvidia’s control panel to setup my 2^nd monitor, or background images, because I got a message that “your drivers do not allow changing the amount of hardware acceleration”. Oh joy! I hope that’s just because they are beta drivers.

Here’s something simpler. “View by folder size”. Why hasn’t this been an option for years? What reasoning can they come up with? For that matter, when you sort by Name, why does that still group folders and files together? Sure Vista can sort files by about 150 different categories (if of course you have the required meta data) so why can’t you sort a folder by something else? I can only hope that WinFS makes this problem go away, but I’m sorta not holding my breath. A huge part of Vista ’s marketing has been thumping their chest about how you store and find your files. I refuse to believe they haven’t noticed this before.

How about “Search”. This issue I only noticed in Vista . But I figured I’d mention it anyway (who knows, there MIGHT be a chance to get it fixed). By default, the search function ONLY searches the index it makes of the files. Also by default , it does not include C:\ in that index. It only includes your documents folder and the recent files you’ve used. You know what, if I’m searching for something, it probably means I haven’t used it in the last 15 minutes!

Here’s another stupid feature of “Search” in Vista . Say you are searching for some music (opera for example), but you also have a program called “Opera” that you happen to use as your internet browser. Vista will just assume that you want to run Opera.exe when you hit enter, and not do a search for it….. $#%^@  I didn’t type it into the RUN command, I typed it into the SEARCH program. What part of the word Search, includes RUN?

A friend of mine also brought up another issue with that. What happens if you have multiple versions of a program installed (say for debugging, or just for different features) what one does it run? Remember folks, Windows knows best, just go along with it. Yes I know you can change how it works. But once again, my Mom isn’t going to know how, so guess who gets a call the first time she uses the Search?

What has really changed with Vista ? Even according to Microsoft’s own website, it’s not a very impressive list.

“Windows Aero”. This is completely unimportant to me. There are many things like Windowblinds that can make windows look as shiny as you want.

“Taskbar thumbnails”. I like this, it works good and is a nice touch. Opera added the exact same feature to its latest browser version. Did I pay $200 for it?

“Windows Flip 3d”… All I’m going to say is… What? How about you show me what the window has in it, instead of making it like trying to read something around the corner. Making the windows ‘3d’, on a 2d monitor does not make it easier to see what they are.

“User account control”… ARG!! You know this even asks to run itself before you can turn it off? I’m sorry, but you know what, if my dad runs a program and this window pops up asking if it can run. He’s just going to click OK. It might be a virus, he wouldn’t know, so what does it end up doing? It just makes things take longer, and frustrates people even more.

“Windows sidebar” Rhymes with Konfabulator?

“Windows backup” hey, know what. Good idea, better backup is good for everyone!

My bet is that one way Microsoft will force people to upgrade to Vista , is through DirectX 10 (or whatever they call it when it comes out). They have already announced that it won’t be available for XP. I know a few people who have been working closely with DXX for a long time now, everything they’ve told me sounds like it’s a great upgrade.

It pisses me off when MS seems to just push a $200 operating system on people. What I really see, is a candy coated XP with a new version of Direct X and a few features that have been available as free 3^rd party programs for years. Most of which, I’m probably never going to use. Will I burn a DVD with the default Vista setup? Doubtful. Will I “network” with Windows live to help make friends and do business? *cough*…right…

XP is still there. They haven’t done anything spectacular, like getting rid of the registry (one can only dream). They’ve only just put on a new coat of paint. Yes I know there is the .NET Framework 3.0 and a new network stack, and the programmer in me, loves that. Damn near everything about the framework is great, but it will take time to see if other programmers take real advantage of it. If every new program for Vista included XCOPY deployment, instead of adding 200 new entries into the registry, I would be a VERY happy consumer. I know that’s not going to happen.