Features you wish for in Windows XP Service Pack 3.......please post your views

[Apoorv]

Features you wish for in Windows XP Service Pack 3.......please post your
views



URL: http://winxpsp3.blogspot.com/

RSS Feed - http://winxpsp3.blogspot.com/atom.xml

 

[Mark H]

What's really needed is an additional windows setup option for F6, to
look for cd-roms instead of a floppy

 

[Mike Kolitz]

I'd agree Mark, though I honestly wouldn't count on this until the next full
release of Windows (codenamed Longhorn, at present).

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Interesting idea.
However if people really want something, it may be a better idea to
contact Microsoft directly:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=114491
Or
http://register.microsoft.com/mswis...=/isapi/gomscom.asp?target=/mswish/thanks.htm

 

[Will Hoenig]

Microsoft Anti-Virus (which is a possible feature in "Longhorn")

 

[David Candy]

Most people get infected with a virus if they want random data destruction. But some idiots install MS Antispywear.

 

[Leythos]

I want MS to stop including applications with Service Packs and with the
OS. I want MS to produce a stable/exploit-free OS.

I would never trust the MS SP2 Firewall or their AV product, they just
don't have a quality track-record in security or AV areas.

Instead of buying up those companies and their products, they should just
release the source code to them so that they can produce even better
applications to protect people.

What we really need is not another service pack, but another OS that is
different from the ground up. Abandon DOS/Windows foundation and create
something that is secure, forward looking, stable, growth oriented, and
provides several modes - Workstation (Developer), Home User, and Small
Server options in the install.

 

[David Candy]

What programs will people run on this OS?

 

[Leythos]

What programs will people run on this OS?

A new and revised batch of the same that we run now. Programs that don't
allow "User" level account to run them should be eliminated (like
installing MS Office 2003 or QuickBooks as a User).

We need, if we're going to move into safer computing areas, adopt the idea
that backwards compatability is not all it's cracked up to be. You can
leave the current Windows platforms where they are, service packs to fix
security problems, but get out of the past and design something that takes
into account the real-world use of computers currently in the market.

I'm not advocating that we all switch to Linux or AIX or MAC OS, but we
need something that's a little more secure for the average user based on
the extensive threat base out there, and that takes FULL computing
advantage of the P4 line and above (not to mention other vendors CPU).

It would be nice to see the next Windows have the ability to install a
kernel based on type of CPU, where it's completely optimized for that CPU
out of the box, where security is first, ease of use second, and
applications third.

Don't suggest that MS can't do it, if I can install MS Office 2000/XP on a
linux box and have it run perfectly, MS can create a new OS and update
Office 2003 to run on it.

Do you know how many people (home users and small businesses) run as local
administrators because they can't run QuickBooks, MS Office 2003, or other
apps without being an admin? Lots!

 

[David Candy]

But noone will buy it. That is why MS is sucessful. They will run your programs.

 

[Leythos]

But noone will buy it. That is why MS is sucessful. They will run your programs.

I bet you would find that many would buy it. MS is currently the leader
due to marketing and pricing and strategy. If they designed a new OS that
was more secure and provided different kernels for different CPU's, I
would buy it - and we handle more than 1000 desktops.

 

[David Candy]

But your customers wouldn't. They like their apps to work.

 

[Leythos]

But your customers wouldn't. They like their apps to work.

And you have to ask yourself, since the the same thing was true with every
major release of Windows, where apps didn't work any more, would they buy
the new OS and upgraded/rewritten applications that run on it, if it meant
that they would be secure and stable?

Customers want security and stability tempered with price - if MS could
give us Windows Secure Platform Version 1, and vendors would make proper
use of the platform, meaning they only have to retool parts of their apps
for the security changes, it would sell like hot-cakes on a cold day.

 

[Leythos]

Question: With trillions of dollars to be made in the online marketing/
banking/service industry, why haven't those folks looking at making the
trillions gotten together and produced one new piece of software:

Because like every software project, there are different platforms,
different service packs, different network connections, different firewall
rules, different user experience levels, etc.....

If it was easy to design an application that would run on all computers
without any problem that the masses could use without instruction, well,
linux would be more popular

Have you ever designed a enterprise application from scratch? It's not as
simple as many people think. Even an application that just pings IP's to
determine if the node is alive can take days and often means you need to
think about all the different systems a user might want to run it on. Then
there's the problem of Support - say you design the banking software,
someone installs it on a marginal system, it causes and exception error
and trashes their system - guess who they are going to call.....

 

[Don Taylor]

Customers want security and stability tempered with price - if MS could
give us Windows Secure Platform Version 1, and vendors would make proper
use of the platform, meaning they only have to retool parts of their apps
for the security changes, it would sell like hot-cakes on a cold day.

Question: With trillions of dollars to be made in the online marketing/
banking/service industry, why haven't those folks looking at making the
trillions gotten together and produced one new piece of software:

A secure tool that is somewhere between a mailer and a browser,
that is only used for these business transactions, something
that when you get a message from your bank or your store you
know it can't be forged, it can't be a fraud, it can't be phishing?
Something that has a reputation for dependability and safety?
And, they give it to you because they want the trillions.

Why hasn't this been done? Much smaller than an OS. Way more profit.
Shouldn't be impossible to make this more secure than using your Visa
card or your ATM card, in fact, maybe that is what you need to stuff
into the drive to authenticate your end of the communication or
transaction. And that same card is what authenticates the bank/
merchant's traffic coming to you, any and everything else that doesn't
authenticate maibombs the national credit fraud swat team with a message.
Six-Sigma quality software, one failure per thousand year (full time year
round, round the clock) customer use is actually feasible if you limit
the trazillion feature crap down to "it works, never fails, with the
bare minimum number of features you really need to do your job."

 

[Don Taylor]

All Windows Explorer crashes/reboots/failures generate detailed Event Log
with an exact description of what caused the failure.

Security Wizard scans the system and points out any potential holes
along with what the suggested change is to close the hole.

Network wizard scans from each machine and points out any potential network
misconfigurations, in particular resolving mixed os network problems.

 

[Al Smith]

Microsoft Anti-Virus (which is a possible feature in "Longhorn")
Here's what I'd like to see:

1) Default settings that are secure.
2) A ZIP function that works well.
3) A CD and DVD writing function that works.
4) A true firewall, that can be turned off.
5) The ability to play DVDs natively, without having to import
codices.
6)SATA built in, so we don't have to mess with drivers on floppies.
7) The complete elimination of Product Activation.

 

[David Candy]

5. Why should all windows customers pay licensing fees for DVD codecs. If it's included then one pays a licensing fee even if one never watches a DVD.

 

[Will Hoenig]

1) The firewall was improved massively and can be turned off in SP2
2) If Microsoft got rid of activation, there would be a massive piracy
problem and they would sue more people.

 

[Al Smith]

5. Why should all windows customers pay licensing fees for DVD codecs. If it's included then one pays a licensing fee even if one never watches a DVD.

By that reasoning, I shouldn't be paying for features in Windows
that I never use, such as networking.

I think the ability to play a DVD movie in Windows, without having
to mess around with third-party aps, is a reasonable feature.