Assuming my software/hardware was working fine and allowing Vista to delete all but the most recent restore point to gain needed resources.

 

Regretting making that choice when Vista decided it didn’t like my new software or hardware days after I installed it.

 
Please Include the “MIDI Musicians” Group in the Roadmap to Windows 7

Microsoft clearly forgot about us when developing Vista. In fact, we were snowed into believing Vista was the answer to our prayers by all the hype about its improved audio, and naturally we assumed that Microsoft realized MIDI went hand in hand with audio. To our dismay, though, we were wrong.
 
Audio performance is important to all musicians; however, it’s not the only thing MIDI musicians need from their PC and OS. And, “yes”, especially in this day and age, MIDI musicians are just as dependent as any other group on the technically advanced software and hardware packaged within an OS. Ending up a double edged sword in the end, which I will address shortly, the advanced audio provided in Vista is only one of several parts of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. Think of the OS as a six-string guitar, and audio represents three strings.

Being able to direct and control MIDI devices (midi ports) is an extremely important part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs.  The first string and a missing string in Vista for us was the loss of the MIDI Mapper. This was the first major reason so many MIDI musicians either chose not to upgrade to Vista or reverted back to XP.

Being able to hear MIDI Sounds in today’s MIDI formats, i.e., GM2, XG1, or XG2 is part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. These MIDI specifications have been in place for 13+ years, yet Microsoft astonished the music community with its decision to bring onboard the already out-dated GS Wave Table in its Vista OS. This synthesizer’s MIDI technology is based on first generation MIDI protocol (GM), a protocol that was developed in 1983, no less. Worse yet, the Wavetable attaches itself to the soundcard, making it the default player of MIDI in Vista, and is nearly impossible to change short of editing the registry. This catastrophe broke the second string in Vista for MIDI musicians.

Many musicians who work with MIDI rely on software synthesizers that are based on, again, current MIDI protocol (GM1, XG1, and XG2) to make and edit music. Now here’s the irony: Microsoft requires HD audio in the Vista OS. This, in turn, has rendered the majority of third party soft synthesizers inoperable. To date, short of spending $400 or more, many MIDI musicians are synth-less. This string in Vista not only broke, it snapped back with a piercing sting smack-dab in the middle of our faces.

It’s important to note also, that the “Gamers Group” who use Vista have suffered from and continue to face the same above three problems, as well.
 
Before I end this email, I’d like to acknowledge and commend the major third party vendors who have managed to make some of their software, if not all, conform to Vista’s stringent requirements. To me, this was a seeming impossible task to undertake as it was two faceted; addressing HD audio in itself, and addressing current MIDI protocols that are not structured for HD audio. The latter said, the MIDI Manufacturers Association is in the process of developing “High Definition MIDI Protocol for next generation devices” (http://www.midi.org/news/hdmidi.php ).
 
It’s obvious now, that the majority of my requests revolve around MIDI, and I hope that Microsoft not only takes MIDI Musicians seriously this time around, but also can acknowledge, in hindsight, that a year’s advance notice for the entire MIDI industry to conform to major changes in a new OS, could very well be an unrealistic amount of time. Better yet, if Microsoft does do these two things, then I hope they will consider collaborating with MIDI software developers as well as the MIDI Manufacturers Association while developing Windows 7.

Assuming my software/hardware was working fine and allowing Vista to delete all but the most recent restore point to gain needed resources.

 

Regretting making that choice when Vista decided it didn’t like my new software or hardware days after I installed it.

 
Please Include the “MIDI Musicians” Group in the Roadmap to Windows 7

Microsoft clearly forgot about us when developing Vista. In fact, we were snowed into believing Vista was the answer to our prayers by all the hype about its improved audio, and naturally we assumed that Microsoft realized MIDI went hand in hand with audio. To our dismay, though, we were wrong.
 
Audio performance is important to all musicians; however, it’s not the only thing MIDI musicians need from their PC and OS. And, “yes”, especially in this day and age, MIDI musicians are just as dependent as any other group on the technically advanced software and hardware packaged within an OS. Ending up a double edged sword in the end, which I will address shortly, the advanced audio provided in Vista is only one of several parts of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. Think of the OS as a six-string guitar, and audio represents three strings.

Being able to direct and control MIDI devices (midi ports) is an extremely important part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs.  The first string and a missing string in Vista for us was the loss of the MIDI Mapper. This was the first major reason so many MIDI musicians either chose not to upgrade to Vista or reverted back to XP.

Being able to hear MIDI Sounds in today’s MIDI formats, i.e., GM2, XG1, or XG2 is part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. These MIDI specifications have been in place for 13+ years, yet Microsoft astonished the music community with its decision to bring onboard the already out-dated GS Wave Table in its Vista OS. This synthesizer’s MIDI technology is based on first generation MIDI protocol (GM), a protocol that was developed in 1983, no less. Worse yet, the Wavetable attaches itself to the soundcard, making it the default player of MIDI in Vista, and is nearly impossible to change short of editing the registry. This catastrophe broke the second string in Vista for MIDI musicians.

Many musicians who work with MIDI rely on software synthesizers that are based on, again, current MIDI protocol (GM1, XG1, and XG2) to make and edit music. Now here’s the irony: Microsoft requires HD audio in the Vista OS. This, in turn, has rendered the majority of third party soft synthesizers inoperable. To date, short of spending $400 or more, many MIDI musicians are synth-less. This string in Vista not only broke, it snapped back with a piercing sting smack-dab in the middle of our faces.

It’s important to note also, that the “Gamers Group” who use Vista have suffered from and continue to face the same above three problems, as well.
 
Before I end this email, I’d like to acknowledge and commend the major third party vendors who have managed to make some of their software, if not all, conform to Vista’s stringent requirements. To me, this was a seeming impossible task to undertake as it was two faceted; addressing HD audio in itself, and addressing current MIDI protocols that are not structured for HD audio. The latter said, the MIDI Manufacturers Association is in the process of developing “High Definition MIDI Protocol for next generation devices” (http://www.midi.org/news/hdmidi.php ).
 
It’s obvious now, that the majority of my requests revolve around MIDI, and I hope that Microsoft not only takes MIDI Musicians seriously this time around, but also can acknowledge, in hindsight, that a year’s advance notice for the entire MIDI industry to conform to major changes in a new OS, could very well be an unrealistic amount of time. Better yet, if Microsoft does do these two things, then I hope they will consider collaborating with MIDI software developers as well as the MIDI Manufacturers Association while developing Windows 7.

Assuming my software/hardware was working fine and allowing Vista to delete all but the most recent restore point to gain needed resources.

 

Regretting making that choice when Vista decided it didn’t like my new software or hardware days after I installed it.

 
Please Include the “MIDI Musicians” Group in the Roadmap to Windows 7

Microsoft clearly forgot about us when developing Vista. In fact, we were snowed into believing Vista was the answer to our prayers by all the hype about its improved audio, and naturally we assumed that Microsoft realized MIDI went hand in hand with audio. To our dismay, though, we were wrong.
 
Audio performance is important to all musicians; however, it’s not the only thing MIDI musicians need from their PC and OS. And, “yes”, especially in this day and age, MIDI musicians are just as dependent as any other group on the technically advanced software and hardware packaged within an OS. Ending up a double edged sword in the end, which I will address shortly, the advanced audio provided in Vista is only one of several parts of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. Think of the OS as a six-string guitar, and audio represents three strings.

Being able to direct and control MIDI devices (midi ports) is an extremely important part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs.  The first string and a missing string in Vista for us was the loss of the MIDI Mapper. This was the first major reason so many MIDI musicians either chose not to upgrade to Vista or reverted back to XP.

Being able to hear MIDI Sounds in today’s MIDI formats, i.e., GM2, XG1, or XG2 is part of MIDI musicians’ basic needs. These MIDI specifications have been in place for 13+ years, yet Microsoft astonished the music community with its decision to bring onboard the already out-dated GS Wave Table in its Vista OS. This synthesizer’s MIDI technology is based on first generation MIDI protocol (GM), a protocol that was developed in 1983, no less. Worse yet, the Wavetable attaches itself to the soundcard, making it the default player of MIDI in Vista, and is nearly impossible to change short of editing the registry. This catastrophe broke the second string in Vista for MIDI musicians.

Many musicians who work with MIDI rely on software synthesizers that are based on, again, current MIDI protocol (GM1, XG1, and XG2) to make and edit music. Now here’s the irony: Microsoft requires HD audio in the Vista OS. This, in turn, has rendered the majority of third party soft synthesizers inoperable. To date, short of spending $400 or more, many MIDI musicians are synth-less. This string in Vista not only broke, it snapped back with a piercing sting smack-dab in the middle of our faces.

It’s important to note also, that the “Gamers Group” who use Vista have suffered from and continue to face the same above three problems, as well.
 
Before I end this email, I’d like to acknowledge and commend the major third party vendors who have managed to make some of their software, if not all, conform to Vista’s stringent requirements. To me, this was a seeming impossible task to undertake as it was two faceted; addressing HD audio in itself, and addressing current MIDI protocols that are not structured for HD audio. The latter said, the MIDI Manufacturers Association is in the process of developing “High Definition MIDI Protocol for next generation devices” (http://www.midi.org/news/hdmidi.php ).
 
It’s obvious now, that the majority of my requests revolve around MIDI, and I hope that Microsoft not only takes MIDI Musicians seriously this time around, but also can acknowledge, in hindsight, that a year’s advance notice for the entire MIDI industry to conform to major changes in a new OS, could very well be an unrealistic amount of time. Better yet, if Microsoft does do these two things, then I hope they will consider collaborating with MIDI software developers as well as the MIDI Manufacturers Association while developing Windows 7.

United States v. Microsoft  found that Microsoft could not bar developer entry to the Windows platform, and Digital Signing does just that, by setting up Microsoft as the lone gatekeeper for hardware and driver-level software on Windows. Furthermore, developers must pay Microsoft a yearly fee for their Digital Signature, which Microsoft may revoke at their discretion at any time. This is a pay-to-play scheme for driver developers.

Not if Microsoft does it right. Take a look at the system requirements for CompizFusion, or any of the myriad third party apps that give you transparency with xp (or 95), or of OSX. all of them are significantly lower then Vista’s.  That’s the biggest problem with vista’s reqs, their much higher then they should be given what the cometition can do

Maybe Mac (or at least OS X) really is the way to go.

Really, vista is a fine os. you just need the proper hardware. People just seem to be brainwashed by apple.

Lolwut?

I myself can’t stay away from the raw power of a finely tuned/tweaked PC either, apple is wicked “hands off”, and I love to open up the hood, mod, etc…

Make it one low price, then charge for orientation on a modular basis. e.g home user, which installs all your home usery type of apps which you specify and maybe business to have ONLY business stuff on there.

On the business note, as os which doesnt require me to give my laptop users Admin rights just to install their home printers would be nice!

Btw, I do agree vista is stabilizing as I use ultimate x64 along XP (i much prefer vista atm), doesn't stop me from looking forward to Windows 7 tho.

At Apple, youll pay 2,000 for the same hardware on a 1,200 PC. Go to Apple.com and customize a laptop. Now, go to Hp.com and customize one with the same tech specs. The HP is dramatically lower, EVEN WITH A GOOD WARRANTY. Unless you get like a 600 warranty, its cheaper.

Microsoft is far ahead of Apple because it has so many resources (i.e. 3RD PARTY SOFTWARE!!!). Apple only has itself, its lonely lonely self.

Perhaps a way to enable/disable the graphical wizardry while we're at it too, and subsequently effect the system performance in the process…

I myself am a bit of an enthusiast so I don't mind having higher spec demands, but if we can strip the edition chaos away it would be great.

I'm thinking with a way to enable/disable effects, one OS could be as much or as little as you wanted it to be…and there really isn't a reason as to why this is not possible.

My advice for Microsoft? Make support better. As a user of Windows XP Professional x64 I found myself almost being punished at times for taking your tech upgrade (no Zune support, OS upgrade not allowed for a few months there).

The UI on windows vista is totally different than XP. plastering a skin over Windows XP is not nearly the same as the UI on Windows Vista. It was basically built from the ground up to offer vastly increased stability and smoothness. Funny, isn’t it. Windows tries to include the very features Mac OS X lover go on adn on about, i.e. a smooth, trouble free, non-crashing UI. And it gets labeled as “crap”. In fact one of the biggest advances on Vista is the UI; different from the kernel up.

The UAC is an asset to the VAST majority of computers. although people may be irritated by it, it protects the 85 percent of “stupid” people out there who don’t know how to avoid possibly malicious software. The fact that Windows now pops a window up to the front to say a program is trying to execute should be viewed as a very big plus. It prevents users from instaling and executing dangerous software or letting them know dangerous software might be executing. deal with it. And like the previous post said, turn it off. MS finally includes advanced security features and now it is labeled as “annoying”.

open up the start menu, type msconfig, click yes on the UAC popup (one last time), go to the tools tab, and click disable UAC, then launch.

once you reboot, UAC will bother you no more…

Additionally, I understand complaints about it needing new hardware, but any computer that costs more than $400 at this point (other than specialty laptops like the Eee pc) will run it. Most people are in the market every few years and the performance demands can be met by extremely low-end computers. If you want to keep your computer from 2001, you have to understand that you are the minority…

- Ran smoothly

- didn't require "new/Recent" hardware

- Came with only usefull accessories

- etc

Yes I think XP is old too! But why can't Microsoft just update XP with a new optional UI and other updates for those who want the extra addons etc?

Yes SP3 is out but that runs just like Vista and those keen on Gaming will know that SP2 is a lot better for higher FPS.

Bells and Whistles should be optional on windows installation OR downloaded from the Windows Site – ordered/purchased at a low cost on DVD.

Anti Virus software should only be Third party "if your serious about keeping your computer virus free" AVG is a company who know what they are doing when it comes to User Protection – WINDOWS does not specialize in Anti Virus Field and don't have as much experience like AVG/Mcfee etc in my opinion Firewall is good but windows defender and UAC is crap and taking it too far when there unnecessary/not decent.

I really want to keep XP but am unable do to less hardware support, my laptop is a prime example – there are hardly any drivers for it and they have stopped updates for xp.

Ill see how this new Windows 7 comes along but if its gonna run like SH** im moving to mac, atleast they can have a nice OS feel yet run smoothly without UAC and other annoyances, haha maybe if more people move to mac there will be better support and variety of programs that are able to run on em..

I see articles written and postings made about how Windows needs to become smaller. I see declarations that Windows needs to be built from the ground up because it is too bloated and unwieldy. I see so many people complaining about the hardware requirements of the operating system. And I see many people complaining about the UI.

I'm glad I don't work at Microsoft because if I did I'd go crazy. You all complain about the very things you want.

You say you want the new windows to be slimmer, not bloated, not unweildy. Well, guess what? You think that your programs from 1999 are problematic to run on Vista? Wait until MS makes an OS out of scratch, just like so many people want. I'd like to see those same people complaining that their archaic software won't work.

As far as hardware requirements, it's the same complaining. The requirements are too rigorous. Make it able to run on less. etc. etc. Well, if you want to innovate, and do new things with an OS, you need to USE the progressively faster and more advanced hardware out there. How about we just use the requirements of Windows XP for another 10 years to make you happy, while all of our computers will be running at the very lowest quad cores. Ridiculous. Vista runs fine on new computers.

And the UI being trash? HA! One of the most important advances in Vista is the GUI. It has been fixed from the ground up to prevent the infamous blue screens of death and crashes. It uses the hardware that we have on every new computer, so what's the complaint about that? I really don't see why Apple is so loved in this department. What is so much more special about brushed metal over transparent windows? And i don't see how different vista is. Same windows, same taskbar, a start button, a desktop with familiar icons, a system tray. what?!!

In short, you want advancement, you get advancement. People moan and moan.

- better compatiblity with older computers
- features that require lower graphics card,
RAM, and CPU power
- the number of versions should be reduced (something that we all universally see as a problem) and all versions should contain a good amount of features (not like Vista Home Basic)
- more user-friendly UI
- no more of the “Upgrade” and “Full Version” fiasco with installation!
- included Windows anti-virus
- included Virtualization, like Mac’s “Boot Camp”
- further improved backward compatiblity

-user interface is way to different from XP. To enjoy your PC, you first have to learn from scratch how to use it’s OS: exactly what stops me from switching to Linux_ and the help system is useless!
-hardware compatibility: not compatible with my printer, my wireless adapter and most other peripherals
-software compatibility: most of my current applications have to be upgraded. Instead of telling you it’s not compatible, the PC freezes so badly you have to reset it. compatible Antivirus software amounted to a mere 2 when I first installed Vista: one was microsoft’s own (shareware) and the other one a 15-day free trial. Security has a cost…
-power/memory hungry
-install time: Vista takes for ever to install. This is driving me crazy
-starting time: one of the first selling points for Vista was its booting speed._ sorry??? I want Windows 7 to take less than 40 seconds to start!
-too much imposed stuff: it installs tons of stuff you’re never going to use.
-Too overpowering: it wants to do everything for you, damn warning windows popping up every 20 seconds_ always trying to block whatever you want to do on your PC.
-Imperialist & unfair: to play the very latest games you must have directX 10. If you don’t have Vista: tough! I accept the fact that I can’t play Wii games on a PS3, but PC games should remain PC games.
-Generally, I want more compatibility and interoperability with the previous OS, I want a slim OS I can easily customize. I want the perfect XP, not a better Vista.

Features I would like:
-cool effects (mac and linux are leaving windows behind in this area)
-a search-box integrated in the task bar
-a places bar (like findexer, but builtin) instead of the nasty actions bar
-Resizeable icons (on the desktop)
-simpler applicatoins, I mean for example: outlook. It is way too loaded with things that nobody uses.
-decent 2d graphics rendering (non-pixelated images on resize, like mac)
-a lot more customizability
-windows antivirus (good, but fast and simple)
-

As for Office integration… Uh… NO.

There are certain things I need from an office suite such as the ability to dynamically generate graphs or find text with a regular expression, or to be able to perform mathematical operations while pasting.

All of these features are broken beyond usability in Office 2007. If MS Office were integrated with the Operating system, I would burn effigies of Steve and Bill in the street.

Having to deal with OS integration of Virus Explorer is bad enough. Ever tried Acid 3 in Idiot Explorer 8?? It's a joke. I couldn't find a browser that failed more spectacularly (with the exception of Konqueror on my system, for some reason)