It's only an advetising way. I believe they already have clear ideas and don't need our support.

the only thing i found wrong is that when you are using a dial up modem . you have to uninstall it each time you reboot and then go to the add new hardware and let it find the modem again and install it again

Newer version than RC1 (Build 5728) available from Microsoft here: (RC1 key work).

From my experience so far, it's a faster more reliable build.

"This build (5728) has a number of improvements and updates from RC1, but has not been put through the same internal testing process as RC1 and therefore may be unstable in certain installations. We are making this release available for a limited time only (and only by download) in order to get broad distribution and testing in a variety of PC configurations. Please note: This build may not have the same level of support or servicing via Windows Update, and you may not be able to upgrade to the final version of Windows Vista."

64bit:

http://download.windowsv...ent-lrmcxfre_en_dvd.iso

32 bit:

http://download.windowsv...c1/en/download-5728.htm

When running Vista 64 I have both the 32 and 64 bit IE on my desktop.
They both work fine but when I close them I get an error on both and I am forced to force the close. I am running both XP and vista, Dual boot does not work. It would be nice if vista 64 could take full advantage of ATI all in wonder 2006 video card.

They have basically hidden the "logoff" and "switch user" options, which make the "Fast User Switching with ease" system a laugh. Aero makes it a trick to find (Open up the > menu next to "Power down".. what kid gets that right off the bat?)

There are several changes made here that are just.. wrong.

Are they asking for feedback on anything else except the UI...?

Great way to make people quibble over the width of a scrollbar and distract them from other issues.

MS certainly are good at what they do... :-P

damn right you are. also, is that the only feedback they call so openly? UI?
I didn' need more UI than XP's.

Don't they care about the whole rest of the OS more than the UI? Who could think that way? M$ only.

Uh, that forum is hosted by the Vista UI team. Why would they take feedback for other parts of the OS that they have nothing to do with?

My point is that they're pushing the UI as the highest profile area of feedback, when really it's the underlying OS that really needs the most work.

!!!PLEASE MAKE ALL "task dialog boxes" (like "Save", "Save As", and "Open With")
1. SIZEABLE (they are TOO SMALL), and,
2. capable of REMEMBERING MOST RECENT SIZE SET

I like Windows Vista UI

I like the Sidebar. I wish it didn't minimize when I click the "show desktop"

I know there is an option to pin it to the desktop, but I don't like the border that is added to the Sidebar. I like the gradient fade into the desktop.

I would like the Sidebar to retain the gradient fade and behave like anyother icon on the desktop. It shouldn't minimize.

Agreed!!!

I like the Sidebar. I wish it didn't minimize when I click the "show desktop"

I know there is an option to pin it to the desktop, but I don't like the border that is added to the Sidebar. I like the gradient fade into the desktop.

I would like the Sidebar to retain the gradient fade and behave like anyother icon on the desktop. It should minimize.

The Sidebar definitely needs work. Can't resize it, can't hide it (or autohide) to the side, can't click thru it, and it takes up a substantial portion of the desktop.

Who needs 1" square icons ?

and, yes, I've already given my feedback to MS via the link on the desktop.

Won't even get into actual functionality of some of the changes.
Wow. 1 step forward, 2 steps back, MS.

Click OK to continue if you ... blah blah blah.
Click OK to OK the previous OK.
Click OK to OK that.
OK ?
O K must mean Over Kill or something.

My prediction on the OK bs is that most people will get so fed up with having to OK everything, they'll just click OK without even reading it eventually, making it a double security risk.

Click OK to allow the Sony Rootkit Installation process. OK ?

jmho.

Can't fault that post - very good. If the Sidebar doesn't hide or resize, that's gonna be a serious pain in the ass.

Don't force people to operate in a way they don't want to - give them an option.

The sidebar does hide and can even be completely closed. Its not a requirement of Vista- and like most widgets, its mostly aimed for taky crap people tend to enjoy messing with. Personally I don't- so I keep it turned off. You just can't even start to 'diss' an optional feature of an OS- thats ludicrous.

The Sidebar doesn't hide - the Sidebar does hide.

Let's have a debate.

I wonder if you have ever used Windows Vista???? I'm pretty sure you never used it and you're just a stupid and ingnorant troll
The sidebar doesn't take up space, because it's on the same plane of your desktop i.e. the windows are in foreground and the sidebar is in background just like a wallpaper

Come on - chant with me now:

Fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight........

Hmm. if you're talking to me....
don't

You obviously ARE a troll.

Flake.

An irony that you mispelled ignorant.

Vista is simply the best...for Microsoft.

Why is there SO MUCH wasted space in dialogs and in the Title Bar? Give us screenspace, Microsoft, that's what we want. Make title bars THIN, or at least provide the option for it in Vista.

Hear, hear!

Hear, hear, hear!

??????

That is so early 1990's? Don't you know it's a vitally important part of branding that applications take up as much screen real-estate as possible?

How else can you explain how Windows Media Player gets significantly bigger (and uglier) with each new release? MS is more concerned that you know you are using their software than what you are actually using it for.

WMP11 is lighter than WMP10, WMP9.
Have you ever try it? Or you're another troll?

Come on - chant with me now:

Fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight........

I can believe it's lighter - after all they did remove the option to backup your licences for your legally-purchased DRM-laden music...

Nice move, Microsoft... that'll make you even more popular.

How about fixing the classic theme so it's not such a horrible half-finished looking mess. I also noticed that Wordpad is still using the old Windows 95 icons in the toolbar.

Microsoft should remove the classic Windows 2000 and 98 themes completely and only include Aero Basic for older computers and Aero Glass for more powerful computers. Who in their right mind would want a GUI as ugly and unproductive as Windows 2000 or 98?

Isn't Aero just a theme running on top of classic though? If you restart in safe mode for example you'll be in classic mode because no themes are running. Getting rid of it would be like getting rid of the walls but leaving the wallpaper.

As for it being unproductive, are you serious? The classic theme is WAY more productive than having everything covered in useless glass eye candy and special effects that do nothing but slow the system down. The first thing I did with XP was disable the ugly Luna theme. Classic is much more professional looking.

"useless glass eye candy and special effects that do nothing but slow the system down."

Not with those effects being handled by the graphics chip, they won't.

Thank you very much but I'm in my right mind (eh?) and I like the Windows 2000 GUI - so shove it.

Not everyone has a powerful DX9 graphics chip, and again how do they make me more productive? Besides, I don't want my graphics card working all the time just to draw the GUI.

The Windows 2000 interface is highly productive. Perhaps you need more practice using your computer. And as far as "ugly", that's a matter of opinion, but I would be willing to bet that the Windows 2000 style would win hands down over the technicolor yawn that was Luna if you put it to a vote.

Why eliminate options?

I have a second computer in my house that uses an AMD Athlon XP 1.8GHz processor along with 1GB DDR PC2100 SDRAM and an old ATI Radeon 9800 Pro AGP 8x graphics card w/128MB of graphics memory. I can run Aero Glass at a resolution of 1024x768 with no slowdown at all on this computer. So obviously you don't need a top of the line graphics card to run Aero Glass at acceptable speeds.

WTF? The 9800 is a FAST card for this purpose, it's also DirectX 9 based. I'm talking about people that still have cheap onboard graphics or old DX7 based graphics cards. You also have 1GB of DDR and you talk like you're running an old Pentium III system. Give me a freakin' break.

Give me a break, where do you live in some cave or something ? Even Radeon 9600 will handle Aero quite well and its very cheap card, also if you don't have 1gb of memory don't come close to vista.

I'm realy poor and still i have athlon 2ghz, gig of ram and geforce 6600 gt. Its quite average or even low-end config for the rest of civilised world. How much does cost such config in US ? I bet its maybe 500$ at most.

Funny - Vista does NOT use DX9 - why complain about something you obviously know very little about.

If people want to complain about the UI thats fine but at least look into what it can and cant do first

"Besides, I don't want my graphics card working all the time just to draw the GUI."

Why not? Why should the graphics card be the exclusive property of 3D gaming? Why shouldn't the OS use it to render the desktop?

"I'm talking about people that still have cheap onboard graphics or old DX7 based graphics cards."

So they can use Aero Basic.

It is not a bad thing that Vista might inspire some people to upgrade their computers.

Please change the Dark Opaque Black style when a window is maximized!!!!Please...It's UGLY :(

I second that

????

How about posting your ideas on that forum instead of here. So actually make a difference? :)

I think MS reviewers read here...or these will also get forwarded over? Either case I'll do both. More branches to sprout our leaves and in my case flowers...cuz I likes em :D

How about showing the approximate size of files in a folder... in detail view, without having to mouse over the damn thing.

That's a feature I've wanted for a while, although it would require indexing and caching of folder data. Not that it's not possible or already done in Vista with the built-in search.

The Search is horrible. Give us the option of the new Crappy search or use the classic search.

What is horrible about the search?

give me a user definable slider tab applet to control all of the appearance and behavior...

Ie., I want my windows to shrink expand a bit faster :)

can do it with some edits but this should be app controlled.

Oh, and can I have a "bubble" theme? To match the bubble scr? It's pretty, and I'm a sissy type guy ;p

hmmm, more things INTEGRATED! :D

I know that irks some, especially commercial competitors but I frankly prefer MS. If you prove you're better (directed at competition), we'll go out and buy yours.

How about fixing that god-awful Aero Basic theme. At least make the window color black to match the damn taskbar.

Or at leasat make it customizable.

Can't understand the folder system now. Where do you put your backed up folders after a clean install? I've got my " My Documents" folder in username/documents/my documents. Surely Microsoft didn't mean people to do that. Aren't the " Documents" "Pictures" and "Music" folders supposed to be folders in their own right, into which you put said contents? Thus: username/documents/files should be correct. Or am I missing something?

Actually it should be the other way round; i.e. Username/Files/Documents (as documents are one type of file) but I would never expect anything as rational as that to be implemented by the likes of Microsoft.

Microsoft clearly value the Windows interface and "user experience" so much that they give it the lowest priority then can, and then make sure it's the last thing that they get round to dealing with (rather than factoring it in from the design stage).

Plus, they only solicit user feedback on the UI design AFTER the software is already at the Release Candidate stage.