Talk:Features removed from Windows Vista

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a WikiProject devoted to maintaining and improving the informative value and quality of Wikipedia's many Microsoft Windows articles.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on WikiProject Microsoft Windows's importance scale.
Image:Splitsection.svg This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Windows Vista, due to size or style considerations.


Contents

[edit] Program Manager

I couldn't find an explicit mention of the Program Manager being removed. While it may fall under one of the categories already mentioned, it shouldn't hurt to give it explicit mention. The Behnam 01:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Program Manager was removed in XP SP2... these articles generally follow a pattern of reporting a comparison with that particular version of the OS. -/- Warren 11:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
This artical should therefore have an explicit link to features removed in SP2, as this could cause a possible 'downgrade' for SP1 users, XP Tablet PC edition, XP Tablet edition 2005, Windows ME users, Windows 2000 users, windows 98 users, etc.

[edit] Professional to Home

Although this may require a seperate article, there should be a mention of features lost when moving from XP to a non-equivilent edition of Vista. Examples of this include the loss of networking features when moving from XP Professional to any of the home or starter editions, the loss of features and inability to upgrade from any of the Tablet PC editions to any edition other than ultimate... etc. This is vital information- for example, it is imposible to upgrade from Tablet PC Edition 2005 of XP To Vista Home Basic or Vista Home Premium, despite the statement of inclusion of "Windows Tablet and Touch Technology" on Home premium. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.31.147.83 (talk) 14:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Reorg

This page is terribly badly organised. Specially compared to Features new to Windows Vista. I was going to do some grouping of the points. Any ideas from anyone before I start? peterl 01:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking sections of:

  • Internal changes
  • File system changes
  • Removed programs
  • Removed shell-related features
  • Features removed from Windows Explorer
  • Features removed from Internet Explorer
  • Features removed from
  • Changes to networking
  • Other minor changes

Anyone else have any ideas on this? peterl 10:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

You might start working on it. But I think that File System changes can be merged into Internal changes, Features removed from Windows Explorer can be to the shell changes. Sections for individual program may be warranted when the list of changes is large (Internet Exlorer fits the bill).
Also, the GDI stuff should be removed. Nothing was removed, but a lot has changed (the paragraph does not make everything clear and is wrong in certain places). I think it should be removed from here. I will exlain it in detail in the Technical features... article. --soum (0_o) 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Media Player plug in

This bit has been deleted:

A Windows Media Plugin is not included, presenting a barrier for alternative web browsers such as Firefox to play embedded Windows Media content. [1]

Looks to me like it it's valid; anyone got any other info?peterl 01:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

That the plugin s not included may be said, but the criticism is no more valid. --soum (0_o) 01:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Sure, but this page is not about criticisms of Vista. There are clear work arounds to the missing plugin on the Firefox page as well. But as far as a comprehensive treatment of the topic, surely this item should stay? peterl 02:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Thats what I was saying - the first part ("A Windows Media Plugin is not included") may be said with a better description of what it missing, rather than using the FF example. --soum (0_o) 07:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I added the bit back, and updated it to include the new downloadable plugin and the development with Microsoft Silverlight. Quasar2112 18:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Phone Dialer

Phone dialer is still in vista, but its not in the start menu. I found it by search for phonedialer.exe or somehting like that. This is amrykid but not signned in

[edit] Some things are quite questionable!

I recently used the file type dialog on vista for changing the default app for some video file types so that's just garbage sorry. And of course are IExplore 7 and the Windows Shell as tightly integrated to each other as ever. Install IExplore 7 on XP and with some experience you will see where the small differences are.

And I am not a fan of some "features" of vista as the terrible DRM stuff and the possibility for MS to disable your operating system from out the internet, so don't get me wrong.

IE7 is not integrated with Explorer on Vista. Something that I see as a step backwards. DRM and your other concerns are not related to features removed from Vista.
^- if this is as you say then please give some hints to proove your actual finding. I can mine: shlapi and consorts are as ever bound to IE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.226.32.17 (talk) 19:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
The file association app is indeed garbage, but that is mentioned in the article.
--Anss123 15:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I see so here is no interest in good journalism and information but just to wine about Vista .. whatever :s —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.226.32.17 (talk) 19:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
WP:NOR is a show stopper for good journalism (whatever that is), less you have a published source.
In any case, shlwapi is a library used to parse URI paths. It is not unusual for separate applications to link up to the same library. Almost any app on Windows use the shell32 library, for instance, but that does not mean the applications are integrated with Windows or each other.
--Anss123 00:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay I can follow your argumentation .. but shlwapi and friends are implementing public api function calls, and are installed/updated with IE, and are fundamental to it, so I fail to see where the integration was removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.226.17.51 (talk) 19:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
We're veering of topic here. But the way I see it, if the applications run in different processes and keep ipc to a minimum they're separate applications.
Keep in mind that The exact delineation between the operating system and application software is not precise.
--Anss123 19:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
In This case IE has never been integrated with the shell. So .. I think you are right this is just absurd ;) xxx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.226.17.51 (talk • contribs)
Thats not quite the case. Up until the latest version, Windows Explorer was an OLE host for the IE COM control. So, it hosted the IE ActiveX control in its own process. IE7 on, it runs in its own process. --soum (0_o) 02:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
And IE being a COM component, has its DLLs shared between all processes that use it, though. But that is true of every other COM component. But each process has its own execution stack. Earlier, this was in Explorer's process, now in IE's process. --soum (0_o) 02:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Features Removed from Windows Explorer

It IS possible to remove the "favourite links" pane on the left of windows in Vista - just go to Organise > Layout and uncheck "navigation pane". Then apply this to all Explorer windows using Organise > Folder and search options, View, Apply to Folders. 131.111.243.37 02:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autosorting

Regarding the autosort on the rename of a file. Previously it didn't re-sort. I don't think the 'removal' of 'don't sort' qualifies as a 'feature removed'. So I've taken that out.

Sure Vista has plenty of annoyances, but I don't think they qualify as 'feature removed'. peterl 23:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DWM

"all Windows applications including GDI and GDI+ applications run in the new Compositing window manager, Desktop Window Manager."

What about when DWM isn't running? Josh 19:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

"undo, DWM might be optional but using it turns off h/w accln for GDI"

What? The article makes it clear that GDI is NOT hardware accelerated, ever. Josh 13:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Several GDI(+) operations, such as blitting ARE hardware accelerated, given hardware support. --soum talk 14:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I still don't understand how a new optional program disabling something while it's running constitutes a removed feature. Josh (talk | contribs) 19:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] File Sync

Should this article include features that were planned for Windows Vista but didn't make it, one example being the file synchronization that Microsoft wanted to put into Windows Vista? --Cumbiagermen 01:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I dont think so. The main Windows Vista article itself lists the things which were planned but eventually dropped. The Development of Windows Vista article also contains stuff which did not make it. Adding them here will cause confusion. This article focusses on stuff which was there in PREVIOUS Windows versions (for years) and which was removed/changed in Vista. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.26 (talk) 18:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested Move

Are these really featured removed "from" Vista, if Vista was never to have them to begin with? They're obviously features removed from Windows. But they weren't removed from Vista.

So, perhaps the article should be renamed to "Features removed in Windows Vista"?216.6.128.244 (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Filesystems

Please stop changing the article to say Vista can only be installed on FAT32 and not NTFS when Microsoft has stated that it's the other way around and I "somehow" have Vista installed on NTFS. - Josh (talk | contribs) 01:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Internet Explorer

Many of the items listed under Internet Explorer are true of all versions of Internet Explorer 7, and therefore really don't belong in this article, as they aren't specific to vista. BThetford (talk) 23:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Vista removes the option to not upgrade to IE7. - Josh (talk | contribs) 23:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
That's not very good logic. For that matter, XP removes the ability to not upgrade to IE6. No ability was removed. It is simply the software that came with the system, and older software is incompatible. Internet Explorer changes are pretty much irrelevant to Vista, itself, and should be discussed in an IE article - not here. BThetford (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
What comes out of the box - whether that causes loss of functionality or gain compared to the previous version is the relevant aspect and accordingly, IE7 removals are appropriate. : ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xpclient (talk • contribs)

[edit] Slipstreaming

It is possible to slipstream SP1 into Vista via vLite. The article claims otherwise. BThetford (talk) 23:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

vLite is a "hack" and not a Microsoft-supported tool. Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
SP1 can be slipstreamed using an administrative installation. No "hack" involved. --soum talk 15:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Drive mappings

Windows has always allowed a network UNC to mapped without a local drive letter being assigned. At the console, this is "Net use \\server\share" while in Explorer, you chose "(none)" as the drive letter. The latter has been removed from Vista. Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that functionality, but simply connecting with a UNC path is not called "drive mapping". -/- Warren 14:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
So what's it called then? (It uses the "drive mapping" dialog box). Any any event, the point is that this functionality has been removed. Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deprecated Features

After the xcopy bit, I wanted to raise the issue - This article seems the best place to put a list of features that have been deprecated from windows vista, in their own section. So the question is a) Is this the right place, and b) would it be a useful list - I think it would, as it was only by looking at the xcopy article I saw that it had been deprecated - If I was lokking for info, I would have started here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.182.210 (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)