Talk:Technical features new to Windows Vista

Speech Recognition

(moved from Talk:Features new to Windows Vista)

"Windows Vista is the first Windows operating system to include fully integrated support for speech recognition. Under Windows 2000 and XP, Speech Recognition was installed with Office 2003."

What I didn't see was the inclusion of speech recognition in the Tablet PC version of XP. XP Tablet Edition also came with speech recognition installed by default - I played around with it plenty on my Tablet PC. Because the page is locked, I currently can't edit it, but I suggest the following change be made:

"Windows Vista is the first Windows operating system to include fully integrated support for speech recognition. Under Windows 2000 and XP, Speech Recognition was installed with Office 2003, or was included in Windows XP Tablet PC Edition."

CobraA1 07:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Os2 warp 4 (codename Merlin) already came with speech recognition way back around 1996. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.48.185.205 (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Too Long

Logical breaks in the article as it stands are hard to define. Suggestion; Technical (eg; networking, SMB2 etc) broken from User (Speech synthesis, display etc.

The level of detail in each heading is excellent. However, I agree with the too long description. I do NOT want to drop the information by summarising. Am I dreaming? Jacketed 09:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Article length

This article is also becoming too long. I suggest splitting off the Programmability section to a new New APIs in Windows Vista or similar article. That way this article could be shortened. And we could have quite some breathing room to discuss the new APIs as well as scripting and programmability. Also then we would have three articles - one for non-technical users, one for moderately technically savvy users and the other for the hardcore geeks. --soum^talk 09:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long on this! I think a separate article covering Group Policy and management features might be an easier way to go. I say that, because I'm thinking about how a lot of the programming content would replicate stuff that is (or should be) in .NET Framework. Which bears an interesting question... should we just vastly reduce the amount of text on the .NET 3.0 stuff in this article, and make sure it's well-covered at the main article on the framework?

Another thought, and this is a bit ambitious (even for us!), would be to integrate information about new APIs into articles about those APIs where appropriate. I was thinking about this a few weeks ago, about how it would make a lot of sense to have a bit of text in, for example, Desktop Window Manager describing the existance of a programmable API for thumbnails. Code samples would be going a bit far, but a summation with the candour of, say, Dashboard (software)#Creation of widgets, would be nice. The programmability of an operating system feature seems like an important aspect to cover! -/- Warren 11:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Splitting the management features sounds like a good idea. And yes, I totally agree APIs should be given a bit more coverage. And delegating overlapped text (like the .net part you mentioned) to their own article keeping only summary here is necessary for the sake of size. We already have articles on WCF, etc. They should be enhanced. And for the DRM features, I am first inclined to expand the Protected Media Path and Windows Rights Management Services first. if needed, thenafter, a separate DRM article may be created. Also, each subsystem (WCF/WPF/WF as also Media Framework, DirectX, DWM, Sidebar Gadgets etc) should have an API coverage in their own article. I am quite willing to give it a try. And, what about those subsystems which do not have their own article (networking, sound, print etc) - I still support an API article for their sakes. This wont repeat stuff from the dedicated articles. --soum (0_o) 12:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I haven't looked into the WinFX stuff much in my professional life so I don't really feel qualified to do much there. That seems more your area of expertise. So yeah, give it a shot! I'll tackle creating this new article. -/- Warren 12:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Too general

I want more technical details! No, I will not detail my request. VISTA RULEZ!!!!!!!!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.234.55.11 (talk) 14:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

Your question is too general! --soum (0_o) 17:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Pruning the programmability section

I am summarizing the API descriptions here and linking them to the main article. This, I think, would take some significant load off this article. --soum (0_o) 17:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Networking related "other features and changes"

WebDAV, Folder sharing info, DFS Replication, Network projection are networking related parts. They should be moved and "made to fit" somewhere into the Networking article. How about starting an "Other features" section in the Networking article?

It might be helpful, but I am not trerribly fond of the section title. But in the absense of a better title, we can go ahead with that one, changing it when a better name strikes someone.--soum (0_o) 18:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Volume Mixer Vista.png

Image:Volume Mixer Vista.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vista Shutdown.gif

Image:Vista Shutdown.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Seems too positive

I noticed that none of the monitoring features are mentioned, and the general tone seems too "hype" and markety. Can this page get a reality check? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.57.177.113 (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a stand alone article. It is a part of the Windows Vista article spun off to focus on a specific aspect. Just like criticism has its own article. And what do you mean by monitoring? soum ^talk 03:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It still comes across like a press release or as if MS folks wrote it. For instance, in this article titled "TECHNICAL features new to Windows Vista" we have a spot talking about the new startup sound, and how it was written by such and such famous dude, and how Vista is the ONLY OS to do such and such, and how X and Y are so much faster than earlier versions of Windows... This REALLY doesnt meet the criteria of any encyclopedia Ive ever read, certainly. It rather fits with a lot of marketing brochures Ive read. I agree-- reality check, please. 76.21.195.156 (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Feature that isn't mentioned

I'm missing information about the improved ETW (Event Tracing for Windows) support. Basically, in Vista stacks are collected with the events so that you can see exactly where events are fired (i.e. exactly where allocations,disk accesses etc are happening). -- mnemo (talk) 18:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT. Btw, thats more of a management feature. --soum ^talk 04:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Windows Vista Network and Sharing Center.png

Image:Windows Vista Network and Sharing Center.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Windows Vista Speech Recognition Tutorial.PNG

Image:Windows Vista Speech Recognition Tutorial.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Stolen Laptop

Is it possible to locate a stolen laptop if someone is using it to gain internet browsing. I don't know the serial number of an ACER laptop. Very critical to business — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.65.57.166 (talk) 20:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Dubiousness in Audio section

"The new audio stack runs at user level, thus increasing stability." seems dubious to me. Simply moving things to user-space doesn't make anything 'more stable' (except the kernel, if the audio subsystem is/was buggy). It can be rewritten in user-space and provide additional stability because the old code was buggy, but simply moving anything to user-space never increases stability. If the rewrite caused additional stability? It is not because it now runs in user-space. I'd actually argue against the statement of moving things to user-space making code more stable, since all code running in user-space is subject to lesser privileges than kernel-code? The kernel can then terminate the user-space code at will. I doubt a kernel module would ever be terminated and unloaded. Then again? I'm not a windows/kernel expert.

If it is meant that it increases stability of the kernel and not stability of the audio subsystem? This should also be made clear.2001:981:9B5E:1:1417:4806:4588:4D36 (talk) 02:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)