I found this post about the Windows 7 Taskforce website on MicrosoftFTW’s Tumblr. Windows performance, or lack of functionality, that I would never consider buggy, was identified and fixed by the Windows 7 Taskforce.
It left me thinking about how readily I accept things without question. With Windows, I’ll believe a problem is merely MY personal User Experience, and my shortcoming, rather than a defect. In fact, there were many design flaws and bugs. MANY users and testers complained.
Is excessive tolerance as bad as finding fault?
Aristotle’s condensed philosophy (very short-form version) reduces to "everything in moderation". Is it applicable to everything? Is this aspect of my personality, passivity and tolerance, actually a character flaw, rather than the virtue I thought? Maybe acceptance is good in moderation only? Passivity should be balanced with criticism!
Aristotelean Quality Assurance
The Windows 7 Taskforce format is similar to StackOverflow’s design*. I’m uncertain if the task force was an official Microsoft initiative. Unfortunately, the project is done. In addition to the items that WERE fixed, you’ll see many others that are unlikely to be corrected.
I just learned about this site, but now it is closed. I didn’t realize how much better Windows 7 could be… So for now all of these are dead ideas going no where:
- It’s Time: Unified Control Panel
- Enable Drag&Drop to the Breadcrumb bar
- Properly Size Default Columns in File Explorer
- Document thumbnails should reflect number of pages
- Option to pause (and resume) a file transfer
- Just a lot of “Windows …” (application naming)
- White background behind file icons in a folder icon
- “Folder in Use” dialog doesn’t specify which program is using the folder
** I am sort of embarrassed about this post. It feels very personal. And possibly pretentious. I’m sorry, I can’t help it. No, NOT the pretentious part! I’m referring to the way I write. It just comes out like this. Well, maybe I am pretentious too. (I can’t seem to do much about that either….)