Talk:List of features removed in Windows 7/Archive 1

Taskbar
"The number of combined taskbar windows is not calculated and shown next to the combined buttons."

This is not correct, since it is possible to see the number of buttons "hidden" behind the first one. Vokidas (talk) 02:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

This article needs to be retitled, or something. the whole thing appears to be a gripe, rather than an actual list of features removed. such as '16 bit programs appear as two programs when pinned to the taskbar' <--- THAT IS NOT A REMOVED FEATURE, IT IS A GRIPE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.104.5.2 (talk) 01:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Sidebar
I think Sidebar shouldn't be listed because there is no loss of any feature or functionality. The gadgets can still be arranged vertically to the right of the screen and they snap into place just like Vista. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.202.210 (talk) 06:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This is correct. The sidebar wasn't removed; it just turned invisible and is now present on every side of the screen. It wasn't replaced by Desktop Gadget Gallery, which is just the name of a new shortcut to the already existing Gadget Gallery. - Josh (talk | contribs) 22:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Windows 7
This is too short to have its own article. - Josh (talk | contribs) 23:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It will eventually get longer. Georgia guy (talk) 23:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're saying "eventually". Wait until that "eventually" happens. When the time comes, re-create this split section of the article. --24.187.49.114 (talk) 00:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (shrug) Seems sensible to me. None of the ancillary Windows Vista articles were created until there was a need for them.   Warren -talk- 02:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Better yet, make a Windows 7 features article and move both this article and Features new to Windows 7 into it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.126.207.183 (talk) 22:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Now, Features new to Windows 7 was titled on the model of Features new to Windows Vista, which I'm sure was titled on the model of Features new to Windows XP, which, in turn, is an article I created at one time to keep the Windows XP article itself from being too large. The "features new to" title was on the model of Windows XP's section "New features" that the info I put in the new article was on before I moved it. Georgia guy (talk) 23:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

As people start using the beta, more removed features will be noticed. Lets wait until then before we take any action. --Mephiles602 (talk) 21:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

IMO the main Windows 7 article or "Features new to" article is going to get quite large (though not as large as the Vista series) so even though this article is small yet, it'll only add to the length of the "Features new" article and require that article to be written in a more summarized form killing some detail. My suggestion is to leave this separate to have parity with the Vista series. Just my two cents. - xpclient  Talk 15:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Josh that this article is too short to be its own article. It should be moved either to the section of Windows 7, or moved to a new page called something like Features changed in Windows 7 and also have the contents of Features new to Windows 7 moved there too. some page --  Turtle Boy 0  ( click here to tell me something ) 19:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Splitting "new" and "changed" feature descriptions into two articles would be a fabulous way of punishing users for daring to want to learn about Windows 7.  Warren -talk- 20:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * He wants both new and removed features to be moved to "Features changed in Windows 7". - Josh (talk | contribs) 21:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Having looked at both articles. I believe the "new" article is plenty long enough to stand on its own, but this simple list needs to be merged into the main article. If/when it grows large enough, this can be split, but I don't see the need for this article yet. Camann • TALK  13:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Start Menu
I notice that the 1st reference doesn't actually mention anything about the (lack) of the old Start Menu... 76.117.247.55 (talk) 17:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It does, the ref's just linked to the wrong part of that page. Ctrl-F may help. --Geopgeop (T) 13:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

A point to note. The Classic Start Menu does in fact exist if forced with group policy. There is no way to switch menu styles through the user interface, but you may reset it to the "new" style menu by resetting the start menu to default settings. I have connected several "7" machines to a corporate domain which does use this group policy setting for certain of our user groups and the classic menu appears.65.185.18.180 (talk) 02:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Forcing the Classic Start Menu via Group Policy does nothing on my end. Would someone kindly elucidate? (MazaG20 (talk) 05:17, 6 July 2012 (UTC))

Features which were never there can't be removed
This line, could somebody get rid of it: "When taskbar buttons are combined and multiple instances/tabs of an application are running, it is not possible to minimize or restore the application by just clicking on its taskbar button. Right-clicking with Shift held does show minimize/maximize options." Combined tabs have not been in any previous version of Windows. If the tabs are separated then applications can be minimised exactly the same as in previous versions of Windows. This line does not belong in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.200.245 (talk) 16:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * You're right; I've removed it.  Warren -talk- 16:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Computing
I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Floating Deskbands
First off, is this really what Microsoft calls them? Second, weren't the truly "floating" ones removed with Vista (I don't know what we mean by saying they were deprecated in Vista but removed in 7)? In Vista, I can create a toolbar on any side of screen, but it must be on a side of screen. - Josh (talk | contribs) 16:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Need someone to verify certain features (or lack of it)
--soumtalk 10:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Slideshows for pictures are only the "plain" ones like XP. Vista-style shows with transitions seems to be gone.
 * 2) FAT/FAT32 formatted systems cannot have a volume label that contains lower case letter and that doing the same was possible <Vista.
 * After installing WLPG, setting the reg DWORD value WinSATScore to 300 as mentioned here seems to bring back the themed slideshows. It gets disabled automatically for lower than 3 WEI.
 * For the FAT32 issue, I dunno about Vista, but in XP, one could set the volume label of a FAT32 volume to lower case but after a few minutes (when Explorer accessed the volume?) it reverted back to UPPER CASE. So probably, they disabled the feature to set it to lower case because it didn't work properly. - xpclient  Talk 11:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Windows Explorer
Explorer windows no longer remember their unique size and location. They open with the size and location of the previously closed window. This applies to Windows Explorer only, not programs. Here's an example: 1. Open Computer, re-size and move it, then close it. 2. Open Recycle Bin, re-size and move it, then close it. 3. Opening Computer again, the window is in the size and position of the Recycle Bin when it was closed. I believe Vista could remember 5000 folders by default. It appears that Windows 7 can only remember 1. Imitationcheese (talk) 07:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move
Features removed in Windows 7 → List of features removed in Windows 7 — the article is currently in list, not prose format. -- Socrates2008 ( Talk ) 11:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅.  Zoo Fari  02:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

XP
The lead was recently changed to mention some of these features are from XP. Any features that aren't in Vista should be removed from this list, and that note removed. - Josh (talk | contribs) 03:15, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead was changed because readers may think only Vista features (newly introduced in Vista) have been removed. All features in this article are there in Windows Visa but some originated in earlier versions such as XP, 2000, 9x etc. I've modified it again to reflect that if that's okay. - xpclient  Talk 10:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

This limitation makes the article a little 'useless' for want of a better word. Many users are coming direct from XP, and many significant feature removals occurred in the XP to Vista transition (or Windows NT 5.x to 6.x transition). I'm not saying it makes this article any less correct in a historical sense, just a little confusing if you read the heading and skim the lead where the scope of the article is (re)defined. Perhaps add a section summarising the XP to Vista removals, with a link to the complete article there and in the lead? --Adx (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Changes to Games Explorer
The feature that will impact the most users that I have seen is the changes to Games Explorer. WINDOWS VISTA: Installing a "Games for Windows" title would reference a file embedded within the installation program .GDF (GDF = Game Definition File). This file contains the ratings information, box art, and launch parameters for the program and initiates the automatic setup in the Games Explorer. Other legacy titles, when installed reference the legacy.dll within windows to look up this information and possibly perform the addition of a legacy title within games explorer assuming the title is in the directory of titles in legacy.dll. If the title is not presently listed in Legacy.dll then the title could be manually added by dragging in a shortcut or other various methods available within windows. Lastly, items such as command lines and switches, icons, compatibility mode, and other various properties could be edited via right click on the shortcut. NOW ON TO WINDOWS 7: A "Games for Windows" title shortcut cannot be edited in any meaningful manner from the user interface. Legacy games shortcuts may or may not allow some editing of the command line, however adding switches (such as .exe -modpack1) will be at best ignored and dropped when you save your changes, or worse, if using a third party editor like VGEE can stop your games explorer from updating any new programs or accepting new shortcuts due to a corruption of the Games Explorer area of the Windows Registry. You can, however partially work around this by making your own shortcut in another location(for example: on your desktop) and then copy this shortcut to the Games Explorer and have it work correctly including your command line switches, however you cannot add box art or modify the other properties about the title without losing the changes you made to the lauch command line or possibly corrupting the system registry as described above. I have also read that using the DirectX SDK would make it possible to create your own GDF files, however I have not tried this since learning to use the SDK will be a serious investment in time. I found this change to Games Explorer after changing over to Windows 7 from Vista - Since I went from Vista 32bit to Windows 7 64bit it was not a true "upgrade" because you have to do a complete system wipe to change the file system over to 64bit. While trying to make shortcuts for legacy games Battlefield 2 with expansions and Battlefield 1942 with expansions since both require a "mod" switch after the program in the launch command. Other titles require video mode switches for video resolutions over those available through the game menu (such as -Widescreen1 -x1680 -y1050) I know that my experience is anecdotal, however the issues presented are real and a major change from the operation of Vista and all prior Windows operating systems. I am hoping someone can better explain this operation in the main article and possibly in the article regarding Windows Games Explorer. Better still, I hope microsoft can see the error of it's ways and correct this feature so that power users (most people that use games explorer would fall into this catagory) can set up thier systems the way they want. To anyone who thinks I am just flaming Windows 7, I truly am not. I actually have found that my system performance has improved around 30% overall using verifiable benchmarks after upgrading from Vista 32bit to Windows 7 64bit so in that regard I am more than happy that I upgraded. It's just that I would have been completely satisfied that I upgraded if not for this change, now I am just happy that I did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.31.184.166 (talk) 22:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Media Player
it used to be that when you right-click on an item in the currently-playing list, there's an option there to "Show in Library", that displays the album that the song is a part of in Library view. Has this been moved to a different context menu, or has it been removed completely? Brownspank (talk) 05:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

The article mentions that lyrics (both static and synchronized) can't be added or viewed. If the file already has the lyrics they can still be viewed in the Now Playing Mode if the Lyrics, Captions and Subtitles option (in Play menu) is set to On if Available (at least in the version 12.0.7601.17514 I'm testing right now, with WMA files). FrozenKoi (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

File System
WinFS not included into windows 7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.140.137.102 (talk) 00:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * WinFS have not been included in any OS prior either, hence why it's not removed from Windows 7 Thor erik ( talk 10:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for Semi Protection.
Some unreferenced or incorrectly referenced entries in this article are found to be invalid upon testing & I just removed them.

And because of such increasing vandalism, I request this article to be semi protected.

Robin Mathew Rajan (talk) 04:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not an administrator, but may I inquire as to what the incorrectly referenced entries were? (MazaG20 (talk) 06:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC))

Check needed
Someone with access to both Windows Vista and Windows 7 should check this page. There are multiple errors, there are (as someone else already said) gripes instead of removed features, and so on.

Some examples:


 * Plain wrong: (Explorer) "[...] opening an Explorer window temporarily as administrator is not possible in Windows 7 without modifying permissions in the registry of system values because of a DCOM restriction." is wrong. Holding the shift key while right-clicking any shortcut adds the "Run as administrator" option to the context menu. This also works for the Explorer.


 * Not a removed feature: (Explorer) "The slide show button from Windows Explorer starts the Windows Photo Viewer, which—unlike Windows Live Photo Gallery—does not support viewing slide shows with themes and rich transitions." In which way is this a dropped feature of the standard Explorer of older versions?


 * Probably a bugfix (not a removed feature): (Explorer) "When no items are selected in a folder, neither the details pane nor the status bar show the total size of files in the folder." Which means it now always shows the size of the selected items - if nothing is selected, there is nothing to show. Consistent behaviour.

See also many of the other comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TvF (talk • contribs) 08:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Windows Registry Reflection
What is Windows Registry Reflection (mentioned under Other Windows applications and features) ? -- Juergen 91.52.186.86 (talk) 10:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)