First Windows 7 RC feature gets pulled

Angus Kidman06 May 2009, 5:09 PM

The Windows 7 release candidate has been live for just 24 hours, but Microsoft has already pulled one feature amidst fears it could make the new OS unsuitable for netbooks.


The Windows 7 RC includes a newly enhanced version of Internet Explorer 8 which includes what the IE development team describe as "tab hang reporting" — a system for tracking whether individual tabs in IE have stopped responding. As in-browser applications become increasingly important, being able to isolate individual problem tabs is an increasingly important feature (and one promoted particularly heavily in Google's rival Chrome browser).

The "tab hang" system originally included in the Windows 7 RC version of IE8 would produce a message after seeing no response from a tab for a prolonged (though unspecified) period of time. Microsoft was conscious that getting this setting wrong could make the browsing experience annoying through constant unwanted interruptions, but decided that it was worth the risk. "Based on the initial, Microsoft-internal, data after putting this in the product, we thought the experience was unobtrusive and overall better for users because it provides more information to improve the product," the company's IEBlog noted in a post late last week.

However, that feature hasn't remained in place for long. On May 5 — less than one day after the RC was made available for general downloading — the IE team released an update that switched the feature off, apparently because it was way too over-sensitive and was reporting potential crashes when absolutely nothing had gone wrong. Or, as Microsoft put it: "We noticed that some users are being prompted to recover from hung tabs more frequently than some would like . . . based on the data we've seen so far, today we are publishing an update that turns off the additional tab hang reporting in Win7."

The problem appears particularly pronounced on lower-spec machines. Microsoft's knowledge base posting on the update notes: "On low performance computers or on computers under high load conditions, the time-out value is frequently exceeded." Given that Windows 7 is being heavily touted as a possible successor to XP on netbook machines, that's not a state of affairs that seems highly desirable. Microsoft's support note says that the issue will be resolved in Windows 7 RTM [release to manufacturing], but doesn't explain how that might be possible.

Microsoft has tried to place a positive spin on the turnaround, arguing on its blog: "The upside here is that we now have a wealth of data about the real issues that users encounter every day, and we are going to continue to work hard to address responsiveness issues up until and after Win7 RTM."

Given that many people who downloaded the software probably haven't even installed it yet, that seems a mildly optimistic assessment. One of Vista's many less than desirable features was a tendency to hang out the "not responding" message a little too readily, so it's unsurprising that Microsoft reacted quickly to avoid similar criticisms with Windows 7, which has generally received a more positive reaction from testers. Windows 7 will also be a key means of trying to push the more recent versions of IE onto a largely apathetic user base, especially in business. According to a recent Forrester Research survey, the most common business browser remains the ageing (and highly non-standards-compliant) IE6.

Nonetheless, there's a growing body of evidence that suggests that the IE team didn't feature too highly in Microsoft's planning for the RC version of Windows 7. As well as today's feature zap, Microsoft also revealed on the IE blog last week that early testers — including those who accessed the software via its TechNet and MSDN programs and an unknown quantity of people who illegally downloaded the software via BitTorrent — would not be able to make immediate use of the Compatibility View feature in IE8, as the list of affected sites hadn't been finalised for distribution with the product. That list did get released along with the latest update though.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

todd_h86 (Cornerstone member):

And people say Microsoft don't listen to people.....

06 May 2009, 6:56 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

petert (Senior member):

Huh, what was that? I wasn't listening.

06 May 2009, 8:08 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

I still think they don't... Something as vital as booting was discovered to be fairly flaky during the Vista beta. Still remains exactly the same in 7.

07 May 2009, 9:36 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CBR1100XX (Cornerstone member):

Quoting todd_h86:
And people say Microsoft don't listen to people.....

... Sometimes it's people using MS products and NOT listening to Microsoft !




07 May 2009, 10:45 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

petert (Senior member):

Quoting CBR1100XX:
Sometimes it's people using MS products and NOT listening to Microsoft !


What do you mean CBR?

07 May 2009, 10:48 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CBR1100XX (Cornerstone member):

Quoting petert:
What do you mean CBR?

Most software comes with minimum recommended specs (eg. cpu, ram hdd etc) and yet there are those luddites out there that incessantly want a product like Vista\Win7 to run on legacy hardware ! ...... Then blaming MS for not providing support for these dinosaurs.




07 May 2009, 12:42 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting CBR1100XX:
Most software comes with minimum recommended specs ...... and yet there are those luddites out there that incessantly want a product like Vista\Win7 to run on legacy hardware !

Would you run Vista/Win7 on their MS recommended minimum hardware spec and be happy with the performance?

And yet there are fan-boys out there who assume everyone without an encyclopedic knowledge of transient part number specs is a luddite. Such ignorance, and inability to accept that others may have different needs is far from helpful.

07 May 2009, 1:07 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CBR1100XX (Cornerstone member):

Quoting Raindog:
Would you run Vista/Win7 on their MS recommended minimum hardware spec and be happy with the performance?

No ! I wouldn't !
So why do the luddites try and run it on hardware that is below the recommended specs !




07 May 2009, 2:13 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting CBR1100XX:
So why do the luddites try and run it on hardware that is below the recommended specs !

Where is the suggestion that anyone is trying to load on inadequate hardware? I posed the question to you regarding minimum specs quoted by Microsoft.
Your reply confirms that operation will be wholly inadequate on hardware meeting Microsoft's specification! Keep to the facts, no amount of name calling of others will change the reality that an unwitting consumer following MS guidelines would be very disappointed.




07 May 2009, 3:28 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CBR1100XX (Cornerstone member):

Quoting Raindog:
no amount of name calling of others

Name calling ? ...... Others ?

You really should not take every criticism posted on this site so personally ! I'm sorry if you have identified yourself as a luddite !



07 May 2009, 4:27 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting CBR1100XX:
You really should not take every criticism posted on this site so personally !

I don't! I still however find referring to others in such a way is childish and unproductive.


Quoting CBR1100XX:
I'm sorry if you have identified yourself as a luddite !

Thank you for the apology however you are mistaken to assume I considered you identified me in that way.

Low spec hardware has nothing to do with sticking to old tech, Net-books are a relatively new phenomenon to our marketplace and would hardly yet be in the hands of Luddites. As I stated previously the marketplace is a little wider than just enthusiast gamers with high spec clones.



07 May 2009, 4:38 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

petert (Senior member):

Quoting CBR1100XX:
What do you mean CBR? Most software comes with minimum recommended specs (eg. cpu, ram hdd etc) and yet there are those luddites out there that incessantly want a product like Vista\Win7 to run on legacy hardware ! ...... Then blaming MS for not providing support for these dinosaurs.


Fair point.

07 May 2009, 1:24 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

While you all argue about who is listening to who.

Perhaps its time to ponder what alpha, beta, and release cycle phases are supposed to represent. It's a worrying sign to see an entire feature to be pulled in it's entirety at RC stage. It reeks of rushed beta development.

07 May 2009, 10:48 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Yep. Though at least this is really a point release, so there's less to screw up.

07 May 2009, 10:58 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

gankul (Cornerstone member):

Thog considering IE8 is meant to be seperate from windows 8 and be completly removable, It does not have the same reek as say IE7, IE6 or a more core feature.

Im more concerned that this was not found during IE8 Beta.

07 May 2009, 11:20 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Halcon (Advanced member):

Let's see how this goes...
Is no time yet to talk about what feature has been taken out without seeing the results first using the latest beta, then talk with appropriate basis.
I am sure there are some toesuckers being paid by Microsoft to praise the software maker, these are the ones who listen Microsoft lately in monkey radio.

07 May 2009, 8:30 PM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jake (User):

guess what everyone... our school finaly updated to IE7.... wow their still behind

09 May 2009, 10:55 AM (10 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags