The title should be "if you fear change, you will hate Windows 7". Holy shit, no Run command (which barely anybody uses) and no default Desktop icons (which are just superfluous next to the start menu)?! WHATEVER WILL I DO!??!
It's people like this Jason character, who feel all change is either (a) bad or (b) simply for the sake of change, who completely hinder innovation. If he wants Windows to "not change anything" then he should keep using XP and stop trying to provide any sort of analysis of something he is so entirely biased against.
At least the author of the actual article gave some relevant information.
It is the installed base that is the double-edged sword hanging over any successful large-scale software product; both its greatest strength, and its greatest weakness.
In particular, the desire to maintain installed-base compatibility runs contrary to the need to make significant changes.
And even if the organization's software engineering practices and UI designs are excellent, significant changes inherently bring incompatibilities and broken applications.
The bigger and more successful your application gets, the tougher the problem.
I remember people complaining similarly when Windows 95 came out. People were happy with Windows 3.1 and many didn't want to learn the new metaphors in 95 (which have stuck right up until XP). People not wanting to leave the 95->XP way of doing things are just as luddite as those who wanted to stick with 3.1.
Err, if you noticed he linked to the "Jason character's" blog post about Windows 7 and the guy himself was pretty active in the comments on that article (jperlow).
All I use in Windows is the Run command. All I use in Linux is the similar feature. If I can't run a program I need in one line, I add it to the path or create a shortcut in the existing path.
Why in the world would they take this out!? Can someone confirm/deny this?
I can confirm that the article has step-by-step instructions for enabling the run command if you really need it, as well as the global key combination to open the dialog.
It's people like this Jason character, who feel all change is either (a) bad or (b) simply for the sake of change, who completely hinder innovation. If he wants Windows to "not change anything" then he should keep using XP and stop trying to provide any sort of analysis of something he is so entirely biased against.
At least the author of the actual article gave some relevant information.