Windows XP -- digital camera/photo features

I would like to comment that people, please don't expect (and ask) professional imaging features from XP. After all, it is an operating system, and let MS focus on developing a better OS core, not adding a lot of bells (yes, there already are a lot of them in XP

I think the image management features of XP are meant mostly for home users/novices, since they are quite limited. You grow up quickly and will find that you'll need much more powerful tools for your digital photo album.

Some feedback:

1) What I like that that thumbnails come up very fast. But, if you click a file to see full picture (image preview), it is so damn slow and displays "Generating preview...". If you resize the window, it takes another while to repaint the window... And the same in slideshow mode, between 2 images you see "Generating preview...". What takes sooo long? Anti-aliasing? Very annoying.

2) I always display all files and extensions in Explorer. It is annoying to see those desktop.ini and thumbs.db files in each folder.

3) No quick way from switching from web view to classic view in Explorer. Win98 had View -> As Web Page.
4) What is the difference between Pictures and Photo Album folder views?

5) Aquire Wizard is very basic, only usable by newbies (can't rename files with your own rules).

6) One problem I encountered when I plugged in my Sony digicam (USB). Windows found new hardware and installed driver automatically. Very nice. Now, camera should show up as removable disk in Explorer, but not visible. I have C, D (CD-ROM) and E (mapped network drive). It looks the camera wants to use E by default, and since I already have E in use by mapped network drive, it is not visible! It becomes visible if I unmap the network drive. But Aquire Wizard still works on that drive and in Explorer I see my network drive

Yes, there are few new imaging/photo features in XP but I suggest that advanced users don't get too excited! Most of the features are for newbies (because they are too limited or too slow) and just a bloat for advanced users. So, my wish is that Microsoft could work more on his OS (less bells) and let the other companies do imaging software Finally, I must say I like XP as an OS (when most bells are disabled) and plan to upgrade as soon it is available (currently on 98).

Ahto

Rick Turner said:

St. Onan said:

What am I missing here? If I have to do a reinstallation, my
settings for my DSL service and ISP would presumably be lost. At
what stage would the installation thwart my efforts to get up and
running because it's unable to "phone home". It's also my
understanding that should I change motherboards (which I intend to
do soon), the program will balk at the process and I'll have to get
permission from Microsoft to process the registration. How far does
this go? If I change CPUs or clock settings? I don't know, but just
having another potential pile of to deal with is unwelcome.

Click to expand...

Registration needs to happen sometime within the first 30 days
after installing, I believe. So there is plenty of time to get
your DSL line up and working before having to register.

If your hardware config changes significantly enough that the code
can't be sure it's the same computer, yes, you're right that the
current plan is you'd need to "move" your registration. I'm not
defending this particular point, only passing on what I believe is
the current state of affairs.

Rick Turner [MS] said:

Those of us who are our own system administrators don't need any
additional workload, thank you. Diatribe over.

A bit of advice... don't bother defending the company line on
something neither consumers nor the industry press likes. You'll
miss out on the specific feedback you're looking for and you won't
convice a single soul.

Click to expand...

Point well taken. I am not trying to drive people away, but I also
believe there is merit to our side of the situation as well.

Rick Turner [MS] said:

As to the digital camera/photo features in question, I really
wouldn't use them. These Microsoft mini apps are generally too
basic and hobbled to be of any real interest to advanced users. My
main concern is that they don't get in the way of the applications
I will use. I don't want to have to battle the OS to have Photoshop
handle jpeg and tiff files. Let me use the programs, printer
drivers and color calibration tools I prefer and I'll be fine.

Click to expand...

We still let apps take over file associations as in the past, so we
won't muck with your preferred environment. As an aside -- what
kinds of things would be helpfull to you if they were included in
the OS?

-Rick

Click to expand...

Hello Rick

Im sure you meant this to be a discussion on the photographic merits of XP but this registration thing has become very interesting. I wasn't aware it was going to work like that.
Just one perhaps obvious question.
What happens if you dont have an internet connection to allow XP to register?

I know a lot of people who use PC's but have no interest at all in the internet and hence, no connection.
Does this mean they can't use XP?

Im sure this will loose you a significant percentage of potential users if that is the case.

It's so obvious there must be something you have in mind to get around the problem.

Fireball

Bob Brennan said:

But I will be darned if I am going to buy 14 copies of Windows XP
and have to try to convince a tech rep to give me a new key code so
I can possibly operate my system again as I make it better. In case
you haven't noticed, contacting and communicating with tech
services at Microsoft is no picnic as it stands right now.

Click to expand...

Well, the activation is so simple - a window pops up asking if you want to activate. You press Yes and you are done. Nothing to fill! It is very easy. Hovever, I'm not sure what happends if I upgrade my motherboard/hard drive. But I think this will not be a problem, your Windows will not stop working.

Ahto

Mr. Turner

I use my digital camera to record collections of garden plants. I take thousands of images each month and each acceptable image is named and grouped.

Three areas where software could save me considerable time is in the naming of the images, in the grouping of those images, and in selecting acceptable images.

On a given day, I may take 500 images of 200 different plants in five different gardens. I need a fast way to select the best image of each plant, name each file, and group the images by location, genus, etc.

Typical file name would be something like arnold_rhododendron_minnie_habit.jpg indicating the place, the plant, and the form.

Typical information about each image includes who took the image, when taken, where taken, what taken, form of what taken, size of image in terms of pixels, file size and file name.

Software that would show me thumbnails of the images where I could review larger images and select using checkboxes which ones I want to delete would be very useful.

Software that would allow me to rename the image based on a text box next to each thumbnail would also be useful.

Software that would allow be to group the thumbnails would also be useful

Software that would make it easy to record information associate will a thumbnail would also help.

The key thing to note is that renaming the files is the most time consuming but selecting and grouping images also takes more time than one would like.

Lastly once you have all the information associated with an image in something like xml format you should be able to generate a xhtml tour of the grouped images with all the associated information.

Here is a url to a "finished tour" that was generated from xml using xsl

http://www.crosswinds.net/~rosebay/cjsmgt1.htm

In a perfect world one would have an interface where one could associate a name and information with each image as the images are taken and then a xml file and file names would be created when the images are downloaded. Software would then aid you in selecting acceptable images and in adding additional information. One would have a way of adding these new images to the already existing set. Lastly one would have a way of generating web tours from the resulting combined xml file.

John Perkins
51 Lake Shore Road
Salem, NH 03079 [email protected]

Rick Turner said:

I've been lurking around this wonderful site for a while. Thanks
for all the great content & information. I am the proud owner of a
Canon D30.

In any case, the reason I am posting today is the recently posted
review of Windows XP's digital camera/photo features. I am the UI
development lead for just about all the features mentioned in the
review, and personally wrote the Photo Printing Wizard. I wanted to
give something back to this site, and also get people's feedback on
our stuff (if people are willing).

A couple of ground rules:

(1) I can't be global technical support for Microsoft products, but
I'll help when/where I can.

(2) I'll eagerly accept any feedback, either positive or negative,
as long as it's polite.

(3) I can't always comment on future plans, but when/where I can, I
will.

So any comments or questions? Fire away!

Thanks.

-Rick

P.S. I also posted this info in the "News" forum but am trying to
move the discussion here as it seems to be the more obvious place
for it.

Click to expand...

Thanks Rick. I plan to get a hold of the beta and give it a spin. How stable is it right now? I did the corporate preview of Win 95 and enjoyed the experience. I reported a few bugs and all were fixed eventually. One disappointing part was that no one from Microsoft bothered to thank me for reporting the bugs. I did software development from ’75 to ’86 when I moved into network hardware. I always thanked people for reporting problems. Even when it meant that I had erred and would cause it meant a lot of work. It makes people feel better.

I really like that you are taking the time to ask these questions and answer our questions. It is a pleasure to know that you care. Are you doing this out of your own caring or as part of a Microsoft initiative?

Morris

Rick Turner said:

Morris said:

Rick, Take a look at Photo Record, which ships with the G1 and may
ship with the D30. It is a fairly nice photo-printing program. It
will automatically layout print pages based on a few simple rules
and allows you to drag the photos to final printing positions. I
know you can not mimic the behavior for copyright reasons but
should get some good ideas.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info.

Rick Turner [MS] said:

Comment on OS registration. I work at a college with over 500
public access computers. We use Norton Ghost to place system
images on systems. We have licenses for every piece of software on
each system and can prove it. Our users regularly trash the
systems and we have to push the image back onto the systems. If
this capability is taken away from us we will make a clay model of
Mr. Bill and squash regularly just like on Saturday night live!

Click to expand...

It is my understanding that sites that have large volume licences
will not have to do product activation/registration. I do not know
all of the details, though. You should talk to your Microsoft
account representative.

Rick Turner [MS] said:

Yes XP comes with some distribution tools. Frankly the third party
tools have and probably will always work better than Microsoft
tools and Microsoft should be darn happy that they are
they’re supporting their products and not squash them. (Do
we hear anti-trust?)

I’m glad you are asking for suggestions and I am glad to have
a chance to give you imput. It is very hard to comment on a
product that I have not yet seen. The marketing is wonderful as
usual. It is a Microsoft strong point. I listen to all the XP
hype and get excited. Then I put my feet back on the ground and
ask this question: I’m running Win98SE fully patched at home
and in the office. Both copies are rock solid. The only time I
see a blue screen is when I load DOS edit. Why should I upgrade?

Click to expand...

More robust code base (although it doesn't seem like this is an
issue for you), more consumer features -- a lot of little things
are easier and more polished, lots and lots of nice features around
digital media (photos, music, etc.), all the benefits of the
NT/Win2k code base. It's hard to give someone who's system is
stable and does what they want it to that they should upgrade.
However, I am pretty sure that if you were to take and hour and sit
down with Windows XP, you'd find at least 10 things you liked
better about it.

-Rick

Click to expand...

I’m about as expert a user as you can find. I used to write device drivers and configure mainframes the good old manual ways. It is such a pleasure to have wizards. Yes when you know exactly what you want to do they can take a little longer, they also avoid many of the common errors that even expert users make. As long as there is a way to go in and tweak I will take a wizard any day.

Morris

Tong Yi Tsui said:

After initial installation:
1. Run a wizard asking a few questions to determine the type of
user they are. Whether they use the computer for digital
photography, printing, work, games, etc.
2. Customize the different aspects of the computer to meet that
profile. If the user is an advanced user, obviously make the menus
and options less newbie-oriented.
3. Allow user to save their profile. This can be part of the MSN
Passport where you login with your e-mail account and import the
profile to wherever you go.

Can I get royalties if this idea sticks?

Rick Turner said:

In any case, we use wizards a lot because in our usability testing
people are really successful at accomplishing the desired task when
it is presented in a wizard. This is compared to almost all other
forms of UI.

However, your point is that we should think about ways to invest in
our users and teach them how to do more on their own is well taken.
Thanks.

-Rick

Daniel Lauring said:

It would be better if there was a wizard interface, that as it
asked the questions it showed the alternative method...highlighting
the boxes it was filling in so the user would know how to do it the
non-wizard way next time. A split screen with the "wizardease" on
the left and the printer option menu on the right might work. As
you answered wizard questions, on the left, you could see how that
selected or filled in the choices on the printer option menu, on
the right. It would even be neater if you could swap, back and
forth, between the two methods on the fly.

Danny

KanedaF3 said:

Nothing specific, just a general comment on the interface.

I hate Wizards. I have always hated wizards.

When I want to do something with the computer, I want to do it.
I don't want the computer to ask me one or two questions at a time
and maybe leave out a few options I did want.

Wizards are good because I know that many people don't know as much
about computers as my crowd, but along with the wizards I think
there should be a more technical way to do things. A screen
covered in options for the people that know what the options are
would be great.

Don't spend all of your time making it easy for people that don't
want to learn. Spend some time adding in some really great options
that pros/experts will appreciate.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Rick,

I really like the new features that are in WIndows Me, With each windows upgrade you have improved the way we view and edit and use our files. The slide show in Windows ME is one of my favorite new features( Thumbnails is right up there too.). I take a ton of pictures. I like to rename them after I copy them to my hard drive. If you continue improving the way you have 95, 98, Me, I'm sure I will love the new features of XP...Keep up the good work!

Debbie

Ali,

While I can't confirm for other notebooks, I can tell you that Windows XP has brought that feature back to my Toshiba 8100! Yahoo.

David

Ali Zaidi said:

Rick,

Not entirely certain if this falls under the specific area that you
want feedback on, but I'll give it a shot anyway. It kinda falls
under video/imaging options, and I've seen other postings ask
questions related to driving external video... anyways, here goes.

I operate from a notebook, that obviously has a built in screen,
but additionally also has a separate vga out to a monitor.

Under Win98 SE, I was able to use the 8mb of video memory that my
laptop has to drive both the lcd as well as the vga out as
independent displays. If I understand correctly, the OS split the
video memory from the one built-in video card into two separate
banks of 4mb each to drive each display independently.

Ever since I upgraded to Win2K Pro, I have lost this capability. I
remember reading a Microsoft bulletin that specifically addressed
this and said that it had something to do with the way video was
addressed/handled under Win2K Pro.

My question is, will I get my two independent displays ability back
under XP? Will it let me drive two independent displays from one
video card again, as I used to under Win98 SE? This one feature
would help greatly in editing photos... being able to arrange tools
in one display while working on the image itself on the other
display.

Thanks,
Ali

Click to expand...

Rick, and other

I know this is about images in XP, but I just like to share some Xperience of XP.

I just get my XP beta2 today, and try to upgrade from win2k pro, fail, it say some incompatible software. So, I go to clean install. I am "triple" boot my computer now (98,win2k and XP). Installation run smooth, and does not require a lot of input. but it takes a little longer than win2k.

I havent try any digicam on it YET.. so bad, I am waiting my first digicam S75... fortunately, this is 180 days trial, wish S75 wont delay till Oct. One thing I notice is that, XP need a lot of memory to run. I have 256MB, i have 4 IE open + 1 media player play some mp3, it uses about 190MB of my physical memory. Rick, will you guys optimize XP more before it release?

XP "seems" very stable, BUT IE6 isnt, I get a few errors and have to close IE.
Well, this is my first Xperience with XP.
Nylazyman

Rick Turner said:

I've been lurking around this wonderful site for a while. Thanks
for all the great content & information. I am the proud owner of a
Canon D30.

In any case, the reason I am posting today is the recently posted
review of Windows XP's digital camera/photo features. I am the UI
development lead for just about all the features mentioned in the
review, and personally wrote the Photo Printing Wizard. I wanted to
give something back to this site, and also get people's feedback on
our stuff (if people are willing).

A couple of ground rules:

(1) I can't be global technical support for Microsoft products, but
I'll help when/where I can.

(2) I'll eagerly accept any feedback, either positive or negative,
as long as it's polite.

(3) I can't always comment on future plans, but when/where I can, I
will.

So any comments or questions? Fire away!

Thanks.

-Rick

P.S. I also posted this info in the "News" forum but am trying to
move the discussion here as it seems to be the more obvious place
for it.

Click to expand...

Will Windows XP be fully compatible with and optimised for AMD Athlon and VIA chipsets or will the VIA 4in1 drivers still be neccessary (or partially neccessary)? What about the latest AMD chipsets?

Rick Turner said:

I've been lurking around this wonderful site for a while. Thanks
for all the great content & information. I am the proud owner of a
Canon D30.

In any case, the reason I am posting today is the recently posted
review of Windows XP's digital camera/photo features. I am the UI
development lead for just about all the features mentioned in the
review, and personally wrote the Photo Printing Wizard. I wanted to
give something back to this site, and also get people's feedback on
our stuff (if people are willing).

A couple of ground rules:

(1) I can't be global technical support for Microsoft products, but
I'll help when/where I can.

(2) I'll eagerly accept any feedback, either positive or negative,
as long as it's polite.

(3) I can't always comment on future plans, but when/where I can, I
will.

So any comments or questions? Fire away!

Thanks.

-Rick

P.S. I also posted this info in the "News" forum but am trying to
move the discussion here as it seems to be the more obvious place
for it.

Click to expand...

John Perkins said:

Here is a url to a "finished tour" that was generated from xml
using xsl

http://www.crosswinds.net/~rosebay/cjsmgt1.htm

John Perkins
51 Lake Shore Road
Salem, NH 03079 [email protected]

Click to expand...

Very nice!

--svb

Nylazyman said:

[...] One thing I notice is that, XP need a lot of
memory to run. I have 256MB, i have 4 IE open + 1 media player
play some mp3, it uses about 190MB of my physical memory.

Click to expand...

I have an older PII/300 system with 192 MB and it runs XP, with about 10-12 applications active, reasonably well (i was not constantly swearing at it, wishing that it'd run faster 8^).

The fact that all available physical memory is to be used by the system is a normal behavior. That is, before paging kicks in, by design. I'm not sure why you were concerned about what you saw.

--svb

dgrogers said:

Will Windows XP be fully compatible with and optimised for AMD
Athlon and VIA chipsets or will the VIA 4in1 drivers still be
neccessary (or partially neccessary)? What about the latest AMD
chipsets?

Click to expand...

I don't know the answer to your questions. Microsoft has this web page available for this type of inquiries:

http://windows.microsoft.com/whistler/compatcenter/en/default.asp

--svb

Son VoBa said:

Nylazyman said:

[...] One thing I notice is that, XP need a lot of
memory to run. I have 256MB, i have 4 IE open + 1 media player
play some mp3, it uses about 190MB of my physical memory.

Click to expand...

I have an older PII/300 system with 192 MB and it runs XP, with
about 10-12 applications active, reasonably well (i was not
constantly swearing at it, wishing that it'd run faster 8^).

The fact that all available physical memory is to be used by the
system is a normal behavior. That is, before paging kicks in, by
design. I'm not sure why you were concerned about what you saw.

--svb

Click to expand...

I agree with that 100%. Check your memory usage with other OS's. Just because it's used, doesn't mean it's a minimum requirement -- it simply means it will run faster since it won't be relying on virtual memory from your hard drive which is much slower.

I haven't gone through all the follow-ups yet, so my apologies if this has already answered, but what about users who DON'T have internet connection? I would definitely consider buying XP, but one installation would be on a PC that is totally stand-alone. If I had to send in a registration card and wait for a reply, or call a number (especially if it isn't in my own country, or if I'm put on hold for an hour), I would definitely think twice about the upgrade.

I'm also curious about the rationale of only allowing US/Canada residents review XP. I realise you may not be in a position to answer this, but doesn't it defeat the purpose of a beta test/review if you limit it this way? If you were providing phone/tech support, I could see the logic, but the review conditions seem to imply that reviewers are pretty much on their own anyway.

• Beth

Rick Turner said:

Gail --

I am sorry about all your trials trying to get a working PC. The
registration process in Windows XP happens over your internet
connection, is the push of one button, and takes 1 minute over a
slow connection. It takes about 10 seconds over a large
connection. This should not require actually talking to someone on
the phone at all.

Click to expand...

I am running Windows XP Beta 2 (or later) on every computer I own or use. I have run into only a few issues, and only one of those would cause a stability issue (video driver hang playing a game -- it's under investigation and will be fixed for RC1). My experience is that WinXP Beta 2 is more stable than any Win9x final release.

As for thanking you for submitting bugs -- I am not directly involved in the support of Beta sites, so I don't know what the normal routine is (whether people are thanked or not for submitting bugs). It's a good point, although I don't know how practical it is (unless you want an automated "thanks for submitting a bug report to us" kind of thing).

I am here of my own accord -- but I am making sure the information presented here gets back to the right people within Microsoft. (At least to the best of my ability).

-Rick

Morris said:

Thanks Rick. I plan to get a hold of the beta and give it a spin.
How stable is it right now? I did the corporate preview of Win 95
and enjoyed the experience. I reported a few bugs and all were
fixed eventually. One disappointing part was that no one from
Microsoft bothered to thank me for reporting the bugs. I did
software development from ’75 to ’86 when I moved into
network hardware. I always thanked people for reporting problems.
Even when it meant that I had erred and would cause it meant a lot
of work. It makes people feel better.

I really like that you are taking the time to ask these questions
and answer our questions. It is a pleasure to know that you care.
Are you doing this out of your own caring or as part of a Microsoft
initiative?

Morris

Click to expand...

dgrogers said:

Will Windows XP be fully compatible with and optimised for AMD
Athlon and VIA chipsets or will the VIA 4in1 drivers still be
neccessary (or partially neccessary)? What about the latest AMD
chipsets?

Click to expand...

Yes, it is. I am running it on a AMD/VIA system as I type this. The VIA 4in1 drivers are not needed. I believe the latest AMD chipsets are supported (the DDR memory, etc.)., but I have not tried myself and I don't have the HCL in front of me at the moment.

The moral -- AMD/VIA are supported as first class citizens in Windows XP.

Indeed, using physical mem is better than using virtual mem(HD), but how about those ppl with only less memory, let say 96MB? They will hear their HD read/write all the time. It may not be that bad since memory price is so low now

dgrogers said:

Son VoBa said:

Nylazyman said:

[...] One thing I notice is that, XP need a lot of
memory to run. I have 256MB, i have 4 IE open + 1 media player
play some mp3, it uses about 190MB of my physical memory.

Click to expand...

I have an older PII/300 system with 192 MB and it runs XP, with
about 10-12 applications active, reasonably well (i was not
constantly swearing at it, wishing that it'd run faster 8^).

The fact that all available physical memory is to be used by the
system is a normal behavior. That is, before paging kicks in, by
design. I'm not sure why you were concerned about what you saw.

--svb

Click to expand...

I agree with that 100%. Check your memory usage with other OS's.
Just because it's used, doesn't mean it's a minimum requirement --
it simply means it will run faster since it won't be relying on
virtual memory from your hard drive which is much slower.

Click to expand...

Like Rick said, users DO NOT HAVE TO register, ONLY ACTIVATE the OS,Activation and Registration are 2 thing in XP. In this beta2, the first time you run the os, it ask you to ACTIVATE xp within 14 days. If you have internet connection, one click is enough, no form filling. Of course, you can still choose to register after that, but that is optional.

However, not sure what happen if I reinstall XP or "Move" my Xp to new computer.

Reto Bolliger said:

Hello Rick,
Thanks for answering all our questions and suggestions. My wish
list as a pro user and photographer is:
First and moist important to me: The OS has to be as stable as
possible and mustn’t crash or freeze if a user application
crashes.

Second; registration: I can understand why MS will do that but I
think it should be just necessary the first time you install the
system or if you move the OS to an other computer and: If MS has
less piracy because of the registration they have less loss and the
OS should get much cheaper for the end user!
And if I buy a new PC with preinstalled XP it should not be
necessary to register, it should be done by Dell, HP, etc.

Also, I’d like that you support the fast USB 2 connection and
not just Firewire.

I’d also like, if you support Bluetooth, e.g. for
transferring pictures wireless from my camera with a Bluetooth CF
card to my Laptop or to my Desktop PC in my studio.
The Pic-View in Explorer should support all common file types, not
just jpg (e.g. tif, gif, PhotoShop, CorelPhotoPaint, Kodak
PhotoCD(pcd), bmp, fpx, tga etc.)

And: I really hate Wizards, too! I hope there is a way for system
administrators to do their job without using Wizards. They are good
for the first or second time, but not if administrating PCs this is
your daily job.

Thanks
Reto

Click to expand...

Woo hoo! I guess I'm going to have to move to XP after all, despite that EVIL registration scheme.

Thanks for the info, David!

Ali

David Turner said:

Ali,

While I can't confirm for other notebooks, I can tell you that
Windows XP has brought that feature back to my Toshiba 8100! Yahoo.

David

Click to expand...