Windows 8 gets a nice Explorer feature

Sometimes, small features can make a huge difference in the overall workflow of an OS.

According to tech-exclusive, the newest feature to be uncovered in leaked builds of Windows 8 is a very nifty drag and drop function in Windows Explorer. If you’re familiar with the Vista and 7 implementations of the Explorer address bar, you’ll recognize the separated format of the address. Each step in the path is its own clickable link, making for easy navigation upwards in a directory tree. Windows 8 is implementing a feature that allows you to drag a file or folder onto any one of those links, moving the object into that folder. Currently, you have to cut and paste the object, hope that the destination folder is viewable in the sidebar, or open another Explorer window to get the job done (and we’re well aware that there may be other arcane and obscure shortcuts to accomplish this).

Image credit: tech-exclusive

It may seem inconsequential, but it’s small touches like this, small improvements to tasks that many of us do multiple times a day, that help make an OS easier to use overall.

As Windows 8 features continue to be uncovered, we’ll hopefully see more of this kind of streamlining. Windows Explorer is an integral part of the Windows experience, and we’d hate to see it ignored relative to other improvements.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8 cloud synchronization confirmed in screenshot

Next Story

Channel 4 launches 4oD for iPad with Xbox 360 version to follow

127 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Stelex said,
Congratulations Microsoft! Welcome to spring-loaded folders, Mac OS X (10.1) - year was 2001 or so ...

Welcome to every other UI element involving folders that Microsoft did, except they were too lazy, uninterested, or busy, to get the fit-and-finish done in Vista.

Stelex said,
Congratulations Microsoft! Welcome to spring-loaded folders, Mac OS X (10.1) - year was 2001 or so ...

WinXP had what you call 'Spring Folders', not sure how you missed this.

Try it today on Win7 or WinXP, drag any document to a closed folder on the left hand folder pane (Explorer Tree/Folder List), it will 'spring/pop and magically open' for you.

Microsoft didn't implement it on folders in the right hand pane, as their usability tests showed that it required too long of a delay to be effective. Without the delay on 'springing open', the folders would pop open too fast and users would bounce though folders without realizing it.

I'd like to see split view feature like in the old Norton Commander and current FTP clients like FileZilla. Oh, and add a command prompt.

bj55555 said,
I'd like to see split view feature like in the old Norton Commander and current FTP clients like FileZilla. Oh, and add a command prompt.

Side-by-side dual folder view - try http://dirsyncgb.wordpress.com
If you like it, tell your friends: if there's something you don't like, tell the author.

The bread crumb bar is becoming more and more like NEXTSTEP's. I like it. One final tweak would make it perfect... that is, if you click on a link moving up the bar, it does not wipe out the previous, intervening folders. In other words you have:

a > b > c > d

You click on b and the bar STILL (until you click on another folder in side b) reads:
a > b > c > d
not
a > b
This makes it super easy to jump back and forth visually (I know, you can use the large back button to do that). It makes it nice if you are zipping back and forth between folders or copying data back and forth along the path.

[edit]
Obviously the current dir in the bread crumb would have to be highlighted somehow.

Tuishimi said,
The bread crumb bar is becoming more and more like NEXTSTEP's. I like it. One final tweak would make it perfect... that is, if you click on a link moving up the bar, it does not wipe out the previous, intervening folders. In other words you have:

a > b > c > d

You click on b and the bar STILL (until you click on another folder in side b) reads:
a > b > c > d
not
a > b
This makes it super easy to jump back and forth visually (I know, you can use the large back button to do that). It makes it nice if you are zipping back and forth between folders or copying data back and forth along the path.

[edit]
Obviously the current dir in the bread crumb would have to be highlighted somehow.

The only way that would work visually I think if the folders below the current one are shown faded out, which would signify that the information is "old" and left over from the last folder view.

But I don't think Microsoft would opt for that because they'd argue it would be confusing for novice users.

Looking forward to this feature.

It would also be nice to have IE shortcuts work in Windows Explorer properly. For instance, Alt+Enter in Windows Explorer's address bar doesn't really do anything, whereas in IE it duplicates the tab. CTRL+Enter in the Windows Explorer address bar opens the folder in IE, which is just weird.

Seriously guys, you decide on not buying Windows 8 now. This build is pre-m3. More features will be added between now and the RTM which is nearly 2 years away. If this was all they were adding it would be a service pack. I actually love it so far, Ribbon UI and the Setting Sync sounds nice.

Show total size of folder in the status bar, like the "Classic Shell" program does (like XP used to...) and don't ever remove it again...

If "Classic Shell" did not exist, I'd still be ****ed at the Explorer. If a status bar is coming back 'by default' - make it useful, or turn it back off. I don't use the start menu part of "Classic Shell" - just installed it for the status bar fix, and I guess the "up" arrow for folder navigation is nice once in awhile.

At the very least, put the option back in to show total used space in folder on the status bar. Seeing how big a folder is at a glance, while you're there, with nothing selected, is so obviously useful that I'm amazed more people don't miss this...

Point and click until you drag and drop all day long... just put the file size back down there in that status bar...

kansanian said,
Show total size of folder in the status bar, like the "Classic Shell" program does (like XP used to...) and don't ever remove it again...

If "Classic Shell" did not exist, I'd still be ****ed at the Explorer. If a status bar is coming back 'by default' - make it useful, or turn it back off. I don't use the start menu part of "Classic Shell" - just installed it for the status bar fix, and I guess the "up" arrow for folder navigation is nice once in awhile.

At the very least, put the option back in to show total used space in folder on the status bar. Seeing how big a folder is at a glance, while you're there, with nothing selected, is so obviously useful that I'm amazed more people don't miss this...

Point and click until you drag and drop all day long... just put the file size back down there in that status bar...

I don't disagree, but with today's computers you are not dealing with a few GB like you were when the status bar could display the folder size rather quickly.

I have folders that literally have over 500,000 items in them, and it would take a small chunk of time to compute this and lookup the file sizes. Yes I know I could turn this on and off, etc... However a basic user will have several thousands of files in folders now, consuming several GB of space, and for them, this would be annoying, steal CPU cycles from other process, and make them think the computer is slow as hell by trying to look up information that they don't want.

One thing of UI design, don't give users information unless they request it, it is fundamental to what they are doing, or can be offered instantly without consuming computing resources.

This feature fails this UI design test on every point.

If you want to know the folder information, right click on it, and hit properties. This is you requesting the information, and it is far more accurate and detailed that even the old school status bar 'folder size' information that was often incorrect on larger folders as the thread timed-out, just like it would on MOST folders today that are freaking huge in comparison to back then.

I think if these comments show anything that Windows users have so many wishes when it comes to Explorer. As one of the most defining things about Windows I truly hope MS concentrates more on this with Win 8 over little gadgets that tend to be better when coming from freeware developers. We have so many files now that have been built up over the years. Tagging needs to be extended to any file type and to folders - its something 3rd party software struggles with as its so integral to the OS.

There are too many focal points in the explorer: top left for navigation; bottom left for info; bottom right for changing view; left pane for folder tree; etc.
It makes your eyes wonder all over the window... not a great idea.

Give me the ability to middle click any links/buttons in explorer to open a new window at the specified target (similar to Firefox UI) and I'll be in heaven!

Sounds like a cool feature but one of those that i'll use once and forget to use again.
I've had Windows 7 for nearly a year now and i'm only just starting to use the favourites bar on the right and 70% of the time i forget and still go the long way round.

Windows 7's explorer is not perfect, but its usable, and when tabs get introduced and features like the one mentioned in this article, it might just turn out to be awesome.

alright, I just been wondering why MS is moving back to having a status bar, after a few versions of saying "its redundant information"... and "we're removing it for good in future versions" then boom its a prominent item in the folder view now

neufuse said,
alright, I just been wondering why MS is moving back to having a status bar, after a few versions of saying "its redundant information"... and "we're removing it for good in future versions" then boom its a prominent item in the folder view now

hmmm

consider that as 'place holder' ,it is still alpha renumber?

neufuse said,
alright, I just been wondering why MS is moving back to having a status bar, after a few versions of saying "its redundant information"... and "we're removing it for good in future versions" then boom its a prominent item in the folder view now

That, and the 'Directory Up' button.

Ci7 said,

hmmm

consider that as 'place holder' ,it is still alpha renumber?

yeah placeholder, sure.... something that was hidden by default for the past two versions is now on by default, they moved a lot of info to it, along with buttons that use to be on the main toolbar.....

we are seeing a lot of "removed" functionality in the past two versions show back up in this version... heck Windows 7 alpha didn't have "placeholders" like this... neither did longhorn alpha...

neufuse said,
we are seeing a lot of "removed" functionality in the past two versions show back up in this version... heck Windows 7 alpha didn't have "placeholders" like this... neither did longhorn alpha...

Windows Vista or 7 didn't try to integrate the ribbon into the shell. I assume the 'placeholder' items were moved there as a way to test functionality while they worked out the engineering details behind the ribbon.

neufuse said,
we are seeing a lot of "removed" functionality in the past two versions show back up in this version... heck Windows 7 alpha didn't have "placeholders" like this... neither did longhorn alpha...

Windows Vista or 7 didn't try to integrate the ribbon into the shell. I assume the 'placeholder' items were moved there as a way to test functionality while they worked out the engineering details behind the ribbon.

For me it is a useless feature though as I always use the right mouse button to drag and drop.
I don't even know what left does anymore? Copy? Create Shortcut? Move? I like to know with the menu thank you

TABS IN EXPLORER. Seriously. Why not? Sometimes I am doing file tasks and I have like 4 Explorer windows open and it is a pain. Implement this and I will be happy. :-)

Aaron44126 said,
TABS IN EXPLORER. Seriously. Why not? Sometimes I am doing file tasks and I have like 4 Explorer windows open and it is a pain. Implement this and I will be happy. :-)
hmmm interesting idea!

Looks like there will be some Quick Launch tools in the titlebar. For sure the UI is no where near its final form and I expect some big changes to the Windows Taskbar & Desktop.

JohnCz said,
Looks like there will be some Quick Launch tools in the titlebar. For sure the UI is no where near its final form and I expect some big changes to the Windows Taskbar & Desktop.

I'm surprised no one else picked up on those little buttons in the left on the title bar. Wonder what they'll do.

GP007 said,

I'm surprised no one else picked up on those little buttons in the left on the title bar. Wonder what they'll do.


Looks like Quick Access toolbar in Office 2007/2010?

GP007 said,

I'm surprised no one else picked up on those little buttons in the left on the title bar. Wonder what they'll do.

No one picked up on them because they're nothing new. With the ribbon comes those buttons, and it's like that for Office 2007, 2010, Win7 Paint/Wordpad, and all of the ribbonized Windows Live Essentials programs. .

i had to quickly switch to my Windows 7 machine as i could have sworn i had already done this, alas no. I think i must have got it mixed up with mac OSX. Really looking forward to that feature, shame they can't back peddle this update to windows 7, as now ive noticed i cant do it, i miss it even more

Yees!! Thanks MS! I've lost count of how many times I've tried to do that.

But I've got to say, even though the ribbon COULD be a good idea, I think the placement of the navigation controls looks very nice, but I know it is a limitation of the windows ribbon framework (which they might want to fix, perhaps?).

eilegz said,
what about tabbed explorer, its something that microsoft should put

I agree. I still can't believe MS is not creating a Directory Opus type of view with dual paned or tabbed explorer windows.

briangw said,

I agree. I still can't believe MS is not creating a Directory Opus type of view with dual paned or tabbed explorer windows.


You can in effect get a dual paned Explorer with Aero Snap. Open two Explorer windows, snap one to the left and one to the right. I use it like this all the time.

roadwarrior said,

You can in effect get a dual paned Explorer with Aero Snap. Open two Explorer windows, snap one to the left and one to the right. one to the front. one to the side. MAMBO JAMBO !

Fixed that for ya

eilegz said,
what about tabbed explorer, its something that microsoft should put
The Taskbar already provides you with "tabs" of multiple Explorer windows. Why should they add another layer of tabs? Would just make dragging things from one tab to another more complicated than it is today.

With all these leaks, I've yet to see anything that is a true reason for me to pay for the upgrade from 7 to 8. I get the impression that Windows 8 is almost like a paid version of Windows 7 SP2. Hopefully they have some nice extras that'll entice me to upgrade, will keep my eyes pealed

sagum said,
With all these leaks, I've yet to see anything that is a true reason for me to pay for the upgrade from 7 to 8. I get the impression that Windows 8 is almost like a paid version of Windows 7 SP2. Hopefully they have some nice extras that'll entice me to upgrade, will keep my eyes pealed

...we've seen just a handful of Pre-M3 features that aren't even remotely final, of course you wouldn't see features worthy of upgrading yet.

sagum said,
With all these leaks, I've yet to see anything that is a true reason for me to pay for the upgrade from 7 to 8. I get the impression that Windows 8 is almost like a paid version of Windows 7 SP2. Hopefully they have some nice extras that'll entice me to upgrade, will keep my eyes pealed

As Windows 7 is no more than a Vista SP , Windows 8 will be no different.

This is not exactly new.. developers typically don't throw the old version away with each new release. Could just as likely say 98 was Win95 SP2, XP was just 2K SP5, etc etc.

sagum said,
With all these leaks, I've yet to see anything that is a true reason for me to pay for the upgrade from 7 to 8. I get the impression that Windows 8 is almost like a paid version of Windows 7 SP2. Hopefully they have some nice extras that'll entice me to upgrade, will keep my eyes pealed
DirectX 12?

sagum said,
I've yet to see anything that is a true reason for me to pay for the upgrade from 7 to 8.

That's the point. Most of the 'reasons to buy the upgrade from 7 to 8' will be under the hood architectural changes to prepare the OS for the next 10 years of hardware evolution.

Directory Opus had this feature about 5 years ago. It has pages of customization and layout options and is superior in every way to explorer. It's funny that a small 3rd party company in Australia makes a better file manager than Microsoft.

powlette said,
Directory Opus had this feature about 5 years ago. It has pages of customization and layout options and is superior in every way to explorer. It's funny that a small 3rd party company in Australia makes a better file manager than Microsoft.

Yeah, because I totally want to pay $92 USD for a fricking file manager. Troll some moar why don't you. (I'm not making that up, $85 AUD = $92 USD)

LiquidSolstice said,

Yeah, because I totally want to pay $92 USD for a fricking file manager. Troll some moar why don't you. (I'm not making that up, $85 AUD = $92 USD)

You use the software everyday though so it's money well spent.

powlette said,
Directory Opus had this feature about 5 years ago. It has pages of customization and layout options and is superior in every way to explorer. It's funny that a small 3rd party company in Australia makes a better file manager than Microsoft.

So use that instead? For my needs and probably the majority of people out there the explorer version now in Win7 does the job and does it well.

Boeing 787 said,

You use the software everyday though so it's money well spent.

I would NEVER ever pay $92 for a file manager. Are you insane? I paid roughly $120 for my copy of Windows 7, and you're telling me it's money well spent to almost buy my operating system over again just for this obscure feature which I don't actually need on a daily basis? I mean come on, if you really wanted this feature, there are so many alternatives to Directory Opus, ranging from free to extremely affordable.

DO is one of the most overpriced apps I've ever tried (tried, not bought, the trial version didn't seem worth parting with a Benjamin for me)

GP007 said,

So use that instead? For my needs and probably the majority of people out there the explorer version now in Win7 does the job and does it well.

Seriously, $92. For a file manager. DO can also do a million things more than the average user wants or needs in a file manager. It's like saying "Oh, Paint doesn't let me have a transperent background, I'm going to go buy Photoshop for $660 so that I can start doing that".

LiquidSolstice said,

Yeah, because I totally want to pay $92 USD for a fricking file manager. Troll some moar why don't you. (I'm not making that up, $85 AUD = $92 USD)

I've been using Directory Opus for years and years and I'd go nuts if I didn't have it. I love that program and wish they'd include a fraction of the features in to the normal Windows Explorer.

powlette said,
Directory Opus had this feature about 5 years ago. It has pages of customization and layout options and is superior in every way to explorer. It's funny that a small 3rd party company in Australia makes a better file manager than Microsoft.

I've also been using it for years and it has saved me countless hours (if it saves me 1 hour than its worth it for me). To the ones who say paying that much is insane: My wife and I went to dinner last night to a semi-nice restaurant and our bill was $103. So.... sure, Explorer is more than sufficient for most BUT if you're a computer professional and won't pay for an excellent tool that costs less than a nice dinner, YOU are insane! ( IMHO of course )

powlette said,
Directory Opus had this feature about 5 years ago. It has pages of customization and layout options and is superior in every way to explorer. It's funny that a small 3rd party company in Australia makes a better file manager than Microsoft.

It's a great software. I didn't pay anywhere near as much for it though and I feel that after Win7 was released it has started to stagnate. With XP it was a 1000% improvement on the horrible file browser it has but now the Win7 file browser is pretty good. I usually end up using DOpus only when I need to haul files back and forth between folders far apart and don't want to deal with multiple Explorer windows for that.

Overall I have to say I'm disappointed in both Apple and Microsoft. Both have rather lacking file browsers. Path Finder on OSX is everything Finder tries to be, I wish it was ported for Windows because it's seriously great.

Mikkeee said,

I've also been using it for years and it has saved me countless hours (if it saves me 1 hour than its worth it for me). To the ones who say paying that much is insane: My wife and I went to dinner last night to a semi-nice restaurant and our bill was $103. So.... sure, Explorer is more than sufficient for most BUT if you're a computer professional and won't pay for an excellent tool that costs less than a nice dinner, YOU are insane! ( IMHO of course )


That's what my Grandfather told me when I told him that I wasn't buying books for university, because I felt I just could ask for it or look them up at the library, and then I realized that it will pay off in time.

LiquidSolstice said,

Yeah, because I totally want to pay $92 USD for a fricking file manager. Troll some moar why don't you. (I'm not making that up, $85 AUD = $92 USD)

BTW: I've seen it for $53 USD, no need to pay full price.

LiquidSolstice said,

Yeah, because I totally want to pay $92 USD for a fricking file manager. Troll some moar why don't you. (I'm not making that up, $85 AUD = $92 USD)

Obvious Troll is you, Opus rocks, get over it. Nobody is forcing you to pay for it - so don't. Opus cost me the price of a game

He had a perfectly valid point - DO is easily the best file manager on Windows period - I've gone through the lot. I'd love MS to include it with Windows.

This is a nice feature, I'm forever cutting and pasting to a folder up from its current one this will make it a lot easier.

Ah look there we go, see, the ribbons can be closed making it just a normal menubar...
Now will people stop complaining about making all the features and options of explorer more accessible?

wooooowwwwwwwwww... i remember specifically posting in the forums when vista was being developed that it would be nice to be able to drag and drop in the address bar to move files to the folder above.

glad to see that Microsoft is putting that functionality in for windows 8!

singularity0821 said,
For a better explorer in 7, Vista and XP you should try this: http://sourceforge.net/projects/qttabbar/
Still too buggy.

Just yesterday it was refusing to open any explorer windows. Killed explorer.exe, logged off and back on and still broken. Had to reboot to fix.

Happened again less than an hour later. Got sick of that so deleted it, rebooted. Problems went away. So just too darn buggy for me at the moment.

AnthoWin said,
Explorer is pretty good as it is. This is just icing on the cake. Next step: spring loaded folders (ala OS X)

Unless Apple have a patent for this already...

Kyang said,
I wonder if they'll be spring loaded as well.

Spring loaded would be awesome (but somehow I have a vague feeling that there are parts that are actually spring loaded already in 7)

LiquidSolstice said,

Spring loaded would be awesome (but somehow I have a vague feeling that there are parts that are actually spring loaded already in 7)

They are to an extent. Grab a file in the right pane of Explorer and drag it to the folder list on the left. Hover it on a folder and that folder will open and show you the list of subfolders. Not sure if it matters, but I have both "Show all folders" and "Automatically expand to current folder" checked under "Navigation Pane" in the Folder Options dialog.

roadwarrior said,

They are to an extent. Grab a file in the right pane of Explorer and drag it to the folder list on the left. Hover it on a folder and that folder will open and show you the list of subfolders. Not sure if it matters, but I have both "Show all folders" and "Automatically expand to current folder" checked under "Navigation Pane" in the Folder Options dialog.

Right, that's what I meant. I guess that's not technically full system-wide spring loading, but I like it nonetheless

It's a much-needed feature and I'm glad they're implementing it. I once found myself trying to do the same thing in Windows 7.

Anaron said,
It's a much-needed feature and I'm glad they're implementing it. I once found myself trying to do the same thing in Windows 7.
The first time I installed Windows 7 I tried to do exactly that only to found that I couldn't This is a little refinement but a welcome change for sure.

AnthoWin said,

that is to say until Windows 9 comes along...

Historically, the next version of windows has not always been an all round improvement on their previous version. 98-ME for example, I had more random crashes on windows ME than any other OS.

Then I shortly after moved over to Windows 2000 which was a truly solid version. After many service packs at least. At the time.

Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.


+1

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

care to explain? sure there are differences, but saying that it's lightyears ahead is a bold statement that should be backed up.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

Oh please, explorer in 2k/XP is a pain, I sure as hell don't miss having to scroll up and down a damn folder tree to go between things I use often. Having the new Favorites area in Vista/7 make it faster and way less of a pain when I'm jumping between folders. I haven't used the tree view in a very long time and don't miss it at all.

Lightyears behind is more like it.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

XP's Explorer was hideous and a pain to work with. Too cluttered with crap, and breadcrumbs.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

you mean there are people that still willing use the XP style Explorer? Two days after using Vista I couldn't have been paid to go back to XP's Explorer. (well I <i>could</i> be paid but it would have to be a nice chunk of change)

GP007 said,

Oh please, explorer in 2k/XP is a pain, I sure as hell don't miss having to scroll up and down a damn folder tree to go between things I use often. Having the new Favorites area in Vista/7 make it faster and way less of a pain when I'm jumping between folders. I haven't used the tree view in a very long time and don't miss it at all.

Lightyears behind is more like it.


+1 to this

i have been trying to compare XP and 7's explorer for the past half hour and 7 seems better in every way.


daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

Gotta be trolling.

Jaybonaut said,

Gotta be trolling.

Most certainly, anyone who DARES to claim something older in windows is better is automatically trolling!

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

^This.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

ahead?? ahahhaha!!! its years BEHIND, the folder sidepane has to be opened EVERY TIME, and its not as good as the vista/7 sidepane, where you can add just what you want and need.. the locaton and search bar are greatly improved... XP will die, no matter if you like it or not

Frylock86 said,
XP's Explorer was hideous and a pain to work with. Too cluttered with crap, and breadcrumbs.

Not to mention if you copy and paste a bunch of files and it bombs out because it can't copy something.

I also love the way Vista/& explorer waits until the END of the copy to ask about duplicate files and system files.

That said I do not like having to go from outside the entire file + descriptors to keep from accidentally selecting a file.

daPhoenix said,
Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

It's better than what they used to have.

Especially with the 'hidden' "No to All" that existed in the old dialog (Shift+No).

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

+1

The folders don't expand in Vista/7 in the folder pane on the left like they do in XP, XP is better.

The toolbars in XP can be customized so you can click once to cut, copy, paste or delete, in Vista and 7 you must click twice and holding the mouse down and letting go on the organize menu doesn't work, XP is better.

Vista/7 use a LOT of space where you can not customize the toolbars, XP will allow you to hide everything except the file menu, XP is better.

XP will allow you to unlock the toolbars and drag them around including VERTICALLY as well as merge toolbars, Vista/7 do not, XP is better.

Vista is fail.

Windows 7 is fail.

Windows 8 looks like it will nail the coffin, Microsoft has gone fail because they've let commies infiltrate their company and intentionally destroy the GUI to make computers more difficult to control.

Oh good luck with trimming all the crap in Vista/7/8 when trying to minimize the junk services and dependencies compared to XP.

XP is better.

JAB Creations said,
The folders don't expand in Vista/7 in the folder pane on the left like they do in XP, XP is better.

Go into the folder options and check a box. Done.

Use keyboard shortcuts for cut, copy, and paste.

They do NOT use a lot of space. I believe less than XP requires for menu, buttons, and address bar.

Screw toolbars.

XP is old and will die.

Vista is great

7 is even better

Windows 8 will be even better than 7.

Don't need to worry about services or doing any bull**** in Vista / 7 it's fine out of the box.

Vista and 7 are better.

mrp04 said,
Go into the folder options and check a box. Done.

Another step in Vista/7, fail.

mrp04 said,
Use keyboard shortcuts for cut, copy, and paste.

Less options means less customization and less tailoring to each individual, Vista/7 fail.

mrp04 said,
They do NOT use a lot of space. I believe less than XP requires for menu, buttons, and address bar.

My screen is 1920x1200, 70% of the toolbar space in Vista/7 isn't even used and the rest toolbar options that I wouldn't use if they were available in XP.

mrp04 said,
Screw toolbars.

If you don't like an easy to use computer you can use Vista/7 as much as you want.

mrp04 said,
XP is old and will die.

Works just fine.

mrp04 said,
Vista is great

How many services do you have running that aren't third party? That's a rhetorical question btw.

mrp04 said,
7 is even better

7 removed the classic start menu, 7 is worse.

mrp04 said,
Windows 8 will be even better than 7.

With rumors that it'll upload all your files to the cloud, remove them from your hard drive and then hold your family photos hostage, definitely nothing any sane person would want.

mrp04 said,
Don't need to worry about services or doing any bull**** in Vista / 7 it's fine out of the box.

The pagefile isn't disabled and Vista sucks up RAM because Microsoft mvoed to help RAM manufacturers. Which one recently left the RAM industry and is selling mostly SSD's now? Proof enough of the low margins.

mrp04 said,
Vista and 7 are better.

If you like slower computers with more useless crap and greatly reduced customization, sure however it still stands, Vista sucks and Windows 7 sucks unbelievably hard.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

Only noobs like you fail to see the settings that allow you to make explorer fit your needs.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

IMO the windows vista/7 explorer is far superior. Much nicer layout. On all my xp installs I felt the need to customize the hell out of explorer because I hated the default layout so much.

daPhoenix said,
Not really, the Win2k/XP explorer is still lightyears ahead of the abomination that they implemented in V/7.

Not to mention that hideous copy / replace dialog.. dear lord.

And Win3.1 Filemanager as well as DOS and CP/M are lightyears ahead of the Win2k/XP explorer...

If you don't 'evolve' your thinking, you probably would see the older 'Explorer' concepts as better. If you do take time to 'evolve' your thinking, you would be like the majority of people and would run from the outdated concepts that were at the heart of how the XP/Win2k Explorer worked.

I don't mean to be rude, but seriously, there are some really new ideas and that go along with the Explorer in Win7 that if you 'get' make it a vast improvement over previous versions of Explorer.

Education is your friend, there are 'REASONS' Windows 7's explorer does not work or look like Win2k/WinXp Explorer, and the majority of these reasons are for POWER USERS.

I sometimes wonder if the fact that things 'look' more simple or easier to use, makes advanced users assume it is designed for people dumbier than them, instead of considering that it might be including the smarter users too.

JAB Creations said,
The folders don't expand in Vista/7 in the folder pane on the left like they do in XP, XP is better.

The toolbars in XP can be customized so you can click once to cut, copy, paste or delete, in Vista and 7 you must click twice and holding the mouse down and letting go on the organize menu doesn't work, XP is better.

Vista/7 use a LOT of space where you can not customize the toolbars, XP will allow you to hide everything except the file menu, XP is better.

XP will allow you to unlock the toolbars and drag them around including VERTICALLY as well as merge toolbars, Vista/7 do not, XP is better.

Vista is fail.

Windows 7 is fail.

Windows 8 looks like it will nail the coffin, Microsoft has gone fail because they've let commies infiltrate their company and intentionally destroy the GUI to make computers more difficult to control.

Oh good luck with trimming all the crap in Vista/7/8 when trying to minimize the junk services and dependencies compared to XP.

XP is better.

Just the fact you are 'wanting' toolbars and 'toolbar' customization says you haven't embraced the concepts that have moved beyond toolbars.

I am very much more than the average 'power user', and when I have to use Explorer in XP I literally want to smack my head on the desk because of how stupid it is and how many hoops it makes you jump through in comparison to Windows 7.

I am really sorry you haven't found Win7's explorer to be a vastly better and faster tool for you, but I do encourage you to reconsider 'your' methods and thinking and try to see Win7's explorer in the way it was designed and not try to apply WinXp concects or 'your' older concepts when using it.

You truly will suprise yourself and will come away from the experience doing this far faster and more efficient in Win7.

Just the 'Seach Box' alone in Win7 is a enough of a reason for you to hate WinXP's explorer. Go look up the advanced search syntax features, you can literally do SQL like operations in the search box and use it like a smart command prompt if you want to get really geeky. (This jumps past the concept of folders and toolbars and how the path text box works.)

WarioTBH said,
I hope that feature can be added to Windows 7 at some point.

Unlikely. That's like Ford giving you a free upgrade to your Ford Focus every year.

TCLN Ryster said,

Unlikely. That's like Ford giving you a free upgrade to your Ford Focus every year.
This logic is flawed. It's quite a bit easier to mass issue a patch to Windows (ie: Service Packs, etc.) than it is to individually apply an upgrade to every Ford Focus. Although your point still applies. It is unlikely that Microsoft will upgrade Windows 7 with anything more than bug fixes.