In future versions of Windows, I would like:

  • Real tab-completion in the shell.
  • A real sudo, or right-click-run-as that works everywhere, and
  • Real symlinks. Not the goofy “shortcuts”.

Everything after that would be gravy.


  1. Posted April 26, 2005 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    Hast though not made nice with Cygwin?

  2. Posted April 26, 2005 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    The Monad shell in Longhorn is supposed to be super-cool. But then, all future tech is supposed to be super-cool, so.

  3. Mike Hoye
    Posted April 26, 2005 at 11:27 pm | Permalink

    Cygwin is not a piece of Approved Software. Wince.

    Hey, Monad. Great, by I’m not super -enthused about Longhorn. And from what I’ve been reading Monad is not going to be a pure superset of cmd; this seems to mean that it’s going to look a lot more like an interactive perl interpreter than a command prompt, which has its tradeoffs. I like the idea of object piping, but for day to day stuff that’s way less important to me than to be able to symlink folders or type in “cd a<tab>” and not have “cd aardvark.exe” or whatever appear on the screen.

  4. Posted April 27, 2005 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Re your Longhorn pic: From what I’ve read, the Longhorn builds that are out now deliberately have the visual stuff turned off, as they’re supposed to be dev builds, used for making sure things compile and work and so forth. The screenshots I’ve seen are uniformly ugly in a way that I’d be shocked if the release version is.

    As for cmd.exe’s command completion, I was just shocked to discover that it existed at all, so am still well-pleased by it.

  5. Mike Hoye
    Posted April 27, 2005 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    It’s actually available back in win2k, as well, but only as a command line switch (/f, I think) and not by default.

  6. Ian Hurst
    Posted April 27, 2005 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

    I haven’t looked into this seriously, but, have you seen Aaron Margosis’ MakeMeAdmin program? I’ve been curious about it for a while, but haven’t yet had a reason to try it out.

  7. Mike Hoye
    Posted April 27, 2005 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    That intrigues me quite a bit. I’m going to look into that forthwith.

  8. Ian Hurst
    Posted April 27, 2005 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    Ah, also, you can set a registry key for command completion in Win2k.


    HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Command Processor\CompletionChar

    to 9.

    It’s still no bash shell… boy, is it ever not…

  9. Mike Bruce
    Posted April 27, 2005 at 11:46 pm | Permalink

    Ugliness: well, they haven’t produced an attractive version of Windows yet, so.

  10. Mike Hoye
    Posted April 29, 2005 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    As long as they keep the Rainy Day color scheme and the “make it look like Win98” options in there, I can live with the rest of it. I’d be stunned if they made it any more flexible than that.

  11. Posted April 29, 2005 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

    I’m not exactly going to go to bat for the graceful beauty of Windows XP, but someone who says, “I want it to look more like Win98” has lost all credibility in the realm of aesthetic judgments.

    Although I guess that since I’m writing this in green text on black, I shouldn’t be surprised…

  12. Mike Hoye
    Posted April 29, 2005 at 10:57 pm | Permalink

    I despise skinning, and skinned applications. Of the list of available from-Microsoft frontends, the least offensive one is the “Classic Windows” look, with all the options but font smoothing turned off. Perhaps not Win98, but Win2kPro for sure.

  13. Posted May 1, 2005 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    You need to read this post of Anatole’s, and then volunteer for the position described:


    And yes, I think this could help with Windows frustration.