Feature Requests for WLM 8.5

I know I'm not alone when I submit these requests (many times, in fact, since
the first 8.x builds):

1. Why is the “classic� menu space still used when classic menus are hidden?
Just ditch it completely and be like Windows Media Player 11’s interface. I
like to put my messenger windows at the top of the window, and I can’t do
that since the classic menu “shifts� the window position down to give it
space.

2. Move the “Classic Menu� button to the far left along with item #1, and
that will accommodate those of us who like to use the classic menus but want
the new interface.

3. Let us customize the toolbars… I never use Call (Phone), Activities,
Games or Block, and I don’t use Winks or Backgrounds either… give me the
chance to turn off those buttons that I never use, so I can reclaim some
window space! (Scrolling menus are just an annoying UI design!

4. Why after all these years can I not right click in the conversation
window and choose “Clear Conversation� to reset it to a clean window?

5. Finally, why are the colors so washed out on the conversation windows
while the main list window is so bold? I prefer the bold, but either way– BE
CONSISTENT!!! Pick the washed out style or pick the bold style!

I love Windows Live Messenger. I really do! But I hate having to use 3rd
party tools to hack the appearance just to have the functionality I've asked
for several times over the past few years. Perhaps now that I'm posting the
requests publicly instead of through the Feedback page, they will gain some
momentum with other users.

Greetings,

3. You can use third-party unsupported patches like A-Patch (www.a-patch.org) and Mess Patch
(www.mess.be) to eliminate unneeded buttons and UI elements.


--
Jonathan Kay
Microsoft MVP - Windows Live Messenger/MSN Messenger/Windows Messenger
Associate Expert
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/
Messenger Resources - http://messenger.jonathankay.com
All posts unless otherwise specified are (c) 2007 Jonathan Kay.
You *must* contact me for redistribution rights.
--


"GoodThings2Life" <> wrote in message
news:BFEE4991-3BEA-4225-B4FD-...
> I know I'm not alone when I submit these requests (many times, in fact, since
> the first 8.x builds):
>
> 1. Why is the "classic" menu space still used when classic menus are hidden?
> Just ditch it completely and be like Windows Media Player 11's interface. I
> like to put my messenger windows at the top of the window, and I can't do
> that since the classic menu "shifts" the window position down to give it
> space.
>
> 2. Move the "Classic Menu" button to the far left along with item #1, and
> that will accommodate those of us who like to use the classic menus but want
> the new interface.
>
> 3. Let us customize the toolbars. I never use Call (Phone), Activities,
> Games or Block, and I don't use Winks or Backgrounds either. give me the
> chance to turn off those buttons that I never use, so I can reclaim some
> window space! (Scrolling menus are just an annoying UI design!
>
> 4. Why after all these years can I not right click in the conversation
> window and choose "Clear Conversation" to reset it to a clean window?
>
> 5. Finally, why are the colors so washed out on the conversation windows
> while the main list window is so bold? I prefer the bold, but either way- BE
> CONSISTENT!!! Pick the washed out style or pick the bold style!
>
> I love Windows Live Messenger. I really do! But I hate having to use 3rd
> party tools to hack the appearance just to have the functionality I've asked
> for several times over the past few years. Perhaps now that I'm posting the
> requests publicly instead of through the Feedback page, they will gain some
> momentum with other users.

Jonathan,

Thanks, for the tip... it comes as a surprise to hear it suggested,
actually. That said, I use MessPatch to accomplish issues 3 and 5, as you can
see here:

http://www.aaronhall.net/index.php/2...ith-messpatch/


I wrote another article on the remaining issues, however:

http://www.aaronhall.net/index.php/2...enger-85-beta/

My #1 pet peeve with WLM8.x is the wasted space because of the classic
menus. So if issues 1 and 2 were resolved, I'd be perfectly content to use
MessPatch for the remaining issues.

I apologize for sounding like I'm bitter and frustrated with WLM... I'm not,
I love the program, and none of these issues would stop me from using it.
But, from a UI design standpoint, these suggestions just make for a good
design.

Most programs have had the option to customize the toolbars for YEARS. Why
not allow that in WLM as well?

Well written and designed apps have a consistent UI look and feel, so why
not WLM as well?

"Jonathan Kay [MVP]" wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> 3. You can use third-party unsupported patches like A-Patch (www.a-patch.org) and Mess Patch
> (www.mess.be) to eliminate unneeded buttons and UI elements.

That's what ****es me off. There's a lot of people asking for changes,
sharing common opinions, and you (Microsoft) don't tell us what you're going
to do about it. Your answer is the same as this: "Yeah.. whatever, we won't
bother changing anything (we don't need to because we already have you). In
fact, we can't make it better so we rely on third-party applications to do
so." For Christ sake, show us some effort!

There's a lot of people asking for changes???
How many???
Do you know that the number of people not asking for changes easily exceed
the number of users requesting for changes?
Want to know how I arrive at the conclusion?
Compare the number of perople asking for changes and those not requesting
...............................................
I don't have the number of people who are testing WLM but accordingly to my
experience when testing MS's software, many suggestions were made and MS
will listen and may implement the features in later versions.
Why introduce new code when the application is stable?


"yllusion" <> wrote in message
news:8722F0E3-BC8B-405A-A952-...
> "Jonathan Kay [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> 3. You can use third-party unsupported patches like A-Patch
>> (www.a-patch.org) and Mess Patch
>> (www.mess.be) to eliminate unneeded buttons and UI elements.
>
> That's what ****es me off. There's a lot of people asking for changes,
> sharing common opinions, and you (Microsoft) don't tell us what you're
> going
> to do about it. Your answer is the same as this: "Yeah.. whatever, we
> won't
> bother changing anything (we don't need to because we already have you).
> In
> fact, we can't make it better so we rely on third-party applications to do
> so." For Christ sake, show us some effort!

Not asking for improvement is NOT the same as not wanting or needing
improvement. At the same time, being the best messenger application doesn't
mean it can't be better.

Humanity, in general, has a tendency to be complacent with the status quo,
and while they may complain about things to their friends and family, they
rarely step up to the plate to do something about it.

That said, I chose to be a voice. In no way am I trying to be obnoxious, I
just wanted to voice my feedback. All I can do is hope that it is heard and
recognized.

You ask, "Why introduce new code when the application is stable?" I say,
"Because that is what development processes are for. All products change,
even 'final' versions."


-------------

All this having been said, I'd really rather this post not become a giant
rant/debate against Microsoft and development processes.

What I would love to see is discussion about the features I asked about. Do
they make sense? Are they good ideas? etc.

Man, your reply is so stupid that it's not worth answering it.

"Sulasno" wrote:

> There's a lot of people asking for changes???
> How many???
> Do you know that the number of people not asking for changes easily exceed
> the number of users requesting for changes?
> Want to know how I arrive at the conclusion?
> Compare the number of perople asking for changes and those not requesting
> ...............................................
> I don't have the number of people who are testing WLM but accordingly to my
> experience when testing MS's software, many suggestions were made and MS
> will listen and may implement the features in later versions.
> Why introduce new code when the application is stable?
>
>
> "yllusion" <> wrote in message
> news:8722F0E3-BC8B-405A-A952-...
> > "Jonathan Kay [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> 3. You can use third-party unsupported patches like A-Patch
> >> (www.a-patch.org) and Mess Patch
> >> (www.mess.be) to eliminate unneeded buttons and UI elements.
> >
> > That's what ****es me off. There's a lot of people asking for changes,
> > sharing common opinions, and you (Microsoft) don't tell us what you're
> > going
> > to do about it. Your answer is the same as this: "Yeah.. whatever, we
> > won't
> > bother changing anything (we don't need to because we already have you).
> > In
> > fact, we can't make it better so we rely on third-party applications to do
> > so." For Christ sake, show us some effort!
>
>
>

Thanks for answering to that guy, you had the patience. I totally agree with
you.

"GoodThings2Life" wrote:

> Not asking for improvement is NOT the same as not wanting or needing
> improvement. At the same time, being the best messenger application doesn't
> mean it can't be better.
>
> Humanity, in general, has a tendency to be complacent with the status quo,
> and while they may complain about things to their friends and family, they
> rarely step up to the plate to do something about it.
>
> That said, I chose to be a voice. In no way am I trying to be obnoxious, I
> just wanted to voice my feedback. All I can do is hope that it is heard and
> recognized.
>
> You ask, "Why introduce new code when the application is stable?" I say,
> "Because that is what development processes are for. All products change,
> even 'final' versions."

you don't have a clue what the beta testers are doing

and if my reply is stupid, you shouldn't be responding

"yllusion" <> wrote in message
news:74D572B2-0FB2-49CD-A0AB-...
> Man, your reply is so stupid that it's not worth answering it.
>
> "Sulasno" wrote:
>
>> There's a lot of people asking for changes???
>> How many???
>> Do you know that the number of people not asking for changes easily
>> exceed
>> the number of users requesting for changes?
>> Want to know how I arrive at the conclusion?
>> Compare the number of perople asking for changes and those not requesting
>> ...............................................
>> I don't have the number of people who are testing WLM but accordingly to
>> my
>> experience when testing MS's software, many suggestions were made and MS
>> will listen and may implement the features in later versions.
>> Why introduce new code when the application is stable?
>>
>>
>> "yllusion" <> wrote in message
>> news:8722F0E3-BC8B-405A-A952-...
>> > "Jonathan Kay [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Greetings,
>> >>
>> >> 3. You can use third-party unsupported patches like A-Patch
>> >> (www.a-patch.org) and Mess Patch
>> >> (www.mess.be) to eliminate unneeded buttons and UI elements.
>> >
>> > That's what ****es me off. There's a lot of people asking for changes,
>> > sharing common opinions, and you (Microsoft) don't tell us what you're
>> > going
>> > to do about it. Your answer is the same as this: "Yeah.. whatever, we
>> > won't
>> > bother changing anything (we don't need to because we already have
>> > you).
>> > In
>> > fact, we can't make it better so we rely on third-party applications to
>> > do
>> > so." For Christ sake, show us some effort!
>>
>>
>>

everyone is welcome to offer their feedback; but numbers count

allow me to provide an example;
say MS Office;
many are not aware that there are numberous teams of developers working just
on certain parts of the whole application;
one team may introduce new code and it may break the other applications;
finally will MS Office incorporate the code?
I doubt so...........................................

same for WLM;
I doubt that there is only one team on WLM;

As for your later part of post, I am sure the developers lurk and listen;
but again numbers count; no way they are going to incorporate a new feature
just because of one whimming; they need lots and lots of whimming

Sometimes I wish MS would offer testing to those curious instead of public
testing releases;
when testing software, break the software if you can and MS will thank you
for that :-)


"GoodThings2Life" <> wrote in
message news:97308772-BF25-4841-9922-...
> Not asking for improvement is NOT the same as not wanting or needing
> improvement. At the same time, being the best messenger application
> doesn't
> mean it can't be better.
>
> Humanity, in general, has a tendency to be complacent with the status quo,
> and while they may complain about things to their friends and family, they
> rarely step up to the plate to do something about it.
>
> That said, I chose to be a voice. In no way am I trying to be obnoxious, I
> just wanted to voice my feedback. All I can do is hope that it is heard
> and
> recognized.
>
> You ask, "Why introduce new code when the application is stable?" I say,
> "Because that is what development processes are for. All products change,
> even 'final' versions."
>
>
> -------------
>
> All this having been said, I'd really rather this post not become a giant
> rant/debate against Microsoft and development processes.
>
> What I would love to see is discussion about the features I asked about.
> Do
> they make sense? Are they good ideas? etc.