New Features, Continued

Games Explorer

As part of the release of Vista, Microsoft has been refocusing its efforts on PC gaming (after they have drifted away for years due to other products such as the Xbox). While core technologies such as DirectX 10 will be a large part of this, the new Games Explorer application is the other critical software component.

In short, Games Explorer is designed to be a single interface for launching and controlling all games, making them a part of Games Explorer instead of being just another application from the view of the operating system. Microsoft sees this as a way to standardize how games are played and used, and Games Explorer can help users find websites related to a game such as a home page or support site, alert them if their computer doesn't meet the performance score required for a game, and list the age rating for the game from several different databases such as the ESRB.

Click to enlarge

Microsoft has done a fairly good job of filling in the games database for the Games Explorer, as it recognizes and adds most major games, but some titles such as Half-Life 2 still give it trouble due to the fact that Steam sits in between the Games Explorer and the game. This shouldn't be a problem for new games however, as part of Microsoft's requirements to qualify for the Games for Windows labeling and promotional program is that they have to adhere to certain requirements, such as Xbox 360 gamepad support and Games Explorer support.

At this point the most practical use for Games Explorer is its integration with Vista's parental controls, which allows parents to lock out games based on their rating. Casual gamers will also find it useful due to the ability to identify performance ratings, while hardcore gamers will likely avoid the Games Explorer because it doesn't do anything useful for them. On the bright side, Games Explorer does serve as a centralized location of all of the installed games on a computer, and upgraders might get a nice trip down memory lane when they see what still resides on the hard drive.

Parental Controls

We touched on parental controls quickly with the Games Explorer, but the parental controls extend beyond just games. Also included are web filtering, time limits, activity reporting, and the ability to block/allow arbitrary programs. The web filtering will likely be a touchy issue for parents and privacy advocates alike, as this is a manual system where categories are issued by Microsoft.

Click to enlarge

In our quick testing of parental controls it has worked as advertised, and the web filter didn't let through any immediately objectionable sites. To Microsoft's credit the system is easy to configure, however the Achilles' heel will be that it only really works with standard accounts, as any kid who can trick their parents into giving them administrative privileges will be able to disable the controls.

Indexed Search

We've also talked about Vista's indexed search system quickly in our look at Beta 2, as well as in terms of performance on various hard drives earlier in this article. Now that Vista has been finished it's worth discussing again. Compared to our initial look, Microsoft has debugged the search feature and it now works correctly in all of our attempts to test and break it. However, it still needs to be configured to index additional locations if users keep files outside of their home directories, which is still not immediately obvious to new users of Vista.

Out of all the new features added to Vista, this is likely going to be the first used and most useful features introduced in Vista. While it has been done before in other operating systems, and 3rd-party applications have implemented similar systems before for Windows, the advantages in actually integrating it into Vista make all the difference.

Windows Mail

Outlook Express is now Windows Mail, and has integrated several technologies from various other sources in order to make up for some of the features it was previously lacking. Searching is now handled via Vista's indexed search engine, which allows for Mail to instantly find any text like Vista itself can find files and documents. Spam protection now uses a junk mail filter based on Outlook 2003's Bayesian-based filtering system; this includes the periodic filter updates for Mail like Outlook 2003 has received. Finally, Mail also implements anti-phishing technology from Internet Explorer 7 which will default to blocking users from going to sites that Mail thinks are part of phishing operations.

Unfortunately, Mail ends up being a mixed bag due to the traditional shortcomings of Outlook Express combined with what Microsoft has added and taken away. Mail does not include Outlook Express's ability to check webmail-based email providers such as Microsoft's own Hotmail service, which given the relation is an odd thing to remove. Mail still suffers from the "Outlook Express is not Outlook" syndrome too, as it doesn't have the integration features that Outlook has with contacts/calendaring, and numerous minor extra features that separate the two. Overall the additions to Mail still make it a better client than Outlook Express, but given the wide install base of Office it makes more sense to use Outlook than Mail. Of course, another popular mail alternative is Mozilla Thunderbird, and in direct comparisons we would subjectively place Thunderbird ahead of Windows Mail.

New Features Vista Version Variety
Comments Locked

105 Comments

View All Comments

  • haplo602 - Monday, February 5, 2007 - link

    Yes I am biased. I am fed up with MS. All the delay was for what purpose ?
    Yes please, point me to the documentation, I'd be glad to learn something.
  • vailr - Thursday, February 1, 2007 - link

    A quick look on Newegg shows the least expensive DX 10 cards (all NVIDIA 8800 based) are priced around $400. When can we expect to see DX 10 cards costing: <$200?
  • Brazos - Friday, February 2, 2007 - link

    I believe that Nvidia is releasing a broader range of directx 10 gpu's in March. They're supposed to be for the low - mid range video cards.
  • PrinceGaz - Thursday, February 1, 2007 - link

    quote:

    BitLocker is the only feature that the Ultimate edition has that no other edition has, but given it requires a Trusted Platform Module to be used...

    Vista Enterprise/VLK also includes BitLocker, it is not a feature unique to Ultimate Edition, but like you say it requires a TPM to be used and if I had a TPM on my mobo, I certainly wouldn't have the hateful chip enabled.

    quote:

    So far however this does not appear to be the case for Vista, as Microsoft has done away with VLK in favor of requiring activation on all copies, with the Enterprise version of Business using a keyserver. The lack of an immediately piratable version of Vista will undoubtedly slow its adoption compared to XP, and the Business versions' popularity will not be as lopsided.

    Before you say that Vista Enterprise is not a copy that any of us are likely to personally choose, because unlike XP it still requires activation, bear in mind that Enterprise edition activation is rather different from other versions and likely to be the first that is cracked indefinitely. Given that you also recommended Vista Business as the preferred version of Vista for experienced users unwilling to pay the extra for Ultimate, that makes Enterprise even more viable as it includes a superset of Vista Business features and the only things it is missing from Ultimate are a few entertainment oriented apps that no one will miss. That's not to say I condone unlicensed use of Vista Enterprise, I'd never say anything like that here, but I think the use of it may be a lot more prelavent than the article suggests.
  • stash - Friday, February 2, 2007 - link

    quote:

    Vista Enterprise/VLK also includes BitLocker, it is not a feature unique to Ultimate Edition, but like you say it requires a TPM to be used and if I had a TPM on my mobo, I certainly wouldn't have the hateful chip enabled.

    BitLocker does NOT require a TPM chip. It can also use a usb flash drive to store the key material.
  • Ryan Smith - Saturday, February 3, 2007 - link

    BitLocker requires a TPM chip. This confused us at first too when we were working on the article, but the documentation in Vista for BitLocker clearly states a TPM chip is required. If it's a 1.2 chip or higher the key is stored on the chip, otherwise it's stored on the flash drive.

    If it was possible to use BitLocker without a TPM chip, we would have more than likely thrown in some BitLocker benchmarks.
  • mlambert890 - Saturday, February 3, 2007 - link

    You're wrong Ryan. BitLocker does NOT require TPM chip. You can store the decrypt AND recovery keys on a USB FOB. Just go here and read scenario 3:

    http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/libr...">http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVi...57-b031-...
  • Ryan Smith - Saturday, February 3, 2007 - link

    Interesting; we looked for something like this when we were doing the prep for this article and came up empty-handed. It's nice to see it's there, though I'm not sure for the reason on why MS would go out of their way to disable this option and not leave any instructions in the Vista help on how to enable it. Thanks for the link.
  • stash - Saturday, February 3, 2007 - link

    Couple of reasons:

    First, it is a hell of a lot more secure to use a TPM to store key material than a USB flash drive. A TPM is essentially a smartcard soldered directly to your motherboard. It is physically and logically tamper-resistant.

    Secondly, BitLocker will only do repudiation checks of the system files with a TPM. When using a TPM. the hashes of certain system files are stored in the TPM. On boot, they are compared and if they have been changed, the user will be notified.

    So, are you going to answer my question about which common 3rd party apps require admin rights to work properly? Cause right now, my impression of that comment is that it is pure FUD.
  • LoneWolf15 - Friday, February 2, 2007 - link

    I was concerned about this too, but my new issue of MaximumPC shows how to use Vista's BitLocker without a TPM.

    Instead of the TPM holding the security key, you need a thumbdrive to do it instead. Doesn't require a high-capacity one, so any cheapie should do (though I'd choose one with a somewhat bulletproof casing to ensure you never break it and end up screwed).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now