Post your ideas/suggestins/wants for improvements to be added to the next version of Windows.

I'd like to see UAC improved. More information about exactly what's going on could be handy.
Bit-locker available in more versions and not just Ultimate.

What do you all want to see?

it's can be detect if one of the virus or hacker wanna into the OS maybe using hacker tool like backdoor or something else..

the OS must be respons soon...

Originally Posted by Crispy

Yeah but where is all your personal information going to get kept on a server or on a PC?

i'm running in server and use thin client for my user company..so still use intranet. it's can be more save..and manage port open..

Originally Posted by ryo

i'm running in server and use thin client for my user company..so still use intranet. it's can be more save..and manage port open..

I am intrigued by the concept of Thin Client Server / Terminal! I hope to be inspired at some point to setup a thin client lab for myself for educational purposes. I wonder though, about the cost differences between having redundant servers to host clients and store all profiles, data, and programs, in contrast with just using PCs with Data Storage Servers? It seems to me we are going full circle back to the IBM AS400 and its dumb terminals?

There are two major concerns, for me, to the concept of "Off Site" Cloud Computing: the reliability of the off site server and Internet connection, for one. A failure anywhere down the line could bring a business to a dead stop if there is no on site host to the computer systems. Dumb terminals with no OS or storage are useless without the server connection.

Second, as has already been mentioned, I am not comfortable giving up all control of personal, sensitive data to an off site location. If hackers go fishing, wouldn't they prefer to have everyone's data collected together, like shooting fish in a barrel, as apposed to having to go after each business individually?

Originally Posted by ryo

i'm running in server and use thin client for my user company..so still use intranet. it's can be more save..and manage port open..

OK I suppose that's alright for a business but what about the home owner, especially say, the silver surfer. The majority of them aren't going to be in a position to have servers or even be able to afford the extra cost of such a set up.

I haven't really looked into the Cloud idea but as it's been mentioned I think I'd be inclined to agree that I'd not feel comfortable either having my personal data up in the clouds.

Originally Posted by iseeuu

I am intrigued by the concept of Thin Client Server / Terminal! I hope to be inspired at some point to setup a thin client lab for myself for educational purposes. I wonder though, about the cost differences between having redundant servers to host clients and store all profiles, data, and programs, in contrast with just using PCs with Data Storage Servers? It seems to me we are going full circle back to the IBM AS400 and its dumb terminals?

There are two major concerns, for me, to the concept of "Off Site" Cloud Computing: the reliability of the off site server and Internet connection, for one. A failure anywhere down the line could bring a business to a dead stop if there is no on site host to the computer systems. Dumb terminals with no OS or storage are useless without the server connection.

Second, as has already been mentioned, I am not comfortable giving up all control of personal, sensitive data to an off site location. If hackers go fishing, wouldn't they prefer to have everyone's data collected together, like shooting fish in a barrel, as apposed to having to go after each business individually?

yah but for the security that's needed.
because if we work at office..so many significant data and we must take care of it.
so we use thin client..and all data user is save to the server using active directories. so is can easy to manage. and of course that thing make user can login to other office too..if the computer join domain. so all of data is saving to the server. that's why being more secure of it.