Great to see so much discussion on this piece; it's a really good demonstration of what the Windows team often say - with such a wide range of users, it's impossible to please everyone with every feature ;-)
@Anonymous - I don't mind you calling it a tirade about signed code; I certainly feel strongly about it ;-)
@LuckyDucky - it's your right not to want to pay $25 to sign one app that you write or a hundred apps that you right (you don't need a different certificate for each app) but it's my right to refuse to run any app that isn't signed; and while I'm expecting that every Tom's reader can make that choice for themselves, I think there are a lot of mainstream users who would not be as savvy (witness the spread of adware and malware and remember that 95% of all copies of Windows are sold on new PCs - if people who are prepared to upgrade a computer make up only 5% of the market, the majority of Windows users probably aren't technically advance; nor should they have to be) and making signing mandatory would be a valuable protection. Re download warnings: IE 9 doesn't ask you if you want to run files unless they're files it's never come across (no-one has ever downloaded it before and they're not signed by a known certificate) - for common files you just get the Open/Save dialog, for the rarities you get a dialog asking you to confirm. Around 40% of those unknown, unsigned files are turning out to be malware. That stat alone makes me even more convinced that code should be signed. I'm impressed with the AppRep service in IE9; I'd be interested in your views if you check it out.
I'm very familiar with Splashtop; that's exactly what I expect Microsoft to be targetting with an instant-on feature (check out the Direct Experience patent Microsoft has for some interesting options). I'm going on Microsoft's figures collecting average boot times across all Windows users that show that while Win 7 starts on average in 12-17 seconds, the POST can take that long too; UEFI can be faster but often it doesn't seem to be and I see a lot of slow BIOSes on the PCs I test - they don't have to be as slow as they are, but system makers have to put the pressure on BIOS companies to shape up.
Not sure what your 12 comment is about (page 12 is battery life and I want a lot more than I get). Core i7 is awesome if you need 8 threads but for most things my Core i5 tablet is the ideal balance of performance and acceptable battery life (I've tested Core i7 notebooks with a massive 60 minutes of battery life, and even the 2-3 hours of many Core i7 models makes me feel that for many users Core i5 is a better choice).
@amigafan I don't think a $25 certificate puts development out of the reach of hobby developers (and one certificate covers all the apps you want to sign). Certificate prices have dropped a lot in the last ten years and they could certainly get cheaper, but it's not out of the reach of the majority of people who have the time and ability to code. If you have an app you probably have a Web site and you pay for the domain and maybe the hosting; you're making the investment of your time and knowledge to do the coding. Think of it like the fee to get your driving licence or passport.
I don't want to have to be organised; I want the computer to do that hard work for me ;-)
@ almost everyone: there are lots of things that it would be very hard for Microsoft to do if it made them closed and proprietary but that would be very valuable if they were done in an open and standardised way. Replace tying your Windows account to your LiveID with tying it to your Facebook ID or your Google account or any other online identity... The permissive Windows and controlling Apple argument is something I certainly agree with, but there's no reason anything ehre except enforced code signing has to be done in a way that takes choice away.
@DavidC - I'm sorry it wasn't clear that when I said SoC processes use more power than ARM, I meant the SoC x86 processors I'd been referring to; Intel is bringing the power usage down, but still not to ARM levels or even to ARM+package levels. Although ARM does produce its own MALI graphics unit many devices use ARM plus a combination of other graphics processors; I'm dubious about calling those packages SoC because they bundle from multiple sources so I tend to think of them as integration solutions, but I didn't get into that nitty gritty because my comparison was with x86 SoC solutions.
@Slite - I'm expecting a lot more simple functionality 'apps' to come to Windows, especially for tablets and for this to make up a lot of the rumoured Windows app store, although I agree - it's the rich and powerful apps that I use Windows for.
@mayanleoboy - that update allows you to run XP Mode without hardware virtualisation, but it doesn't make it fast or efficient enough for you to use it as the basis of Windows. We need hardware VT (and it needs to be enabled on all the machines that have it on!)
Thanks again, everyone. If I missed anyone and you'd like a reply, just holler. Please keep the comments and your own wishlists coming!