Philly, this is already in use on Windows 8.1. 

you can set it to always boot to desktop.  Simply rigt click on taskbar and it is an option in there.

Stable. Efficient. Intuitive. Customizable. 

Its like linux mint 

Would like to see an option for the USER to pick the kind of shell they want for the OS
so that both parties are happy windows7 users will have the startmenu back , while windows8 users can get the windows 8 style startmenu.
A one click solution would be nice to quickly switch between those styles.

Most important:
I would like to be not forced to upgrade windows8.1 to windows Threshold aka Windows10 because I don’t want to have the old/NEW startmenu10 back unless they have an option like mentioned above. Edit: turns out it has 

Would like to see some improvements on the personalisation also.
Aero and Blur -an extra option to choose to install that would be nice.
I hope they will make some improvements to Ad-Hoc .

A simpler safe mode boot function without activating F8 or checking boxes.( an extra option besides restart maybe ? ) something better than shift restarting...that’s all the rest was smooth in windows8 already cant wait to see what actually has been improved

Windows 7 with a proper file search and a static tool bar!

Oh really? I only just upgraded to windows 7......

What i personally expect from win 9:

1) NTFS with real sym and hardlinks, no registry crap.

2) Global menu bar option  for applications insode panels  ( main menubar inside panel)

3) a grey theme design with nice borders for buttons

4) a launcher/start dock with opened apps on the right or bottom side.

5) a desktop icon / fences like  full screen start menu woth real icons

6) nicer and rounder  min max close buttons.

7) wine integration into the system:  https://www.winehq.org  ( yes the windows emulator schould also be integrated to win7 with a patch ( really necessary) !!!)

8) the new metro ui apps windowed with menu and toolbar.

If microsoft implement these 8 points in their systems i would buy it. if not win 7 is enough for me.

regards bluedxca93

I want to see windows 7 with a 9 on it.  No more than that.  What I don't want is to smell windows 8 anywhere near it.

^^^^What he said.

Why would you want to run a Windows emulator when you have the real thing?

 hi,

  ah , yes i did forget dosbox integration as 9. point.  

Why? Test old/early 32 bit applications and some xp apps  on windows 7 and on slitaz with wine. If they run on wine they run normally more stable and faster. For these apps you would not need a VM normally .

And windows 64 bit does nearly break these apps runtime processes and you have to run most of them with administrator rights why ? that is the question here.   I need it especially for editing simple pdfs. ( on linux there program works and on windows it crashes often even if its a windows program.) .Photo Line a graphic editor  is really fast on wine, but so slow on windows.

 Also why doesn`t my norton  commander work well on windows 7 ? i did search for reasons but didn`t find one. 

i do find it frustrating that approx. only + 50 mb of installation disk cache could ensure backward compatibility. Microsoft does like to force the users to buy new programs, even if there is no reason. I hope that win9 would add a compatibility layer for 32 and 16 bit programs. They don`t even think that a system more compatible to older software could increase the sales of the Os in this case win9. No they try to invent new GUI what is a good thing, but don`t respect the fact that users like to run older software too. Its natural that they can`t support every old program , but they don`t  even try to make old simple apps runable without support. The win 7 xp 95 etc combatibility layer is only a fake for some registry matters and some what os am i using calls from these appplications. DAMN

 regards bluedxca93

Norton Commander? NC's been "dead" for years......

I believe you mean Windows Commander - which by the way works just fine in any Windows version.

MOAR TILES