I'd like to dismiss ID's Item 4 because it misrepresents the Live Mesh product and the general utility of cloud computing to the OS itself. Mesh is an application, and as it is developed and shaped into its final form the integration issues will be smoothed out by the Mesh team; it does not behoove the Windows team to bend up the crown in order to accomodate a minor jewel.
_________________________________________________________________________
As far as tacking my own items to the wishlist, I'd want to make the product footprint smaller via better implementation of the single-language localized-build concept seen in WinPE; when a user has no utility for Spanish and Czech and Tiawanese, he tells the setup, and no Spanish, Czech or Tiawanese support, in any individual file or reference form, is transferred to the HDD. No special fonts, no seperate help files, no hooks for multiple-orientation layouts, nothing. If that means that later on, should an additional lang capability be desired, and the user has to do a lengthier reinstall, then so be it. Core market benefits, install times go down, protection takes less resources, etc. etc.
.
I'd also aggressively seek out licensing and experience required to provide in-shell viewing and handling of a much, much, much broader variety of filetypes. Going 64-bit-only would be a step in the right direction, as it would force third-party entities to provide 64-bit handlers, but I doubt we're going to see that and we certainly won't see it all done in time for Windows 7 to hit shelves. Imagine you have a directory with a huge variety of filetypes in it:
.avi, .eps, .txt, .svg, .cdr, .jp2, .flv, .xps, .obj, .otf, .zip, use your imagination. Now, most of these formats and the code required to preview them are proprietary to third-party developers, and if you own their software they usually provide a handler mechanism to allow for preview and thumbnail integration into the OS. But why do we have to own the software required to manipulate the files just so we can view and organize them? We don't, and it's high time MS put their foot down and native-ized these capabilities - you build your software to run on our OS, we help you make your app work with it, but you got jack and shlt unless you play ball and help us give all users the capability to seamlessly integrate the organization and viewing of your files in the Explorer umbrella, the core of file manipulation for everyone. Is it realistic to expect seamless preview support for, for example, 14GB architectural workups? No, but it's eminently do-able, and as far as complaints about prying eyes go, it's simple enough to set a previewable flag on save and no one should be using file formats as a privacy protection tool to begin with.
.
My last item is really more a plea to hardware developers than anyone else: Remember how Vista launch made a big deal about integrated tablet-pc functionality? Hooray! But why can't you buy any more sophisticated tablet PCs than you could three years ago? What we saw, aside from the bleeding-edge ruggedized world, was not a proliferation of actual tablet PCs, but a bunch (cough, HP) of buzzword-riding imitators cutting corners with worthless passive touchscreens. Poll the unfortunate masses who ended up with a fingerpainty touchscreen, did they like it, suddenly it seems no one wants tablet PCs anymore. I know Wacom's ready to play ball, I know Intel has tablet-pc-ready blueprints keeping up with the rest of mobile tech that never come to fruition, I know there are no hard stops between the old-tech, low-capability architecture in use by everyone today and high-end, ET, gen-step hardware.