More Indications Windows 7 Is Coming In 2009 369
An anonymous reader writes "Following on the news that Microsoft was going straight to a RC for Windows 7, the One Microsoft Way blog has put together some dates on the upcoming roadmap for Vista's successor. Microsoft has always said 'three years after the general availability of Windows Vista,' which was released on January 30, 2007, and that the release date was also dependent on quality. Internally though, Microsoft is saying other things. It looks like we'll see the RC coming in April, and a final RTM version before October 3. Yes, that means Redmond is currently hoping to get Windows 7 out the door in 2009."
Drivers (Score:4, Informative)
If I recall correctly (rhetorical, I *do* recall correctly) the problem with Vista was *not* the OS itself, but driver support from Vendors.
Even Nvidia were ironing out Video card bugs months past the release date. It took Creative almost 14 months to release a Vista Audigy driver. That's not even touching on people who had to purchase new Wifi cards because the likes of Netgear refused to even release *any* drivers for supporting 'old' hardware (801.22g is super old?).
Unless Redmond is putting pressure back to hardware Vendors, regardless of the much impressed SDLC Microsoft are displaying, the OS will only an *end user* disappointment.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if that's the case, it shouldn't be a problem. Little or no driver support from hardware manufacturers is par for the course for every other PC operating system, and they all seem to get along okay.
Re:Drivers (Score:5, Interesting)
No it wasn't, it was the fact the release was barely beta quality (corrupting files during copy, UAC going nutso and not letting you do simple things, etc.), it hit the hard drive almost constantly, took 3 times as long as XP to start apps even when fed 4GB of RAM.
Drivers just wasn't the issue.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Changing OS verions is almost as in depth and challenging for a business as completely changing OSs. And costly. There is no "low cost" upgrade path.
Drivers for us were THE issue. Big business class printers cost real money and not one driver was released for Vista. And that was spread amount several manufacturers, so it wasn't isolated. No drivers for our scanning solution either, which handles many thousands of invoices per month.
UI bugs you mentioned are quite legitimate problems preventing adoption. How
Re: (Score:2)
Corrupting files during copy (one of the problems listed) is not a UI bug, it's something that should never have gotten into the earliest beta, let alone the production version. That's a glaring, show-stopping bit of inexcusably careless coding, not a minor glitch. And how hard is it, anyway, to read a chunk out of one file, write it into another, then lather, rinse repeat until you're done? That's all a file copy is, after all, yo
Re:Drivers (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Did you use the Vista driver or the native drive of the beta? The Vista driver should be more stable, but will reduce the functionality (not as drastic as using an XP video driver on Vista, which disables Aero, but GDI operations will be on par with Vista, while they will be faster in Windows 7 with a WDDM 1.1 driver).
It was always possible to run a stable video driver at Vista release, and that was the XP drivers. The reduced functionality made it a sour option.
Re: (Score:2)
... (801.22g is super old?).
The IEEE hasn't even released an 801 standard, at least as far as I can tell. Even if it has, 801 likely has little to do with 802.11.
And as the fanbois over the internet (Score:4, Insightful)
are celebrating their Vista SP 2-3, er, Mohave, um, I mean Windows 7 as the greatest thing since sliced bread, and lining up to pay for it; I will still be getting my Ubuntu for free and with an (often) significant upgrade every 6 months.
Don't focus on money! (OT) (Score:5, Interesting)
Instead, one should focus on the legal restrictions on that software. MSDNAA lets me get gratis copies of Windows, sure, but reviewing the license reveals some interesting terms; for example, upon graduation, I am supposed to remove the software from my computer. With Fedora (likewise Ubuntu), there is no such restriction: I am free to use the software for any length of time, regardless of my status as a student or my employment. MSDNAA also forbids the use of the software for any use that is not personal or academic; once more, Fedora (etc.) comes with no such restriction.
Purchasing a copy of Windows in order to gain the right to use the software indefinitely only partially addresses that issue. I cannot modify Windows in such a way that allows me to access it remotely while someone else is accessing it (multi-user access). Again, in Fedora, there is no such restriction.
I do not agree with everything RMS/FSF has to say, but in terms of proprietary versus free-libre licensing, they are spot on.
Re:Don't focus on money! (OT) (Score:4, Interesting)
Your university is a for profit organization. Guess from where they are getting the money to pay Microsoft for the university wide license.
That's right, your tuition. I hope you are using Windows, as you are paying for it in any case.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Don't focus on money! (OT) (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope - as a former prof myself, I can tell you that the little college campus I worked at paid Microsoft $1500 per year for the privilege of MSDNAA covering approximately 150-200 students. They kept perfect accounting for it as well, and if the numbers went up, your yearly fees went up.
Meanwhile I was handing out copies of RedHat, Mandrake, Gentoo, and SuSE as fast as my CD burner could spit them out. RedHat themselves sent me a stack of pre-burned CDs when the Linux classes first began in early 2000, and they practically evaporated. The cool part was, I didn't have to give a damn if you were using them for academics or not, and I usually (and gently) extracted a promise that you would share it with someone else if you had a burner at home.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It may go to sporting infrastructure (you're a slashdot poster, so I assume you don't use it
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I do not agree with everything RMS/FSF has to say, but in terms of proprietary versus free-libre licensing, they are spot on.
Your complaints above are not about the licensing, but the cost (albeit in an indirect fashion). If you are prepared to pay for an appropriate Windows license, all of your complaints are addressed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Which is a licensing issue. You need to pay Microsoft to get a license to use the same software in a different way. In the case of free software, that is not true -- you get a license, and from there, you can do what you wish with the software.
Also, the OP was trying to make the point that Ubuntu costs n
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I focus on money very very much. My company is an all linux and open source shop, and my total cost of ownership as MS once loved to push is saving me an easy $250,000 a year or more. From servers and routers to desktops. We are not an IT company, and most of employees could hardly type when they came through the door. I am not against paying for software, I just have found free open source software which is superior for my purposes.
The open source biz model works. At our current small size, whenever possib
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For all the Linux and open source community says about embracing freedom there are always a few "evangelists" who completely miss the point. While people such as yourself continue to "promote" Linux by rubbishing the opposition (both product and people) millions of Windows users will continue to think of Linux as a geek toy used by nerds and children.
Anyone and everyone should be free to use whichever OS they fancy. If someone asks why Linux is great then explain, but please don't refer to Windows users as
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
But then what sort of smug satisfaction can we derive? For Apple users it comes from the fact that we paid a premium for a stylish and well done product. For Linux users, it comes purely from the fact that we aren't using Windows. And for Windows, well, there isn't much to be had since everyone runs it.
If what you say is true, then this has serious implications for my self-identity.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For Linux users, it comes purely from the fact that we aren't using Windows.
It also comes from the fact that we didn't pay a premium for a stylish and well done product ;)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So, you're saying you got a product for free that wasn't well designed and not particularly well done? ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course nobody calls Linux users 'fanbois', right?
Pot/Kettle and all that...
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but what I have read in Internet in last few weeks, it all smells like so well orchestrated hype and geeks, who are usually so smart to point out what's wrong with Linux, suddenly are ready to pass over the fact that Windows 7 is just marketing ploy to try to sell Vista.
And I am usually very careful with words, because yes, I agree, everyone uses what suits them best and what they know. And yes, saying "Windows sux0rs, Linux ftw!" is totally wrong way to spread the world of positive effects of using
free to use whichever OS they fancy (Score:2)
They are free to choose.
And when they call for some informal friendly tech support, we're now free to offer them the help they really need: a disc that can relieve them of the pain of viruses and spyware forever. And if they decline, we're free let them walk the path they've chosen and leave them to their adventure.
Except for Mom, of course. Mom gets the same service as before.
Problems in Vista still unresolved in Windows 7 (Score:5, Interesting)
The Protected Video Path has introduced several problems with pre-existing software that deals with video and works perfectly with XP but fails in Vista. I operate in the healthcare segment, and GE's medical records software still does not possess Vista support. PACS viewers from major companies like VEPRO and E-Film still do not support Vista.
Given that three are no architectural changes in Windows 7; these problems will remain with Windows 7 and corporates looking to use pre-existing application software will stick with XP as long as they can.
http://www.merge.com/na/efilmlanding.htm [merge.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Here is a more relevant link... this page has remained so for the past 1 year and more...
https://www.merge.com/NA/estore/content.aspx?pname=eFilm%20Workstation%E2%84%A2&returnUrl=&productID=215&contentTypeID=4 [merge.com]
MS Vista Users:
eFilm Workstation 3.0 is currently undergoing testing for operation within the MS Vista operating system environment, and will be validated for use in Vista systems soon.
Supported Operating Systems:
Windows 2000 Professional (SP4 or higher)
Windows XP Professional (SP2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Protected Video Path has introduced several problems with pre-existing software that deals with video and works perfectly with XP but fails in Vista.
Given the Protected Path is not even active unless you're using DRM-encumbered media, I think you need some evidence to back that up.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the Protected Path is not even active unless you're using DRM-encumbered media, I think you need some evidence to back that up.
Why else would video software that worked with XP suddenly stops working with Vista? Is PACS video DRM encumbered? Why should software vendors be compelled to keep rewriting their code everytime Microsoft releases a new driver model, concept or Operating System?
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't know why it stops working with Vista; but you are sure it is nothing to do with DRM. You claim companies like GE ands E-Merge do not know how to write proper code. And yet it is video software like PACS and Medical Records that I am talking about.
You are clueless, yet you talk like an authority. Very good.
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't know why it stops working with Vista; but you are sure it is nothing to do with DRM.
I am sure the Protected Path isn't active unless you have DRM-encumbered content. Whether or not you have DRM-encumbered content, I can't say since you refuse to give even a basic description of a) what you're trying to do and b) what doesn't work.
You claim companies like GE ands E-Merge do not know how to write proper code.
We have the displeasure of a hundred-odd Radworks machines in our environment, most
Re: (Score:2)
Ha Ha Ha! Wait until you 'upgrade' to McKesson PACs. You'll kiss the feet of the GE programmers (may God rot their souls).
Really, talking about problems with medical software is a waste of time. You have no idea where to start. I seriously doubt that Radworks uses Protected Path. It's major problem is likely the deprecated VB4 routines stuffed in the bowels of the program.
You are of cours
Still no compiler (Score:2)
It also doesn't come with a compiler, perl, python, or any other real programming environment.
When we talk about how crippled the thing is, let's not forget the basics.
Re:Problems in Vista still unresolved in Windows 7 (Score:5, Interesting)
" Yes, the PVP was introduced with Vista, but it's up to your app provider to update their app to work with newer versions of the OS. Same as it ever was."
What gives Microsoft the right to change the way the Windows platform handles media content? Healthcare providers have no necessity to watch Hollywood movies on their screens... just patient's medical records. Why should software providers keep rewriting their code just because of Microsoft's whims and fancies? The cost of software deployment keeps going up without any increase in value... the value proposition for Windows gets diminished as a result.
I am now trying to get a Linux version of the viewer to replace all Windows PCs and get rid of the problem forever.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
you are aware that there is no stable branch of linux right. so linus has the right to change the way the linux kernel handles content, whenever he wants.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The userland API is pretty stable -- and changes are pretty trivial to work around. It's the in-kernel linux API that is constantly getting slammed for not being set in stone.
Btw, the linux analog to graphics is X11. X11R7 is from 2005, and is backwards-compatible with X11R6, from 1994.
RTFM? (Score:2, Funny)
So finally Windows will start telling the users to RTFM, well, without the F word?
But, DirectX 11 in Vista too (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3507 [anandtech.com]
"To be fair, the OS upgrade requirement also threw a wrench in the gears. That won't be a problem this time, as Vista still sucks but will be getting DX11 support and Windows 7 looks like a better upgrade option for XP users than Vista. Developers who haven't already moved from DX9 may well skip DX10 altogether in favor of DX11 depending on the predicted ship dates of their titles, all signs point to DX11
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 7 = Vista Service's version of XP SP2 (Score:4, Insightful)
For those who loved Windows 2000, Windows XP SP2 was the version of Windows XP that finally got holdouts to switch.
Windows 7 is built on Vista. Like XPSP2, Windows 7 fixes almost all the bad aspects of Vista and adds new features and tweaks. With such a promising, upcoming OS, it's no wonder why MS is having a hard time finishing Vista SP2. It must be like coding for a dead fork.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it should be acknowledged that M$ is *charging* for Windows 7, while XP SP2 was free.
If I were Apple, I would start readying the ad campaign:
Apple guy walks up, sees "PC guy" obviously dressed up in drag.
Apple: "Uhh, what are you doing, PC?"
PC: "Shhh... I'm not Vista. I'm Windows 7. I have nothing to do with Vista. I'm the new, sexy, operating system of the future."
Apple: "Do you really think anybody will be fooled by that?"
PC: "Yes."
Re: (Score:2)
Er, you mean exactly like Apple does with OS X Panther, Leopard, Tiger...
Windows 7 == Vista Service's XP SP2 (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows 7 (Score:3, Interesting)
I have to admit, Windows 7 actually looks really good. I may even get a home PC loaded up with it again, just to have it on hand.
Still will be mainly a Mac user. But I will be finally comfortable recommending Windows 7 to those who need to run Windows.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I had the opposite reaction. I put Windows 7 Beta on a VirtualBox partition on my Mac and tried using it for awhile, and I find using it awful. Compared to XP it feels like a mish-mash of web interfaces and compared to MacOS X it feels like a toy. I would still recommend XP over Windows 7 any day of the week, and recommend neither to any non-geek or non-business user.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless its virus defenses have been upgraded, I'll have a hard time recommending Windows 7 to the people getting new computers.
The US computer market is saturated right now; there are almost 0 "first time buyers". As a generalization, the only people who are getting their first computer are the elderly and a few middle-aged people. Even with virus protection, spyware protection, and a firewall, the last two people in my life who bought PCs needed a "quick restore" due to viruses or worms. This is unacceptab
!notnews (Score:2, Insightful)
Who cares when it will be released. Windows Se7en will still require the outlandish hardware that Vista does. Most Enterprises will not be migrating to it anytime soon due to cost and time of upgrading desktops and application incompatibility for their outdated software that they rely on to keep the business running. Trust me, I see this first hand at my job.
Re: (Score:2)
The hardware demands are not finalized and most companies will turn off the visual effects anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Pedant alert: didn't you mean to title your comment "notnews" or "!news", rather than "!notnews"?
Anyway, with my "Systems Manager for a London University" hat on, I agree. We're still using XP on our student desktops and in classic mode, to boot. We're agonising over Vista right now because some staff have a perception that students "want Vista" and also a tiny percentage of the applications we provide are starting to require Vista.
Rob.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Who cares when it will be released. Windows Se7en will still require the outlandish hardware that Vista does.
And by "outlandish" you mean "sub-$500 PC", right ?
Heck, even when Vista was released, a PC that could run it well was only about $800.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows Se7en will still require the outlandish hardware that Vista does.
You mean it will require at least a Pentium 4 2.4GHz, 1GB RAM, 32MB video card, 80GB HDD? That's what I have and it runs as well as XP, except for Aero.
Curious (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm curious why all these people who hated Vista are showering love on Windows 7. Is it some sort of mass psychology type thing?
I'm a UNIX guy, and I don't consider myself a Microsoft hater per se, the visual changes in Windows 7 just look hideous. I try and keep my screen as clean as possible to cut down on the distractions (meaning my windows machine looks about the same now as it did in 1995), and by this benchmark, Windows 7 is even worse than Vista with all its worthless gizmos and gadgets and stuff like that.
Is it really so hard to understand that I don't want shit moving around on my screen when I'm trying to think? Or that I don't want to see icons for anything except stuff I'm actually working on? The new Windows 7 taskbar looks -- crap, I already used "hideous" -- uh, distracting.
Combine with all sorts of stupid decisions in Vista like to replace the up-arrow button with a refresh button that does nothing in all common cases, and, yeah... I'm mystified why people are so positive about Win7,
Re:Curious (Score:5, Insightful)
It's natural that people would lower their expectations after the dissatisfaction of Vista. Once the expectations are lowered, they are in turn easier to satisfy. Especially when most of the customers have few other choices.
Yes I know they do have choices. But MS now is still a monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
As another poster wrote, this is the vista equivalent of XP SP2.. it gets the major bugs out and finally produces something usable.
Yeah it still has some of the UI stupidities of Vista (although they've fixed quite a few too) but at least it's not actively preventing you from getting any work done any more..
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it does still have some of the UI stupidities of Vista (thankfully you can turn some of them off), but it also introduces some really nice usability changes. The Win-arrow key shortcuts, for example, are great (win-up to maximize, win-down to minimize, win-left to dock to left half of screen, win-right to dock to right half
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
but it also introduces some really nice usability changes. The Win-arrow key shortcuts, for example, are great (win-up to maximize, win-down to minimize, win-left to dock to left half of screen, win-right to dock to right half of screen).
*boggles*
These have been *configurable* shortcuts in KDE for a coon's age.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You are not the target audience. You'd prefer to remain in a stoneage of GUI (no offence, but it's true), and people have gotten use to a pretty interface for their operating systems.
Plus, those gadgets aren't worthless. I have gadgets to show me the weather, CPU and network activity, etc. They appear when I want them to appear, and they aren't distracting because you get used to them. Why can't you evolve like everyone else has? That's my question.
Re: (Score:2)
Why must he change? If something works, you should keep it working. I thought the whole idea of desktop gizmos was stupid and pointless when Active Desktop first came out and I have yet to see any reason why I should think differently. Aside from a clock in the taskbar I cannot image any use for all those stupid gadgets floating around. If people like them, that's fine. I, however, have no use for them.
Of course, I stopped using Windows some time ago. Vista was the last straw. Microsoft is evil and h
Re: (Score:2)
Because I actually tested the beta and compared it to Vista? I'm not saying it is the world's greatest operating system. Eventually, XP will die and neither Mac nor PC are going to be an option where I work. And in the enterprise, there are some good client management reasons to go with windows.
But anyway, on to the comparison of Vista and 7. On a Dell Optiplex 620 with 1 gig of ram, 7 runs faster and is more responsive than Vista. I gained about 30 seconds in boot time and application launches, while
Proof (if any were needed) that M$ can't learn (Score:2, Insightful)
from their mistakes. Vista was unleashed/released upon the Earth far too early, and their solution to this has been "Windows 7 will fix it all".
It's the Obama of Operating Systems, and it's been getting some damn positive pre-release press and general good vibes from techies who've seen the Beta.
So naturally, the only sane and rational thing to do (in M$ world) is cut the testing, drop a beta from the schedule, only have one release candidate and hit the markets.
No company this stupid should survive the cre
Windows $NEXT_VERSION will floor all comers (Score:5, Funny)
Guest post [today.com] by Mary-Jo Enderle
I have seen the future: Windows $NEXT_VERSION build $MOCKUP.
I tried it on a low-end netbook with four Core 2 Duo chips and only 8 gig of memory, and trust me: $NEXT_VERSION is shaping up to be one heck of a product.
WordPad and Paint have seen major overhauls to their user interfaces. Forget the freetards and their "distros" full of all sorts of useless shovelware like "FireFox" and "OpenOffice" and, haha, "GIMP"! - the bundled software with Windows $NEXT_VERSION is clear, simple, sparse and to-the-point. The much-loved $HATED user interface from Office $HATED_VERSION is now part of WordPad and Paint!
The controversial Digital Rights Management system in Vista has been worked over, with user-downloadable "tilt bits," which you can configure to your own liking. It'll require every user to supply a blood sample for DNA analysis, and the beta nearly took my finger off, but of course that's only if you want to play premium content. The Blu-Ray(tm) of Battlefield Earth was unbelievable on this operating system.
A release candidate should be available by the end of this year. There's just no way that Steve "Trains Run On Time" Ballmer will miss the Christmas deadline. The final release should leave the midnight queues on Vista release day - the street riots, the water cannons, the rubber bullets - in the shade.
I am so excited about $NEXT_VERSION of Windows. It will go beyond just solving all of the problems with $CURRENT_VERSION, it will be an entirely new paradigm. Forget about security problems, those are all fixed in $NEXT_VERSION. And they're finally ridding themselves of $ANCIENT_LEGACY_STUFF.
Also, there'll be $DATABASE_FILESYSTEM. It'll be awesome!
I wonder how $NEXT_VERSION will compare to $NEXT_NEXT_VERSION.
So we're guessing... (Score:2)
...using rumour, extrapolation and second-hand information. Sooo, can we please not call it "slippage" when your hopes and dreams are shattered when it doesn't appear in October? Because it seems bashing Millisoft on here for things they never promised is a very popular pastime. And no, I'm not new here. Bashing for letdowns is one thing, but when you're making up release dates for something you're not involved in, well, work it out for yourself. I'm not suggesting it makes you look foolish or anything.
Oh,
Windows XP 2nd edition is coming in 2009 (Score:2)
you stand corrected.
At least they stopped selling hope (Score:2)
The prevailing driver for buying new versions of Windows has always been the hope that the next version would be decent and safe (a bit like Bush & Blair promising glory to get elected).
At least they have given up on that [istartedsomething.com].
I still won't buy it.
This is all a sham (Score:5, Interesting)
Phase 1:
People have high expectations of your new product. They're fed up by the repetitive software releases you've done over the years and the lack of innovation from your part. Then you release a software that draws all the attention (or aggro, for WoW players). Once everybody has jumped either on the hater bandwagon or put up with the new, yet old, system you go to the next step. You use popular figures (like comedians) and one of your famous company people (maybe a nerd) to make advertisements that make people go "Really? What is this shit? I won't buy, but I know it's Delicious" to sidetrack even more of the critics.
Phase 2:
You announce your "true" new product (which was in development all along and was intended to be the successor to your old product line in any case) as the next big thing "coming soon". Since that newly developed system doesn't have enough new ideas to convince people to switch, and people are already confused by your current shitfest of a project you need to give them an incentive, that's what they needed Vista for. MS released Vista saying it will be their new OS and after the confusion had manifested and the expectations had been severely disappointed they start the next phase.
Phase 3:
You release an older polished release candidate of a less important branch of your true product as "the real deal". Then when people start questioning your abilities you go ahead and re-release your original new product line under a fancy new name. This way the expectations have already been lowered from the outset and the "new alternative" looks like a worthwhile contestant all of a sudden. Without Vista, the very same criticism that hit it, would have hit Windows 7 instead. Win7 looks like a slightly improved Vista, whereas Vista looked like a slightly improved XP. So, instead of making real big jumps and actually innovating you do two little intermediary steps and consumers will praise you for two entirely different new version of the operating system.
Phase 4:
Profit?
Seriously this, to me, sounds like an elaborate plan to con consumers into buying into the age old "fuck up and re-release" cycle that we have come to expect from Microsoft. A clever usage of market economics of perception rationale. If you serve people average products you will eventually go broke. But if you sell them really terrible products for a short period of time, rule out all options for downgrading and then start selling average products again you will be better off than by simply selling average crap to begin with.
They've employed a 300 Million Dollar ad strategy and let me tell you
So, I'm guessing 2009... (Score:2)
... won't be the Year of Windows on the Desktop either.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Debug faster or you'll be gettin' the chair, m'boy!
Re: (Score:2)
A 2009 release or 'RTM' date shouldn't be a surprise at all.
The beta expires in July, so the 'Release Candidate' build should be out before then, and the final version soon after.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A 2009 release or 'RTM' date shouldn't be a surprise at all.
The beta expires in July, so the 'Release Candidate' build should be out before then, and the final version soon after.
the beta expires in august. ms even tells you such when you sign up for your beta key.
Re:Surprise to Anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
Clearest indication Windows 7 will be released soon?
Astroturf levels go well past "histrionic".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I am enjoying the Windows 7 beta on my gaming desktop and netbook and look forward to *gasp* purchasing a copy to replace Windows XP.
Clearest indication Windows 7 will be released soon?
Astroturf levels go well past "histrionic".
I'm also using the beta and will buy W7 to replace XP on my laptop. Why - it seems to run faster, especially when accessing shared drives.
Of course, I run it on Fusion on my Mac (I need to run the Win versions of Office for work, and W7 so far appears to do that better than XP.
Just because some has a reason to upgrade doesn't mean they're part of a astroturf campaign.
Now, if Snow Leopard allows seamless connectivity with exchange and i can replicate Outlook's functionality on my MAC then I may just pop for
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting comment.
All the benchmarks I've seen so far show Vista/Win7 being close to 30% slower than XP running office apps on the same hardware.
Care to explain what makes it "better" enough to spend a couple of hundred dollars getting Win 7?
Re: (Score:2)
I need to run the Win versions of Office for work, and W7 so far appears to do that better than XP.
Interesting comment.
All the benchmarks I've seen so far show Vista/Win7 being close to 30% slower than XP running office apps on the same hardware.
Care to explain what makes it "better" enough to spend a couple of hundred dollars getting Win 7?
I'm running it via Fusion on a Mac; and W7 takes significantly less time to access my shared folders - it opens them instantly; while XP takes 10 - 15 seconds. That alone is a big improvement; and worth the price.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
All the benchmarks I've seen so far show Vista/Win7 being close to 30% slower than XP running office apps on the same hardware.
[Citation needed]. Seriously, 30% is a lot, and how do you measure office application performance anyway? Post-SP1 game benchmarks have shown that the performance difference is less than 5% and in many cases identical, largely due to the fact that drivers for Vista no longer suck, so I don't see how office apps, which are much less demanding, could run that much slower.
For one thing, window management in Windows 7 is a lot nicer than any other Windows to date, and I would say miles better than OS X (althoug
Re: (Score:2)
My brother is running Vista on a 1/2 gigabyte of RAM. If I upgrade it to Windows 7 in 2010, will it run faster or slower or not at all?
Re: (Score:2)
Links please?
All the benchmark results I've seen show Win7 being within a few percentage points - less than the margin of error - of Vista's performance.
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, I run NeoOffice but it doesn't quite handle Office files properly in all cases so I can't rely on it for critical client work. That really doesn't make sense. If layout is so critical, just export it to PDF. NeoOffice/OpenOffice even give you a handy button to do that directly. If your clients can't deal with PDF, they might just as well crawl into their own graves and pull the soil over their heads.
Except that my clients pay my bills - so I need to make sure my stuff works for them.
In addition, PDF export is not fool proof either, and does not embed animation or video (unless you go with the full version of Acrobat) so even if I could use it it still is not a good substitute. also, if NeoOffice mungs the file in the conversion then exporting to PDF just creates a non-editable screwed up file.
I'd love to be able to use NeoOffice exclusively; but unfortunately that is not possible for me.
As to the GP
Re:Surprise to Anyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
There have been large amounts of astroturf around this latest release, Slashdot has certainly played its part in posting many articles fawning over the new operating system.
Personally, I installed the beta on a VM, it's certainly slower than XP (in terms of time to start up and resources used when booted). Once the feeling of wow, this really does look like KDE4! was gone, I was left feeling rather deflated and eventually just went back to my Ubuntu desktop. It looks, feels, and even the feature list [wikipedia.org] reveals, that this is just another minor release of Vista. A Vista SE, if you will. :)
Having said this, it's is just my opinion and I'm not representative of the great computer-using public. Here are my predictions for the release of Windows 7:
One more thing: incremental releases, like Windows 7 are a good idea. Ubuntu, Apple, etc. do this themseleves. However, if Microsoft charge the same amount for seven as they did for Vista, they deserve to be mocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Stone me, that angle hadn't occurred to me! Those poor bastards who got stiffed or fooled into buying Vista are gonna be mighty pissed off, aren't they? Never was the "itsatrap" tag more appropriate.
Re:Surprise to Anyone? (Score:4, Informative)
Really? I just pulled it off my son's machine because it refused to install America's Army, except for an old version. Nor would it take the patches.
On the plus side:
It boots noticeably faster than XP on the same machine.
It shuts down noticeably faster than XP on the same machine.
The from-scratch install was as easier than any previous Windows install, and damn close to as easy as Kubuntu 8.10 and Fedora 10.
Aero *is* spiffy.
It recognized all my RAM using the 64-bit version.
The 32-bit compatibility on the 64-bit version was transparent.
It picked up my WiFi-N/WPA-2 network early on in the install and used NTP to set the clock.
On the down side, how hard is it for Microsoft to add some code to accommodate people who have their hardware clock set to UTC? I mean just put a damn check box there!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Surprise to Anyone? (Score:4, Funny)
"What features are there that are "must have" apart from the "ooh shiny" aspect"
Never underestimate the power of the "ooh shiny" marketing. The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why?
What can justify the cost and performance hit of Windows 7? Yes, it is faster than Vista but it isn't faster than XP.
Last time I checked, all games support Windows XP. Also, why on earth would someone want to BUY an OS without it being bought/bundled with a new PC?
What features are there that are "must have" apart from the "ooh shiny" aspect?
That's not to mention the inevitable problems of early adoption...
How about being able to use all of the ram instead of being limited to only 3gb and also being able to use the 64 bit processor instead of being stuck with only a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit pc. Both of these situations mean that Windows 7 is actually faster than XP in some situations as being able to use all the memory and processor power not just part of it
Just 2 thoughts that come to mind straight away.
Shame XP64 never got fully completed. Still if it had then I guess Vista would have had even more problem
Re:Surprise to Anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
but browsing the net and sending emails just isn't that demanding.
not a firefox user eh?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The updated file browser (assuming it used the same one as Vista)
It is the best non-Linux default file browser I've used.
There's probably a few other little built in things that make life better too, but for me that is the one I use every day and really appreciate.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, you really, really should upgrade your version of Windows at home. Windows 98SE is much more stable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In the last year, about half of us at work bought new laptops. With only ONE exception, they all were upgraded from vista to either linux or xp.
That one exception was a software tester. She kept saying how she was able to configure vista so that it works "really fast."
Last week, she said "Maybe I should install linux on my laptop".
Who knows what happened. Maybe her vista horked up a hairball ... who cares. The bottom line is that if Microsoft can't keep its' most loyal fans on board, what about th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're in a "fortune 10 company", then you probably are aware that the ones that bitched the most at Vista being so late was the fortune tops. Usually, with volume licensing and license insurance and all that junk, you break "even" if a new OS comes out every 3 years, so anything beyond that and you're getting rimmed.
That said, if your Vista equipped 4 gigs lap-top is even significantly slower than XP, your department needs to do their job better. Making sure the software installed on it (anti-virus come
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have to ask though, what do you do with Vista that needs so much RAM, seriously? I'm a windows developer, with tons of high volume services installed on my box (from SQL Server to Oracle, from Visual Studio in multiple flavors to Eclipse, etc), and I often have most of that running all at once, and while I have 4 gigs of RAM (well, 2.75...I need to move to 64 bit, ugh...), It has been MONTHS, according to my system's stats, since I went over 2 gigs, and from memory, when I did, it was because I let Firefo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
VMs, Games, and Photoshop.
Heck, *searching* brought explorer.exe up to 970MB.
Re: (Score:2)
Games is obviously not very relevant in the enterprise environment, though, Crysis aside, I haven't hit a game in a long time that pushed Vista over 2 gigs of RAM (that wouldn't do the same to XP that is). Didn't try GTA4, I heard that was pretty bad, but aside that?
VMs, ok, but those take exactly the amount of RAM you want them to take, give or take the overhead, you can bust 10 gigs of RAM on any machine with that if you so wish it, and I did mention design and stuff (so Photoshop).
I haven't rebooted sinc
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, MS has been a bit on the early side lately. Visual Studio and SQL Servers' latest versions came up a little on the early side, for example. With the organizational and project management internal issues that caused Vista now fixed, they freed up a -lot- of resources. Its actually a bit hard to keep up with them really, because a lot of people got used to the crawling snail paced release schedule of the early decade.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, though I wasn't clear on my side. The SQL Server release schedule was always every 5 years, and with SQL Server 2008, it was moved to 3~ They didn't make the projected date, but were way ahead of their previous 5 year schedule.
The dev tools have updates to work with the "new cool stuff" relatively quick and off band. When I said things went too quick, it was more like, .NET 2.0 -> 3.0 -> 3.5. Not only it added a lot of the "new cool stuff", it also added entire new technology stacks. It
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how you could possibly doubt the word of Steve "Trains Run On Time" Ballmer [today.com]!
(Don't talk about how Steve lights up lightbulbs with his mouth [theregister.co.uk], though.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cue the "W7 == Vista SP3" posts (Score:4, Informative)
Take a Windows XP machine & tell me what SP it's running without going to System Properties....just using it like grandma would. You probably won't be able to.
I can tell you if it has SP2 on it just by watching it start up (SP2 dropped the "Professional" and "Home" branding on the boot screen).