maly1

Windows 7

38 posts in this topic

Why would someone want to use vista whether it's SP1 SP2 when you can use an unbloated version of Windows 7 it comes out in 2009/10 but that does'nt mean you cant use XP till then right ?

My message to people who use Vista for the default OS..dont end of story get over it and wait for 7, some people waste Microsoft's time around the world while asking witty questions and reporting bugs, this is a cause of delayed products and why they release SP's. Hopefully Microsoft will ignore and slowly take their time needed to create this new OS instead of focusing on times + deadlines. Not only this but if your thinking of buying a computer or hardware you might have to buy more after because hardware vendors will need to support certain things within Windows 7 eg DirectX 11.

let the typing commence :thumbup

uxevangelist.net

WRONG TOPIC CAN YOU PLEASE MOVE IT TO "Microsoft Beta Discussion" ? Thanks

This website here shows some Windows 7 screenshots, would'nt microsoft want to move away from vista lol i mean why release SP's and updates on two OS (vista, Windows 7) that look-a-like as each other, does not make sense they both will do the same things obviously unless vista will be use for only directX 10 and Windows 7 will be DirectX 11..but still the OS will do the same things..no sense hm im getting way ahead of myself now.

Edited by maly1
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would someone want to use vista whether it's SP1 SP2 when you can use an unbloated version of Windows 7 it comes out in 2009/10 but that does'nt mean you cant use XP till then right ?

I personally find the features of Vista compelling to me (instant search, a much better x64 version of the OS, x64 MCE, everything laid out far more logical and easy to find, faster and better able to use RAM with superfetch, dynamic kernel memory management, SMB 2.0, to name a few). I also wasn't silly and bought a machine able to handle the OS, dual-core and 4GB of RAM - just like I did when XP released in 2001 (512MB of RAM!!!). As always, hardware and drivers being capable to handle the increased load a new OS and codebase puts on it is most important with a new Windows OS. XP is "fast" because it's design was for "high-end" hardware in 2001 with an NT kernel, which is sprightly but lacks security (hence SP2 brings the "bloat" in memory usage and running processes).

My message to people who use Vista for the default OS..dont end of story get over it and wait for 7, some people waste Microsoft's time around the world while asking witty questions and reporting bugs, this is a cause of delayed products and why they release SP's.

And since the next product is built on the last, fixing bugs so they don't exist in the new codebase is a bad thing?

Not only this but if your thinking of buying a computer or hardware you might have to buy more after because hardware vendors will need to support certain things within Windows 7 eg DirectX 11.

Just like every new OS, you need beefier hardware to run it. And all of the hardware vendors will provide it to us in time - in fact, this seems to be the EXACT argument you are using for NOT using Vista...

This website here shows some Windows 7 screenshots, would'nt microsoft want to move away from vista lol i mean why release SP's and updates on two OS (vista, Windows 7) that look-a-like as each other, does not make sense they both will do the same things obviously unless vista will be use for only directX 10 and Windows 7 will be DirectX 11..but still the OS will do the same things..no sense hm im getting way ahead of myself now.

Do you remember screenshots of the XP alpha builds in late 1999 and early 2000 (before 2000 even RTM'ed, no less) and how "shockingly" similar they looked until the new XP green/blue/clouds theme hit? This is normal (read above on how each version of Windows is based on the last to understand...).

I know this was meant to illicit flames and be trollish, but it's just silly. You take your time and wait for Win7 and skip Vista - we'll have the exact same issues when Win7 releases that we had with Vista, that we had with XP (I remember the EXACT same comments about slow performance and driver compat issues about XP back in 2001 and 2002, before SP2 released), that we had with 2000 (hardware/driver compatibility issues, anyone? Ever try to get an old scanner, sound card, or webcam working with 2000? It was horrible at RTM and SP1, until driver vendors got it figured out or just abandoned the old products altogether).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with cluberti here...every new Windows release goes through the same thing. I think maybe the only release that didn't was NT4, but that was mostly NT 3.51 with the Win95 interface thrown on top. WinXP went through the same things. When it was released people said it sucked, was slow, had compatibility issues, driver problems...the list just keeps going on. Now look at it. It's a stable, mature OS that, when properly configured, runs great on even modest hardware.

I'm not running Vista...yet...but it won't be much longer. To be honest I'm just waiting on the Vista SP1 DVDs to hit MSDN (yes, I have a subscription). I have Server 2008 ready to go as well...but my DC/DHCP/DNS/WINS/file server isn't ready to go (I want to upgrade it to x64 capable hardware first...which probably won't happen before Hyper-V is released anyway, which is what I really want to wait on).

You keep waiting while the rest of us keep up with the advances being made right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me three here. I'm already running Vista on my laptop, and it's the least capable machine of the three that I use. The other two would actually make better use of the optimizations in Vista/Server 2008 (64-bit support, multi-core, 4GB RAM). So far, the only drawback has been my touchpad drivers, but they're buggy even on XP, so that's no fault of Vista.

I think all that needs to be said has been said. :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My message to people who use Vista for the default OS..dont end of story get over it and wait for 7, some people waste Microsoft's time around the world while asking witty questions and reporting bugs, this is a cause of delayed products and why they release SP's. Hopefully Microsoft will ignore and slowly take their time needed to create this new OS instead of focusing on times + deadlines.

You realize the same thing that is happening with Vista will happen with 7 right? it will come out, vendors will not be willing to sink R&D money into writing drivers for it till they see people using it (ie SP1 for 7) it is the same thing that has happended with every other OS. the adoption rate of the OS with determine how quickly you will see drivers and applications for it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never had a driver problem, i had drivers even when the BETA was out n it was all new hardware too :D But mainly the same thing happened to XP when it was released as said above, i agree with Cluberti 100% :thumbup

Edited by LegoLiam™
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah all the Vista hate is usually from people I wouldn't allow to touch my PC anyways. The kind of people that think 'ROFL OMG vitsa is teh bloated!!11 M$ is the sux!' is a well thought out argument against Vista.

a word of warning Vista haters: if you hate Vista, you're gonna hate windows 7 even more. you have been warned.

honestly the only legit complaint ive seen against Vista that hasnt been addressed as thoroughly as i would like is the 'file copying over network' issues. all the other 'bugs' or annoying features can be disabled or toned down. just like XP.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wait till Windows 7 ist out i has more now technologies in it like a new NTSF ore options for not installing things like WMP11 ore IE7. Vista is only out to make quick money like ME.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 7, think it will run in both 64bit and 32bit? Probally both...

and a new NTSF structure would be interesting :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windows 7, think it will run in both 64bit and 32bit? Probally both...

Actually, it should only come in x64! I hope so at least.

Why? Because, there's still too many devices without x64 drivers out there, and the amount of native x64 apps is still very low.

This would force companies to release x64 drivers if they want to continue selling hardware (write x64 drivers, or go out of business). It would also generate a huge demand for native x64 versions of most apps. And software that don't really work well on x64 platforms (like some codecs) would likely be upgraded real quick too. It would finally make x64 viable for everybody.

By the time Windows 7 is out, RAM will be even cheaper than it is now. And I already see kits like 2x2GB of PC6400 for as low as $73, like Corsair XMS2 at ncix right now. By then, 8GB will likely be like $50, so everyone's going to buy lots of it, and not be limited at 3.x GB. Besides, it's not like you'd want to run Windows 7 on a pre-64 bit CPU either, like an old P4 or Athlon XP.

I mean, right now, you can build a basic quad core computer with 4GB of RAM for ~$500 e.g. Phenom X4 9550, Gigabyte GA-M78SM-S2H mobo, 4GB Corsair XMS2 PC6400, Antec NSK4480 case/psu, LG G-H20NS10 DVD writer, and a 500GB P7K500 hard drive -- $527 at ncix for all of it, and it's basically the same price for a Q6600, and only like $50 extra if you want a nice motherboard instead. Now imagine in 2 years or more. Faster quad cores will be even cheaper, same thing for RAM. At some point, we have to make the big switch to x64.

New NTFS version? Well, it's only interesting if it brings new & useful features really. The current one is adequate right now. But hey, if they can improve some things, why not?

As for people hoping they'll be able not to install WMP and such, good luck with that. They want everybody to use their WM codecs and such, and WMP is a way to do just that, and it's also part of their "strategy" for media stuff (think media extenders, the XBOX 360 and all them things). And seeing how there's been zero demand for the "N" flavors of XP, you can pretty much guess they're going to include it regardless. IE wise, I think they clearly demonstrated their unwillingness to unbundle it before, and some parts of it are used by other apps too. So there again...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, it should only come in x64! I hope so at least.

microsoft probally released vista with exspectations of vista moving the world into the 64bit era :D releasing 64x and 86x OS's... if you go to best buy now days (or at least around here) anything over $500 has 64x vista.

microsoft planned this movement :P haha

but yea i do agree with moving onto the 64bit OS's... for the several reasons you stated above crahank and + times change and you have to grasp reality and move foward

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
microsoft probally released vista with exspectations of vista moving the world into the 64bit era :D releasing 64x and 86x OS's... if you go to best buy now days (or at least around here) anything over $500 has 64x vista.

A lot of them now come with the x64 version, and I'm sure that does work fine for basic work nowadays. But when it comes to doing more than the basics, there always seems to be various issues -- things like missing drivers, codecs and such. Being x64 only would force them all to make their stuff work on x64 platforms for good.

microsoft planned this movement :P haha

Then they must have planned pretty poorly. They had 64 bit NT4 for the old Alpha chips 12 years ago, and x64 adoption is barely starting (true enough, x64 chips aren't quite that old). Despite even XP x64 being 5 years old, there's hardly anyone using it yet (I don't think I've ever seen a XP box running the x64 version actually). And despite being not new at all, the transition isn't always easy. You'd think basically everything would be available in x64 by now (5 years of XP x64 being out isn't long enough?) Even MS' own dev tools were lagging behind when it comes to x64 -- debugging x64 apps with VS2005 was a PITA. The transition to 64 bit on other platforms has been far easier seemingly (like 64 bit Linux, with the exception of flash). I mean, x64 Windows is getting there, but it shouldn't have taken this long. Then again, it's not completely MS' fault -- they can't force hardware/software vendors to release x64 drivers and apps.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people compare Windows Vista to Windows Me.

A more fair comparison would be:

Windows Vista RTM = Windows Me

Windows Vista SP1 = Windows XP RTM

If that trend continues, then Vista SP2 would be something like XP SP1...which is not bad at all!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumors Facts & News

1. Rumor

Windows 7 to include WinFS (Windows Future Storage)

WinFS Definition

TarryBlogging have featured an excerpt from an interview on Windows 7 that seems to indicate that Windows 7 will include some form of the “Hypervisor” Windows Virtualisation technologies that will ship shortly after Windows Server.

The interview also claims that Windows 7 might include the Windows Future Storage (WinFS) technology.

2.Fact

Windows 7 releasing around the time touch screen LCD's are "affordable" of general home usage. Windows 7 to

take advantage of this?

The demonstration of the Windows 7 multi-touch feature was interesting but I think most users have asked themselves how likely it would be that they would be having a multi-touch LCD monitor in their homes at the time Windows 7 is released to the public. If you currently look at hardware retailers you notice that touchscreen monitors are rare and expensive. Newegg for instance lists 72 touchscreen monitors with a price range of $200 to $2000 of which one has a size greater 20″, sixteen a size between 18″ - 19″ and the other 55 a size of 17″ or less.

albatron_multitouch-400x266.jpg

To answer the question. Yes they will be ready and affordable at the time Windows 7 will be released. Would you pay an additional 20% to get a touchscreen LCD monitor ?

Pulled From

http://windows7news.com/2008/06/04/multi-t...-7-is-released/

3.News

Better gaming, less resources used to run? We'll see?

The ability to be lower power, take less memory, be more efficient, and have lots more connections up to the mobile phone, so those scenarios connect up well to make it a great platform for the best gaming that can be done, to connect up to the thing being done out on the Internet, so that, for example, if you have two personal computers, that your files automatically are synchronized between them, and so you don’t have a lot of work to move that data back and forth.

- Bill Gates

Windows Digital Lifestyle Consortium in Tokyo

Edited by Redhatcc
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.