[Redhatcc]

Windows 7 2009


Read this today... not for sure but some sources say that W7 could come into the market by this next holiday season...

[Nihility]

Rumors have been anywhere from July 09 to Jan 10.
The only official date is Q1 2010 and Microsoft has no reason to change that. If they finish early (when do you ever finish an OS anyway? You can keep tweaking forever) they'll release it.
Keep in mind that Windows 7 is coming out with DirectX11 which will require a lot of testing before it comes out.

Right now the beta seems really close to finished but even if it's 99% finished, getting that last 1% could easily be just as much work as the previous 99%.

[Nemesis]

I am anxious for it but I want it to be "done" when they release it. We all know what happens when they push stuff out the door early.

[Redhatcc]

i was very impressed with the beta they released a month or so back... i didnt investigate it in detail nor did i run it for along time but i put it on a few machines here at work and gave it a run for its money and worked pretty well.

Quote

Right now the beta seems really close to finished but even if it's 99% finished, getting that last 1% could easily be just as much work as the previous 99%.

haha that is true

[Tripredacus]

I heard that Starter Edition (the one that would be most available in SEAsia) would be released earlier... Not sure about that though.

[cluberti]

No, it'll all RTM at the same time (it's the exact same codebase across all), although "general availability" for certain editions may come sooner from the OEMs than others.

[TheWalrus]

Personally I would say OS is not in useable state until SP1 is out

[cluberti]

Have you tried any of the 7xxx builds yet?

[Access Denied]

Obviously not, lol. Anyone who has run the 7000 build knows how good 7 is already.

[Win2k3EE]

Right now Windows 7 build 7022 leaked to torrent sites, but there's rumors about build 7032...
Win7 is pretty much done, there are a few glitches here and there, but as I see it Win7 will need only SP1 for the updates.

[knowitall_wannabe]

I would guess Redmond is pushing like crazy to get 7 out to shed the Vista headache ASAFP. Can't blame them. I never wanted to use Vista until well after SP1 came out along with purchasing a PC with enough a** and more to spare to run Vista.

[mattbiernat]

they won't ever admit to it but Vista was their biggest failure... it was like a windows ME dejavu all over agian.

[CoffeeFiend]

mattbiernat, on Feb 15 2009, 08:26 PM, said:

Vista was their biggest failure... it was like a windows ME dejavu all over agian.

Not quite!

ME removed features or hidden them (like real mode DOS). And the only new feature it seemed to bring was system restore, which was useful for re-infecting your PC if you used it...

Vista brought us TONS new new stuff, like a new shell (new explorer, new start menu that doesn't suck, etc), SMB 2.0, desktop composing, the sidebar, aero glass (and thumbnail previews in the taskbar like win7 has, and flip 3d over alt-tab), a great x64 OS, a totally new installer (no more NT 3.1-era installer), a new deployment method (WDS instead of RIS), image-based deployments that are not HAL and language specific, MUI in Windows Update, built-in search, it gave us the same version of IIS than the latest win server (2008) has, some nice new apps (photo gallery, sniping tool, new games, etc), some updates to MCE, DirectX 10, MUCH improved power management (sleep, which acts like a hybrid between S3 and hibernate, and actually works!), the mobility center, some nice new fonts, and TONS more. Nearly 1 out of 4 computers is running it, and many of us are happily using it everyday. Hardly a ME-like failure.

[cluberti]

Vista was a big failure, but the fact is that the OS was not. It was perception that killed Vista - well, that and the fact that it really did have serious driver issues until SP1 (also not totally the fault of Microsoft - I'm looking at you specifically, nvidia). If Vista had RTM'ed at the SP1 codebase rather than RTM, things would've been different. Maybe not vastly so, but people wouldn't be comparing it (totally wrongly) to Windows ME.

[Access Denied]

Ever notice the worst failure(@ the time) is followed by the real WOW? ME was the worst(IMHO anyway), followed by WOW, XP who still lives. Now we have Vista's mass failure, followed by a beta that is getting WOW all around. Win 7 is the next XP.

This post has been edited by accessdenied042: 15 February 2009 - 08:56 PM

[CoffeeFiend]

accessdenied042, on Feb 15 2009, 09:55 PM, said:

Ever notice the worst failure(@ the time) is followed by the real WOW?

Nope.

accessdenied042, on Feb 15 2009, 09:55 PM, said:

ME was the worst(IMHO anyway), followed by WOW, XP who still lives. Now we have Vista's mass failure, followed by a beta that is getting WOW all around. Win 7 is the next XP.

Hardly accurate. All win95 and 98 editions were pretty good for their times. Only one truly sucked (ME).

On the NT side, I don't recall one truly sucking either. The only one that comes close is Vista, and even then only as a marketing failure (like cluberti just said). All of them suffered their share of issues at the time of release, which were eventually fixed by service packs.

Your sample size is only 4 (ME, XP, Vista, 7), and you're switching between lines (ME -> XP), and one of those you're counting as a failure is very arguable (Vista). Had you taken more samples, or switched to the NT line at a different point in history, or looked at both series individually, or have a different view on what defines Vista's success i.e. anything but the one specific scenario you picked, then it doesn't hold true.

[Access Denied]

I was just trying to point out they had to nearly fubar one before they could get one right. Its not always true, nor did I state that, but you are correct also. Windows 7 will be great just like XP(IMO) and it had a stinker right behind it. XP was great and had a stinker right behind it, lol.

On topic, I wish they would release it next month before I rebuild this thing.





<<< as you can see, I am not knocking it before I tried it

This post has been edited by accessdenied042: 15 February 2009 - 09:49 PM

[mats]

in the list of new good thing in Vista i miss bitlocker, Usb management, ipsec, no more gina, printerpermissions, delta replication of offline files, one offline cache per user, Smartcard based EFS and some more Corp features

If MS would have pushed theese parts instead of gui changes, Vista would have been a hit. As they did it, CIO:s heard gui changes=High costs for education of the users=Not interested instead of hearing Faster and more reliable sync and scure data on laptops=Higher production=more money=Happy CEO

[Access Denied]

Yeah, it bombed in sales to me. I actually like it, its just too **** heavy. Granted my hardware is old, but it runs 7 just fine.

edit: what beavers build is a bad word. no comment

This post has been edited by accessdenied042: 16 February 2009 - 06:37 AM

[Nihility]

You can't say ****?

You're all forgetting that win98 (pre SE) used to BSOD like crazy.