Windows 7: A better Vista?
LOS ANGELES--Microsoft on Tuesday offered up far more details on Windows 7, successor to the company's oft-maligned Windows Vista.
In particular, Microsoft is focused on improving the time it takes for Windows to start up and shut down. In addition to its own work, Microsoft has been working directly with computer makers to address all of the factors that affect system performance.
As far as other features, Windows 7 features support for multitouch input and a new taskbar that makes it easier to manage multiple open Windows.
"The focus is on making sure the things you do (today) are easier and that the things you always wanted to do are possible," Corporate Vice President Mike Nash said in an interview Monday. "There's a lot of work we've done to just make things easier and faster.
The early, prebeta version being handed out to developers at the Professional Developer Conference here has all of the programming interfaces that will be in the final version but only some of the planned features.
Several enthusiasts who have been checking out the new code for the past couple of days praised the stability of the release, particularly for an operating system, at this early stage.
With Windows 7, Microsoft has changed the way it approaches building early releases. In the past, Microsoft included features at various stages of development. With Windows 7, features are included in the main Windows build, only after they are fully baked.
Microsoft is clearly looking to leave a far different first impression than it did with Windows Vista, which made major changes under the hood and led to considerable incompatibilities. With Windows 7, Microsoft is not introducing any major changes to the Windows kernel and is keeping much of the other plumbing substantially similar to that of Vista.
The software maker has also tried to reduce some of Vista's other annoyances, such as the frequently criticized User Account Control feature, which some complained led to too many annoying dialog boxes. With Windows 7, users will be able to choose for themselves how often the system warns them of changes being made to their computer.
The next external release of Windows 7, a feature-complete public beta, is slated for early next year.
Nash wouldn't say whether the company plans more than one beta version before its final release. "We'll see how the first one goes," he said.
The company has said it will have the release out within three years of Vista's January 2007 mainstream release, however, CEO Steve Ballmer has said he wants Windows 7 out next year.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina.
How cute! And I see you bought your friends with you!
Apple is great, OS X is great but all us dont have budgets of over 1500$ for a notebook, that is a fact. My priorities are some where else, just spare me the jobs gospel.
Take that, Steve Jobs!
I switched to Mac in 2001. I switched back to Windows in 2005 :)
Yeah... Apple prolly still had it beat there, prior to Xp Tablet Edition, but not for use with an actual PEN. Not in 7.5!
I've been using it for about a day now, and I love it. I don't permanently allow things to run in Administrator mode that are 'one time' or that I have to click and press 'administrator mode' for, but anything else that HAS to run in Administrator Mode.... I've permanently allowed them.
There are many things that are faster on XP. And it has less bugs. If you like Vista, you might as well get a Mac because Vista (like OS X) is just designed to wow you with flashy UI (which in reality is nauseating if you are not a Mac or MS fanboi), rather than actually being an invisible engine upon which your real apps run.
Honestly, you XP monkeys should just learn to let go.
This does seem to portend well, in direct counterpoint to your comment.
/P
Your growing level of shrillness is astounding to behold. Its like the unfolding of a flower.
"In that case, tell us Dan: Why does an allegedly revolutionary OS still carry bugs in it from eight years ago? "
I'm not sure, perhaps you should ask Apple that question for the multitude of iTunes bugs, OS X bugs, and more?
Really now, you can do better than that if your'e just here to troll. Come back when you have something useful to say.
Heya guys - how about answering the question instead of resorting to ad hominem or strawmen arguments... or is that too much for you? Why does an OS that the vendor points at as a heavily reworked product that's allegedly been gone over from the ground up... still have common buffer overflow exploits in it?
...and if it's identical to the Vista kernel (note the spelling, Mr timber), then why should the world bother? Trusting a vendor's ratings (like they'd have no reason to push folks off of XP) is next to worthless - if it's possible on all of them and has the same attack vector, exploit, etc, then it's equally possible.
"Heya guys - how about answering the question instead of resorting to ad hominem or strawmen arguments... or is that too much for you?"
Well, I believe it's because *YOU* don't answer the questions put forth to you. This sort of behavior is classic for a troll. You have chosen to behave this way. Don't be surprised when people treat you with the amount of respect you have earned by that behavior.
But I'll answer your question. The OS still has issues because without rewriting the entire thing from scratch, there will always be legacy issues. You know this, and you have even commented on it frequently. Why you have forgotten your own comments or chosen to ignore them is up to you. Any IT Professional knows this. Apple has the same exact issue with OS X, which you conveniently ignored. Amazing how that is.
Once again, your failure to completely understand the subject before posting without any evidence, proof, or even little ducks walking along a roadside in England in a spring rain have embarassed you.
If you would like to help automate your postings, I believe SportCo has a special on trolling motors. :)
Do you paint your pot any other color than kettle black, Penguinisto?
Personally, I really like OS X. It why I'm using it right now. I also really like linux, which is why most of my production machines use it. I also like Vista because its a solid OS and fits a large number of roles. What I don't like is knee jerk reactionary responses. I dislike shrill poorly thought out arguments based on willful ignorance. I really dislike closed mindsets that take up pointless partisan positions based on emotion laden ideology.
Its not that you don't have a valid point. This bug is embarrassing and never should have seen the light of day. However, developers are still struggling with classes of bugs that are *decades* old so having a vulnerability like this show up isn't unexpected because its endemic to the industry as a whole. It's not just a failing within MS.
Penguine, just go away. You hate MS so your opinion means nothing here. Youre just a shill spouting hate and disinformation. Go back to your linux, it suits you well.
Every operating system has security holes. Even WITH A COMPLETE REWRITE.... some security holes are impossible to avoid, because even the people writing the code cannot see them. We really need to stop expecting there to be 'no security holes' in operating systems.
I'm happy, as long as they are fixed, or, if they aren't fixed, they are minor ones that you would have to do upteen things to allow someone into your system. With the security flaws Microsoft HASN'T FIXED..... that last things is met in spades.
"Why does an allegedly revolutionary OS still carry bugs in it from eight years ago?"
Which OS? They all (windows, linux, osx) carry bugs and they all receive patches. Can you tell me that linux and osx have never been patched for a bug that has existed for years? No, you can't. It's when they are discovered is when they get patched. In that case, penquin, why don't you tell the whole truth rather than slant it to suit your biased opinion?
I am, however, willing to give Win7 a chance, because I'm always open to the latest tech, and I'm okay with being coaxed back if I think it's worth it. So far, though, I'm still seeing a lot of transparent windows, and man, I got sick of those in 2003.
OS X works. Vista works but only if you get in pre-installed on a new Vista Machine. Upgrading old ones (even though Vista does come in an upgrade vesion) is a PITA. Worse than XP, 98, 95, 3.1 and 1.X combined. That's my personal experience. I like the Vista interface, but I also like things to work. My most recent install where I used all the Drivers from the OEM failed. After fighting with it I went to XP which worked.
Because the interface it better if you haven't hit the dog side of Vista you would think it's great. For me. It's a dog. One I'd like to like but it just keeps biting me.
However OSX works? Well, yes, most of the time but in my experience anyway it's no more reliable than post SP1 Vista.
YMMV.
OS X just works? Perhaps you can come by my site and help our video guys get their disc printer working so I can take the Vista VM off of their OS X machine. The software provided by the company has all sorts of problems in OS X, and works flawlessly in Vista (without even installing software). I'm really glad OS X "just works."
Not sure what the point of your post was.
To bad you stuck in the past, you really outta break out and see the world for what it is, free and open with MS.
In what way? You and those apple commercials have yet to make one statement as to WHY you consider it better. If you are going to state why, tell the whole truth on not the apple spin on the truth which doesn't tell the entire story. Apple commercials are just as bad as the one I just saw saying the reason I should buy an SUV is becuase it has more "cup holders". If you say, "It has a better browser", then state why. If there are things in the browser that aren't better, then don't ommit those either. In other words, tell it all. Then, and only then, will I listen. I've used OSX and do not support your claim that it's better. It's different, and for you that may be what you want. Just don't expect everyone to share your beliefs. So far all you and apple has done is try to scare people into believing the competition is bad, but has said nothing about themselves. When politicians do that, it's usually because they are worse.
Personally , there is nothing more hypocritical then a bunch of Mac users making broad statements about the failing of Windows. You Mac users waste a lot of time trying to convince people to switch without ever providing a real and tangible argument. The fact is there isn?t a single thing that a Mac can do that a Windows machine cannot.
Vista and Windows 7 are about money. Nothing else. XP will be supported till 2014. Why change? Why fix something that isn't broken?
W7 will be better... thanks for the fluff Apple - now we get o reap the benefits versus the over price - overhyped OSX now with so many finger gestures you'll be lucky to use/understand how they work for ages (thank goodness it's on "silky smooth glass" YIPPY!!!)
The Model T was a flex fuel vehicle. Sometimes the world catches up to what has already been done. XP isn't broken. Vista isn't perfect. There is room for both as they continue to get the bugs out of Vista. When they hit SP2 I'll try it again where it's failed to do the job. I do like the inferface.
Good point, my truck is also a flex fuel vehicle- but that doesn't mean I can actually buy any ethanol for it. The nearest supplier is nearly 80 miles away on a military base that isn't open to the public. Heh.
Vista runs fast (turn off AERO), and has yet to slow down like XP always did after a few months. Sticking with XP is like sticking with a rotary phone.
UAC is annoying when you first set things up, but after that it doesn't pop up that often.
Regarding Windows 7, MS took a lot of flack for taking so long to release Vista and vowed to ship a replacement within 3 years... by 2010.
As for the reviews, was it not strange when a lot of those reviewers got p tin a room with VISTA named something different. Then they all suddenly liked it?
As for Ran for it? In 2008 was good for mac they got up to 2.6 million Macs shipped. In comparison for the same Q4 sales HP 11,900,000, Dell 9,666.000, Other 32,180,000 Total PC sales 65,587,000.
Microsoft Q4, 2008 shows 180,000,000 Vista Licenses shipped to date. Up from 80-90 million mark of Q4-2007. So yes Vista is doing pretty good despite, urban legend.
MUI - multi-language support
4 OS Virtualization out of the box (yes run four OS's for the price of one...)
Bitlocker for hard drive encryption
Better management tools for deployment
Those are four good reasons to upgrade not including