Windows 7 Build 7077 Leaked... no surprise here either

J

Joe Average

Ad Blocker - Banned
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
15,459
On Tuesday, that is... built on April 4th so, very close to the RC1 state which is expected to be released to partners and select testers on Friday. This could become the actual RC1 build if nothing drastic is discovered, aka showstoppers. x86 only for the initial leak, x64 probably today (Wednesday) or whenever...

Friday's the day, however, if Microsoft sticks to their announced date.

We'll see what happens.
 
sorry in advance for the extreme noobness that is about to fall upon you but...

could someone explain to me what Windows 7 exactly is? Isn't Microsoft still riding the Vista wave?
Is this Vista-ish or something totally different?

Does it play nice with the 32-bit world of existing software?
 
Windows 7 is the next version of Windows. It has a 32bit and 64bit version.
 
Boo, i just upgraded to 7068 a couple days after having run 7000 for months

BTW, Symantec Endpoint Protection hates 7. It messes with anything that writes even remotely heavily the to the hard drive (picasa when loading pictures off a camera) and causes the whole app to lock up.
 
lol, I am waiting for a) x64 and b) fridays release... I am going away for the weekend (easter) and when i am back, microsoft hopefully will have left me a present.
 
stormshadow said:
sorry in advance for the extreme noobness that is about to fall upon you but...

could someone explain to me what Windows 7 exactly is? Isn't Microsoft still riding the Vista wave?
Is this Vista-ish or something totally different?

Does it play nice with the 32-bit world of existing software?
Click to expand...

Windows 7 is the next version of Windows based on the Vista kernel. It looks and feels like Vista, but there are more new useful features on the desktop as well as other areas. Windows 7 also runs much faster than Vista on older machines. On current machines, Vista, XP, and Win7 are all equally fast. It will be offered as 32 and 64 bit.

Not sure what you're alluding to with the word "Vista-ish". Even Vista's a great operating system for most of us.
 
thanks. ok- so do i buy this with full licenses? i heard it was just a beta.

also - do I need to have Vista in order to install it or can it be a fresh install of just 7.

finally, can this be dual booted on my current XP rig?
 
Are you sure you are a [H]ard|Gawd of 2.8 years?

You don't buy it at all right now, you download it. Don't ask where.

Its a full OS, so no, you don't need Vista. Yes you can dual boot.
 
criccio said:
Are you sure you are a [H]ard|Gawd of 2.8 years?

You don't buy it at all right now, you download it. Don't ask where.

Its a full OS, so no, you don't need Vista. Yes you can dual boot.
Click to expand...

lmfaooo

yea man. i'll go toe-to-toe on a lot of topics and i'm up to date on most things but i've been a stubborn ass regarding replacing XP. I'm now just getting out of the woodwork and considering a change of OS.
 
Well this build resolved the two primary issues I had with 7068: the WMP mini player Pause/Previous/Next issue and apparently the video issues with the GMA950 driver. So far, video playback with MPC-HC using the EVR renderer gives me the same performance levels that I had with the older driver and 7057 and previous builds, it was just something about 7068 that screwed things up.

Install time was about 14 minutes from start to finish at the Desktop using a 4GB USB stick (average read speed about 18MB/s), so that was a bit faster. Seems snappier at the Desktop, my normal Geekbench test (command line, old version) has results about where the other builds pre-7057 were, but 7057 turned out to be fast, damned fast.

So far so good, will play with this until Friday or whenever I acquire the RC1 build if Microsoft can get it done and out.
 
Just posted this over at Neowin and quite jazzed about the discovery as I haven't seen anyone else take note of it, and me being the List view bastard I am (those idiots over there censor the word BASTARD... bleh) I thought for other List view bastards it would be nice info:

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but being the old fool I am I prefer the List view above all others, always have, always will. There was that nasty little thing in previous builds where in List view columns in Explorer would just "cut off" at a non-specific and seemingly random point, leaving you with a filename that ended with ... if it was too long, and the only way to see the whole name was to hover the cursor on it or change the view to something else like Details and widen the column.

Well, I just happened to notice that in 7077 that's fixed, and while I have no idea how they accomplished it, I'm damned happy about it. :D Not only that, but the columns in List view are absolutely independent of each other - what a magical piece of coding this is to have accomplished this. The screenshot below shows what I mean. It's standard List view, a directory of some lossless files I copied off DVD backups, with a huge variety in the length of the filenames.



I captured the screen then pasted it into Paint Shop Pro and measured the columns:

- the first column is ~335 pixels wide (measured from the Crash Test Dummies song, longest filename in that column)
- the second column is ~370 pixels wide (measured from the Information Society song, longest filename in that column)
- the third column is ~435 pixels wide (measured from the Marky Mark song, longest filename in that column)
- the fourth column is ~320 pixels (measured from the Sophie B. Hawkins song, longest filename in that column)

I checked this amongst the other folders, and it's consistent: using List view the column widths are now independent based on the longest filename in that particular column. In all previous versions of Windows the columns in List view would take the width of the longest filename in that folder, which could really wreck the view sometimes if you had a bunch of short folder/file names and one long one. Now, that can still be a problem, but it'll only affect that one single column that long folder/file name happens to be in, not the entire folder display.

How freakin' cool is that? :D

Pretty damned cool I say, pretty damned cool, indeed.

Note: this was something I just noticed in build 7077 so I expect it'll be "stuck" from now on with later builds, hopefully. 7068 and all previous ones didn't do it, at least not with what I was testing, but 7077... hell yeah!!! :)
 
In detail view, do folders have sizes, or is that still missing?
 
I just switched one of the other FLAC folders to Details and it shows the folder name, Date modified, Type, and Size - but the Size column has no data, so perhaps they'll resolve that at some point also. Send 'em Feedback about it because I can see where it would be useful for those that use the Details view, and sometimes I do as well for info, but I always switch back to List view at some point.

Would be GREAT to be able to see the folder content size that fast, it truly would, or at the bottom in the Status bar... that should be something automagic, really.

NOW, the only big thing left for me (that comes to mind at the moment, that is) would be if they would just once and for all make the Space Bar pause/play Windows Media Player at all times... my god, that's my most requested single feature for Windows 7 and they still haven't done it. :) It'll work at random times depending on where the focus of control is in WMP, but it should be the default action.

Every other media player out there does it, yet WMP still hasn't been "fixed" to do it.

COME ON MICROSOFT, I KNOW YOU READ THESE FORUMS dammit... You're doing an awesome spectacular job, now give us that Space Bar pause/play functionality in WMP... pleeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssssseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... ;)
 
just tried a dual boot installation and added 7 to my existing XP system.

Interesting that no matter what you assign to the new partition, Windows 7 considers the main partition a "C:" drive. Does that interfere at all the fact that my XP install is on it's own "C:" drive?
 
Nope, as Vista does the same thing; the OS sees the partition it is installed on as C: now (at least with Windows). When the other OS in a dual boot (meaning XP in your case) is loaded, it will remain whatever drive letter it is/was.
 
so games installed on the new 7-loaded partition would be installed on that specific partition?
 
If you install a game in Windows 7, it's going to default to C:\Program Files or C:\Program Files (x86) depending on it being x86 or x64 aware - that means the Windows 7 partition, not the XP one.

When Vista or Windows 7 is running, C: is it, that's your system drive, regardless of whatever other OSes are installed on the machine, and programs will install to that partition as it's where the Program Files directories are. You can always change the program installation target with the installer (at least by using the custom installation or altering the target installation destination manually), but if you leave everything at defaults and install an app/game under Windows 7, it'll get dropped to the C: drive where Windows 7 is running from.
 
Joe Average said:
If you install a game in Windows 7, it's going to default to C:\Program Files or C:\Program Files (x86) depending on it being x86 or x64 aware - that means the Windows 7 partition, not the XP one.

When Vista or Windows 7 is running, C: is it, that's your system drive, regardless of whatever other OSes are installed on the machine, and programs will install to that partition as it's where the Program Files directories are. You can always change the program installation target with the installer (at least by using the custom installation or altering the target installation destination manually), but if you leave everything at defaults and install an app/game under Windows 7, it'll get dropped to the C: drive where Windows 7 is running from.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't games also be installed at c:\users\public\games? Or is this just a WoW thing because of user-modified add-ons causing interference with UAC in Program Files?
 
Azhar said:
Wouldn't games also be installed at c:\users\public\games? Or is this just a WoW thing because of user-modified add-ons causing interference with UAC in Program Files?
Click to expand...

WoW is the only game I've seen request to be installed in that folder and I've got several installed.
 
popbob said:
Yay, another buggy, unstable alpha build!
Click to expand...

yay another person who doesnt know how to setup a computer crying!

Sorry felt that was in line.

It's called a BETA. If things don't work, its not suprising. Also, this is meant for testing. You did not pay for Windows 7 and you have no entitlement to having it run properly. It is use at your own risk. If you dont know what you are doing, use something else.

That being said, you are one of very few with issues. I've been running 7 on my main box since build 7000 and its been beautiful.
 
x64 is floating around the usual places and has a healthy number of seeds.. I'll probably update my rig at home tonight after I update the firmware on my vertex ssd
 
Joe Average said:
I just switched one of the other FLAC folders to Details and it shows the folder name, Date modified, Type, and Size - but the Size column has no data, so perhaps they'll resolve that at some point also. Send 'em Feedback about it because I can see where it would be useful for those that use the Details view, and sometimes I do as well for info, but I always switch back to List view at some point.

Would be GREAT to be able to see the folder content size that fast, it truly would, or at the bottom in the Status bar... that should be something automagic, really.

NOW, the only big thing left for me (that comes to mind at the moment, that is) would be if they would just once and for all make the Space Bar pause/play Windows Media Player at all times... my god, that's my most requested single feature for Windows 7 and they still haven't done it. :) It'll work at random times depending on where the focus of control is in WMP, but it should be the default action.

Every other media player out there does it, yet WMP still hasn't been "fixed" to do it.

COME ON MICROSOFT, I KNOW YOU READ THESE FORUMS dammit... You're doing an awesome spectacular job, now give us that Space Bar pause/play functionality in WMP... pleeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssssseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... ;)
Click to expand...

It works 100% of the time when WMP is the focus window, but do you really want to be typing an email / twitter / flitter / pitter / patter / chatter or what ever your're doing and pausing your WMP each time you hit the space bar?

That's why extended multi-media HID controls were built on to new keyboards. :)
 
Bbq said:
In detail view, do folders have sizes, or is that still missing?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I'd say that it's "missing." I don't know of any operating system that lists the size of directories in that sort of view. That would be a lot of computing. Then again, I could be wrong.

I've got an XP box, a Mac (Leopard), and a Fedora box all here in front of me and none of them have an entry for "size" when viewing files and folders in a list or details view.

But again, I could be missing something.
 
No size recorded in Xp or Windows 7.

The most likely reason they don't do that is right in front of you.. go to properties on a folder that you know is large and see how long it takes for the size to come back.

Now imagine if windows had to do that to every folder in your view before it could list the folder information .. how long would that take? talk about slow..
 
Hurin said:
I'm not sure I'd say that it's "missing." I don't know of any operating system that lists the size of directories in that sort of view. That would be a lot of computing. Then again, I could be wrong.

I've got an XP box, a Mac (Leopard), and a Fedora box all here in front of me and none of them have an entry for "size" when viewing files and folders in a list or details view.

But again, I could be missing something.
Click to expand...

In OS X, put finder into column view, then view > show view options > calculate all sizes.

in XP, there's a little plugin you can use which will show you folder sizes. Not in Vista, though, and i don't know about 7.

In Linux, nautilus has an option for it.
 
Bbq said:
In OS X, put finder into column view, then view > show view options > calculate all sizes.

in XP, there's a little plugin you can use which will show you folder sizes. Not in Vista, though, and i don't know about 7.

In Linux, nautilus has an option for it.
Click to expand...
Is there a drag on performance when working in Windows Explorer/Finder/Nautilus though? Or is the size data stored in a database like search data/indexing?
 
stormshadow said:
what would be the downsides of using 7 (7077) as my one and only OS?
Click to expand...

Some third party software may not work?

Your hard drive could catch fire? (insert standard pre-release software disclaimer here)

As long as you have backups of anything that you don't want to lose, I say go for it.
 
Andrmgic said:
Some third party software may not work?

Your hard drive could catch fire? (insert standard pre-release software disclaimer here)

As long as you have backups of anything that you don't want to lose, I say go for it.
Click to expand...

You seemed to leave out the most important issue. It will expire...
 
Im thinking about trying Windows 7, how much faster is it performance wise than vista? Also how is the support on drivers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top