Ballmer Says Windows 7 Nearly Final

XamediX said:
Doesn't W7 have a whole new interface? Different memory footprint? Touchscreen support?
Click to expand...

Ink and touch interfaces have been in Windows since XP Tablet PC Edition, though Windows 7 adds more capability and deisgn factors that make touch work betters.

Tablet technology is one area where Vista actually was a lot better than XP, and it looks like 7 is even a bigger step forward.
 
ShagnWagn said:
anyhow, i can't wait to load up win7 and see the changes. i'm thinking it will be the vista i was expecting after 7 years of development ;)
Click to expand...


i bet ms thinks the same thing. but to those reading, that doesnt mean they ripped people off on vista. every business tries to make the best product but at some point they have to sell it, and it was getting far too long for ms to wait anymore. people knew they were having problems making vista, yet when it was finally released they also expected perfection right out of the box. it just doesn't make sense for pc software (especially an OS!). it was obvious rtm was an infant, but everyone seemed to take it as a piece of junk (because they are clueless to what the changes really are and what type of feedback it takes to perfect a os).

i believe microsoft had planned originally for vista to last 10 years.... but since its name was immediately and so harshly blackened, they were almost forced to re-bag and resell. and it makes sense because they had always hinted that updates to vista would be at a price. people FREAKED about that, but now we want that heavily discounted vista-to-win7 upgrade? oh brother....
 
ShagnWagn said:
Very sad I actually bought Vista, and feel taken advantage of for even buying the Ultimate flavor. I figured it was the next "XP" and would be around for 7+ years. Guess it pays to not pay until you use it through its life cycle. lol
Click to expand...
^QFT
 
acidic said:
it will most likely not screw up. XP doesn't recongize vista because obv xp came before that, all you had to do was fixmbr and use the vista boot loader. 7 will recognize both
Click to expand...

i know about the fix i'm just lazy ;p
 
spacetrader said:
i believe microsoft had planned originally for vista to last 10 years.... but since its name was immediately and so harshly blackened, they were almost forced to re-bag and resell. and it makes sense because they had always hinted that updates to vista would be at a price. people FREAKED about that, but now we want that heavily discounted vista-to-win7 upgrade? oh brother....
Click to expand...

Where are people getting this idea that Vista was supposed to be THE OS from Microsoft for 10 years? That makes no sense. As well as XP was recieved people were complaining when there was not new OS for 5 years, let alone 10.

And at its core, 7 isn't a huge change over Vista, not like Vista over XP. The driver model is the same for one.
 
heatlesssun said:
Where are people getting this idea that Vista was supposed to be THE OS from Microsoft for 10 years?
Click to expand...

microsoft had hinted at it, ill try to dig up news archives but it was years ago. they wanted vista to last for a looong time, while charging for the incremental updates. people took this as "be charged for service packs now, while new operating systems coming every 3 years". its almost a failure on microsofts part to not proclaim their direction defiantly, but i suppose they might not even know exactly.
 
spacetrader said:
i vote this for worst post of the year for 09 while my elbows are on the table and my face is buried in my palms :(

cmon dude... your post is exactly what im talking about.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I was shaking my head in disbelief. Who said all opinions are created equal? I hope nobody. With all the stuff i am hearing, i'm actually quite excited to try it out tomorrow.
 
heatlesssun said:
...And at its core, 7 isn't a huge change over Vista, not like Vista over XP. The driver model is the same for one.
Click to expand...

Sprinkle some glitter on new icons and explorer thumbnails, change the GUI around (hey, who moved my cheese?!!!) and you'll have Vista users falling over themselves for a copy of the second coming (W7).

Meh, so I'm casting...:p This is a great thread.
 
I really do feel bad for all the people that paid retail for Vista. I'm curious though, how many users here are still using XP and thinking about W7? The whole "W7 so soon after Vista" argument doesn't apply to us and I wanted to know if I'm in the minority.
 
spacetrader said:
microsoft had hinted at it, ill try to dig up news archives but it was years ago. they wanted vista to last for a looong time, while charging for the incremental updates. people took this as "be charged for service packs now, while new operating systems coming every 3 years". its almost a failure on microsofts part to not proclaim their direction defiantly, but i suppose they might not even know exactly.
Click to expand...

Sure Microsoft wanted the architecture to last for good while, the driver model hasn't changed in 7, but I don't believe that for an instant that they actually expected to actually have the Vista brand around for ten years.

Vista is Windows 6. Windows 7 is actually Windows 6.1.
 
XamediX said:
I really do feel bad for all the people that paid retail for Vista. I'm curious though, how many users here are still using XP and thinking about W7? The whole "W7 so soon after Vista" argument doesn't apply to us and I wanted to know if I'm in the minority.
Click to expand...

For that matter one could feel sorry for anyone who paid reatil for anything. There are so many legal ways to obtain Windows and Office for a fraction of retail its hard to keep track.
 
Joe Average said:
No offense, but Windows 7 is whatever the hell Microsoft wants to call it, sooo... ;) The arguments over damned build numbers and whatever is a bit ridiculous.
Click to expand...

While your statement is true dot releases are not usually major upgrades. Windows 7 isn't a major upgrade over Vista.
 
XamediX said:
I really do feel bad for all the people that paid retail for Vista. I'm curious though, how many users here are still using XP and thinking about W7? The whole "W7 so soon after Vista" argument doesn't apply to us and I wanted to know if I'm in the minority.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall a recent stat that had XP on 80% of all computers world wide.

I have Vista on two laptops, XP64 on my primary gaming rig and XP32 on a back-up computer. I'm planning on upgrading my primary box but I'm not going to touch W7 until it's been out for a while.
 
spacetrader said:
^^ and to further my point, people are also saying 'vista sucked out of the gate, maybe microsoft learned this time around'. again, their the SAME os at the core. to whip up windows 7 was all too easy for microsoft. building from the ground up is why vista took so long to mature. now that it IS mature, they are selling it again to all those people that were convinced vista was crap. brilliant for microsoft, and pitiful for the idiots.

that said, i probably will buy windows 7 but only on new machines. right now there is really no reason to upgrade at all if you have vista already.
Click to expand...

This is implying that Windows 7 offers no substantial improvements over Vista. VIsta SP1 is a very stable and secure operating system, but from a UI standpoint it is an absolute mess. Microsoft worked really really hard to improve and streamline the UI in Windows 7. It is something I always rail on Vista for relative to a much more streamlined operating system like OS X. What takes me 5-6 steps to do in Vista thanks to countless superfluous submenus and drill-downs (and that's if I know exactly what to do) takes me only two very logical steps in OS X.

Well, apparently that's fixed in Windows 7. Everything I've seen has me very excited.

Window and application management, streamlining the UI and submenus, these are substantial improvements that will speed up and improve workflow.

Even if the "core" is essentially the same, an OS with a radically improved GUI also has value. These are actual practical benefits. It might be window dressing to some people, but this makes an actual difference in terms of getting real work done. Its why OS X has been my preferred OS since 10.4 and why I expect Windows 7 will be a great operating system, Microsoft's best.

Maybe things like streamlining UI, workflow, and usability don't matter to you. It sure as hell matters to me. I just want to get my work done fast with as little intrusion from the OS as possible.
 
Serpico said:
Maybe things like streamlining UI, workflow, and usability don't matter to you. It sure as hell matters to me. I just want to get my work done fast with as little intrusion from the OS as possible.
Click to expand...

+1

And why I don't use Vista on my primary box.
 
ICOM said:
+1

And why I don't use Vista on my primary box.
Click to expand...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Yeah, there are some quirks in the Vista UI but the one thing that beats is over XP IMHO is the Start Menu, its much easier to find and launch apps and find documents. People rag on the search, but its quite good if its setup properly and has the PDF filter. Very useful.
 
XamediX said:
I really do feel bad for all the people that paid retail for Vista. I'm curious though, how many users here are still using XP and thinking about W7? The whole "W7 so soon after Vista" argument doesn't apply to us and I wanted to know if I'm in the minority.
Click to expand...

I am still using Windows XP:D And yeah, of course it doesn't applies to us. One good thing for us is that even if Win7 is an upgrade from Vista, we'll just have this improved version of Vista.

I am very exited about this, although i may not be the first in line for Windows 7 when its released. Its going to be a perfect upgrade for us from WinXP
 
heatlesssun said:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Yeah, there are some quirks in the Vista UI but the one thing that beats is over XP IMHO is the Start Menu, its much easier to find and launch apps and find documents. People rag on the search, but its quite good if its setup properly and has the PDF filter. Very useful.
Click to expand...

that is really the only issue I have left with vista, it pretty with lots of bells and whistles but its lacking in some of the very basic functions. put it another way, you could argue that a business would increase it productivity by going to XP, your really can't make the same claim with vista. I am really wanting to take a look at windows 7
 
Azhar said:
Monitor drivers? Who installs monitor drivers? :-P
Click to expand...

actually it didn't work anyways, there is driver bug with nvidia that does not detect some monitor accurately. still need it to calibrate my hanspree.
 
Serpico said:
This is implying that Windows 7 offers no substantial improvements over Vista. VIsta SP1 is a very stable and secure operating system, but from a UI standpoint it is an absolute mess. Microsoft worked really really hard to improve and streamline the UI in Windows 7. It is something I always rail on Vista for relative to a much more streamlined operating system like OS X. What takes me 5-6 steps to do in Vista thanks to countless superfluous submenus and drill-downs (and that's if I know exactly what to do) takes me only two very logical steps in OS X.

Well, apparently that's fixed in Windows 7. Everything I've seen has me very excited.

Window and application management, streamlining the UI and submenus, these are substantial improvements that will speed up and improve workflow.

Even if the "core" is essentially the same, an OS with a radically improved GUI also has value. These are actual practical benefits. It might be window dressing to some people, but this makes an actual difference in terms of getting real work done. Its why OS X has been my preferred OS since 10.4 and why I expect Windows 7 will be a great operating system, Microsoft's best.

Maybe things like streamlining UI, workflow, and usability don't matter to you. It sure as hell matters to me. I just want to get my work done fast with as little intrusion from the OS as possible.
Click to expand...


good points on the gui. i wasnt trying to imply windows 7 is useless... but i just wont classify as necessary like it was going from 98 to xp....
 
visionviper said:
Service packs are free. So in a sense I am wondering if you guys think Microsoft will start charging for service packs.
Click to expand...

thats what i was trying to say a handful of posts back. they do want to charge for service packs. buying windows 7 will be very much like paying for sp2 in xp. i dont think microsoft really wanted to launch a whole "new" os, but the bad name of vista forced them to re-tag the logo and sell it as something totally different, even though they knew all along that vista would be the base of the next 3 or 4 'overhauls'. if you truly hate vista, then you might as well go with apple products for the next decade because vista's kernel is here to stay.
 
heatlesssun said:
For that matter one could feel sorry for anyone who paid reatil for anything. There are so many legal ways to obtain Windows and Office for a fraction of retail its hard to keep track.
Click to expand...
That is another reason why I feel bad for them. I mean who didn't capitalize on the free office 2007 and Vista deals that were posted on here and anandtech's hot deals section? I didn't but a friend got me a copy of a legit Vista 32bit.

spacetrader said:
good points on the gui. i wasnt trying to imply windows 7 is useless... but i just wont classify as necessary like it was going from 98 to xp....
Click to expand...
Anytime you are 3 generations behind anything hardware or software, it's usually necessary to upgrade.

spacetrader said:
thats what i was trying to say a handful of posts back. they do want to charge for service packs. buying windows 7 will be very much like paying for sp2 in xp. i dont think microsoft really wanted to launch a whole "new" os, but the bad name of vista forced them to re-tag the logo and sell it as something totally different, even though they knew all along that vista would be the base of the next 3 or 4 'overhauls'. if you truly hate vista, then you might as well go with apple products for the next decade because vista's kernel is here to stay.
Click to expand...
That opinion will be moot when Vista SP2 comes out, for free. Windows 7 may or may not be launched yet but they are not gonna end support for Vista.
 
XamediX said:
Except ME deserved its rep while Vista really didn't.
Click to expand...
Yup.

From what I hear on the Windows Weekly podcast what we see on win7 now is pretty close to what we're going to get. I'll be getting the public beta tomorrow and load it up on a spare machine.
 
what are the issues with copying in vista? I transfered 120GB worth of movies from my laptop running Vista SP1 over to a internal hard drive with a usb adaptor without a single hitch
 
ShagnWagn said:
Windows 7 = Windows Vista SP2
IMO, this "update" should be free for Vista owners. Vista has many broken features that makes it a pain to use. My biggest gripe is still how it randomly resets folder views, but it goes much deeper than that.

Very sad I actually bought Vista, and feel taken advantage of for even buying the Ultimate flavor. I figured it was the next "XP" and would be around for 7+ years. Guess it pays to not pay until you use it through its life cycle. lol
Click to expand...

QFT

I couldn't have said this better myself. My feelings about Vista exactly.
 
I'd love Windows 7 to:

- allow me to choose what I want and don't want to install
- actually not install or save files to apps that I specifically didn't want on my drive.
- sell for a reasonable price - anything over $175 (and I'm already stretching the budget here) is overpriced, as for me when it comes to spending money, hardware trumps software.
- allow >>>>me<<<<< to fully control (i.e. disable, enable) DRM
- not be sold in 10 different versions; I don't mind getting the most basic OS, as long as basic doesn't mean completely castrated. I'd go for basic if it meant 'streamlined', 100% pure OS, no BS, no bloatware added. No IE, no WMP, no Outlook - if that dreadful thing should still come with W7. And should I need those, then I could always find them on MS's website.
I'd take a nice GUI, though.

Is that too much to ask? Am I being reasonable?
 
aShrubbery! said:
I'd love Windows 7 to:

- allow me to choose what I want and don't want to install
- actually not install or save files to apps that I specifically didn't want on my drive.
- sell for a reasonable price - anything over $175 (and I'm already stretching the budget here) is overpriced, as for me when it comes to spending money, hardware trumps software.
- allow >>>>me<<<<< to fully control (i.e. disable, enable) DRM
- not be sold in 10 different versions; I don't mind getting the most basic OS, as long as basic doesn't mean completely castrated. I'd go for basic if it meant 'streamlined', 100% pure OS, no BS, no bloatware added. No IE, no WMP, no Outlook - if that dreadful thing should still come with W7. And should I need those, then I could always find them on MS's website.
I'd take a nice GUI, though.

Is that too much to ask? Am I being reasonable?
Click to expand...

A great many Windows components are NOT installed by default in Vista. Outlook is not part of Windows. IE & WMP are easily replaced as the default apps though removing them completely isn't built in.

As for DRM, DRM that you could disabled wouldn't really be DRM would it? The DRM debate over Vista is overblown. The DRM in Vista is there because third parties like Sony require it. Try playing a Blu-Ray disc in Linux. You can't unless you break the DRM.
 
What's the best and easiest way to partition my drive so that I can dual boot this and xp. I had xp and vista dual booting, but ended up whiping the vista partition. It still asks me which OS do I want to choose lol :p
 
heatlesssun said:
... IE & WMP are easily replaced as the default apps though removing them completely isn't built in....
Click to expand...

That's my main gripe. I'd love to know the reason why is it so. Any official explanation from MS on that? If you don't need it and you want to dump it, why do HAVE to have it?

heatlesssun said:
As for DRM, DRM that you could disabled wouldn't really be DRM would it? The DRM debate over Vista is overblown. The DRM in Vista is there because third parties like Sony require it. Try playing a Blu-Ray disc in Linux. You can't unless you break the DRM.
Click to expand...

Valid point. However, I'd still want to have that option, even if disabling DRM would not allow me to play BLu-Ray discs. I don't need Blu-Ray on my PC. I RARELY watch DVDs on the computer. Let alone Blu-Ray. I for one do not own a TV with a high enough resolution that could do Blu-Ray justice, and my lack of interest for movies has not justified the expense. Maybe further down the road, ...much further. I actually reduced my watching TV dramatically after I ditched Dish Network, so replacing my TV is not on the list for a long - I mean, real long - while to come.

When I pay for using a licence I would like to be the master of what I paid for. Not be at the mercy of corporations who want to control what I doled I my cash for.
I'm all for Sony getting their royalties and rights enforced, but not at the expense of my rights.
Like I said, allow user controlled DRM, and limit the use for digitally protected media. That's a trade off people should be allowed to make.
 
aShrubbery! said:
That's my main gripe. I'd love to know the reason why is it so. Any official explanation from MS on that? If you don't need it and you want to dump it, why do HAVE to have it?
Click to expand...

Would you ask the same question of Apple and why they don't remove QuickTime and iTunes from OSX? I wonder...

Yes, you can delete iTunes rather easily but QuickTime is a bit more hooked into the system, and since the damned OS is written with those tools/utilities in mind, you're effectively crippling it by mucking with it.

Why do people continue to bash Microsoft for WMP? I don't get it... geez, if you want an OS with absolutely nothing in it and you add precisely what you want from nothing to exactly the machine and OS you desire, go mess with Linux From Scratch.
 
Vistas great, stop knocking it. If microsoft wants to push it aside, no problem. Bring on windows 7. I'm still gonna use Vista 64 in the meantime. ;)
 
finalgt said:
You know, I was actually starting to believe that Vista wasn't a feature-incomplete abortion of an OS. I railed it pretty hard when it first came out because of the number of issues with it, but after SP1, it was starting to seem like an actual next-gen OS. But by releasing a whole separate operating system less than 3 years after Vista, Microsoft is basically acknowledging that Vista was a pile of shit. They're fucking over anybody who supported them and actually bought it. Not only that, but the majority of the new "features" in Windows 7 look like tweaks to stuff that Vista fucked up - everything about it looks like what Vista was SUPPOSED to be, if they hadn't released it early just to turn a quick profit.

Why is Microsoft surprised that so many people pirate their operating systems, again?
Click to expand...
You must be new to the computer scene. Think of how many years between Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows 2000's releases, and then read your post again. That's not even counting the OEM Service Releases, Windows 98SE, or Windows Me (and I left out NT because it wasn't mainstream).

Windows Vista (regardless of my opinion of it) is the EXCEPTION for Microsoft in how long it took to release it, not the rule. If it had been released on time, Windows XP would have only been out for 3-4 years before its release.

That said, I'd honestly prefer that Microsoft had a 5-year OS cycle, provided they could get things right the first time.
 
I couldn't of said it better myself as Vista was a year or so too late, people got to comfortable with XP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top