What will you do on Aug 1 when Windows 7 Beta Quits working?

X

XTC

Gawd
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
879
According to the MS website Windows 7 will stop working on Aug 1 2009, but it also makes it sound like they might make an extension to the time so that we could continue using the beta.
Watch the calendar. The Beta expires on August 1, 2009. To continue using your PC, please be prepared to reinstall a prior version of Windows or a subsequent release of Windows 7 before the expiration date.
Click to expand...
Will there be another release?

In the past with MS beta's have they allowed people to use the beta until the retail edition was available?

I am putting together a new system and I can't decide if I should install Vista (I bought it just in case Wndows 7 doesn't work with my config) or just go for it with Windows 7 beta and take my chances that I might have to change/downgrade later.
 
Why would they extend it? They're a business to make money just like any other businesses in the world. You're going to have to buy a license key to continue to use it. Don't bother getting your hopes up for an extension.

Win7 beta is on a spare PC I tinker with frequently between Linux, BSD, various Windows servers, and so on. If it expires, then I'm going to do what I feel like doing at the time. It's like eating to me. I'll eat what I'm in the mood to eat each night. ;)
 
The site says Aug 1, but if you type winver in the run command, it will show 7/1/2009, so it might be crippled 30 days after July 1st.

Hopefully there will be Release canidates or even a Release to Manufacturing (final code that will ship on disc) around that time or atleast extent it. I'm enjoying Win 7 so far.
 
Windows 7 is a beta OS, and should be treated as such. Meaning, since you bought a new computer, and you have Vista lready, you should be loading Vista. There's nothing wrong with Vista, and no reason to be avoiding it right now, especially for a beta OS. There are no guarantees that a new beta will exist that lets you maintain the current install and such. There's no guarantees of anything, to be honest. Vista has been working great for a long time now, the drivers are mature, so I couldn't see any reason NOT to put it on your current, main system.

Install Vista, and if you still want to play around with Windows 7, use a VM, or your previous computer to run it.
 
I will either install my Vista Home Premium again or move to a Release Candidate version of Windows 7 if one is available at the time.
 
Once a Windows OS goes public beta it is basically a released product its not like Microsoft will not have other releases.

Technically anyone who want to start using Windows 7 now can and will never have to go back unless there are technical problems.
 
Paying for it isn't the issue, I just wanted to know if at some point I will be FORCED to go back to a previous version or if I will be able to continue with some form of Win7 until the retail version is available to purchase.

I was hoping to draw on peoples past experiences with MS and beta's to see what they historically do in these situations.

Thank you for your responses.
 
Ill be already using win7 x64 RCx, or retail, if its available.
 
Delete the virtual machine or install something else on the temporary loaner hard drive I have W7 on.

There's a reason I don't install short lifespan BETAs on my primary rigs....because...I don't want to waste my time doing a reinstall.

When it becomes officially released..that's when it goes on my primary rigs.
 
These kinds of questions point out the ignorance of people when it comes to beta testing. During beta testing, the idea is to release a build that's stable enough for use outside of the controlled "lab environment" on a near-static hardware platform, almost like having a console machine.

Because bugs are found, modifications are made, sooner or later another beta build gets released depending on the severity of the bugs, glitches, and modifications that are being made. So, when such newer updated builds become available, the beta testers wipe the old build away and install the new one. Hence, the beta testing period is extended with respect to a new build being released.

Then perhaps another beta, and even another if necessary (the most "public" betas I've ever been a part of were with XP, which had 2 and then 3 release candidates before it went "gold" aka RTM status for OEM/Retail distribution).

Windows 7 Beta (aka Beta 1) so far has been the single most "stable" standalone beta OS I've ever had the pleasure - or displeasure when remembering some of the crap I've tested in years past - of working with. While I can't positively say it's ready for RC status, I will say it's awfully damned close with just relatively minor (on the big scale) bugs I've noted and read about. I haven't seen or heard of any showstoppers - bugs so severe they can literally stop the entire development process at a moment's notice until the entire development team fixes or resolves it...

So, worrying about running Windows 7 Beta (aka Beta 1) all the way into July or August is a bit silly. There might be another beta build released, or it could move to release candidate stage at any point... and if it does, realistically you don't continue using the old build - you dump it, wipe it away, and you install the updated bug-fixed more tightly developed and tuned code and start using that version.

People that ask such questions obviously aren't real beta testers. They're folks that just jump on the chance to get their hands on a new OS for bragging rights or whatever reasons they happen to have.

Cold, blunt, to the point - that's me. A real beta tester would never even dare ask such a question since they know the next beta or RC build is just around the corner... the other types of people are just in this for shits and giggles, and actually consider running a beta OS for ~6 months or longer somewhat of a serious thing and worry about it "dying" at the end of its effective lifespan. Those are the types of people we really could do a lot better off without because the overwhelming majority of these "Oooo, lookee what I got and you don't" folk aren't helping much in the long run.

Just the facts, folks...
 
I've been using 7 on and off for a week or so now.

Dumping all my crap on an external and reinstalling isn't really too much of a headache. And by then, it will give me a chance to clean out all the crap i accrue that i don't even use.

I really like 7. I think the install process was the best out of any OS i've yet worked with. It even installed all my chipset and graphics drivers by itself...which really 'tickled me pink'. ;-)

When the time comes I'm pretty sure I'll just end up wiping it and sticking on a real copy of the software.

It seems to be as fast as xp and as pretty as vista...so the best of both worlds, I think.
 
If your beta testing machine isn't connected to internet I am pretty sure you could just change you bios date or even the Windows time and date settings and keep using it indefinitely.

If you installed in your primary machine have fun reinstalling Vista or XP... :p

If you are doing a fresh install a new computer, you could always do this thing called dual booting...

Or if you only have 1 machine, there is this amazing thing called a Virtual Machine that will save you a lot of time and trouble.....

Choices really aren't that hard... and I doubt you will be able to downgrade from Beta OS
 
What would I do? Not boot onto that drive maybe? What the hell am I supposed to do? It's not like I don't have two other operating systems on here.

Besides, Windows 7 will be out before then.
 
Jump out of the top story of a 20 story building!::cool:

Seriously, at this point Windows 7 is now probably the #4 desktop OS in the world following XP,Vista, and OS X. Maybe Linux as a group more widely deployed but I probably not any one distro, maybe Ubuntu. Please not trying to flame just saying!

Windows 7 is now part of the computing universe, its here to stay and anyone can start using today from now on. So if you like 7 you'll get it and if you don't you won't. I'll be building my next gaming rig around Windows 7 and my next tablet will have it as soon as the product looks good, which I don't expect to see in final form until late Q3.
 
I am going to test it, mess around with it, then wipe the drive most likely and move on.

It is a Beta, and shall be treated as such ;)
 
I'll keep using Vista, since it's not really that much different, and I already have a copy of it.
 
Azhar said:
QFT!

UAC prompts me thousands times a day, it hogs all my RAM, and no driver works on it.
Click to expand...

Latest I heard was that in order to maintain the security level of Vista, you still need to run the UAC up to Vista levels in Windows 7; as the default "lower" setting presents security risks.

I wish people would stop whining about UAC, it's really not a new thing, just new to Windows; and it's here to stay.
 
AbJ32 said:
I'll keep using Vista, since it's not really that much different, and I already have a copy of it.
Click to expand...

Actually its quite different. But perhaps by far the most dramatic change are the tablet features which aren't going to been by a large percentage of the users.
 
rampantandroid said:
Yeah, that faster perf, better security and lower memory footprint is insignificant. Right?
Click to expand...
What faster performance? I don't see any. When I switched to Vista from XP, I noticed a pretty dramatic performance increase. Going from Vista to Windows 7 Beta, the difference was minimal.

Better security? Could you elaborate on how it offers better security?

Lower memory foot print? It's not much lower for me, and certainly not enough to warrant buying a new OS.

heatlesssun said:
Actually its quite different. But perhaps by far the most dramatic change are the tablet features which aren't going to been by a large percentage of the users.
Click to expand...

It uses for the most part, the same kernel, and the same driver model, with some minor changes, so I wouldn't say it's quite different. The biggest change is to the user interface, from what I've seen.
 
AbJ32 said:
It uses for the most part, the same kernel, and the same driver model, with some minor changes, so I wouldn't say it's quite different. The biggest change is to the user interface, from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

As I was trying to say, it depends where you look. Sure this isn't a big architectural change however the tablet features are a big change which it why I've kept if on my tablet pc full time now. I guess that could be considered a UI change but UI would be user input in this case. And its going to be an even bigger change in that area when fully functional multi-touch drivers become available. From the perspective of someone who uses a tablet, its this biggest change since the tablet pc OS was introduced in 2002.
 
So I seem to have struck a nerve with a few of you, and perhaps I should have explained myself better from the beginning. So here's the deal, I have a sealed in the box copy of Vista, my plan was to run Win 7, accepting the risk that goes with running a beta OS. If Windows 7 didn't work correctly for me then I would have something to format and install instead. IF windows 7 didn't give me any problems I was planning on selling my copy of Vista on ebay. But I didn't want to come across a period of time where win 7 beta would be disabled and there wasn't another option other than going back to a previous Windows version.

Hopefully that clears up the confusion, I just wanted to know if I could sell my copy of Vista, but as so many of you have pointed out I am just an idiot. I now know that I should not ask questions of a community forum, thanks for the education.
 
heatlesssun said:
As I was trying to say, it depends where you look. Sure this isn't a big architectural change however the tablet features are a big change which it why I've kept if on my tablet pc full time now. I guess that could be considered a UI change but UI would be user input in this case. And its going to be an even bigger change in that area when fully functional multi-touch drivers become available. From the perspective of someone who uses a tablet, its this biggest change since the tablet pc OS was introduced in 2002.
Click to expand...

Technically the UI covers every aspect of how the user interacts with the OS. The distinction with Windows 7 is that almost all of the changes are in the UI, whereas the way the OS actually works underneath it all is nearly identical to Vista. It's similar to Win2k versus XP, except the subsystem changes from Vista to 7 are actually smaller than in that situation IIRC.
 
AbJ32 said:
What faster performance? I don't see any. When I switched to Vista from XP, I noticed a pretty dramatic performance increase. Going from Vista to Windows 7 Beta, the difference was minimal.

Better security? Could you elaborate on how it offers better security?

Lower memory foot print? It's not much lower for me, and certainly not enough to warrant buying a new OS.



It uses for the most part, the same kernel, and the same driver model, with some minor changes, so I wouldn't say it's quite different. The biggest change is to the user interface, from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

At one of the office buildings I maintain, we have a computer school. I was talking to one of the teachers, who specializes in computer forensics. He told me 7 has some serious security issues. Unfortunately, He didn't elaborate. This guy is a MS engineer, and he honestly didn't seem at all impressed with Windows 7. So I guess we'll see what shakes out in the final release.
 
dkev said:
At one of the office buildings I maintain, we have a computer school. I was talking to one of the teachers, who specializes in computer forensics. He told me 7 has some serious security issues. Unfortunately, He didn't elaborate. This guy is a MS engineer, and he honestly didn't seem at all impressed with Windows 7. So I guess we'll see what shakes out in the final release.
Click to expand...

Then shouldn't Vista have the same security issues? As many here have pointed out 7 isn't a major architectural change from Vista, its basic security mechanisms are the same and its looks to be that Vista has actually held up well compared to any prior Microsoft desktop OS.
 
Zero82z said:
Technically the UI covers every aspect of how the user interacts with the OS. The distinction with Windows 7 is that almost all of the changes are in the UI, whereas the way the OS actually works underneath it all is nearly identical to Vista. It's similar to Win2k versus XP, except the subsystem changes from Vista to 7 are actually smaller than in that situation IIRC.
Click to expand...

What you say is true, but to say that major changes to the UI of a desktop OS is a not major difference is looking at the OS in terms of code, not function.

Functionally, all the little changes in 7 add up to a big change at least for an end user's perspective. It's a matter of perspective.
 
heatlesssun said:
What you say is true, but to say that major changes to the UI of a desktop OS is a not major difference is looking at the OS in terms of code, not function.

Functionally, all the little changes in 7 add up to a big change at least for an end user's perspective. It's a matter of perspective.
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree. The user interface changes are extensive, and make the OS vastly different from Vista. The point is that on a technological level, Windows 7 has few improvements, so to criticize Vista and place 7 on a pedestal above it based on so-called performance and security improvements is incorrect, since any changes in those aspects are minimal. In theory, you could slap Windows 7's UI straight onto Vista and it would act pretty much identically.
 
Okay, well I was hoping to get the same info that XTC was looking for. As I read it, what MS was saying was to be prepared to either, Install your old version of windows, meaning Visa or XP or update to either a newer beta OS or buy a licence for the retail version of Win 7. I was assuming that they would either offer an update to keep you going, offer the retail version as an update for a cost, or you'd have to uninstall 7 and start over with anther OS. I hadn't even considered having to start over as an "only" alternative.

I understand your question XTC...I don't think you're an idiot!! If someone here actually ran Vista as a beta what happened when the testing was over? Did you have the option to continue using it for a fee? Dis MS decide that you needed to uninstall and start a fresh install with the retail or OEM version? It just doesn't seem to make much sense. If the program is developed enough to release it as beta to the public then, I would think, it is pretty close to being what is to be released as a retail and all the issues with the beta could be sorted out with an update downloaded to your beta version , bringing in line with the retail version. But thats just my own theory with absolutley no experience to draw on except my own version of common sence.
 
I shrank (that doesn't sound correct, but it is..) my Vista install on my AAO and installed 7 in the free space it created so when the Beta expires I will just delete it and expand Vista again. Simple.
 
criccio said:
I shrank (that doesn't sound correct, but it is..) my Vista install on my AAO and installed 7 in the free space it created so when the Beta expires I will just delete it and expand Vista again. Simple.
Click to expand...

Yeah, same here. I'll probably do the same thing, too. Just delete and expand. That or I might install Linux on that partition, but I'm not sure about that.
 
heatlesssun said:
Then shouldn't Vista have the same security issues? As many here have pointed out 7 isn't a major architectural change from Vista, its basic security mechanisms are the same and its looks to be that Vista has actually held up well compared to any prior Microsoft desktop OS.
Click to expand...

Dude I couldn't tell you. But this dude knows way more about this shit then most of us ever will. Hell for all I know, he may think the same about Vista. Like I said, he didn't elaborate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top