Windows 7 will be released

[Xavier434]

Meh...I'm just glad they working on the next version. I enjoy the benefits of Vista well enough, but I will be happy to get something better. Hopefully it will better. Beyond hope, there is really nothing more any of us can do except debate about it, but never getting past square one.

 

[Arkaign]

I don't like Vista very much, but the truth is :

It's not that bad (as the haters would like to tell everyone)
It's not that great (as the lovers would like to tell everyone)

It's time for Microsoft to put Vista to sleep, and give a real reason to upgrade.

 

[Gothgar]

haha, crazy, glad I stuck with XP, and probably will till they stop releasing updates for it.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
From what I have read it sounds like they are going the right way with windows 7.
The kernel and basics of the operating system are supposed to be under 25MB.
That doesn't include the user interface though.

Some pics of windows 7 in use.
Look familiar ?

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/win7_6519.asp

I'm glad they are not touching the UI. I like Vista's UI plus it shows me they are not wasting their time so much on eye candy. I really wish MS would have just waited longer to do the job right, but I realize there is less money to be made that way. I always endorse quality over quantity, but the reality of the business world doesn't escape me either.

 

[OutHouse]

I have Vista on my new XPS laptop and so far so good. The security warnings gets annoying even with it turned off the added security it still pops up INMO far too much. Yes i would have prefered to have the system shipped with XP but that is not a option for the dell XPS systems. XP is stable, reliable and a great OS. The amount of RAM Vista uses is insane, with nothing running, just Vista my system sits at 1.3gigs of RAM in use. but i really dont care how much RAM the OS uses, why would I as long as i have enough to run my other apps who gives a shit how much RAM the OS uses.

but i dont do a whole lot on my system, it run aventail to VPN into work, the office 2007 suite, mozilla and WoW. it does what i need.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Citrix
I have Vista on my new XPS laptop and so far so good. The security warnings gets annoying even with it turned off it still pops up INMO far too much. Yes i would have prefered to have the system shipped with XP but that is not a option for the dell XPS systems. XP is stable, reliable and a great OS.

What I want is a version of Vista with all the bells and whistles that is at least as stable and reliable as the current version of XP. I hope that is what Windows 7 will at least come close to delivering. It would be a shame to give up on the what Vista is trying to offer as an OS.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: Citrix
The amount of RAM Vista uses is insane, with nothing running, just Vista my system sits at 1.3gigs of RAM in use. good thing i bought it with 4gigs.

Yeah, much better having that memory sitting around doing nothing. :roll:

Originally posted by: Xavier434
What I want is a version of Vista with all the bells and whistles that is at least as stable and reliable as the current version of XP. I hope that is what Windows 7 will at least come close to delivering. It would be a shame to give up on the what Vista is trying to offer as an OS.

I've yet to personally experience any issues to indicate that Vista isn't more stable and reliable than XP.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: Citrix
The amount of RAM Vista uses is insane, with nothing running, just Vista my system sits at 1.3gigs of RAM in use. good thing i bought it with 4gigs.

Yeah, much better having that memory sitting around doing nothing. :roll:

Originally posted by: Xavier434
What I want is a version of Vista with all the bells and whistles that is at least as stable and reliable as the current version of XP. I hope that is what Windows 7 will at least come close to delivering. It would be a shame to give up on the what Vista is trying to offer as an OS.

I've yet to personally experience any issues to indicate that Vista isn't more stable and reliable than XP.

dont you have that with any OS? :roll:

if you wanna see idle RAM you should see my server room. I got hundreds of servers with lots and lots of RAM just sitting there doing nothing.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: Xavier434
What I want is a version of Vista with all the bells and whistles that is at least as stable and reliable as the current version of XP. I hope that is what Windows 7 will at least come close to delivering. It would be a shame to give up on the what Vista is trying to offer as an OS.

I've yet to personally experience any issues to indicate that Vista isn't more stable and reliable than XP.

My experience with issues have been minimal as well, but I have experienced them and they were not all driver related. I like Vista. However, there is a lot of room for improvement. MS knows that. This is why there is talk of seeing Windows 7 so soon. They are finishing what they started which doesn't really bother me much to be honest. I paid for Vista and the experience so far has been worth it even if I do upgrade 1-2 years from now.

 

[OutHouse]

hummm interesting, XP Extened to 2010

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: Citrix
hummm interesting, XP Extened to 2010

I don't know if you can really say they are extending xp to 2010 rather than turning it into the operating system for lower end laptop systems till 2010 (aka hardware catches up to vista)

Microsoft confirmed Thursday that it will extend the sales of Windows XP Home to OEMs beyond the current deadline of June 30, 2008, to accommodate a new class of ultra-low-cost PCs (ULCPCs) that are just beginning to pepper the market.

I use three different versions of windows at the moment. vista, xp, and 2000. XP for my desktop and Vista for my laptop. I honestly don't think vista is that bad. I do get a slight performance dip and that's after I turn off aero, indexing, and defrag. But I don't really have that much issue with it. UAC is only really a problem when installing a lot of new programs, even then, it comes up usually about the time other prompts for the program (ie where to install, etc) come up, it's not coming up 50% through the installation and it really isn't all that inconvenient. And if it was? Go into MSCONFIG and disable it.

XP Works, and I'm not discontent with it. I didn't pull vista off my laptop, and i gave it a good month before deciding that I didn't particular like it, didn't particularly dislike it, but instead found that it worked for my laptop. My desktop is XP, I'm not going to upgrade it, but if I did i wouldn't have an issue with it.

At work I use 2000 and Vista. (Yea I know, business environment that skipped XP, what the dilly-o? I'm not the IT dude, but most people are on 2k or XP, I have one of like 3 Vista machines for testing).

I'm no admin so I'm not telling the admins that they are wrong saying vista is hard to implement or whatever. I won't argue that cause I can't. But as an end user I don't really have all that much beef with vista. I do find the blind hatred by some pretty interesting though.

 

[RightIsWrong]

It would appear that

Vista == Windows ME Version 2

 

[5to1baby1in5]

Seems like the only trick here is to pick which versions of windows to skip.

DOS: Buy
3.1: Buy
95: Skip
98: Buy
ME: Skip
NT: Skip
2000: Buy
XP: Skip
XP w/ SP2: Buy
Vista: Skip
7: Buy(?)

I won't be buying any OS until it gets the ATOT Seal Of Approval.

(Note: Buying = get a free copy from a MS Tech show)

 

[Chryso]

They are just coming out with a new one so they can force people to upgrade by stopping support for XP.

 

[UNCjigga]

WTF!?!?!?!?? I just spent $100 on a Vista license. PWNT. :|

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5

(Note: Buying = get a free copy from a MS Tech show)

Hehe :thumbsup:

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: Citrix
dont you have that with any OS? :roll:

Yes, you do. At least while the memory is sitting there not doing anything, Vista puts a good bit of it to use.

Originally posted by: Xavier434
My experience with issues have been minimal as well, but I have experienced them and they were not all driver related. I like Vista. However, there is a lot of room for improvement. MS knows that. This is why there is talk of seeing Windows 7 so soon. They are finishing what they started which doesn't really bother me much to be honest. I paid for Vista and the experience so far has been worth it even if I do upgrade 1-2 years from now.

What sort of problems?

I'm not saying Vista is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it gets a raw deal, IMO. I find it much more snappy and stable than XP now, and light years ahead of where XP was at this point in its life cycle. I understand if XP works for people and they don't want to shell out for a new OS, but honestly, I've gotten 3 copies of Vista for free from MS promotions that took almost zero work...anyone was eligible for these things too. For me, for the price of free, or with a new machine, the quality and new features of Vista are pretty darn good. Really all I can complain about is all the mucking about they did with network connections.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: Xavier434
My experience with issues have been minimal as well, but I have experienced them and they were not all driver related. I like Vista. However, there is a lot of room for improvement. MS knows that. This is why there is talk of seeing Windows 7 so soon. They are finishing what they started which doesn't really bother me much to be honest. I paid for Vista and the experience so far has been worth it even if I do upgrade 1-2 years from now.

What sort of problems?

Many have been fixed at this point through one update or another, but one of the most consistent problems that comes to mind is file transfer speed/lockups on my home network and copy/paste speeds/lockups on a local machine. Even with SP1 out, they is not as fast as XP. I also recall an issue back in the early days of Vista involving some files being lost after moving them from one directory to another. I think that only happened once or twice to me though and I had additional copies of things that were lost so I really didn't look into it so much. Everything else was driver related which I do not blame MS for although I do question how much time was spent on MS's part to try to make the process for the creation of drivers for Vista to be easier. I do not support the idea of an OS being built around drivers, but some consideration needs to be given. I'm not sure how much was given in this case.

 

[UNCjigga]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
I would not want to be in Microsoft's position because of the bunch of net nerds like you guys. You always want something more secure and uses new tech, but when something comes along, you bitch because it uses more resources. Of course it's going to use more resources...I don't hear you guys bitching because Intel or AMD comes out with more powerful processors every year and wanting to charge you for it.

You say the drivers are crappy...
...but that's 90% on the developers of the hardware, not Microsoft.

You bitch about twice the RAM being used...
...1.) RAM is cheap 2.) turn off superfetch 3.) why have RAM if you aren't going to fucking use it?

You bitch about it using more CPU...
...1.) so what? 2.) why have the CPU if you aren't going to use it? 3.) Vista is an advanced piece of OS, you expect it to run on air?

You bitch about the administrator prompt...
...for crying out loud, turn it off!

You bitch about Microsoft coming out with a new Windows within 3-4 years...
...well, bitch about CPU's coming out every year, new video cards coming out twice a year, new iPod's every year (shit, Vista is cheaper than those), new cars coming out every year, etc etc.

It's unfortunate that it's become cool on the internet to berate Microsoft and anything they do, because Vista is a great OS, and a worthy successor to XP. I've been using it for over a year now, and IMO, it's stable as hell. From looking at the reliability and performance monitor built into Vista, in the past year, I've only had 2 Windows failures (which I don't even remember) and very few application failures. I've managed to crash iexplore a few times, but with Vista, it's always recovered perfectly fine without a reboot.

The fundamental flaw with Vista is that it was paired with a piss-poor marketing strategy that killed any hope for consumer/business support and adoption.

First of all, Vista is overpriced to begin with. There is no compelling reason to upgrade from a consumer's viewpoint. Enterprise users have better security and management features, but MS knows they will wait until SP1 to upgrade and should've waited longer to release Vista Business at a later date, maybe with the new filesystem (to get better stability/more enterprise functionality on the original launch date of Business.)

Having a pretty face isn't reason enough to justify the high price tag. Upgrades to Home Premium should've been priced at $79-$99 from the start, with an upgrade to Ultimate costing $129-$149. The price cuts we've seen are pure reactionary measures that prove Vista has a much lower value proposition than the Marketing idiots originally believed.

Vista Home Basic shouldn't exist. It's a worthless SKU. They should get rid of it now and lower the pricing across the remaining editions. Some marketing idiot thought "but what about all the folks who can't run Aero? How will they run Vista?" The answer should've been "they won't. Wait until they upgrade their PC."

The OS is fine--yes there have been some serious issues with file transfer speed and driver support, but those have largely been fixed within 6-12 months post-launch. The product may have been rushed to market to avoid another slip, and MS could've used additional usability testing, but I believe that this wouldn't have been as big an issue if MS could've axed Home Basic and delayed the Business SKU. Where MS really needs to learn a thing or two from Apple and others is marketing.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx

Originally posted by: Chiropteran
I'm using vista 64bit, and I love it.

Vista uses more ram, ZOMG!

It uses a little more, but if I was using 32bit XP I would be hard-capped at something like 3GB of ram anyway. I have 4GB of RAM, Vista "uses" 900MB and I still have more free RAM that any XP user. And I say uses in quotes because a lot of that ram is just cache, which is released the moment an application needs it.

Vista uses more CPU, ZOMG!

Not that I have noticed. How are you even measuring this? Task manager shows CPU usage at 1% or less unless I'm running some other program.

Vista sucks and crashes a lot, ZOMG!

I haven't had any Vista-caused crashes.

Vista drivers suck!

In my experience, 64 bit vista drivers are fine. Of course I stick to hardware that is well supported- ATI video card, Intel chipset boards, etc. When ATI drivers are 100% stable but nVidia drivers crash, that isn't microsoft's fault- that is nVidia's fault.

Same here. I'm loving Vista 64. Granted I have a quad core machine with 4gb ram, but after you give Vista the juice it wants, it runs flawlessly. Not one program has managed to lock the OS. Even when games crash due to video card issues, Vista can recover from it without a reboot. Having that level of abstraction which allows it to recover from just about anything takes resources.

Also, dreamscapes is awesome. This is my desktop background (click on the video tab).

I've only been using Vista 64 for about 3 weeks now, but I'm with you guys, so far it's rock solid. I've had no driver issues so far, and I certainly couldn't say that when I first went to XP.

Thanks for the wallpaper, Mxylplyx!! It's so hypnotic.

And no way will Windows 7 be out next year. Engadget really needs to stop with the predictions. They really suck at it.

I have to agree, it can be a bit slow, it can be a resource hog with the sidebars and whatnot, but it's vista can dynamically redirect those resources to applications that need it and work on a much smaller footprint when more computing power is needed.

Also, I think everyone forgot the most important thing of all, no matter how much faster XP works, if it hard locks and you need to reboot, that's easily 10 or more minutes lost just Control+alt+deleting and then finally giving up and rebooting and then reloading the programs and hoping your file is recovered. Vista is much more stable. Win98 crashed multiple times a week, XP crashes from time to time, Vista never hard locks and forces me to reboot, at worst I wait for a little while to shut down the program or process.

I never understood the guys with dual or quad cores and 2+gigs of ram that run Linux and bitch day and night about what's less efficient and uses more resources. My roommate constantly tries to explain to me why Gnome is better than KDE even though Gnome is nowhere as attractive. I mean if you paid for the hardware, might as well use it.

It's like if you bought a minivan like a dodge Caravan and then bitched everytime you had to carry passengers in that van.

I think people jut need to bitch, when they run out of real things to bitch about because of their cushy lifestyle, they just make up reasons just so they can say something. It's like when Paris Hilton complains about the color of the leather in her $300K Mercedes.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: UNCjigga

Vista Home Basic shouldn't exist. It's a worthless SKU. They should get rid of it now and lower the pricing across the remaining editions. Some marketing idiot thought "but what about all the folks who can't run Aero? How will they run Vista?" The answer should've been "they won't. Wait until they upgrade their PC."

Ya, Home Basic was a bad idea for the consumer. It might have been a good idea to make more money though. Not sure about that one. Not that I support money over quality, but that's business.

Originally posted by: UNCjigga
The OS is fine--yes there have been some serious issues with file transfer speed and driver support, but those have largely been fixed within 6-12 months post-launch. Where MS really needs to learn a thing or two from Apple and others is marketing.

They should have waited another 12 months. In regards to marketing, Apple severely relies on eye candy and trendy fads so I don't know how much I agree with that one. Vista and certain apple products may be more on the same page in terms of marketing than you realize.

 

[BeauJangles]

I hope that microsoft makes some changes in the next version of windows to include a newer navigation system and, while Aero is a great improvement over WindowsXP, I think it's still too 'kiddy'. Everything is transparent and flashy and I think they should move to something more classy with fewer colors and a more simplistic interface.

I'm also hoping they include the trimmed down kernal and winFS, but I'm probably just dreaming.

 

[UNCjigga]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

They should have waited another 12 months. In regards to marketing, Apple severely relies on eye candy and trendy fads so I don't know how much I agree with that one. Vista and certain apple products may be more on the same page in terms of marketing than you realize.

I'm not saying MS needs to add more eye-candy to their OS. I'm saying they should focus on end-user usability for a major feature release like Vista, and focus on performance/efficiency for point releases. User Account Control was horribly thought out, and really that feature is my biggest beef with Vista SP1 as it exists today. UAC is an enterprise feature that should never be used on consumer releases under the Admin account.

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
I hope that microsoft makes some changes in the next version of windows to include a newer navigation system and, while Aero is a great improvement over WindowsXP, I think it's still too 'kiddy'. Everything is transparent and flashy and I think they should move to something more classy with fewer colors and a more simplistic interface.

I disagree. After using Vista for a week, I think the Aero interface is a nice transition from XP. In fact, XP had more garish colors than Aero. The glass adds a 'classy' touch, and the fade ins/outs are not as "kiddy" as the minimize/maximize effects in OS X.

 

[Tempered81]

i like xp pro sp2 better than my vista home premium on my laptop.

I would like to try a vista vs. xp comparison on my e8400 4ghz desktop for a good even comparison. but i think poor performance on a c2d w/2gb of ram is good enough to tell me it sucks.

 

[BudAshes]

Originally posted by: DoubleROFL
http://www.engadget.com/2008/0...-year-says-bill-gates/

What do you think?

All i can think is that having that annoying of a sig makes you a douchebag and me less likely to vote for obama.