Windows 7: An impressive upgrade
Summary: Windows 7 is officially available to the public tomorrow, after nearly a year of testing. I've covered its features and capabilities in detail over the past few months. Today, on the eve of the official launch, I look at Microsoft's new operating system and answer the big question: Who should upgrade?
Windows 7 is impressive. That word is rarely used in the same sentence as "Microsoft" and "Windows" – certainly not in recent years. But it fits here.
Unlike its predecessors, this Windows version feels as if it were designed and built by a single, coordinated team instead of being assembled from interchangeable parts. In daily use, Windows 7 feels graceful and often (but not always) elegant. Although it builds on elements that debuted in Windows Vista, it fixes many usability sins and adds consistency and polish to an interface that had too many rough edges. And some very impressive new capabilities, especially the grossly underrated Libraries feature, offer rewards for digging deeper.
Windows 7 runs smoothly and efficiently on even modest hardware. Remarkably, it reverses the longstanding trend to make Windows bigger. From a standing start, Windows 7 uses less memory, runs fewer services, and consumes less disk space than its predecessor, Windows Vista, and in the 64-bit version it can address about five times more RAM than you can actually stuff onto a single motherboard. This year, anyway.
I've already covered the features in Windows 7 extensively. Little in Windows 7 has changed since I wrote What to expect from Windows 7 back in May. If you review the screenshot gallery I assembled for that post, you'll have a very good idea of how Windows 7 looks and acts today (the sole exception is Windows XP Mode, which has changed significantly from the beta release I looked at in May).
When Windows Vista was released in January 2007, I suggested that most businesses of even modest size and complexity would be wise to heed conventional wisdom and avoid it until Service Pack 1 was ready. I don't feel compelled to offer that same advice here. The development process for Windows 7 has been steady and deliberate. The Release Candidate code that Microsoft made public last May was arguably more stable and reliable than most recent official Windows releases. As I wrote in What to expect from Windows 7 nearly six months ago:
From a features and capabilities point of view, Windows 7 is essentially done. It’s all over but the process of hunting down bugs, many of them associated with OEM hardware and drivers. In a bygone era, code this stable and well tested might have been released as a 1.0 product, followed six months later by a service pack. Not this year. Microsoft is treating Windows 7 as the world’s most ambitious shareware release ever.
I'm told that 8 million people have been running the Windows 7 Release Candidate. That's four times the number of people who registered as Windows Vista beta testers during its development process. My gut feeling is that the number of people actually using Windows 7 in recent months is at least an order of magnitude higher than the corresponding head count in the runup to Windows Vista. And based on everything I've heard, the overwhelming majority of those who try Windows 7 like it.
So, who should upgrade? And who shouldn't? As always, I don’t believe in one-size-fits-all recommendations. But for a few categories, the choice is simple:
- If you're running Windows Vista and gritting your teeth over it, you should upgrade as soon as possible. The relief will be immediate.
- If you're shopping for a new PC, get one with Windows 7 on it. And if it doesn't run properly on Day 1, return it and find another. OEMs that do a good job of matching PC hardware to Windows should be rewarded. Those who didn't learn from the Vista experience deserve to be punished.
- If you're perfectly happy with the performance of XP and don't want to relearn established habits, stay put.
- For anyone relying on mission-critical Windows-based apps or specialized hardware, testing trumps any desire to have the latest OS, no matter how well it's been reviewed.
And if you're feeling gun-shy about switching, it's OK to wait. Most people forget that the venerable Windows XP was unpopular and unloved for its first two years in the marketplace. And Windows Vista has matured into a solid, if forgettable OS after many reliability updates and two service packs. Based on that experience, Windows 7 will improve with age.
Yes, there are downsides to the Windows 7 transition. For Windows XP users in particular, the upgrade process is tedious. Licensing is still a confusing mess, especially for small business owners. Drivers are still a potential source of headaches, as I’ve found in recent months.
But its improvements in productivity, security, and reliability make Windows 7 worth those short-term hassles. It is, without question, the most impressive software development effort Microsoft has ever undertaken. For anyone who has chosen Windows – out of preference or necessity – it is an impressive achievement and as close to an essential upgrade as I have ever seen.
More Windows 7 Coverage:
- Special Report: Windows 7 at the finish line
- Windows 7 in the real world with real PCs
- Windows 7 in action: a closer look at Windows XP Mode
- How long until Windows 7 beats Mac OS X Leopard/Snow Leopard?
- Nine out of 10 corporate PCs can run Windows 7
- Gartner: Looking beyond Windows 7 and Office
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Windows 7 review:
<strong>Performance enhancements</strong>
<font color=#808080>"We have already determined that W7 won't make your computer run any faster. And if you are upgrading from XP, it might run slightly slower, just as with Vista. ...
...
But it's not really anything new. We hate to be the reviewers who say that the emperor has no clothes, but there's <strong>so much hype surrounding W7</strong> that most people are probably expecting an entirely new operating system. What they will find is an improved version of Vista, with the same warts and flaws and a few improvements. That's really it."</font>
^o^
<br>
But alas...
Offering what?
Faster? No.
Cheaper? No.
Are there apps that DEMAND it? No. Not yet, anyway.
So thanks for the eye candy, but we'll pass.
Spot On
So while Microsoft regard my needs as unworthy of support I think I will regard their need for cash as equally unworthy of my support.
Ken
IT Director
Melbourne
Great!
You'll be on it in two to three years or you'll be out of a job.
Turd polishing
Microsoft, who has ever gotten any help from them?
I expect a lot of negative articles now describing the emperor's lack of
clothes, probably not from ZDNet though.
Uh? I have got always great support (nt)
Live beyond Windows
Windows, and MSFT is just forcing more and more people to go looking
for it.
no one
However, if you buy a new PC, Windows 7 is the way to go.
Do not upgrade then
which includes constant improvements of
previous versions of their OS. If you like
an older OS stay put as long as you want.
Some of us are glad we can play with a new
OS and are more than happy to switch. I
like the media center and is the one
reason I would upgrade (once my free win 7
beta expires of course. I mean at my
company I just got rid of our last windows
NT 4.0 computer about 6 months ago. It ran
fine and was rock solid for what we used
it for. So DO NOT upgrade until you are
ready.
Please stop whining that a company comes
out with new software. We know they will
always develop that next big thing that is
just what they do. Does not mean you need
to buy it. I went for adobe CS to Adobe
CS4. so without 2 or 3 then 4 would have
never been and 5 would not come down the
road.
Agree. No need to upgrade yet.
XP runs smooth and stable. And i prefer the old, straightforward, classic Windows look.
The eye candy you can add yourself by use of tons of GUI enhancement applications.
I dont see any other reason to upgrade then to ensure Microsoft's profit.
XP stays here for a long time until an upgrade is really needed.
Why do people post such stupid things?
People who actually do serious work on their computers can see the benefits of newer versions of software. Many of us use applications that are capable of taking advantage of the newer hardware with muli-core CPUs and more than 3 GB of RAM, so we benefit greatly from a 64 bit OS.
Just because you are too stupid to see that there are benefits for many of us doesn't mean those benefits don't exist. If you don't need the new features, that is fine. Don't upgrade. No one really cares if you want to stay in the past. No one cares if you don't buy a new car or a new camera or a new TV either.
Rick
And If You Want Real 64Bit Performance, Security, Dependability...
Barring the immediate need for a particular feature of Win7, which would make one think that user would already have a beta or advance copy, Why would anyone do this??
I would think that if one wanted something really interesting and unique (relative to Windows) to play with and investigate, one would install a copy of Linux.
Oh, well, chac'un, son gout.
<a href="http://www.westernnewsco.com/seamus/wine/winearb.html"> Wine Arbitrage</a><br><a href="http://www.thevault.WesternNewsCo.com"> Bullet Proof Backup Systems</a><br><a href="http://www.theodosius.us/LinuxShop/index.html"> The Linux Shop</a><br><br><br>
Camping out
As for installing Linux, I suppose that's fine for people who can use it. All my 64 bit applications are Windows-only and Linux won't do me any good.
Rick
Linux 64 bit
install a copy of Linux?
You are not offering options many people can use.
Bill
No one gives a whit about your Windoze apps NT
Apple FTW
Huh? You want a perpetual motion machine?
You're asking for something that's basically impossible and Windows is DAMN close to this now as it stands.
Windows DOES
PS. For anyone wishing to employ someone to build a quality but custom build machine at a fraction of what you'd pay anywhere else, give me a holler. I build em for supplemental income and I've yet to have one unsatisfied customer - so long as they follow my care recommendations at time of purchase of course.
"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
Okay, so you admit you play games.
Most of us have more practical uses for computing and don't want something as shady and flaky as Windows running our applications.
And you're right - professional companies like Adobe won't give Linux the time of day. (And they DO support OS X.)