It sure seems like an upgrade from vista, just some stolen and tweaked ideas added on.
I'm still sticking with Windows XP because it has more compatibility with software/hardware than vista/7.
it would not be a whole new windows because if it were, like win 98/200/me/xp/vista, there are major tweaks noticable at first.
it should be called vista 2.
*I thought Vista was supposed to be a new standard OS, now a whole new OS is comming out?
A first look at the Windows 7 PDC release
Notification area clutter reduced
The ever expanding galaxy of notification area icons gets corralled in a pop-up box, which appears when you click the arrow at the left end of the taskbar section still best known as the system tray.
Just In
RE: Media Center gadget supports Internet TV (A first look at the Windows 7 PDC release)
Its just Vista with a few pretty changes, someone got a shovel and tried to slap makeup on the problem. Adding more junk will not make it run better. I want speed not junk!
Looks like they got around to changing the rest of vista that they didn't have time to fix in the first go around er first 2 go rounds including sp1. This looks like sp 1.5 to me.
Yeah i have the same opinion. but actually windows 7 is based on windows XP, so its compatible with just as much things that can work on the XP. so actually its a XP update, a kind of.. but im already tired of looking at the windows 7, cause it looks like the windows vista.
"but actually windows 7 is based on windows XP"
Actually, it's based on Vista. They're not taking out the changes they made between Vista and XP.
They're mostly tweaking it to fix the most common complaints about Vista - which is largely UAC's black and white nature right now. They're allowing people to scale back UAC without turning it completely off.
Other than that, they really don't need to change much - driver compatibility will come with time as more hardware manufacturers offer updates and less people use older devices. It's already vastly improved from the time Vista was first released.
Program compatibility, ditto. It'll improve over time for the same reasons. They're not moving back to XP, nor to they need to.
Actually, it's based on Vista. They're not taking out the changes they made between Vista and XP.
They're mostly tweaking it to fix the most common complaints about Vista - which is largely UAC's black and white nature right now. They're allowing people to scale back UAC without turning it completely off.
Other than that, they really don't need to change much - driver compatibility will come with time as more hardware manufacturers offer updates and less people use older devices. It's already vastly improved from the time Vista was first released.
Program compatibility, ditto. It'll improve over time for the same reasons. They're not moving back to XP, nor to they need to.
It isn't just based on XP, it is a mix of Vista and XP lamer. and it is far from Vista SP 1.5. Other then the interface and layouts there isn't really any comparison to Vista. Vista is rather sweat now, butWindows 7 owns all. There is no reason to hold on to the yuck'di'fied XP anymore. If you knwo Windows as much as you and many others talk like then you will have no migration issues at all. I have a lot of software and all but 2 titles work and they are games that require there to be a specific location for the My Documents folder. One of the 2 simply had to be installed with compatability for Windows XP SP2, the other one well it is just stuck in the gross apeal of XP. Yes XP is okay but it deserves very little bragging rights. TO me it is nothing more then a Windows 9x with ME extentions. You know like a short hair femailspending money to have longer hair by the way of hair extentions!!
BOTTOM LINE get off XP and ride Windows 7, you will be glade you did. the few small almost transparent bugs in 7 won't matter a bunch, and everyday it seems there are new improvements to the fixes as the pubic final is released.
BOTTOM LINE get off XP and ride Windows 7, you will be glade you did. the few small almost transparent bugs in 7 won't matter a bunch, and everyday it seems there are new improvements to the fixes as the pubic final is released.
It is a cheap copy of KDE. The larger menubar and the free floating desklets are taken straight from Linux/KDE. But then, isn't anything made by microsoft these days "inspired" by somthign else?
Internet explorer struggles to run after Mozilla and claims to have introduced innovative features that were available in mozilla for since 5 years ago. The innovative menu VIsta was shipped with was already available in linux (it is called kicker).
I am sure that soon they will claim they invented multiple desktops, on their OS, just like linux has had for many many years.
One thing to say is that, while Microsoft is not leading the way with innovative features, is definitely the first to patent features invented by others.
Internet explorer struggles to run after Mozilla and claims to have introduced innovative features that were available in mozilla for since 5 years ago. The innovative menu VIsta was shipped with was already available in linux (it is called kicker).
I am sure that soon they will claim they invented multiple desktops, on their OS, just like linux has had for many many years.
One thing to say is that, while Microsoft is not leading the way with innovative features, is definitely the first to patent features invented by others.
OS X is a build of FreeBSD stripped out of its powerful (but complex) features and its desktop is an enhancement of Enlightement.
I still think that KDE, and generally linux these days, is leading the way.
I still think that KDE, and generally linux these days, is leading the way.
Because I cannot see the satire.
Os X is based on a unix kernel, derived from BSD Unix and improved with parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD.
I don't see why you are so surprised.
I don't see why you are so surprised.
that Ubuntu has to look more like OSX.
If KDE was leading the way, then they would say that Ubuntu must look more like KDE.
If KDE was leading the way, then they would say that Ubuntu must look more like KDE.
KDE is a Desktop Manager.
It is available ALSO for Ubuntu (distribution).
Ubuntu ships by default with Gnome (another desktop manager).
kubuntu ships by default with KDE.
The reason why Shuttleworth says that, is because Mac OS X it is undeniably easy to use, a thing that Apple has managed always to achieve with its Operating systems and that linux has to learn from them.
It is available ALSO for Ubuntu (distribution).
Ubuntu ships by default with Gnome (another desktop manager).
kubuntu ships by default with KDE.
The reason why Shuttleworth says that, is because Mac OS X it is undeniably easy to use, a thing that Apple has managed always to achieve with its Operating systems and that linux has to learn from them.
Because I know what Enlightenment is and I use OS X on a daily basis and have studied OS X for years and for the life of me I cannot see how one can compare Quartz to X/Enlightenment. It's like comparing a airplanes landing gear to a helicopters landing skid.
Anyhow. Moving on...
Anyhow. Moving on...
There is some Next in there, too. But KDE is lame
compared to OSX. Also, OSX is not stripped. It's got full
blown Unix under the hood. Apple just made a consumer
oriented interface and made the standard settings more
secure for people who don't want to fool around with
permissions and other complexities of UNIX. You can
command line all you want in OSX if that's what your heart
desires. Still, if you are really into Unix and all its
complexities and controls why buy a Mac? There are many
free versions of UNIX available to wet your whistle..
compared to OSX. Also, OSX is not stripped. It's got full
blown Unix under the hood. Apple just made a consumer
oriented interface and made the standard settings more
secure for people who don't want to fool around with
permissions and other complexities of UNIX. You can
command line all you want in OSX if that's what your heart
desires. Still, if you are really into Unix and all its
complexities and controls why buy a Mac? There are many
free versions of UNIX available to wet your whistle..
OSX uses the Darwin kernel which is derived from BSD. This means when you use it in a terminal it is UNIX. The desktop imaging technology is called Quartz and it's Apple all the way.... They might have taken some inspiration from the Gnome group and vice versa but it isn't taken from a UNIX desktop.
nm
MAC is in a world of it's own. Besides UNIX Linux and MAC are all so close to each other on the Kernel level there is nothing else to say about them. so what one is more freindly then the other, and this one over there is a pay product, while that one over there is used more then communications. There that sums up Linux to MAC advantages between them all.
Who cares. to invent something knew you must take inspiration on the things you know make something else better, then improve the little things over looked. That is how all technology works.
Who cares. to invent something knew you must take inspiration on the things you know make something else better, then improve the little things over looked. That is how all technology works.
It's all a copy of Xerox's GUI from 30 years ago. Don't let your lack of knowledge get in the way of your histrionics, though.
You are absolutely right!
"...It is a cheap copy of KDE" -
Except Microsoft Windows 7 won't be so "cheap" - if Vista's initial pricing structure was any indication, we can look at a Windows 7 "Home/Basic" version probably weighing in at around $200 USD, and a "Professional" version around $329. All the various Linux distros worth having and KDE are free. I myself run Ubuntu 8.10 (along with XP dual boot).
Except Microsoft Windows 7 won't be so "cheap" - if Vista's initial pricing structure was any indication, we can look at a Windows 7 "Home/Basic" version probably weighing in at around $200 USD, and a "Professional" version around $329. All the various Linux distros worth having and KDE are free. I myself run Ubuntu 8.10 (along with XP dual boot).
Well, in considering the prices on Vista and it's many versions
(which was a bit of a joke for Apple and MacOS 10.5 which
only had one version), I really hope for MSs sake and the rest
of the MS users, that this time they will only offer one version
which suits all. It would stop the piracy. Don't you think?
(which was a bit of a joke for Apple and MacOS 10.5 which
only had one version), I really hope for MSs sake and the rest
of the MS users, that this time they will only offer one version
which suits all. It would stop the piracy. Don't you think?
Doubtful. There are those who get a kick out of cracking stuff. And there are those who want stuff but they refuse to pay for it at any price.
If there was any validity to your logic, the ultra cheap copies of Windows would have stamped out piracy of Windows and Office in Asia. It hasn't.
If there was any validity to your logic, the ultra cheap copies of Windows would have stamped out piracy of Windows and Office in Asia. It hasn't.
i agree with all but the piracy will never end
I'm not sure why so many people keep perpetuating thse myths about Windows pricing.
Fact: you can buy the absolute most expensive variant of Windows (Vista Ultimate full retail, shrink wrapped boxed) for $267.49. See: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116473
But nobody (who knows anything anyway) buys that. If you are building your own system, you buy the system builders version for $169 or if you are upgrading you buy the upgrade version. So there are extremely few people who would ever need to pay the full $267.49 - NOT $329.00.
Fact: Applying the same reasoning to Home/Basic, you would pay $89.990 for the system builders edition or $98.99 for the upgrade (not the $200 you quote). Its $99/$122 if you substitute home premium for home basic. Yup, you could pay $222 for a full, retail, shrink wrapped home premium, but there is hardly anyone who would have a reason to do that.
Are there a lot of versions and is it confusing? Yes. But if you look on http://www.honda.com and try to buy a Civic, you will immediately see that there 6 different versions of the Civic with a myriad of options and prices ranging from $15K for the cheapest up to $28K for the most expensive. Would you walk into your Honda dealer and just say "I want a Civic" or would you do some homework on what the differences were between the 6 models and what functionality you actually get with all those different options? Another thought: would you complain about there being so many options or would you praise Honda for offering you the ability to get a car better suited to your needs?
Now, if you just don't want to pay for an OS and want a free option, I can understand that. But you should be able to do that without spreading myths, disinformation, and scare tactics on Windows prices.
Fact: you can buy the absolute most expensive variant of Windows (Vista Ultimate full retail, shrink wrapped boxed) for $267.49. See: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116473
But nobody (who knows anything anyway) buys that. If you are building your own system, you buy the system builders version for $169 or if you are upgrading you buy the upgrade version. So there are extremely few people who would ever need to pay the full $267.49 - NOT $329.00.
Fact: Applying the same reasoning to Home/Basic, you would pay $89.990 for the system builders edition or $98.99 for the upgrade (not the $200 you quote). Its $99/$122 if you substitute home premium for home basic. Yup, you could pay $222 for a full, retail, shrink wrapped home premium, but there is hardly anyone who would have a reason to do that.
Are there a lot of versions and is it confusing? Yes. But if you look on http://www.honda.com and try to buy a Civic, you will immediately see that there 6 different versions of the Civic with a myriad of options and prices ranging from $15K for the cheapest up to $28K for the most expensive. Would you walk into your Honda dealer and just say "I want a Civic" or would you do some homework on what the differences were between the 6 models and what functionality you actually get with all those different options? Another thought: would you complain about there being so many options or would you praise Honda for offering you the ability to get a car better suited to your needs?
Now, if you just don't want to pay for an OS and want a free option, I can understand that. But you should be able to do that without spreading myths, disinformation, and scare tactics on Windows prices.
We can (I will) keep using XP which won't cost anything when 7 is released. There's no need for a new OS as proven by Vista (let us pause and fondly remember that wonderful program of MSFT heritage, Windows ME, aka Millions of Errors).
The problem from this perspective is not enough IT people are willing to give MSFT/Win the snubbing it deserves. When Jobs and his sales forces comes around, just put out the "gone fishin'" sign. It may take them 10 years, but someone in WA will eventually get the message. Probably a secretary...
What if they introduced an OS and nobody came to see it? There's dream I can live with.
The problem from this perspective is not enough IT people are willing to give MSFT/Win the snubbing it deserves. When Jobs and his sales forces comes around, just put out the "gone fishin'" sign. It may take them 10 years, but someone in WA will eventually get the message. Probably a secretary...
What if they introduced an OS and nobody came to see it? There's dream I can live with.
After laying an egg with Windows Vista Microsoft should give Vista user's a FREE update to Windows 7 as a gesture of apology and good Faith. Sort of like XP's service pack two. Anything else and Microsoft has had it! Vista is a turkey and a failure and they know it. If Microsoft does not send Windows 7 forth as an olive branch then they risk losing further market share to Apple, linux etc. Why should user's pay full price for OS wallpaper? How is Windows 7 a major update to Windows? Answer: it isn't.
Jon, you must be kidding if you think MS is giong to give out free copies of W7 for all Vista owners. First, Vista was not an "egg" as you put it. Vista rocks, especially in 64-bits. You can play that "Vista is a turkey" card all you want, but you won't win any games with it. It just ain't true.
Come on ... Be serious... KDE is just a crappy and
cheap OS shell...
No Microsoft things are not more inspired by something
else than KDE and Ubunto and Apple etc...
This is a wrong discussion to always tell that
microsoft always copy on others...
Yes Microsoft is sometimes inspired by others products
and sometimes others are inspired from Microsoft products and yes sometimes Microsoft by companies for
their technologies... And so what??
cheap OS shell...
No Microsoft things are not more inspired by something
else than KDE and Ubunto and Apple etc...
This is a wrong discussion to always tell that
microsoft always copy on others...
Yes Microsoft is sometimes inspired by others products
and sometimes others are inspired from Microsoft products and yes sometimes Microsoft by companies for
their technologies... And so what??
If you are so correct, then if the other special folks who "invented" these things had patented or copyrighted them, then problem solved, right? I guess it's just too bad for them..... OR maybe it's actually NOT the same as it looks. At first appearance Venus "looks" like Earth, but try to live there. Nothing more then wah wah boo hoo here. Move along folks....
"It is a cheap copy of KDE. The larger menubar and the free floating desklets are taken straight from Linux/KDE. But then, isn't anything made by microsoft these days "inspired" by somthign else?"
Okay for one what is this MS these days inspired by something else stuff? When didn't MS steal something from someone else? Maybe your a noobie kid that doesn't know the history!! Who knows.
Everything about Windows was stolen there was never a day Windwos or DOS saw that wasn't stolen and barely legal. Shoot MSDOS is a derivitive of PROUDOS and IBM DOS, and windows was a extremely poor variant of Mellisa.
MAN kids these days just don't understand!!
Okay for one what is this MS these days inspired by something else stuff? When didn't MS steal something from someone else? Maybe your a noobie kid that doesn't know the history!! Who knows.
Everything about Windows was stolen there was never a day Windwos or DOS saw that wasn't stolen and barely legal. Shoot MSDOS is a derivitive of PROUDOS and IBM DOS, and windows was a extremely poor variant of Mellisa.
MAN kids these days just don't understand!!
of the underlying code: Will it be a bit more compatible with older hardware, will it have a smaller footprint, will it be better tuned?
I am sure a lot of that is happening in the background, you just can not see it via a screen shot, so this does not tell you much about if it is "Viata" or "7"
I am sure a lot of that is happening in the background, you just can not see it via a screen shot, so this does not tell you much about if it is "Viata" or "7"
Will it be a bit more compatible with older hardware, will it have a smaller footprint, will it be better tuned?
From what we've seen here at PDC, the answers are Yes, Yes, and Yes.
Of course you're right: none of this comes across in screen shots. And, for that matter, even a lot of the UI ease-of-use enhancements don't show well in static screen shots.
From what we've seen here at PDC, the answers are Yes, Yes, and Yes.
Of course you're right: none of this comes across in screen shots. And, for that matter, even a lot of the UI ease-of-use enhancements don't show well in static screen shots.
Why not make windows 7 touch screen?
Microsoft has already announced that they will be incorporating touch-screen capabilities into Windows 7.
Vista had nothing in its cheaper editions to inspire me to move from XP and I dont see anything in Windows 7 that will change that. I admit vista ultimate is pretty but its damned expensive both in cash an resource terms. Frankly I think I may well stick with XP for a few years now ad benefit from all the cheap redundant hardware that is going to flood the market as soon as Vista & 7 users are forced to ditch all their old peripherals.
If you are not interested in running high end computers, touch screens and enhanced networking then there is very little in there really
If you are not interested in running high end computers, touch screens and enhanced networking then there is very little in there really
This looks like smoke and mirrors for most folks. XP still deleivers all essentials and I don't have to replace anything.
Microsoft is really going to have to offer something that changes my opinion. The only thing that they do offer lately is a bloated OS.
Microsoft is really going to have to offer something that changes my opinion. The only thing that they do offer lately is a bloated OS.
You said "Microsoft is really going to have to offer something that changes my opinion". My question to you is what do you want them to add? What would change your opinion?
Does the items such as Paint remember your choices between invocations or are they as dumb as they are now with stupid defaults to which they are ALWAYS reset??
Example is "page setup": default is a picture, seemingly no matter what size, is spread over multiple pages
Another is Excel's "Paste Special" whose default makes it the same as "paste". I usually want "values" but it never remembers,even in the same session.
Example is "page setup": default is a picture, seemingly no matter what size, is spread over multiple pages
Another is Excel's "Paste Special" whose default makes it the same as "paste". I usually want "values" but it never remembers,even in the same session.
This is what we've been waiting for since Windows 95?
A dock? Come on Microsoft, you have billions in
research $$, how about thinking up your own ideas.
A dock? Come on Microsoft, you have billions in
research $$, how about thinking up your own ideas.
You are a real winner. You haven't seen anything until you've seen it in action. Seriously. The tards saying "oh the taskbar is lame" or "unoriginal" or "like the Dock". The screenshots are not showing jack in terms of the functionality. I've seen it live. It rocks, bigtime. People who judge so quickly without ever seeing it live or using need to get a friggin clue.
The U.I is without doubt prettier and apparently
easier to use than Vista.
If it is significantly faster/less ressources hungry
than Vista, includes significantly better backward
compatibility and is scallable enough to run
flawlessly on netbooks then Microsoft has a winner.
Anyway, i am impatient to test it.
easier to use than Vista.
If it is significantly faster/less ressources hungry
than Vista, includes significantly better backward
compatibility and is scallable enough to run
flawlessly on netbooks then Microsoft has a winner.
Anyway, i am impatient to test it.
I don't mean to be closed-minded, but when I look at Ubuntu, even if I make Ubuntu look like Windows Vista, I found myself easy to switch back to Windows Vista, since I don't find it flexible with Emerald (a window manager) to extend the glass to client, like Microsoft did with Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, etc. and Chrome from Google.
I highly doubt that Windows 7 will be much faster/less resource hungry than Vista. I doubt it will be any more backward compatible, and I certainly don't think it will work a netbook. Remember, this is built upon Vista.
In his keynote at PDC, Steven Sinofsky showed what he said is his main machine--a Lenovo netbook running Windows 7.
...it was an Asus EEE 1000 with a 1 GHz chip and 1 GB of RAM.
And they did say 1GHz and 1GB RAM. Friggin cool.
...It's still a netbook. 1 GHz + 1 GB RAM. Sweet!
First off xp is the only windows OS that is stable, I wouldnt touch windows 7 with a ten foot pole and same with vista. Ubuntu has conquered and made its mark. Im not a distro soldier but, I prefer ubuntu and debian. Even though I did start out on slackware......Im a true debian/ubuntu fan. XP is fine, it works and if I want all the eye candy and stuff ZMicrosoft stole from mac and linux ill just use mac and linux. Windows xp is as far as I go on 1 box, the othr 8 in my house run linux and mac. And for all the right reasons. ---------Sr Network admin. If you want to game go get a console. Games run fine on mac and linux anyway. Granted my newest system has 8 cores and can run anything along with 12gb of ddr3 ram, but thats besides the point and a whole notha issue. Mac and Linux win. I know ........cause the majority of my side job (computer repair) is people buying new laptops or desktops ("newbs" compared to us) want me to take vista off and put xp back on. Plus Ive even converted a few custy's to ubuntu and debian. Granted I installed it and got thier hardware and all thier **** working, but they like the desktop just fine. Plus they never get all the crap like pop ups and virus's, and spyware, I could go on and on. Thier really is no need for and more MS Os's because linux distros and mac are not pushing you to buy all this anti this anti that software crap, like MS does. Cause......you DON'T need it. We have the most stable and as safe as the user can make it OS kernel. Peace and One Love!
AIM: pizo56 If ya wanna comment to me directly.
AIM: pizo56 If ya wanna comment to me directly.
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
