Anyone else really excited about windows 7?

[fluidedge]

I think it could be awesome. Along with Snow Leopard we might finally have two really good OSs and with them both installed on my Mac Pro i can happily work in either!

I was debating whether to install xp or vista on my machine. I think i'll wait two days and install 7 instead judging by the really positive reviews it's had so far!

 

[bertpalmer]

I'm excited about 7 - I don't know why as I don't have a PC and have no need for a Windows platform anymore.

But - it seems really fast and reliable from what I have heard and doesn't look too bad.

I just hope snow leopard goes one better!

 

[petvas]

Please do not forget that Windows 7 has all the issues that Windows traditionally had. DLL hell, Registry fragmentation, programs that cause problems to other apps, etc...Nothing has changed there! Of course there is the .NET Framework but not many developers create self containing apps for Windows...
Windows 7 has a different interface, looks good but inside it is the same Windows kernel...which frankly sucks big time

 

[darkcurse]

Yeah excited enough to probably go get a cheap OEM or Education version, install it, play with it, go "ooooh shiny", then discard it a few weeks later

 

[arkitect]

Anyone else really excited about windows 7?

Me? Not so much.

Especially since the only program* I still use a Windows computer for is being ported to OSX.

*Rhino 3D
Link…

 

[fluidedge]

thats a ridiculous thing to say. So no version of windows will ever be good in your eyes simply because of the kernel it's built upon??! They aren't just designing new interfaces all day everyday you know.

 

[petvas]

thats a ridiculous thing to say. So no version of windows will ever be good in your eyes simply because of the kernel it's built upon??! They aren't just designing new interfaces all day everyday you know.

It is the Win32/64 subsystem that needs serious redesign. I am sorry that you don't understand it. Microsoft is really trying hard to make Windows better and better but as long as they offer 100% backwards compatibility, they won't be able to get rid of the sins of their past...It is not the kernel, it is the presentation layer of the OS that sucks big time. The way system libraries interact with application libraries. Most applications need to access system libraries to provide their functionality but the problem is that each app could actually need a different version of the same library...The problem isn't as big now as it was a couple of years ago (Vista tried to provide a solution to that) but it is still there. The other thing is Registry fragmentation. This is serious...Try installing 100 applications on any Windows OS...Over time the OS becomes slower because its registry is fragmented...The only solution I know is not to use the Registry but that would mean to break compatibility..Of course in that case Windows has to be redesigned...(the Win32/64 subsystem)..

The system kernel is great, actually one of the best available (created by Dave Cutler)...What is around it though sucks big time.
If you only care about looks then go with Windows...

I am a MS Professional (in Enterprise Messaging) and I deal with Windows systems every day. I use a Dell Laptop given to me from my company and if I had the option I would immediately replace it with an Apple Laptop (with matte display )
Thank god I have my Mac Pro at home and I can enjoy how computing was meant to be!!!
There are many things that Apple users take for granted, go with Windows and you will reconsider...

 

[fluidedge]

i understand what you're saying. Sort of. lol!

I can only go on the reviews i've seen around and expert users seem to really like Windows 7. I only use windows professionally for about 4 applications (Maya, Photoshop, Digital Fusion, Firefox - and a couple of others I don't use that often) so hopefully I won't run into the problem of Installing hundreds of applications. I like to keep my OSs as clean and tidy as possible (anally so!) so i'm hoping that Windows 7 will be a good option for me. The Mac OS X version of Maya is really bad compared to the Windows version (it's almost worth moving over for the better version of FCheck!) and thats my main app so i'm looking to move over to Windows on a more permanant basis, whilst still keeping Mac OS X for personal use and some other applcations and licences i have for mac only.

Fingers crossed windows 7 will suit me.

On another note has anybody watched the Windows 7 videos on the MS website? They're awful. Two guys sitting behind laptops, you can barely see their faces. One guy looks like they've fallen out of bed 5 minutes before he was put in front of a camera - he might have brushed his hair at least. The camera is badly out of focus. Black Background! The two guys don't know what they're doing properly either.

Give me "Hi I'm John" on his white background, clean outfit and computer to the side of him any day.

MS really need to take a leaf out of apples book on website introductory videos.

 

[petvas]

If you have clear rules about your Windows installation then the OS works very well and stable. Just install only the applications you need, try avoiding everything else. If you want to test sth, then use VMWare and create a VM with Windows on it to make your tests. When you are sure that an app is ok, you can install it on your live OS...

I personally don't want to bother with that. On my Mac it doesn't matter how many apps I install, I don't care. The system doesn't slow down, I haven't found a single application that makes the system don't start or other applications not function...

That is the difference between the two worlds...Windows 7 is going to be a better Vista, nothing more.

 

[MacBoobsPro]

Isn't Windows 7 still based on the same 'ancient' architecture as Windows 95?

From the bits I have seen of 7 it looks once again like XP dressed up. I'm not having a dig at Microsoft here but thats what it looks like.

Also how can they come up with Windows 7 within 12 months if if took them 5 years to come up with Vista and Vista is crap? Doesnt really say much for 7 does it?

 

[TBi]

Isn't Windows 7 still based on the same 'ancient' architecture as Windows 95?

Nope it's built on the same ancient architecture as Windows NT. Although at least it's not as old as the ancient UNIX architecture used in OSX.

Also how can they come up with Windows 7 within 12 months if if took them 5 years to come up with Vista and Vista is crap? Doesnt really say much for 7 does it?

Maybe they got a lot of the work half finished when making Vista. These could be things that they had hoped to release but didn't have time to. If you read your history on Vista you would know that they scrapped the first version entirely and started again from scratch. Vista as it is now didn't actually take 5 years to create.

 

[rasmasyean]

Windows 7 looks like Windows Vista with a few UI tweaks for the most part. But I think the problem for most people is just like in Vista, initially it will take a large investment to use it properly. It's not just a "powerful computer and half-decent video card" this time. It's a multi-touch screen, extra screen and hardware for low-power mode, and DX11...forget it...expect to pay even $300 extra minimum if you want to play the latest game. Other than that, I don't see it as too much different from Vista and until the price of this hardware comes down, it seems only the enthusiast will jump on initailly. I know they have a version for "netbooks" but that's hardly anything to get "excited" about.

 

[rasmasyean]

Please do not forget that Windows 7 has all the issues that Windows traditionally had. DLL hell, Registry fragmentation, programs that cause problems to other apps, etc...Nothing has changed there! Of course there is the .NET Framework but not many developers create self containing apps for Windows...

That's because you probably don't know how to use it. All computers have problems. But do you think that the monopoly would exist if so many businesses are flopping from DLL hell?

And you don't even know what you are spewing about. Look up programming jobs and see how many .NET jobs are out there. Even on the server side, Microsoft owns majority >40% of the market...and don't tell me that most people run C++ and Java or something on them. Check IDC research stats and see the increasing trend of Windows Servers...this is not even counting Exchange and Sharepoint and whatever else they got.

I suppose everyone has their "trauma flashbacks" but you should get the facts, dude.

 

[MRU]

Windows 7 looks like Windows Vista with a few UI tweaks for the most part. But I think the problem for most people is just like in Vista, initially it will take a large investment to use it properly. It's not just a "powerful computer and half-decent video card" this time. It's a multi-touch screen, extra screen and hardware for low-power mode, and DX11...forget it...expect to pay even $300 extra minimum if you want to play the latest game. Other than that, I don't see it as too much different from Vista and until the price of this hardware comes down, it seems only the enthusiast will jump on initailly. I know they have a version for "netbooks" but that's hardly anything to get "excited" about.

That's quite a lot of FUD there.

Windows 7 is expected to run more efficiently on older machines than vista ever did or does.

I'm running the BETA 1 on a MSI Wind (1.6ghz Atom) and it runs smoothly and as fast as XP did on the same machine. Vista was a slouch in comparison on the same machine.

I have also installed BETA 1 on a cheap Vostro 1400 and it too runs very well indeed, with applications opening fast and with Aero working perfectly albeit on an older integrated graphics machine.

Unless somthing radical changes before release I have no reason to suspect that Windows 7 will suddenly require all those things you mention. I mean come on! Will require a touchscreen

 

[r.j.s]

I'll probably install the Beta on Sat, mess around until I get bored or remember that it is STILL Windows, then delete it.

 

[rasmasyean]

That's quite a lot of FUD there.

Windows 7 is expected to run more efficiently on older machines than vista ever did or does.

I'm running the BETA 1 on a MSI Wind (1.6ghz Atom) and it runs smoothly and as fast as XP did on the same machine. Vista was a slouch in comparison on the same machine.

I have also installed BETA 1 on a cheap Vostro 1400 and it too runs very well indeed, with applications opening fast and with Aero working perfectly albeit on an older integrated graphics machine.

Unless somthing radical changes before release I have no reason to suspect that Windows 7 will suddenly require all those things you mention. I mean come on! Will require a touchscreen

So what? Linux will run on your old Dell from 5 years ago.

What I'm saying is what's the point of getting a state of the art OS on "old hardware"? In order to take advantage of new features you NEED advanced hardware. That's been a fact of computer life since the transistor was invented. Just because you can "scale it down" doesn't mean that it's anything to get "excited" about...unless your main goals is to save a few pennies. Most people get excited about new things that open up new opportunities.

You don't just "use the OS". You "use the entire computer" and the OS is just a vehicle that enables that computer to do things...whether it be 1st or 3rd party related.

 

[pilotError]

I watched part of the keynote at CES last night.

I see a bunch of clone things (networking setup, their version of the dock, and a few others) are showing up in Windows 7. I read the engadget coverage and even they are like "where did I see this before".

At least they are willing to change and improve at the cost of embarrassment.

I'm starting to see Apple get beat at their own game. I'm hoping they step up and answer the call. Slingbox has pretty much stomped on ATV and can even run on your iPhone now. HP is out with their media center solution. Win 7 is starting to actually make up for the past mistakes.

Should be an interesting year!

 

[r.j.s]

Who here used an early beta of Vista, when it had all the great features?

As always, even with Leopard, features will get removed - and in the end, it will still be Windows.

 

[rasmasyean]

Isn't Windows 7 still based on the same 'ancient' architecture as Windows 95?

From the bits I have seen of 7 it looks once again like XP dressed up. I'm not having a dig at Microsoft here but thats what it looks like.

Also how can they come up with Windows 7 within 12 months if if took them 5 years to come up with Vista and Vista is crap? Doesnt really say much for 7 does it?

I suspect Windows 7 is not going to be as hunkey-dorey as everyone is making it out to be when it releases. A lot of it is marketing too. It will still have it's issues considering how many new hardware items it is supposed to support (and everyone is going to rush out new products for it...and give you a driver patch months later...), though since the change is not as drastic as XP->Vista, it "should" be a bit better in certain aspects I guess. But as always, if you can't wait to experience it, minor issues probably won't be able to slow your type down much.

Vista is not "crap". If you read a lot of blogs and or media (where everyone loves Apple and iPod/iPhones, you get a lot of trash talk. In reality, although it did not live up to the hype, it still has an installed base % beating XP during the same period and at some point was expected to beat XP in business adoption with the advent of Windows Server 2008. But then we hit the crisis so I'm not sure what the latest findings will be in this regard. If you look at the fact that it costs 6 billion to develop and sold 180 million copies in June (excluding early liscensing), you can figure out that it has made a ton of M$.

 

[Twinnie]

Yeah, the 'crap' thing about Vista is mostly just trash talk and bad rep. No it doesn't run well on old hardware but then I don't think MS ever anticipated the demand so much, they were looking forward instead of at the present and neglected the importance of a good first impression. It got off to a very rocky start but most of the issues are fixed now and people who still complain about it being a memory hog even on good machines are just idiots who haven't read about SuperFetch. I've been using Vista for years now and I've had no trouble with it at all, not a single blue screen and most of the little problems are my fault or crappy programs not uninstalling properly, but then I have had the same install for about two years now which is something I only dreamed of in XP considering how much I fiddle and mess about with my computer.

I'm still expecting initial hardware problems with 7 though, with it's lower system requirements there's going to be stacks of old hardware that people will be expecting to work perfectly and the pressure will fall on MS to support these cos the manufacturers sure as hell won't do it. There's also gonna be trouble-a-comin' when people realise that MS is actually going to be forcing people to use the new dock and will totally remove the old way of organising windows. I expect someone will just hack it in and I'll be using the old way as soon as I can, but it won't stop people moaning about being told what to do.

 

[petvas]

That's because you probably don't know how to use it. All computers have problems. But do you think that the monopoly would exist if so many businesses are flopping from DLL hell?

And you don't even know what you are spewing about. Look up programming jobs and see how many .NET jobs are out there. Even on the server side, Microsoft owns majority >40% of the market...and don't tell me that most people run C++ and Java or something on them. Check IDC research stats and see the increasing trend of Windows Servers...this is not even counting Exchange and Sharepoint and whatever else they got.

I suppose everyone has their "trauma flashbacks" but you should get the facts, dude.

I posted that earlier but got deleted...
Read my post again and maybe you will understand it...Read first and then post..

 

[TheCenturion]

everyone has different wants/needs from their computers and the software on them. just because you dont "like" something doesnt mean it doesnt do everything someone else wants it to.

i'm downloading the windows 7 beta from my technet account and once i get my MBP next week i'll be installing it and giving it a shot.

 

[XianPalin]

I'm impressed the feedback seems decent so far. I was expecting most of it to be "It's vista, with a new version number." I'll give it a chance. I'll install the beta in Vmware, but unfortunately that means it won't really get used. Sadly, I don't intend to format my Vista drive to install it in Beta form, though from the buzz maybe it'd be worth it. I'm worried my games will be too picky though.

 

[Schtumple]

I think MS has finally learnt from all their mistakes, and 7 will be a proper OS, one the company can be really proud of. Once it's fully stable (beta or GM), I'll wipe XP off here and install 7, considering it's supposed to be faster than XP or Vista.

 

[rasmasyean]

Yeah, the 'crap' thing about Vista is mostly just trash talk and bad rep. No it doesn't run well on old hardware but then I don't think MS ever anticipated the demand so much, they were looking forward instead of at the present and neglected the importance of a good first impression. It got off to a very rocky start but most of the issues are fixed now and people who still complain about it being a memory hog even on good machines are just idiots who haven't read about SuperFetch. I've been using Vista for years now and I've had no trouble with it at all, not a single blue screen and most of the little problems are my fault or crappy programs not uninstalling properly, but then I have had the same install for about two years now which is something I only dreamed of in XP considering how much I fiddle and mess about with my computer.

I'm still expecting initial hardware problems with 7 though, with it's lower system requirements there's going to be stacks of old hardware that people will be expecting to work perfectly and the pressure will fall on MS to support these cos the manufacturers sure as hell won't do it. There's also gonna be trouble-a-comin' when people realise that MS is actually going to be forcing people to use the new dock and will totally remove the old way of organising windows. I expect someone will just hack it in and I'll be using the old way as soon as I can, but it won't stop people moaning about being told what to do.

True, people are resistant to change but I think a lot of this has to do with MS marketing. They said it would work on old machines but got a class-action for it because it didn't "really". Add to that all these people saying "Oh I meet the minimum requirements" to follow the hype and more ppl get disappointed. All MS had to do was to say we really recommend that you buy a new computer with X and Y, if you want to desired performance and there won't be as much giant bashing.

As for SuperFetch, it's a nice read, but try explaining this to 90% of the users out there and confuse the hell out of them...and they might end up running away toward the Apple store. LOL It might seem like a cool feature to geeks but most people are just scared by these kind of features...along with all the other long list of cool features in Vista.