Author Topic: WINDOWS 7 THREAD (ongoing) (Read 244,562 times)

MrCrispy · « **Reply #75 on:** December 15, 2008, 02:27 AM »

Quote from: zridling on December 04, 2008, 05:34 PM

Yes, the ribbon is not efficient in all contexts, and Microsoft should force it onto simple apps.

Don't you mean shouldn't force it?

zridling · « **Reply #76 on:** December 15, 2008, 03:54 PM »

Doh! Yes, let me edit that. Thanks!

zridling · « **Reply #77 on:** December 15, 2008, 04:12 PM »

Quote from: MrCrispy on December 15, 2008, 02:26 AM

Add me to the Win 7 fan club! I just bought a new laptop for my brother with pretty decent specs - HP Pavilion with 2.2Ghz C2D, 4GB Ram, Intel 4500HD integrated graphics (I don't trust Nvidia cards!).

Good for you for not trusting Nvidia. While ATI has opened up their driver code, Nvidia has locked theirs down, making it difficult to run a new Nvidia card on a Linux machine.

I really haven't read any bad reports on Win7 yet. By all accounts, they're busting their brains to make Vista what it should be (if you assume Win7 is an upgrade to Vista since they share the kernel), and it already preserves battery life better on laptops. I hope it's one of those versions that users can sit on for years like we have with XP. With Win7 running on an i7 chip, I can't imagine needing to upgrade for 4-5 years afterward! By the way, here's an updated calculator shot:

[attach]

MrCrispy · « **Reply #78 on:** December 17, 2008, 10:33 PM »

Looks like the Win7 beta is going to be out very soon.

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/17/new-windows-7-beta-released-to-select-testers

I haven't received my invite yet (I hope to!), but I bet it'll be available from the 'usual sources' as well

zridling · « **Reply #79 on:** December 18, 2008, 12:30 PM »

Don't screw us, MrCrispy, when you get it, share your impressions!!

MrCrispy · « **Reply #80 on:** December 27, 2008, 08:01 AM »

Win7 beta 1 (build 7000) has leaked! Obviously I can't put a link here but its spreading around the usual torrent sites etc. Paul Thurrott of Winsupersite has posted the official beta 1 screenshots (I'm guessing after the leak an NDA apparently does not apply)

http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_beta_screens_01.asp

I expect Microsoft will make it publicly available as soon as they are back from the holidays and the hangover's gone

zridling · « **Reply #81 on:** December 27, 2008, 03:49 PM »

Adam Kingsley-Hughes reports that the first Win7 beta is awesome, and should be ready to go by summertime. Woohoo!!

That taskbar, however, looks like a dead-on copy of KDE 4. No argument from me since you can make the one in KDE look anyway you want, as thin as you want, and you can dock it on any side of the desktop.

nontroppo · « **Reply #82 on:** January 02, 2009, 12:24 PM »

Jason Perlow is not so enthusiatic:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/perlow/?p=9360

I think he represents the "Don't mess" with my OS brigade[1]. Anything that is not really like XP is a regression. Ed Bott replied:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=630

Thugh I personally find Ed Bott a little too much apologetic sometimes, he raises valid points that most of Jason's issues a really just because he is refusing to adapt to universal search and other new paradigms that IMO are so clearly superior to the old hierarchical clicking. But if you were a grumpy old (wo)man with Vista, you'll still have plenty (or more?) to be tetchy at with Win 7...

----
[1] Grumpy old (wo)men syndrome!

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #83 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:19 PM »

It's even funnier when you read the follow-up discussions ...

Why are people such stick in the muds.

Personally I don't like Vista and still prefer/use WinXP but that is for a number of reasons that irritate many people - not least UAC, the burying and scattering of options and truly appalling networking options (especially with multiple adapters which breaks networking completely).

Having said that Vista isn't all bad and it is more usable than many people give credit for.

Windows 7 looks like it is the first potentially exciting release of Windows since Windows 2000 - at least the developers are tying to implement changes based on usability, and at least there seem to be some changes this time.

I know underlying technologies change but one of the things I have found somewhat frustrating is that until Vista the user interface has not appreciably changed since Windows 95. While to many there is comforting familiarity it has seemed to me that each time there was a lost opportunity to change the way things work for the better.

I haven't played with the W7 beta yet but the new task bar looks like very useful development, the tray icons (and user control over what appears there) looks like a huge step forward and actually the 'start' menu with its built in "Find and Run Robot" looks like a big improvement.

I'm sure many people will bellyache (probably me too) over incompatibilities with XP software, stupid hardware demands and poor support for legacy hardware products but I do think it makes a change for people to be looking at an OS that looks like it is at least an attempt to move things on from the 1980s approach to Windows.

I just hope MS have learned a few lessons from the Vista debacle (they seemed to after the WinME fiasco producing Win2k and XP which have proved very popular). The priorities should be for lightness of touch and speed of use (not a resource hog that requires hi spec graphics and large amounts of memory just to get it to run properly), a reduction of flavours to a sensible Server, Pro and Home versions and proper support for hardware - giving manufacturers some incentive to produce new drivers for legacy hardware for Windows 7 - something they have failed to do with the current prohibitively expensive certification scenario.

Darwin · « **Reply #84 on:** January 02, 2009, 02:34 PM »

My favourite line(s) from Ed Bott's reply are these:

Quote

Yes, there’s a learning curve. And if you insist on using those techniques you learned back in the last millennium with software that was designed differently, you will be frustrated. But I believe that an open-minded XP user who actually takes a few minutes to learn how the new UI works will be more productive very quickly. The secret is breaking old habits and developing new ones.

This has certainly been my experience going from XP Pro (which I still run with the Classic theme) to Vista.

Windows 7 looks interesting, but hardly earth shattering. I still (grumpily) feel that it amounts to Sp-2 (or 3), rather than a major new OS. A lot of self-interest there, I suppose... having just upgraded to Vista Ultimate

zridling · « **Reply #85 on:** January 02, 2009, 03:42 PM »

Quote

[Darwin]: Windows 7 looks interesting, but hardly earth shattering.

And that's just it: it doesn't have to be. Correcting Vista's ugliness is the major goal, and as A. Kingsley-Hughes writes, speeding up everything is the first thing you notice. But he reminds people like me that if you didn't like activation, validation, and forced updates before, you really should move to another OS. The latest piracy news from China show that Microsoft is getting ready to ramp up anti-piracy measures in '09.

Darwin · « **Reply #86 on:** January 02, 2009, 03:59 PM »

Quote from: zridling on January 02, 2009, 03:42 PM

And that's just it: it doesn't have to be. Correcting Vista's ugliness is the major goal, and as A. Kingsley-Hughes writes, speeding up everything is the first thing you notice.

Heh, heh - goes directly to my lament about it being released as a new Windows version rather than as a Service Pack to Vista

Having said that, Vista is stable and very quick on my system (T5750 CPU - 2.0 Ghz and 4GB RAM with 512MB dedicated video card)...

zridling · « **Reply #87 on:** January 02, 2009, 06:01 PM »

I see what you mean, there, Darwin. Going from Vista to Win7 won't be a big deal like XP-to-Vista was. But you have to figure that from now on Microsoft will likely issue only one SP before rolling out another major OS version, just to keep the revenue stream intact. Gates lamented not making XP-SP2 a new OS version on its own. They won't be sitting on Win7 long either before rolling out another version.

Darwin · « **Reply #88 on:** January 02, 2009, 06:52 PM »

Quote from: zridling on January 02, 2009, 06:01 PM

I see what you mean, there, Darwin. Going from Vista to Win7 won't be a big deal like XP-to-Vista was. But you have to figure that from now on Microsoft will likely issue only one SP before rolling out another major OS version, just to keep the revenue stream intact. Gates lamented not making XP-SP2 a new OS version on its own. They won't be sitting on Win7 long either before rolling out another version.

Drat! Actually, if they revamp their pricing scheme to mimic Apple's this won't be the end of the world, and would likely line their coffers like never before. I'd be pretty happy paying $150 every 18-36 months for a DVD with the full version of whatever the current version of Windows is (or to download a disc image) and a licence. I suspect that if they did this, their revenues would go UP (and pirating would be curtailed) because perception here is the name of the game. Paying $150 every 18 months for the latest OS works out to about $100 a year. XP Pro and Vista Ultimate don't cost that much! And yet... spread the pain out like this and people won't flinch. Mac users love upgrading the latest OS X point release and gladly pay to do so. Yet many of them, and all Windows personal users, balk at the idea of paying $200-300 in a lump payment to upgrade from one version of Windows to the next. I think if people were able to pay half that to buy a full version (ie the DVD contains everything and the licence allows them to do a "legal" clean install), without worrying about Home Basic vs. Premium vs. Ultimate, etc., they'd be more likely to do so and more likely to keep pace with development, rather than sticking with, say, Win2k for upwards of 10 years, missing two or three versions before finally upgrading...

OK, this is turning into my frequent "If only MS would follow Apple's pricing scheme" spiel, so I'll shut up now

zridling · « **Reply #89 on:** January 04, 2009, 01:07 AM »

Quote

[Darwin]: Actually, if they revamp their pricing scheme to mimic Apple's this won't be the end of the world, and would likely line their coffers like never before.

They really, really should do that (copy Apple's pricing). Another thing they NEED to do is drop the Software Assurance program for businesses. They no longer have the money to make what feels like lifetime payments to Microsoft when they're stuck using XP and Office 2003. OS X just crossed the 10% marketshare threshold this week. Not a big deal, you say? The old revenue paradigm of proprietary office suite dependent upon proprietary OS has lost its grip. As such, Software Assurance comes across as punitive in this economic climate.

nontroppo · « **Reply #90 on:** January 04, 2009, 11:15 AM »

Hm, I've just played with a copy of Win 7 on a friends Macbook Pro (in VMWare). As the VMWare drivers aren't tuned, Aero was not working. My friend said he thought Win 7 was faster than Vista, though it is well known that Vista hates virtualisation.

Dropping memory down to 512MB, Win 7 is still nicely responsive. That is not the case doing the same with a Vista VM.

I do much prefer the taskbar to XP and Vista, having launch and task management unified is much more intuitive to me. As we had no aero, all the sexy features were not available (which cripples the task bar substantially IMO), and to be honest the overall experience was underwhelming, it really feels like Vista SP3 UI wise. Moving windows to the edge to resize them is nice. Though some have commented that the beta is stable, we constantly froze it using Java 6, and windows experience index would always fail to complete.

One thing I loved compared to Vista - I always put my utilities like process explorer in a directory "Accessories" in "Program Files". Vista made this amazingly irritating with UAC enabled. Win 7 handled it fine, bravo!

I'm sure I'm missing some of the smaller tweaks here and there (I think there are many of the poor UI design bits fixed), Win 7 was nice, but underwhelming. I think it *is* clearly better than Vista resource wise (which is not saying much IMHO).

nontroppo · « **Reply #91 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:20 PM »

Thinking about it a bit, I think it is actually terrible that the biggest usability changes are locked into Aero. It means if Home Basic will not include Aero, substantial functionality will be missing for all those users. Windows has long been crippled by poor window management, and treating it as a "luxury" extra is just wrong IMO. Again, Apple was using transparency, scaling live thumbnails, using visually responsive features for years.

Even with no significant hardware acceleration, this all works elegantly on old Apple laptops. Exposé, desktop peeking, live thumbnails are treated as an essential part of the OS interface as they should be. Honestly, my productivity is significantly higher with robust window/app management over and above the crude alt+tab.

The idea of crippling your OS just to pump revenue is despicable (let alone confusing for end users, I'm also 100% with Darwin). Note, I have no problem with "value-added" addons (premium themes, software bundles for "ultimate"), but to break your core UI experiences is just 100 shades of WRONG!

Darwin · « **Reply #92 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:51 PM »

Well, let’s hope that the following prediction from Bill Pytlovany comes true:

Quote

My real prediction is the Microsoft will actually price Windows 7 so that people might actually buy it instead of trying to get a copy from their friend... Expect fewer versions of Windows 7 to be available to ease the confusion.

Darwin · « **Reply #93 on:** January 04, 2009, 03:56 PM »

PS couldn't get the url to work!

BTW - nontroppo, you're spot on with your comments about MS making so much of Vista/Win7's usability dependent on Aero and up to date hardware. As I've noted before, just about everything that Apple has tossed into OS X 10.4.11 works on my 8 year old iBook... I'd be stuck with Vista Home Basic on my XP and Win2k machines (5 years old and 9 years old respectively). I can, and have, used third party apps to get most of the functionality that I care about onto those machines/into those OS's, and hope that people trying to run Vista/Win7 on older hardware will be able to as well, but why should they have to?!

nontroppo · « **Reply #94 on:** January 04, 2009, 04:53 PM »

Well, as far as i can see from screenshots, the Win 7 installer offers the same 4 "versions" as Vista, so we will have the same stupid user-unfriendly obnoxious choice.

PPS, what URL?

Darwin · « **Reply #95 on:** January 04, 2009, 06:52 PM »

Quote from: nontroppo on January 04, 2009, 04:53 PM

Well, as far as i can see from screenshots, the Win 7 installer offers the same 4 "versions" as Vista, so we will have the same stupid user-unfriendly obnoxious choice.

PPS, what URL?

Why the one missing from my previous post, of course!

I had tried to link to the Bill Pytlovany blog post directly but no matter what I tried it failed to lead to anything other than an error page...

zridling · « **Reply #96 on:** January 07, 2009, 05:36 PM »

CNET's Renai LeMay confuses me. She starts with this stunning theme sentence:

Windows 7 could be one of Microsoft's greatest operating systems, if it fulfills the promise shown by the unofficial beta version (build 7000) we have been testing for the past couple of days.

only to end with this qualification:
...Microsoft has spent a lot of effort with Windows 7 on delivering a solid operating system that won't "wow" anyone....

But then goes on to say:
I want to stress that we didn't test the Windows 7 beta exhaustively....

Are Apple devs the worst ever?
Windows 7 didn't thrash the hard disk or ever feel unresponsive, except when we were installing Apple's iTunes, a notorious pain on Windows systems.
_______________________
Still, all reports on Win7 continue to be positive, and that's great news. Now if Microsoft can only not muck this up between now and the official release.

MrCrispy · « **Reply #97 on:** January 08, 2009, 01:05 AM »

The Win 7 public beta will be out sometime between tonight and tomorrow and next 2 days.

One of the mistakes Microsoft made with Vista was allowing OEM's (and Intel shares a very large part of this blame) to label even their crappy low end configs with slow cpu's, low Ram and integrated graphics as Vista-ready, which led to a lot of grief. Home Premium should be the bare minimum.

nontroppo · « **Reply #98 on:** January 08, 2009, 10:55 AM »

Quote from: MrCrispy on January 08, 2009, 01:05 AM

One of the mistakes Microsoft made with Vista was allowing OEM's (and Intel shares a very large part of this blame) to label even their crappy low end configs with slow cpu's, low Ram and integrated graphics as Vista-ready, which led to a lot of grief. Home Premium should be the bare minimum.

Well, as other OS vendors have been doing, and now MS themselves are seeming to do with Win 7, it *is* possible to make a revised OS without sinking low-end machines in the first place. I agree that Microsoft's inability to optimise their OS until SP2 (Windows 7) *was* compounded by PC vendors desperate for sales pushing hardware that Microsoft was incapable of optimising for in the 5 years Vista took to bake, but you can hardly blame them.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #99 on:** January 08, 2009, 11:04 AM »

According to Windows Secrets the new beta is set to expire around 1st August encouraging speculation that Windows 7 will be released this year. Given that MS have extended the distribution of OEM WinXP until the 30th May it seems that even MS have given up and finally admitted that Vista has been a bad experience for everyone