Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.224.166

Forum Moderators: bill

Message Too Old, No Replies

Officially, it's Windows 7: Pre-Beta Developer Release Due

     

engine

11:52 am on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator engine is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month Best Post Of The Month



Officially, it's Windows 7: Pre-Beta [windowsvistablog.com] Developer Release Due
In a few weeks we are going to be talking about the details of this release at the PDC and at WinHEC. We will be sharing a pre-beta "developer only release" with attendees of both shows and giving them the first broad in-depth look at what we've been up to. I can't wait for them to see it.

And, as you probably know, since we began development of the next version of the Windows client operating system we have been referring to it by a codename, "Windows 7." But now is a good time to announce that we've decided to officially call the next version of Windows, "Windows 7."

Lord Majestic

11:56 am on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Good thing if they keep this name for release - this is what they need to shake off terrible Vista taste, that brand is ruined forever.

JamieBrown

12:56 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows 2000
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7

Yeah - that is a well thoughtout roadmap.

Lord Majestic

1:10 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



:o

You missed out

Windows 1.0
Windows 2.0
Windows 3.0 (very successful)

and

Windows NT 3.1
Windows NT 3.5
Windows NT 4.0 (pretty successful actually)

;)

JamieBrown

1:24 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Absolutely. And not to mention stuff like Home Basic, Home Premium, Business and Ultimate. Its all a wee bit complex.

kaled

1:42 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member kaled is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



It doesn't matter what they call it - the problem is that it's built on Vista not XP. That means it's probably going to be slow and almost certainly going to be bloated (not that XP is exactly trim).

I wonder if they'll provide an option to run without virtual memory at all (at least until it's really needed) that would speed things up quite a bit but somehow I doubt they'll manage anything as simple as that.

Kaled.

maximillianos

2:01 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I'm holding on to XP until Android is released for the desktop... ;-)

sgietz

2:03 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



One would think they learn from their mistakes.

I have to say that I enjoy many of Vista's features, but performance is certainly an issue. Hopefully they will keep the aesthetics part alone and focus on performance with this next release. Vista is pretty to look at, and it would be nice if it could fly like XP does on my machine. There certainly is a problem with inefficient code running around aimlessly.

The fact is that Grandma staying in touch with her grandkids is not Microsoft's bread and butter; it's the business world! They need to seriously address that with a complete overhaul of how the OS utilizes the computer's resources. I guess they relied on newer CPUs and fast memory to make bloated Vista a non-issue. Too bad that didn't happen.

Curious to see what they come up with. :)

rise2it

3:35 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



You silly rabbits are completely missing the point of what 'Windows 7' really stands for...

Lust
Gluttony
Greed
Sloth
Wrath
Envy
Pride

;-)

iThink

3:36 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



There is still no clear plan from MS to introduce a light weight OS for low cost notebooks such as Dell mini or HP 2133 mini-note netbooks that are still selling with Win XP pre-installed because Vista is just too bloated for them.

kapow

3:37 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Their marketing guys say "Make it pretty",
The customer says "Make it fast and safe",
Wheather MS will be a major player in 5 years depends on which one of the above they are guided by. Certainly the increasingly healthy up-and-comming competitors (linux, Google...etc) seem to listen to the user, so they will only get stronger.

Lord Majestic

3:43 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Almost correct order rise2it... :)

Envy (of Macs OS) - Windows 1.0
Lust - Windows 2.0
Sloth - Windows 3.1
Wrath - Windows 95
Greed - Windows ME
Pride - Windows XP
Gluttony - Windows Vista

The 8th sin will be invented when Windows 7 ships :)

simsim2500

4:13 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Lord Majestic:

I would agree with you...

only make it:
Gluttony - Windows ME
Pride - Windows XP
Greed - Windows Vista

lol
My $0.02

AlienDev211

4:26 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



that has got to be the greatest reference to the sins i have ever seen in my life. i agree with most of it. only i would make it

Envy (of Macs OS) - Windows 1.0
Lust - Windows 2.0
Sloth - Windows 3.1
Wrath - Windows 95
Repentance - Windows 98
Gluttony - Windows ME (they were trying to eat more then they could chew)
Greed - Windows XP (created so many different versions)
Pride - Windows Vista (stand tall guys, cause it sucks)
? - Windows 7

visually it looks like they should be repenting again... so lets hope this one is worth it

kaled

4:27 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member kaled is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



Their marketing guys say "Make it pretty"
Sad but true, however, we the public are largely to blame for this.

Several years ago, I saw a laptop with a shiny screen for the first time - a Sony. My first thought was that it was an absolutely idiotic idea but the simple fact is that it was a brilliant idea from the business perspective - one that has been copied by every manufacturer since. Shiny things sell, even if what's underneath is rubbish, because most people are either too stupid to think about or too busy research their purchases.

Kaled.

Gomvents

4:49 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



why can't fast, stable, and compatible be top priorities? They should have a fresh new kernel, possibly Unix-based and use an internal VM (seamless to user) to run older software that'll run slightly slower than native but with a super-fast quad core CPU very few will notice plus as time goes no we'll need less and less older software, eventually none... Is my hope only a pipe-dream, or a possibility?

[edited by: Gomvents at 4:49 pm (utc) on Oct. 14, 2008]

sgietz

4:58 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Shiny things sell ... LOL!

That's very true, and there is no shortage of smart people who will exploit those idiotic human tendencies.

... but i like shiny things, too! :)

kaled

5:09 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member kaled is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



They should have a fresh new kernel, possibly Unix-based
I have no knowledge of this area of Windows, however, I have read several times that the Windows NT Kernel is indeed based on Unix/Xenix.

Kaled.

carguy84

5:16 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows 2000
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Yeah - that is a well thoughtout roadmap

Ya, not exactly forward thinking. However, care to list out the names of the Linux distributions?

System

10:32 pm on Oct 14, 2008 (gmt 0)

redhat



The following 30 messages were cut out to new thread by bill. New thread at: microsoft_windows_os/3766766.htm [webmasterworld.com]
2:10 pm on Oct. 16, 2008 (jst +9)

Tastatura

2:16 pm on Oct 16, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member




numbering scheme goes like this: there were three versions of the original Windows, with NT dubbed 3.1. Then came 95 as version 4, with 98, 98SE, and ME all considered minor updates. 2000 got the next major update to 5, while XP is 5.1, Vista is 6, and this new one is labeled 7. The confusing bit is that it's actually numbered 6.1 internally, a minor version change for the sake of application compatibility.

How does MS number thy Windows? [engadget.com]

From Ms : Why 7 [windowsvistablog.com]

Miamacs

5:11 pm on Oct 16, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



thnx Tastatura i laughed out loud while reading the MS blog.

I'll quote the same "reasoning" from there too... ( link above )

That brings us to Windows Vista, which is 6.0. So we see Windows 7 as our next logical significant release and 7th in the family of Windows releases. (...) So we decided to ship the Windows 7 code as Windows 6.1

*heh* ... now i like this name even more
btw code name v12 will be followed by either v12.1 or v14.
Just to let you know...

...

anshul

7:02 pm on Oct 16, 2008 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I'm holding on to XP until Android is released for the desktop... ;-)

Even I stick to Win XP after using Win 2003 but what is that Android?

One other thing: 4 years before, I'd used Fedora 4, isn't it best free Linux? Or what else is there: is it Ubuntu?

fakedsysadmin

1:10 am on Oct 17, 2008 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



"I have no knowledge of this area of Windows, however, I have read several times that the Windows NT Kernel is indeed based on Unix/Xenix."

Kaled, is this a joke?

If it isn't, then I suggest to do some research on David Cutler.

To start, read this articles:

[query.nytimes.com...]

[query.nytimes.com...]