Windows 7 ... shows promise

[dong20]

I finally got around to installing my Windows 7 beta and while visually it owes a great deal to vista, under the hood some nice features have been added, and more importantly, they seem to work - especially in the areas of home networking, media streaming and file management. Also, the UAC has been tamed!

Of more interest to me, system management has been enhanced and the 25 minute hands off install was nice too. Thus far it runs stably and surprisingly quickly. Whether it will reverse the damage caused by Vista is another question of course.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

I like the Superbar (merging the taskbar and the Quick Launch bar) and the Powershell for scripting. I mostly like HomeGroup, since the proxy server setups that I use always end up failing. The old Windows connection sharing really sucks. I've been using a router for networking, but HomeGroup might be an easier alternative for the average user who isn't familiar with proxies, port forwarding and NAt rules, etc.

I'm surprised that it runs quickly. Isn't it a Vista upgrade and not a standalone OS? If so, I doubt that it will "reverse the damage caused by Vista."

 

[dong20]

I like the Superbar (merging the taskbar and the Quick Launch bar) and the Powershell for scripting. I mostly like HomeGroup, since the proxy server setups that I use always end up failing. The old Windows connection sharing really sucks. I've been using a router for networking, but HomeGroup might be an easier alternative for the average user who isn't familiar with proxies, port forwarding and NAt rules, etc.

I quite like it, altough beyond the 'painting and decorating' things are not that very different although it all hangs together rather better than Vista.

The home networking side has had a good deal of work done on it, but because my install isn't joined to a domain (yet) I have not had time to play with the AD enhancements. Perhaps when I get the chance I'll create a test domain. One nice touch is iTunes support within Media Playe. It also offers support for Ultra Wideband and wireless USB as well as blu ray writing. Other things include sensor (and touchscreen) support, which could be useful for mobile devices.

I'm surprised that it runs quickly. Isn't it a Vista upgrade and not a standalone OS? If so, I doubt that it will "reverse the damage caused by Vista."

Ballmer described it as 'Vista, but a whole lot better' which would appear to be a kiss of death. That said and it's barely a beta 1 it seems to redress some of the key flaws with Vista. It's not a feature locked version so things may yet change a little.

As for speed, perhaps I haven't given it long enough to clog up yet, I've only been fooling with it a short time, it sat on my desk for a while before I got around to installing it.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

The largest computer system software vendor on earth- one of the richest companies in the world, and they can't put put out a functional system in fewer than 3 tries?

And at that it will be found to be rife with holes and insecurities that MS will be slow to address.

It astounds me that MS can not seem to attract more talented development staff, or managerial staff than is reflected in the debacle of Vista.

And from what I read, Windows 7 is still a half year or more from general release?

Sheesh.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

The largest computer system software vendor on earth- one of the richest companies in the world, and they can't put put out a functional system in fewer than 3 tries?

And at that it will be found to be rife with holes and insecurities that MS will be slow to address.

Like it's software, MS is big and bloated. Look at what Google has been doing with it's small development teams--creating great software like Chrome and Earth and buying great software like Picassa and OpenOffice.

I'd use Ubuntu if it had better software. I guess that I could always run Windows though Ubuntu, but that's too slow and buggy.

It astounds me that MS can not seem to attract more talented development staff, or managerial staff than is reflected in the debacle of Vista.

Their business model was always flawed. The execs are too scared of losing their options and the coders are overpaid. The project teams are far too big. Also, their marketing is flawed; They should open their source more and try to improve their own software rather than pounce on their competitors. They have lost $ billions in fines due to their aggressive and unfair marketing strategies.

And from what I read, Windows 7 is still a half year or more from general release?

They haven't set an official date, which is good since they are always late with their release dates. The release will be determined by "product quality".

 

[Notaguru2]

The largest computer system software vendor on earth- one of the richest companies in the world, and they can't put put out a functional system in fewer than 3 tries?

And at that it will be found to be rife with holes and insecurities that MS will be slow to address.

It astounds me that MS can not seem to attract more talented development staff, or managerial staff than is reflected in the debacle of Vista.

And from what I read, Windows 7 is still a half year or more from general release?

Sheesh.

Well, even with its quirks, MS operating systems have the largest install base hands down. There is nothing out there putting pressure on MS to produce anything better, so why should they?

Linux is for hobbyists, Mac is for.... people that check email, Unix is for legacy application support. See where I am going with this? Windows has no legitimate competition and as a result it frequently falls short of end user expectations.

I will say this for MS though. Windows Server 2008 is a quantum leap in business computing, especially in the virtualization space.

 

[Deno]

Mac is for.... people that check email

Oh... no he didn't.........

 

[blar]

I have been hearing good things about it...I hope M$ doesn't make a last minute change before it comes out that screws up everything

I think I may wait still this comes out to make the change from xp

it seems Vista is the Windows Me of today

 

[Deno]

I don't know if I don't expect to much out of Vista or if I have turned off all the faulty stuff but my computer runs 24/7 for months at a time. I do however see alot of things in the logs which could be fixed like constant reports of the internal clock not being able to update and needed to do it from a different source, and the report of to many connection from the tcpi thinkie. Nothing that actually gets in the way of Vista operating. But like I have said I have turned of alot of bells and wistles such as gadgets, UAC, superfetch, windows doing a freaking harddrive defrag every day, and the daily creation of a restore point, what good is a restore point if they make one every day and ever time you install something, if you actually wanted a restore point a few weeks away you wouldn't have one.

I guess I just use window as a simple OS and never really did care for all the add features, all I wanted when I bought it was a cheap OS that was verified and legal. I bought the cheap 99 dollars upgrade after hearing it could be installed on a newly formatted HD. It was actually cheaper then the copies of XP still being sold.

 

[hairyman101]

is it true that it has touch screen option?? no mouse. this was all over the news that the mouse will be gone with win 7. true or false???

 

[dong20]

is it true that it has touch screen option?? no mouse. this was all over the news that the mouse will be gone with win 7. true or false???

It has native touch screen support, yes. But that's already available as an add on with other OS. Of course that requires appropriate hardware and a great deal of current software isn't [well] optimised for non mouse input. I think those rodents will with us for a while yet!

 

[Deno]

I think touch screen use is stupid. Telling kids its o'k to touch a screen is just asking for trouble. It is also gonna cause an entire new range of stress related disabilities.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

Mac is for.... people that check email,

Actually, Macs are for creatives.
The 6% of users that are on Macs produce more than half of all books, video, music, and art that is produced on computers.

Macs are for people who want a computer that is more of a facile creative tool, and less of a techno-hobby.

 

[B_Nick4444]

it seems Vista is the Windows Me of today

that's exactly what it feels like

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I think touch screen use is stupid. Telling kids its o'k to touch a screen is just asking for trouble. It is also gonna cause an entire new range of stress related disabilities.

Agreed.
MS is full of imbecilic innovations.

The "table" computer? Please... a table surface is the worst possible viewing angle and ergonomically a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Apple, in fact just came out with glass fronted Imacs BECAUSE they were losing educational sales from discontinuing the CRT tubed eMacs.

Touch and gesture sensitive displays will be great for board presentations and other performance applications...
But for home use?
Who wants to be waving their arms around on the computer?

And how the hell do you get Jr's peanut butter smears off the surface?

 

[dong20]

I think touch screen use is stupid. Telling kids its o'k to touch a screen is just asking for trouble. It is also gonna cause an entire new range of stress related disabilities.

I disagree, and the rest of your assertions are based on what evidence? Depending on the context, touch screen use is far more intuitive than using a mouse, IMO.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I think they Are intuitive... but that is not enough.
Haptics are vastly more intuitive than any mouse... but they still have not caught on.

I think gestural touch screens are GREAT for such applications as the iPhone and new Blackberry....
I definitely think they will come to dominate small portable devices....


Great if you are standing around a table... or standing up at a big screen in front of a group...
But those are uses based upon PERFORMANCE... i.e. Show and Tell.
Its why you will see a lot of gestural screens on television... it looks good on video...
( of course... the company that developed this technology KEPT the wall mounted screen for themselves... they only sold MS the rights table top use...)

But most of us do not stand all day...
We sit at a computer.

A mouse or a wacom tablet does the exact same thing without the expensive touch-screen...
Unfortunately... displays are still costly, and like eyeglasses, the more you TOUCH them, the faster they get damaged.


But to be useful for a desktop computer... the screen surface would have to be at least mounted like an old fashioned drafting table... just to make it so you could see and reach the thing.... And as a guy who still has one... I can tell you nobody uses them as an all purpose desk.


The best evidence I can offer you is the Cintiq... a display where you used a wacom-like pen, DIRECTLY on the display.
They sell... but they have not really caught on as THE way to do art on the computer.

 

[dong20]

I think they Are intuitive... but that is not enough.
Haptics are vastly more intuitive than any mouse... but they still have not caught on.

I think gestural touch screens are GREAT for such applications as the iPhone and new Blackberry....
I definitely think they will come to dominate small portable devices....

I agree, though oddly, having owned a number of such devices I prefer (in many cases) traditional keypad input. What can I say?

Great if you are standing around a table... or standing up at a big screen in front of a group...
But those are uses based upon PERFORMANCE... i.e. Show and Tell.
Its why you will see a lot of gestural screens on television... it looks good on video...
( of course... the company that developed this technology KEPT the wall mounted screen for themselves... they only sold MS the rights table top use...)

But most of us do not stand all day...
We sit at a computer.

Which is why I wrote, depending on the context.

A mouse or a wacom tablet does the exact same thing without the expensive touch-screen...
Unfortunately... displays are still costly, and like eyeglasses, the more you TOUCH them, the faster they get damaged.

Well if you mean interact with content yes, but I would disagree that they interact with the user in the exact same way, and yes they can wear - much like any HID.

But to be useful for a desktop computer... the screen surface would have to be at least mounted like an old fashioned drafting table... just to make it so you could see and reach the thing.... And as a guy who still has one... I can tell you nobody uses them as an all purpose desk.

See above. I don't entirely agree with you about their value for traditional desktop use, but neither do I entirely disagree. I think that largely comes down to personal preference.

The best evidence I can offer you is the Cintiq... a display where you used a wacom-like pen, DIRECTLY on the display.
They sell... but they have not really caught on as THE way to do art on the computer.

Change is often resisted ... people like to stay with the familiar - but then neither do I recall suggesting that touch screens were a panacea. I know this because they are not. They are merely an alternative and, having used (and seen used) a wide variety of systems I can confirm that they have drawbacks as well as virtues.

Personally, I'd like to see 'intelligent' (as in natural language not pseudo robotic) voice control for many tasks, but the past reality failing to meet the hype has set that back somewhat, which is a shame.

 

[dong20]

I just installed the latest build.

The setup T&Cs title it RC1 which came as a mild suprise given what M$ have been saying - but then they generally speak with forked tongue. Given the RC1 status and the rate at which new build are being created I'm no longer sure of M$'s true vs public timetable (not that I ever really was), but IMO, the sooner Vista is 'round filed' the better. I assume that's their aim.

There are a fair few changes since the last build I bothered to install. Some are significant and some minor. It's also noticeably faster.