Windows 7 RC1 branch builds being compiled?

(1 reply) #1 +TCLN Ryster on 18 Feb 2009 - 00:47

I agree entirely. There should be at least one interim build between milestones. Doing away with Beta 2 is one thing, doing away with every single other released build between Beta 1 and RC is another entirely different thing. Without an interim build, theres no way to confirm if our reports on Beta 1 have been fixed, and by definition Microsoft believes the RC build ready to be released. How can they know this if the testers are not given the opportunity to verify bugs have been resolved from the previous build.

I'm sorry but this beta just feels entirely different to any previous Windows beta I've been involved with. Microsoft seem to be moving along at lightning pace and it just feels like us Tech Beta participants are being left behind. While it's true that Beta 1 of Win7 is more stable than Vista was at the RC stages, thats no excuse to bypass due diligence and process. This just seems to me to be another example of Microsoft planning a release based on a fixed rigid timetable, rather than basing it on product readiness.

#1.1 VRam on 18 Feb 2009 - 21:49

TCLN Ryster said,

I agree entirely. There should be at least one interim build between milestones. Doing away with Beta 2 is one thing, doing away with every single other released build between Beta 1 and RC is another entirely different thing. Without an interim build, theres no way to confirm if our reports on Beta 1 have been fixed, and by definition Microsoft believes the RC build ready to be released. How can they know this if the testers are not given the opportunity to verify bugs have been resolved from the previous build.

I'm sorry but this beta just feels entirely different to any previous Windows beta I've been involved with. Microsoft seem to be moving along at lightning pace and it just feels like us Tech Beta participants are being left behind. While it's true that Beta 1 of Win7 is more stable than Vista was at the RC stages, thats no excuse to bypass due diligence and process. This just seems to me to be another example of Microsoft planning a release based on a fixed rigid timetable, rather than basing it on product readiness.

They sure as Hell didn't release Vista on a rigid timetable. If you want an example of an OS being forced out the door to meet a date bugs be damned, look no further than Ubuntu.

Last edited by VRam on 18 Feb 2009 - 22:06

(3 replies) #2 on 01 Jan 1970 - 00:00

#2.1 +Chris123NT on 18 Feb 2009 - 02:00

I never claimed to be special. Honestly I could care less what audience they give builds to. It's never been about "feeling special" for me. The point I am trying to make is that 1-2 test builds is NOT enough to get quality testing and build and great product.

And the techbeta still have a special role, they actually get to see the status of their feedback, but it would be nice if they could also verify that issues have indeed been fixed. THAT is my point. So why don't you try reading things and not jumping to conclusions.

#2.2 M_Lyons10 on 18 Feb 2009 - 02:12

Wow, what a harsh, completely meaningless post.

I agree with this article. Releasing a Beta to ANYONE to gather feedback and bug reports and such, then to not release 48 subsequent builds is bizarre and makes the Beta process all but worthless. I'm sure they got a lot of feedback from the Beta that they released, but now to go to RC without allowing any of the beta testers to see any further Beta Builds is bizarre. Even if we only consider the changes made to resolve bugs that were reported, that's a large amount of code changes (And I'm sure a lot more was changed and features added). Now to go to RC without getting any input on any of those changes or bug fixes is just silly.

And I saw nothing in the article that made it sound like the writer were simply "...whining because the beta isn't limited to Technet anymore" or that he doesn't "...feel special anymore"...

#2.3 tom5 on 18 Feb 2009 - 11:25

I don't think this is about being special or not. It's rather about whether all the beta testing is taken seriously or not. And what kind of impact we really have on the development process.

I was really surprised knowing that the technical beta testers are provided with build 7000 only

#3 Paulz0r on 18 Feb 2009 - 02:19

For the record Chris123NT wrote the article.

#4 hardgiant on 18 Feb 2009 - 02:21

Windows 7 will be pushed out the door to soon and then it will be fixed with sp1 just like Vista and XP. Microsoft can't break there bad habits.

(1 reply) #5 Intelman on 18 Feb 2009 - 03:21

It doesn't matter. Feedback will not change anything major in 7. The beta process started when 7 was basically complete.

#5.1 jpalo on 18 Feb 2009 - 19:01

True, so true!

(2 replies) #6 Kojio on 18 Feb 2009 - 06:35

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

No it's not. An RC build =/= code freeze. It is a release canidate. Hence, the RC1. If the RC1 does well, then they will make a final RTM build. Otherwise, there will be an RC2 build. Besides, there is software vastly more complicated than Windows, that gets by with far less public testing. Windows 7 is not meant to be complicated, it's meant to be a streamlined O/S.

But let's ignore rational thought for the sake of sensationalist news articles. All the cool news media outlets are doing it!

#6.1 Jugalator on 18 Feb 2009 - 09:05

That's often not how RC's work at Microsoft.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/softwa...SSfeed_IWK_News

That article was written in 2006, but is unfortunately still quite current.

#6.2 Kojio on 19 Feb 2009 - 08:29

You said "That's often not how RC's work at Microsoft." and yet you link to an article which only quotes the Windows Vista development as of recent. Your posted article contradicts your own statement.

You should also look into the fact that Vista went through an RC2 stage before being pushed to RTM, which further destroys your argument. ^_^

(1 reply) #7 Digix on 18 Feb 2009 - 06:56

One build is not enough to gather enough feedback to move ahead this quickly

This is completely true and was obvious with Vista testing.

#7.1 BigCheese on 18 Feb 2009 - 20:15

The problem with vista testing is that Microsoft just didn't fix a lot of the bugs that were reported.

#8 angel4u on 18 Feb 2009 - 09:37

What I think is that Windows 7 is far more stable then any other Windows especially Vista. There are issues but mostly with software compatibility and for sure it should be because it still almost all of the software manufacturers haven't given there Windows 7 compatible programs. One thing I have read in one Article for the reason why the Kernel version is 6.1 instead of 7, is because if they change the Kernel version for the OS almost 100% softwares will crash. Unless and untill the software manufacturer make there software compatible. Beside that the bugs in the OS will always remain and will be found at later stages as "No One's Perfect", same goes for OS. I myself have issues with Windows 7 but those all issues are related to Software compatibility. And as Kojio said this is RC1 and there might be RC2 and then RTM after which there will be a Final Release.

(1 reply) #9 vistalabs on 18 Feb 2009 - 19:14

Would you be complaining and saying that there wasnt enough time spent testing a Service Pack if they had spent 2.5 years on it? Because realistically, Windows 7 is more like a service pack for vista than a full new OS & Kernel. A very good one though at that. and with millions of testers around the world i'm sure they have gathered plenty of feedback.

#9.1 SHoTTa35 on 18 Feb 2009 - 19:36

definitely need to quit with the 7 being only a Vista service pack thing. That's like saying Windows XP is only a service pack to Windows 2000. Even that was more true for say XP RTM - SP1. When SP2 came out it gave XP a great overhaul to bring it into the "current" as it was already outdated when it was released.

Windows 7 on the other hand doesn't have much in the ways of visual differences compared to Vista but it's definitely more than just a few updated DLLs and exe's. Much much more!

(4 replies) #10 luis mazza on 18 Feb 2009 - 20:25

They did it wrong with Vista. They won´t do it wrong again with Windows 7, as we can already test on build 7000.

This is RC1 for god sake... If it is called number 1, they are certain that they might release a candidate 2.

We should concern only after testing RC1.

#10.1 +TCLN Ryster on 18 Feb 2009 - 22:33

luis mazza said,

They did it wrong with Vista. They wonï¿½t do it wrong again with Windows 7, as we can already test on build 7000.

This is RC1 for god sake... If it is called number 1, they are certain that they might release a candidate 2.

We should concern only after testing RC1.

Sorry, but thats rubbish. By definition, an RC build (no matter the number) is one that Microsoft think is ready to be released. Thats what Release Candidate means! They put it out to make sure that everyone else has the same opinion. If not, they act on the feedback and put out a second RC build. Once the majority of people agree that RC build is ready, they turn that build into the RTM.

Planning ahead for multiple RC builds is a complete contradiction to what an RC build is actually for.

#10.2 luis mazza on 18 Feb 2009 - 23:37

It is also a contradiction the fact that we are being given a chance to test a Windows Beta version and help it to be coded correctly and then we will have to pay itÂ´s full price when its released. Though we still do it.
A contradiction is not necessarily a bad thing these days, as you can see.

#10.3 +TCLN Ryster on 19 Feb 2009 - 19:27

How is that a contradiction? Do you even know what the word means?

When signing up to do techbeta testing, it clearly states that a free copy of the product is not guaranteed. Anyone beta testing solely to get something for free is doing it for the wrong reasons. Out of interest though, how do you know we WONT receive a free copy this time around? Has that been confirmed somewhere and I missed it?

#10.4 luis mazza on 19 Feb 2009 - 21:34

You seem not the type of person that really has a sense for abstraction or creativity. But you do like to make a super sense of everything. ThatÂ´s a contradiction.

(2 replies) #11 +TCLN Ryster on 18 Feb 2009 - 22:35

A shame someone didn't quote the drivel that the original poster of comment #2 made. I'd love to have read it

Based on the replies, it sounds to me like it was a load of self-righteous twaddle.

#11.1 Kojio on 19 Feb 2009 - 08:20

It started something like "What a meaningless article" which I sort of agree with, however the original poster made a huge rant about it.

#11.2 +TCLN Ryster on 19 Feb 2009 - 19:28

I could've sworn I hit reply against #2, how come the post got posted separately?

#12 anthonyjb82 on 19 Feb 2009 - 11:35

you guys HAVE noticed how better win7 in beta is better than vista sp1 right?

bring it on i cant wait...

#13 Angel Blue01 on 19 Feb 2009 - 14:11

They should have had a beta 2....

#14 Acheron_77 on 19 Feb 2009 - 21:57

I read in Ars Technica that build doesn't exist confirmed by Microsoft employee... We must wait some days more.. Or we can't?

TheARC

#15 Paulz0r on 20 Feb 2009 - 01:48

Updated: http://www.geeksmack.net/microsoft/119-win...90211-xxxx.html

Sorry guys, our source was incorrect. The real build compiled on that date is 7041.

Neowin.net