Video claims to demo breathtaking Windows 7 features

Update: A Microsoft spokesperson has confirmed the video is fake.

Thanks TechMedik for posting this in our forums, Ars Technica have posted what could be a promo video for Windows 7. Read on ...

Many users are interested in whether or not Windows 7 will be an improvement in terms of performance, but that verdict will only be out once benchmark tests are performed on the RTM build. That will be a while. Other users have their eyes set on what features Windows 7 will offer over Windows Vista. Will Microsoft's next operating system add something that truly makes the user exclaim "wow!" or make customers rush to stores the second it hits the shelves?

The current internal builds look like Windows Vista, and this is completely normal because Microsoft begins work on the user interface last. Nevertheless, there have been minor features added already (none of which are set in stone of course). Out of everything we've seen in these early builds, there really hasn't been anything to write home about yet, until now.

View: Full Article @ Ars Technica

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Debian and Ubuntu flaw leaves private SSL/SSH keys guessable

Next Story

Windows Live Messenger 9.0 Beta program frustrates testers

69 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Vista works great, except there are too many fools who actually believe all the negative posts they read.

WINDOWS 7 SUCKS, I'M STICKING WITH GOOD OLD RELIABLE VISTA.

That aside, I do hope they make it faster and smaller, and preferably 64bit only, having many versions in 32/64bit oem/retail N/KN etc. does make for confusion.

I voted real, because only MS could add those "features" to an OS and claim they're "breathtaking". Besides, who the hell needs a website and blog designing tool in the OS?

It isn't real, apparently it's some collection of Vista add-ons from a third-party that's in beta right now.

Believe me, know one here thought that video was "breathtaking" :P

Nobody seems to be worried about that FrontPage replacement. Seriously, what's that logo in the corner? Like, 4 blobs?

this is completely normal because Microsoft begins work on the user interface last...

Haven't learnt a thing, have they?

(Edit: Read #21.)

(mattrobs said @ #1)

Haven't learnt a thing, have they?

(Edit: Read #21.)

Quite a telling statement, actually.

I sincerely hope that's not Windows 7. Who keeps adding these craplets to Windows? An improved file explorer would be ok, but this other crap is a complete waste of space, resources, and is generally in poor taste.

Um, I love me my Vista but that was only breath taking if your English is bad and you mean YAWNING...

Or unless it was Jobs saying all these new features were "breath taking" ™ and then LTD would agree. :P

Real or not, those features are not exciting me.

Nothing beats the time where XP came out while I was still on a Win95 PC.
That time XP really excited me, I prayed to get it :P
Maybe thats because I'm pretty much a kid at that time.

The first time I'm on Vista, I'm totally lost.
Its like they splited up the usual display properties and throw them around.
Many things are split up and relocated, had a hard time configuring the system for my uncle.

hmmm even if it is fake im expecting very little from Windows 7 and Hoping for a lot. I find that Microsoft are very out of touch with there users these days. Multitasking is a massive aspect i think windows needs to work on. I particularly like expose for Mac (and whatever it is on fusion) I don't particularly want Aero its not doing anything special for me not a reason i would want Vista as my OS. If it wasn't for the game compatibility on Windows I wouldn't even run it (and i've always been a Windows person). Unix Systems these days are soo much easier to multitask. I REALLY hope MS fix this with windows!!! PLEASE!

I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing there that would cause me to upgrade. On a side note, dude in that video has a darn fast machine or something. Or maybe mines just aged.

Christ, we've barely hit Milestone 2 and people are already bitching...
Seriously guys, what DO you want? Vista was all eye candy and you hated that, now this looks like Microsoft is actually adding in stuff that'll genuinely increase productivity (Dual pane Explorer? Hell yes!) and it's still not good enough?
Ok, maybe "breathtaking" isn't the right description, but I've yet to see an OS that looks "breathtaking" and didn't **** all over productivity at the same time.

(Kushan said @ #17)
Christ, we've barely hit Milestone 2 and people are already bitching...
Seriously guys, what DO you want? Vista was all eye candy and you hated that, now this looks like Microsoft is actually adding in stuff that'll genuinely increase productivity (Dual pane Explorer? Hell yes!) and it's still not good enough?
Ok, maybe "breathtaking" isn't the right description, but I've yet to see an OS that looks "breathtaking" and didn't **** all over productivity at the same time.

If these things make to the final version, I'll be getting it. These are things I can actually find a use for (compared to the new features in Vista).

I used to be a hardcore Windows fan, but, after the Vista debacle I decided to make the move to Mac. All I can say is that it was the best technological decision I've made. I've been constantly let down by Windows and it's BSOD, hanging programs, frozen screens, incompatibilities, driver issues, etc. I'm not trying to hate, but, after looking at this short video, I am far from impressed. Mind you, I do understand that it will be distinctly different looking when all is said and done, but I can't but feel like MS is still on the same destructable path as always in regards to the OS wars. Mac OS X, on the other hand, while not perfect, is much more stable, easily usable, programs work, no BSOD's, etc. I hope that MS gets it together soon. I like that there is still competition between the two platforms. We all win.........

Is that a joke?
There is no way you were a "hardcore Windows fan" if you switched due to the Vista "debacle".
There is NO Vista debacle there WAS NO Vista debacle. It's just a bunch of people expecting a new OS to run on outdated computers. I bet you are very happy with a NEW Mac that runs OS X fast. Guess what, a NEW PC would run Vista fast, too (as long as you make sure you dont get crapware from an OEM).

(mrp04 said @ #15.3)
Is that a joke?
There is no way you were a "hardcore Windows fan" if you switched due to the Vista "debacle".
There is NO Vista debacle there WAS NO Vista debacle. It's just a bunch of people expecting a new OS to run on outdated computers. I bet you are very happy with a NEW Mac that runs OS X fast. Guess what, a NEW PC would run Vista fast, too (as long as you make sure you dont get crapware from an OEM).

QFT

(mrp04 said @ #15.3)
Is that a joke?
There is no way you were a "hardcore Windows fan" if you switched due to the Vista "debacle".
There is NO Vista debacle there WAS NO Vista debacle. It's just a bunch of people expecting a new OS to run on outdated computers. I bet you are very happy with a NEW Mac that runs OS X fast. Guess what, a NEW PC would run Vista fast, too (as long as you make sure you dont get crapware from an OEM).

Well said. I could never go back to Xp now I have Vista.

(Shiranui said @ #15.5)

Well said. I could never go back to Xp now I have Vista.

BS

my pc runs vista just fine but why would i drive a DRM Bloat machine
when i can run a good os instead ?

its pretty much like trading in a Porsche for a VW Bug with a flashier paint job and spiffy rims and tinted windows etc

You Vista fanboys will forever get owned in every debate for one reason.

Performance.

if that has no value to you then by all means drive your bloat wagon
and leave the rest of us intelligent computer users alone kthxbye

google the word overclock.. 14 and a half million hits
look it up and see what it means and then come and tell me that performance doesnt matter
this whole vista vs xp debate is retarded how can a bloated pos "Symantec Norton Vista" be better when the facts PROVE otherwise

It must be nice to live in a illusionary world where the facts / reality can be warped to suit your needs as you see fit

I guess we have reached the age when Overclocking / Benchmarking has DIED

(I am Not PCyr said @ #15.6)

my pc runs vista just fine but why would i drive a DRM Bloat machine
when i can run a good os instead ?

Performance.

google the word overclock.. 14 and a half million hits
look it up and see what it means and then come and tell me that performance doesnt matter
this whole vista vs xp debate is retarded how can a bloated pos "Symantec Norton Vista" be better when the facts PROVE otherwise

It must be nice to live in a illusionary world where the facts / reality can be warped to suit your needs as you see fit

I guess we have reached the age when Overclocking / Benchmarking has DIED :(

I have to wonder if it's actually you living in the alternate reality. I run Vista and haven't run into any DRM related problems. My computer is also overclocked from 2.13 GHz to 3.2 GHz, all running fast, stable and smooth on Vista SP1. On the same machine I've also got OSX Leopard installed and guess what? Both Vista and OSX run equally well. Both have their pluses and minuses. In the end they're just operating systems and its up to you to decide which one you like better. I like both.

Wow. Never heard anything like this before. Did you cut and paste this crap? Are we really supposed to believe any of it, or is it a joke?

EGG[ said,#13]Anyone else totally unimpressed by the video ?

:(

I'm just amazed that anyone actually *is* impressed by it. I guess people don't have much faith in us these days?

I mean seriously... do some of you actually want SmartFTP to replace Explorer? lol

As most people have already said, this stuff can be done with 3rd party tools. But if they're built into the O/S they should be less resource hungry and work better. No more games not installing because you have Daemon Tools installed for example...
Nothing breathtaking here though...

What can anything shown here do that any modern operating system can't do with a few free 3rd party programs?

:wacko:


By comparison, Leopard is still killing even Windows 7.

And if so, then that could only mean Mac OS X 10.6 (whatever codename they use) will be even more ahead ... LOL! :D

Then again, we'll just have to wait and see until Windows 7 hits at least Beta 2 (or even RC1) before we can make a reasonable judgement.

By what comparison exactly? Your opinion, and that of every other Mac zealot?

The numbers speak for themselves.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10

I don't think "killing" correctly describes the effect MacOS is having on the Vista market share. Vista is beating OS X on both PowerPC and MacIntel platforms, combined. I'm not a big fan of Microsoft or Windows, but be realistic about the success of each platform. There never will be a mass exodus of users. . any change will take place gradually over a long period of time, possibly as long as 10 or 20 years. We could be in the middle of that right now, only time will tell. I guess it's not all bad though. . while MacOS may be number three behind Vista and XP, at least MacOS is doing better these days than every other version of Windows. Unfortunately there are still more geriatric corporate desktops running NT4 than there are PCs running my OS of choice.

I can say this though, so long as Apple runs any advertisements that insult their competition (and by extension that platform's users), I'll be passing on their shiny product. Even if I don't run Windows, the advertisement jabs at people running machines without a fruit on the side of the box.

Can download 3rd party apps to do that, but goos to see it'll be in windows by default, hopefully they won't remove things like they did with Vista...

Cool....I get mentioned on the front page. Now if only half these things actually make it into w7. Some of these are actually useful.

(warwagon said @ #6)
Nice to know, yes. Breathtaking, uh NO! Breathtaking would be like hearing that they scratched the registry.

Lol that would be breath taking. Like when compiz fusion was introduced - that was breath taking.

Removing the registry is more like asphyxiation. If they're going to do that they'll need to start again and have no support for backwards compatibility (outside of virtualization).

And what problems has the registry caused since Windows 2000 anyway? Especially now Microsoft push users into not running admin accounts. It’s just a database used to store settings, if they're not being stored there that means they'll have to be stored in config files, which create a whole lot of new problems.

(warwagon said @ #6)
Nice to know, yes. Breathtaking, uh NO! Breathtaking would be like hearing that they scratched the registry.

There is nothing wrong with the registry... it's just a database... XML config files and INI files are not multi-user and have concurrency locking issues which the registry fixes...

(virtorio said @ #6.2)
Removing the registry is more like asphyxiation. If they're going to do that they'll need to start again and have no support for backwards compatibility (outside of virtualization).

Something they should have done with Vista. Completely rewrite the operating system from the ground up.

(kylejn said @ #6.4)

Something they should have done with Vista. Completely rewrite the operating system from the ground up.

If they did that it most likely wouldn't be available now, or in the foreseeable future, nor would it run much (or any) of the software currently available for it, at the same quality it currently does - which is the main reason Windows has the stronghold that it does.

You can’t just re-write an operating system in two years, certainty not properly, and not one that does all the things people expect Windows to. So get real.

(virtorio said @ #6.2)
Removing the registry is more like asphyxiation. If they're going to do that they'll need to start again and have no support for backwards compatibility (outside of virtualization).

And what problems has the registry caused since Windows 2000 anyway? Especially now Microsoft push users into not running admin accounts. It’s just a database used to store settings, if they're not being stored there that means they'll have to be stored in config files, which create a whole lot of new problems.


The registry IS the main problem with Windows, and the whole point originally of the scrapped new file system, by having things in a database structure with tables instead of a registry, it will speed things up while at the same time make installing/uninstalling programs easier. The registry has been considered a mess since it's inception, and needing replaced a long time ago.

(virtorio said @ #6.2)
Removing the registry is more like asphyxiation. If they're going to do that they'll need to start again and have no support for backwards compatibility (outside of virtualization).

I think virtualization is the way to go. You can make major OS code changes and still maintain compatibility with XP, simply because you're actually running XP.


(z0phi3l said @ #6.6)
The registry IS the main problem with Windows, and the whole point originally of the scrapped new file system, by having things in a database structure with tables instead of a registry, it will speed things up while at the same time make installing/uninstalling programs easier. The registry has been considered a mess since it's inception, and needing replaced a long time ago.

WinFS wasn't a filesystem, and wasn't meant to replace the registry.

It sure as hell didn't speed anything up =P

(virtorio said @ #6.2)
Removing the registry is more like asphyxiation. If they're going to do that they'll need to start again and have no support for backwards compatibility (outside of virtualization).

And what problems has the registry caused since Windows 2000 anyway? Especially now Microsoft push users into not running admin accounts. It’s just a database used to store settings, if they're not being stored there that means they'll have to be stored in config files, which create a whole lot of new problems.

The problem with the registry IMO is that it tends to make configuration very difficult to take with you.

If configuration data is stored in a file, I can easily copy that file and just that file, if I want to set up the program the same way on a new PC/after a clean install/whatever.

There's no uniform way to retrieve the registry units associated with a given program.

If it isn't fake, I welcome those changes with open arms. The Explorer file browser (and OSX Finder for that matter) has always been a huge piece of **** compared to something like Directory Opus. Having dual panes is extremely useful. I also like the idea of editable, even custom keyboard shortcuts. It's one of those "long overdue" things. Personally I wouldn't mind if they really went to town with the Explorer interface.

What Windows really needs though is a new program installation paradigm. The "Next-next-next-next-next-next-next-finish" deal is just annoying and dated. Just steal the OSX "mount image, drag icon to Applications" system already! Have some sort of virtual machine or wrapper for the old (current) stuff that vomits files all over the hard drive and registry as a backwards compatibility method.