Do we really need Windows 7

By jjrambo
in The Fast Ring (Insider Previews)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

jjrambo

Posted
Posted

Do we really need Windows 7 now? I think it would be better to release one big SP2 with new features, changes, fixes and patches.

I don't see why Vista should be replaced since UAC behavior, new features, patches and fixes can be pushed through SP2.

Windows 7 will be like what Windows XP was compared to Windows 2000. The other reason is probably to get rid of Vista just because of the bad image it has right now. Having new OS every 3 years is too much. I think that should be moved to every 5-7 years.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/637817-do-we-really-need-windows-7/
Share on other sites
Proficient

39 Thieves

Posted
Posted
Do we really need Windows 7 now? I think it would be better to release one big SP2 with new features, changes, fixes and patches.

I don't see why Vista should be replaced since UAC behavior, new features, patches and fixes can be pushed through SP2.

Windows 7 will be like what Windows XP was compared to Windows 2000. The other reason is probably to get rid of Vista just because of the bad image it has right now. Having new OS every 3 years is too much. I think that should be moved to every 5-7 years.

This is merely going back to the same release schedule Microsoft has ALWAYS had. The time line that Vista followed was an aberration and definitely not the norm. I don't get why some people on here just can't seem to grasp that concept.

Grand Master

+Gary7 Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted
This is merely going back to the same release schedule Microsoft has ALWAYS had. The time line that Vista followed was an aberration and definitely not the norm. I don't get why some people on here just can't seem to grasp that concept.

Well there was Windows 95, then Win 98, then Win 98SE, Then Windows 2000, Then Windows ME, Then Windows Xp, Then Windows Vista. Most of these had Sp's. Win 2000 is at SP4, Xp is at SP3. I don't see anything wrong with a Vista SP2. I like Vista, never had any problems with it. Although I liked some of the Beta releases better than the final product.

Grand Master

markwolfe Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Do we really need Windows 7 now? I think it would be better to release one big SP2 with new features, changes, fixes and patches.

...

Microsoft doesn't charge for SPs. They can charge for a new version.

'Nuff said. ;)

Grand Master

mad_onion

Posted
Posted

well it's not going to be out tommorow. it's called sftware developement for a reason. the software develops over time. they need to release a new version eventually 3 years seems like a good time frame to me.

yeah, microsoft doesn't make money out of services packs, they aren't running a charity. new features are for new versions of the software. windows is no different. if you want more features you will have to (well firstly wait) and then buy them.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Since Windows 7 will be implemented using MinWin as base and has Sinofsky as the project leader I think W7 might as well be the best OS ever by MS.

It will be, at least, interesting to see how he resolves some old problems that Windows has.

Grand Master

Lt-DavidW

Posted
Posted
Like ? A top 3 would be perfect .

Here's my top ten: :p

1. Bring back 'File Types' under 'File and Folder Options'

2. Standardise all of the 'Search' boxes across all applications

Some are 'Search' (WMP, WPG), some are 'Search...' (Calendar), one is 'Start Search' (Start), and one is 'Search all gadgets'.

The 'Go' arrows to the right of the Search boxes also lack consistency.

3. Add a 'Search' box to Group Policy Editor (gpedit.msc)

4. Add a 'Custom' configuration for encoding videos with Windows Movie Maker

5. Replace Sound Recorder with Windows Sound Editor

6. Native support for Xvid, Divx, AC3, MOV, MKV, and other popular video and audio codecs

7. Revamped Windows Media Player visualisations

8. Create a shortcut key for flagging and make the Flag icon clickable in Windows Live Mail

9. Optimise the code and remove redundant legacy code to speed up the OS

10. More modular and less dependant on the registry (or include a 'Cleanup Registry' utility)

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
There is nothing wrong with the registry, the only problem is programmers who do not use it correctly.

Then there is something wrong.

Someone suggested a "sandbox" kind of solution for it. The idea was that each app that needed the registry had its own individual registry emulation in order to avoid a big central file that governs the entire OS.

There is an undeniable danger in allowing such an important and central file to be modified so easily. There is a reason why other major OSes have adopted an "individual settings" scheme.

There are some other problems, like GUI inconsistencies for example. Its true that every OS have them, but: Just because others do it then its perfectly fine to have them?

Also, and this has been stated even by MS in the past: Legacy support its getting quite troublesome. And in fact that was one of the reasons MinWin started, as far as I know (Im sure Brandon knows more about this so he will have the ast word about it): To remove unnecesary layers from the kernel and make it act more like a component manager.

Collaborator

Master_X

Posted
Posted

People that say we don't need a new version of windows every 2-3 years are being a little retarded, imo. Think about it for a minute. Say we got handed Windows 95. That means you wouldn't have the better Windows 98 or 98SE, the next OS you would have gotten would have been Windows ME. Sure there may have been 2000 around too, but ME was what shipped with a lot of home PCs. Then since you have to wait those 5-7 years again that'd bring you to about the time Vista RTM'd. Would you really want to use Windows ME for that long? :p

Grand Master

Brandon Live Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Do we really need Windows 7 now? I think it would be better to release one big SP2 with new features, changes, fixes and patches.

So basically you're saying Windows 7 should be free. That the product of years worth of work by thousands and thousands of people, with millions upon millions of dollars in R&D and engineering, should be given away for free...

Sorry, things just don't work that way.

XP SP2 was a special one-time thing. Don't count on it ever happening again.

As for whether you "really need" Windows 7, ask me again after we ship beta (if you still have any doubts, that is).

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
So basically you're saying Windows 7 should be free. That the product of years worth of work by thousands and thousands of people, with millions upon millions of dollars in R&D and engineering, should be given away for free...

Sorry, things just don't work that way.

XP SP2 was a special one-time thing. Don't count on it ever happening again.

As for whether you "really need" Windows 7, ask me again after we ship beta (if you still have any doubts, that is).

Brandon, please read my last post, Im sure you will know a lot better than me, I still have doubts about MinWin so any comments about it will be appreciated. :)

Grand Master

Brandon Live Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Then there is something wrong.

Someone suggested a "sandbox" kind of solution for it. The idea was that each app that needed the registry had its own individual registry emulation in order to avoid a big central file that governs the entire OS.

Depending on the specific usage, that eliminates many of the benefits and purposes the registry currently provides.

There is an undeniable danger in allowing such an important and central file to be modified so easily. There is a reason why other major OSes have adopted an "individual settings" scheme.

It's not a file. It's a database. Apps can't modify most if it, just the per-user part. Same as the filesystem. If an application has configuration data that doesn't need to be shared among different processes, then maybe it shouldn't be using the registry to begin with.

Nobody gets to modify the registry files directly. Even the database if only accessed via the registry APIs.

Grand Master

Digitalx

Posted
Posted
Do we really need Windows 7 now? I think it would be better to release one big SP2 with new features, changes, fixes and patches.

I don't see why Vista should be replaced since UAC behavior, new features, patches and fixes can be pushed through SP2.

Windows 7 will be like what Windows XP was compared to Windows 2000. The other reason is probably to get rid of Vista just because of the bad image it has right now. Having new OS every 3 years is too much. I think that should be moved to every 5-7 years.

Yes we do cause quite frankly Vista isn't exactly efficient enough with memory and things. Vista SP's can't just fix that up it's something that needs to started from scratch like with this minwin kernel stuff. Vista has muddy foundations it doesn't matter much how much you think SP's can fix it they can only resolve pre-existing issues and features rather then add any major improvements at ground level. So yes i believe for sake of developers, gamers, media enthusiasts, commercial environments etc we do need Windows 7.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Depending on the specific usage, that eliminates many of the benefits and purposes the registry currently provides.

Agreed but its safe to trust unexperienced or shady programmers. Im sure nobody here is unaware of corrupted registry problems in the past :(

Im not blaming MS for this, I just think that a more secure way can be found.

Grand Master

Brandon Live Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Brandon, please read my last post, Im sure you will know a lot better than me, I still have doubts about MinWin so any comments about it will be appreciated. :)

There are lots of C9 videos where people talk about this stuff. I'm not an expert on it nor am I at liberty to discuss any current or future plans. However, I believe the original goal of "MinWin" during Vista was more about identifying the layers of dependency that exist within the OS already and making sure that new components fit into them in sensible ways going forward.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
There are lots of C9 videos where people talk about this stuff. I'm not an expert on it nor am I at liberty to discuss any current or future plans. However, I believe the original goal of "MinWin" during Vista was more about identifying the layers of dependency that exist within the OS already and making sure that new components fit into them in sensible ways going forward.

Then I was not that wrong but Im sure its a lot more complex. Thanks for the clarification.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.