Windows 7 Builds already in Progress!

[Glowstick]

The Brazilian rain forest would like to have a word with you.

[ANova]

Upon what are you basing that claim? The ridiculously huge sales of Vista over the last year? The quicker-than-usual business adoption? You sir are full of crap. Vista has the same stigma that Windows 95 did. In fact, most every release gets bad-mouthed by tons of people. They still buy it and use it though.

He is spot on. An MS branded suit and beer goggles tend to muddy one's judgement. Rest assured most people don't like Vista for a multitude of reasons, no amount of damage control is going to change that. Vista has sold only because of the huge windows user base attached to the mainstream computer market and OEM sales where most resellers don't give the buyer an option, especially for home users.

Nothing except huge gains in security and reliability. Oh and hundreds of new features, countless bug fixes, etc.

Seriously, why do you care if there's a new file system? What benefit are you looking for that isn't offered by the current one or possible to build in? As for a revolutionary make over, Vista is a pretty damn major leap from previous releases. Even changing as much as Vista did causes shock to many users. That's why those large of changes don't happen with every release.

I see no serious bugs in XP and very few overall. I also see no new features in Vista worth a damn, all are minor with little or no useability such as DX10, superfetch or UAC (horribly implemented and incredibly annoying). Most of the security implementations are over the top and unnecessary. I've been running XP with admin rights for well over two years with no antivirus of any kind, just a simple hardware firewall through the router and a secure browser and have yet to get infected with anything. Vista's UI is cumbersome and thrown together with a mish mash of features linking to other features that you often have to search for rather than find easily in one spot. It's completely uncustomizable and the whole OS is painfully slow compared to pretty much any other os available.

And look how well that's worked for them... What's their OS market share again?

Oh come now, OSX needs accompanying and expensive hardware, it doesn't take a genius to figure out why Apple doesn't sell as well.

Source?

And Vista is far from "massive." Certainly it is no more so than OS X or your average Linux distro.

In terms of size yes, Vista is massive at over 10GBs. So is OSX but Linux is not in the least. Some of the distros approach their size but they include a ton of apps, drivers and support files.

1. That's a fallacious argument.

2. It doesn't (run an identical UI on half the resources).

Yes it does, Ubuntu runs happily on an old P4 or even P3 with 512MB ram and Compiz runs great with a modest card such as an X600, try doing that with Vista. There is a reason why MS labeled computers Vista capable, which they overshot themselves. Vista is a resource hog, give it 2GB ram and it will eat more than three quarters of it, even with superfetch disabled. It runs horribly slow with less than 1GB. Time the startup process between XP, Vista and OSX on a similar speced system and you'll find XP starts up a minimum of 10 seconds faster than Vista and OSX goes right to desktop after you log in with about the same startup time as XP from the boot screen.

[Mordkanin]

Yes it does, Ubuntu runs happily on an old P4 or even P3 with 512MB ram and Compiz runs great with a modest card such as an X600, try doing that with Vista.

I'm pretty sure the x600 has a WDDM driver. That alone pretty much means it runs perfectly fine with Aero (I've never seen a card that struggles with Aero, honestly. They set the bar a little high with WDDM, so your two options are either: "doesn't work", or "works beautifully". I've never seen a "works poorly")

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Yes it does, Ubuntu runs happily on an old P4 or even P3 with 512MB ram and Compiz runs great with a modest card such as an X600, try doing that with Vista. There is a reason why MS labeled computers Vista capable, which they overshot themselves. Vista is a resource hog, give it 2GB ram and it will eat more than three quarters of it, even with superfetch disabled. It runs horribly slow with less than 1GB. Time the startup process between XP, Vista and OSX on a similar speced system and you'll find XP starts up a minimum of 10 seconds faster than Vista and OSX goes right to desktop after you log in with about the same startup time as XP from the boot screen.

My main dev machine until recently had an X200 (integrated) video chip and an X300 PCI Express card. It ran Aero great across three monitors (including two 24" displays at 1920x1200).

It's a fantasy to think that a P3 with 512MB of memory is going to run Compiz with any proficiency. It won't be any better than running Aero on a P3 with 512MB of RAM (which you could do, assuming a sufficiently modern graphics card). But that's not even the point I was making. Compiz isn't the DWM. For one, it's not even complete. It's called version 0.7 for a reason. It doesn't have the same quality, compatibility, or set of requirements placed upon it. Comparing performance between a glitchy half-complete solution with no compatibility burden simply isn't a useful exercise.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

He is spot on. An MS branded suit and beer goggles tend to muddy one's judgement. Rest assured most people don't like Vista for a multitude of reasons, no amount of damage control is going to change that. Vista has sold only because of the huge windows user base attached to the mainstream computer market and OEM sales where most resellers don't give the buyer an option, especially for home users.

Most people don't care. Most of the non-technical friends and family I have (including my mom and my sister) have bought new computers in the last year, mainly laptops, and they all came with Vista. None of them have complained about Vista. To be truthful, they largely don't notice the difference. My sister has had a lot less trouble with malware on her new laptop versus her old XP one. And she really likes Office 2007 (which is a common trend among people I know who have used it). Other than that, she'd just tell you that her new laptop works better than her old one.

In terms of size yes, Vista is massive at over 10GBs. So is OSX but Linux is not in the least. Some of the distros approach their size but they include a ton of apps, drivers and support files.

Is your hard drive really small enough that you consider a 9GB OS to be too large?

[spenser.d]

Most people don't care. Most of the non-technical friends and family I have (including my mom and my sister) have bought new computers in the last year, mainly laptops, and they all came with Vista. None of them have complained about Vista. To be truthful, they largely don't notice the difference. My sister has had a lot less trouble with malware on her new laptop versus her old XP one. And she really likes Office 2007 (which is a common trend among people I know who have used it). Other than that, she'd just tell you that her new laptop works better than her old one.

A big +1 to this.

A big -1 to Neowin users' continual astounding ability to extrapolate the tech-oriented community that we're all immersed in to the general public when they're not even close to the same. The majority of the people using Vista aren't going to have problems with it because, well, it just works (believe it or not), and that's all they care about. None of them give a sh*t about the picky problems that tech communities manage to come up with just to rail on Microsoft. I know a lot of people here in college who all have new laptops that have Vista on them (including my younger brother) and I haven't ever heard a single complaint. The only complaining I ever hear about Vista comes from this site (or other tech-related sites, but this is the one I visit the most).

-Spenser

[ANova]

It's a fantasy to think that a P3 with 512MB of memory is going to run Compiz with any proficiency. It won't be any better than running Aero on a P3 with 512MB of RAM (which you could do, assuming a sufficiently modern graphics card). But that's not even the point I was making. Compiz isn't the DWM. For one, it's not even complete. It's called version 0.7 for a reason. It doesn't have the same quality, compatibility, or set of requirements placed upon it. Comparing performance between a glitchy half-complete solution with no compatibility burden simply isn't a useful exercise.

Really? I ran Ubuntu on a P3 866 with 512MB ram and loaded Compiz, the whole OS ran better than XP did on the same system. I wouldn't even try running Vista on such a system because I would know the outcome.

Most people don't care. Most of the non-technical friends and family I have (including my mom and my sister) have bought new computers in the last year, mainly laptops, and they all came with Vista. None of them have complained about Vista. To be truthful, they largely don't notice the difference. My sister has had a lot less trouble with malware on her new laptop versus her old XP one. And she really likes Office 2007 (which is a common trend among people I know who have used it). Other than that, she'd just tell you that her new laptop works better than her old one.

That is exactly why I brought it up. You said Vista was selling well, it's selling well precisely because the majority of people who buy their PCs do so from vendors like Dell and HP who bundle Vista with the system and don't give them a choice. Not only that but as you said, many people don't care or don't notice. That does not automatically equal Vista being a good OS that everyone likes. Everyone I know at work doesn't like it, when they buy a system it comes with Vista but they often just blow it out and put XP on.

Is your hard drive really small enough that you consider a 9GB OS to be too large?

No, but why does it have to be so large when you can get Linux down to 1 GB. Having it that size also means more resource useage (typically) and makes it not a reasonable OS to load on a USB stick which MS apparently wants to start doing now.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

That is exactly why I brought it up. You said Vista was selling well, it's selling well precisely because the majority of people who buy their PCs do so from vendors like Dell and HP who bundle Vista with the system and don't give them a choice. Not only that but as you said, many people don't care or don't notice. That does not automatically equal Vista being a good OS that everyone likes. Everyone I know at work doesn't like it, when they buy a system it comes with Vista but they often just blow it out and put XP on.

That's either a lie, or you work with people who fall under 0.0001% of the population. Not only is it absurd to claim that a statistically significant percentage of users would want to downgrade on a new machine, but it's absolutely laughable to suggest that they actually do it. Of course, I believe you simply made that up, as it's the most logical explanation.

No, but why does it have to be so large when you can get Linux down to 1 GB. Having it that size also means more resource useage (typically) and makes it not a reasonable OS to load on a USB stick which MS apparently wants to start doing now.

Size on disk has nothing to do with memory usage. Look at the NT kernel versus that of Linux. The NT kernel is by far more compact. I'd be interested to see a comparison of other components, like Explorer to KDE, DWM to Compiz - both on disk and in terms of memory usage. I doubt they're significantly different.

Remember, Windows Server 2003 is less than one CD. The core OS binaries haven't grown all that much. The additional space consumed by Vista's Windows directly is largely consumed by pre-installed libraries in WinSxS (many of which are different versions of the same file to prevent the old "DLL Hell" issues, MUI resources, etc) and back-ups that allow the system to restore itself.

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

i just want winfs back!

after watching that, it almost seems too... fake? You'll probably defend yourself, but you did post in the Windows 7 area. The ideas on there only seem to be ideas, and not actual coded projects. The window headers are very large, and look just like "Longhorn" did. Some of the ideas are cool, but there just so much going on.. I can't say it's real, because it's too early

[Brandon Live Veteran]

after watching that, it almost seems too... fake? You'll probably defend yourself, but you did post in the Windows 7 area. The ideas on there only seem to be ideas, and not actual coded projects. The window headers are very large, and look just like "Longhorn" did. Some of the ideas are cool, but there just so much going on.. I can't say it's real, because it's too early

Funny thing is, WinFS wasn't even in that video.

[ANova]

That's either a lie, or you work with people who fall under 0.0001% of the population. Not only is it absurd to claim that a statistically significant percentage of users would want to downgrade on a new machine, but it's absolutely laughable to suggest that they actually do it. Of course, I believe you simply made that up, as it's the most logical explanation.

I work at a convention center with people who run theatrical lighting and sound systems (which includes the use of computers), so yes we may be a minority as far as what we do but I speak no lies. No one likes it. I never claimed a statistically significant portion of users "downgrade" I claimed that those who care do. I also claimed that Vista is selling because it comes standard, which was the original argument and why I brought it up.

Size on disk has nothing to do with memory usage. Look at the NT kernel versus that of Linux. The NT kernel is by far more compact. I'd be interested to see a comparison of other components, like Explorer to KDE, DWM to Compiz - both on disk and in terms of memory usage. I doubt they're significantly different.

Remember, Windows Server 2003 is less than one CD. The core OS binaries haven't grown all that much. The additional space consumed by Vista's Windows directly is largely consumed by pre-installed libraries in WinSxS (many of which are different versions of the same file to prevent the old "DLL Hell" issues, MUI resources, etc) and back-ups that allow the system to restore itself.

Whether the OS binaries have grown or not at the end of the day an XP installation is about 2GB and a Vista installation is about 11GB, that's a big difference in size. I don't know the specific sizes relative to the NT kernel and Linux but that's rather besides the point; Linux is far more efficient, especially compared to Vista. It runs much faster on a system not nearly as powerful and with a third of the ram. I don't understand how you can argue this point, Microsoft has all but admitted it developing minwin.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

I don't understand how you can argue this point, Microsoft has all but admitted it developing minwin.

You clearly don't understand the purpose of the MinWin effort. It has nothing at all to do with install size.

[ANova]

I'm not attributing file size proportionally to resource usage, just commenting that it often seems to be a factor. Minwin is an effort to slim down the NT kernel and make it faster for the next version of windows as far as I can tell.

Edited March 5, 2008 by ANova

[Mordkanin]

I'm not attributing file size proportionally to resource usage, just commenting that it often seems to be a factor. Minwin is an effort to slim down the NT kernel and make it faster for the next version of windows as far as I can tell.

Isn't Minwin's primary goal to remove a lot of the interdependancies inside the NT kernel, and make it more modular?

As Brandon has pointed out, the kernel itself is already quite slim. Most of the footprint isn't coming from it.

[Crazysah]

Is there any tree trunk for the various builds and stuff before release or next beta or something similar to the firefox tree trunk?

[nX07]

after watching that, it almost seems too... fake? You'll probably defend yourself, but you did post in the Windows 7 area. The ideas on there only seem to be ideas, and not actual coded projects. The window headers are very large, and look just like "Longhorn" did. Some of the ideas are cool, but there just so much going on.. I can't say it's real, because it's too early

That is the PDC 2003 Demo :), It is real, I even have that specific release in my Longhorn archives. This is actually what Vista was suppose to be though, and is not a demo of Windows 7.

[Badie05]

the next version of Media Center due in '08.

Wow. Is that for Vista. Or a whole separate OS for HTPCs?

[nX07]

Wow. Is that for Vista. Or a whole separate OS for HTPCs?

I believe it will be for Vista editions that have Media Center :) (Basically every version except Basic).

[zivan56]

Macs use EFI to boot, Windows is limited (until SP1) to the severely outdated BIOS and will be until MS decides to push EFI.

and what exactly is wrong with current BIOSs? I guess we should all switch to a system unsupported by most operating systems and initially developed only for Intel Itanium for HP systems?

Can you give some benefits besides mass incompatibility? :rolleyes:

I guess there is one thing...MSI belives you want to use a mouse when configuring your BIOS :D

[Crazysah]

Guys... any tree trunk or some sort or a release schedule?

[alsheron]

Let the games begin: The kids will quite soon start Win7 Bashing, saying its crappy and just not as good as xp/vista. It's inevitable and quite honestly, sucks the enthusiasm I have out of me where one i loved new releases on Windows and looked forward to them. Windows 7 will be labelled a "faliure" like Vista, make no mistake, UNLESS is has some significant UI changes because, lets face it, it's the UI that most 14 year old kids who brand Vista a faliure and who spend most of their time playing cutting edge PC games, are bothered about. It's a shame because I use Vista daily and never ONCE did I consider it a faliure.

It's been beaten to death but there is such a thing as simple reality and simple nonsense and you can't give time to discussing nonsense. That Vista is a significant improvement over XP, while being slower on the same harware like every other Windows release is REALITY. That Vista is a complete flop and no different to XP except slower and more "bloated" is simply nonsense, but it is still argued about and discussed like it deserves the time. People are so wrapped up and impressed by their own opinion they seem to think that just because they have an opinion it has a right to be taken seriously: This is clearly false and yet these same people have the power to literally "drown out" any sensible voices or opinions of those who are actually in a position to comment fairly and knowledgeably. This power they should not have. This is not a democracy.

Windows 7 will most likely be an improvement over Vista. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 will most likely be slower than Vista on the same hardware. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7's adoption rate will be closely tied to the sales of new PC's. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 users will initially experience compatibility issues with hardware and software. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

As for the above points: They have always and WILL always be present and correct and the outset of any Windows release. GET OVER AND ACCEPT THEM and lead a happier, stress-less life. For the sake of us all.

This is Neowin: Let's get back to focusing on what we ENJOY and like about Windows and win-related stuff

[D e v i a n t]

Microsoft isn't saying, but my source tells me it is farther along than most people think: most of the features have been locked down, and work is proceeding at a steady pace.

Why would it not be locked down? Umm remember Longhorn and the cool innovative features? No? Let me refresh your memory:

I'm sure there will be other new advancements to come along other than what we have seen in Longhorn.

I for one am a Microsoft Beta Tester (Got my Free Vista Ultimate and Now Vista SP1 iso). I will be waiting with open

arms to beta test Windows Vienna! :woot:

Edited March 17, 2008 by CyPheRToXiC

[cropcircles]

Let the games begin: The kids will quite soon start Win7 Bashing, saying its crappy and just not as good as xp/vista. It's inevitable and quite honestly, sucks the enthusiasm I have out of me where one i loved new releases on Windows and looked forward to them. Windows 7 will be labelled a "faliure" like Vista, make no mistake, UNLESS is has some significant UI changes because, lets face it, it's the UI that most 14 year old kids who brand Vista a faliure and who spend most of their time playing cutting edge PC games, are bothered about. It's a shame because I use Vista daily and never ONCE did I consider it a faliure.

It's been beaten to death but there is such a thing as simple reality and simple nonsense and you can't give time to discussing nonsense. That Vista is a significant improvement over XP, while being slower on the same harware like every other Windows release is REALITY. That Vista is a complete flop and no different to XP except slower and more "bloated" is simply nonsense, but it is still argued about and discussed like it deserves the time. People are so wrapped up and impressed by their own opinion they seem to think that just because they have an opinion it has a right to be taken seriously: This is clearly false and yet these same people have the power to literally "drown out" any sensible voices or opinions of those who are actually in a position to comment fairly and knowledgeably. This power they should not have. This is not a democracy.

Windows 7 will most likely be an improvement over Vista. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 will most likely be slower than Vista on the same hardware. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7's adoption rate will be closely tied to the sales of new PC's. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 users will initially experience compatibility issues with hardware and software. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

As for the above points: They have always and WILL always be present and correct and the outset of any Windows release. GET OVER AND ACCEPT THEM and lead a happier, stress-less life. For the sake of us all.

This is Neowin: Let's get back to focusing on what we ENJOY and like about Windows and win-related stuff

Projecting how an OS integrates on my PC is different then yours or another guy who is not familiar with services or how to install basic drivers properly. It is a step up in a financial committment with additional memory and a reasonable video card to get the best experience. Its pretty simple, but to the average guy Vista does appear to be behemoth system to manage. The trail and error of a new OS is exciting and the rants and raves come with the spirit of the adventure. Neowin is able to filter that out quite well. Have you tried Windows Server 2008 yet alsheron. I've had it installed for about a week now it is nice in my opinion. In comparison to Vista running as a workstation WS2008 is a fast and smooth Vista "type" OS which it basicly is. Whats nice is it comes by default with all the "bloated" bells and whistles turned off, but you can initiate most of these if you like. I agree with you that Vista has made allot of mistakes but thats what will make 7 impressive, if WS2008 is any indication of what is down the road.

[Crazysah]

Let the games begin: The kids will quite soon start Win7 Bashing, saying its crappy and just not as good as xp/vista. It's inevitable and quite honestly, sucks the enthusiasm I have out of me where one i loved new releases on Windows and looked forward to them. Windows 7 will be labelled a "faliure" like Vista, make no mistake, UNLESS is has some significant UI changes because, lets face it, it's the UI that most 14 year old kids who brand Vista a faliure and who spend most of their time playing cutting edge PC games, are bothered about. It's a shame because I use Vista daily and never ONCE did I consider it a faliure.

It's been beaten to death but there is such a thing as simple reality and simple nonsense and you can't give time to discussing nonsense. That Vista is a significant improvement over XP, while being slower on the same harware like every other Windows release is REALITY. That Vista is a complete flop and no different to XP except slower and more "bloated" is simply nonsense, but it is still argued about and discussed like it deserves the time. People are so wrapped up and impressed by their own opinion they seem to think that just because they have an opinion it has a right to be taken seriously: This is clearly false and yet these same people have the power to literally "drown out" any sensible voices or opinions of those who are actually in a position to comment fairly and knowledgeably. This power they should not have. This is not a democracy.

Windows 7 will most likely be an improvement over Vista. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 will most likely be slower than Vista on the same hardware. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7's adoption rate will be closely tied to the sales of new PC's. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

Windows 7 users will initially experience compatibility issues with hardware and software. It doesn't take a genius to work that out.

As for the above points: They have always and WILL always be present and correct and the outset of any Windows release. GET OVER AND ACCEPT THEM and lead a happier, stress-less life. For the sake of us all.

This is Neowin: Let's get back to focusing on what we ENJOY and like about Windows and win-related stuff

I totally agree there with you. Nice post.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

So what is up with this? The way Microsoft creates new version of it OS and just build onto where they left? I thought they were going to recode the core or something to make it newer and faster? It's something i read years ago that they were going to do with Vista, but pushed it til the version after vista?

That is what happened with Vista. That's the main reason it has/had compatibility problems. Lots of new driver models, associated kernel reworking, major reworking of basic systems (like the window manager - ie for UIPI), introduction of process trust levels, reworked audio, network, and I/O stacks, etc.