Windows 7 Build 695x revealed at WinHEC 2008 China


Recommended Posts

Hmm... nice looking screenshots. I would have loved to watch a stream of that keynote though, is it available on demand yet?

An on-demand webcast of the opening keynote is available here: http://focus.it168.com/200810/WinHEC/index.html

well i got 4GB of of performance rams and i cant seems to break 5.5 yet

overclocked by any chance ?

i get 6.7 with Q6600 @ 3 Ghz

it is the former , as far as i know

i do take what he say over outsiders source since he is affiliated/working for MS

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

The base scores currently range from 1 to 5.9. The Windows Experience Index is designed to accommodate advances in computer technology. As hardware speed and performance improves, higher base scores will be introduced. However, the standards for each level of the index stay the same. For example, a computer scored as a 2.8 will remain a 2.8 unless you decide to upgrade the computer's hardware.

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

yea right , you are better of doing there jobs :rolleyes:

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

It takes time to build a 7.9 machine

Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

I'm glad you bring this up which prooves that rating system in Vista is pointless, stupidest idea MS could came up with. I have nothing against benchmarking but they should presented in a way 3DMark Vantage does it. Better hardware higher score, slower hardware lower score and so there is no limit of what your upper score can be. Use that number to measure how fast your hardware is but do not measure your hardware against OS which runs on it. MS should set minimum requirements and if they are not met simply refuse installation, so you send clear message to some idiot who wants to run Vista on 1Gb for example, aint gonna happen buddy cause your machine sucks.

What you said is actually happening sort other way around. My graphic system gets score 5.9 but also 8800GT gets 5.9. Now average Joe goes, Crysis runs on my card really slow and i have same score like Mr. Me with SLI GTX280. It's all because MS way of thinking is so ****ed up...as i said it goes beyond comedy. I have feeling that good idea from somebody there shows up and then upper management ****s it up for who knows what reason.

Solution:

Remove Performance Scoring. Your hardware is either capable of running Vista or not. There is no gray area. Keep benchmarking tool in Vista, extended it and show visually tests to customer. Do scoring as 3DMark Vantage does. Faster hardware gets better score, slower hardware lower score. No upper limit. Average Joe goes, oh my card scores let's say 14 but Mr. Me graphic card scores 25. Average Joe goes, that makes sense...that's why he runs Crysis much faster.

Edited by jjrambo
Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Now you're contradicting whole story about Windows 7. It means Windows 7 should have scoring from 1 to 3.9 since it's gonna run better on the same hardware running Vista, right?

Open Games Explorer and look at right pane bottom screen for each game you click.

I just took some random name like GTX380 referencing future Nvidia video card which will be faster then GTX200 series.

Score should not have upper limit. How stupid is your argument and MS idea is example of having now scale from 1 to 7.9 so quad 2.6Ghz shows 7.2 so i guess for Windows 7 that CPU is not enough to actually score 7.9, which means it seems that have even higher requirements then Windows Vista.

Seriously your argumentation is EPIC FAILURE.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1 as well

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

I know it's not their target, i'm saying they are doing it wrong, absolutely wrong.

I don't criticize any **** MS is serving me. I will give you an example. Backup feature in Vista is absolutely perfect solution and as I can see they are adding option to save your Image to some location on network which was missing in Vista i talked about after first day of Vista release. I found myself in situation where i didn't have any media to save my image but network location. As I said Backup Feature is brilliant but it seems nobody talks about it here. Another brilliant feature in Vista? Ability to resize partitions through disk management in real time? It's something i was waiting for since Windows 2000 is released. Again, nobody ever said anything good about it. It seems that majority of people on this forum actually saying that some things are great but actually they are utter crap or really bad or just bad.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

As you seem to have completely missed the point yet again as you did with WARP10, allow me to spell it out for you.

The WEI is a simple benchmark tool to give users a basic indication of the performance of their PC, it's in no way intended to replace or even compete with a tool such as 3DMark.

Each release of 3DMark returns a lesser score on the same hardware, this is fine for powerusers, overclockers and etc, however it is NOT good for the generic joe bloggs.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

Dude I can run Crysis with fine framerates on my 8600GTS @ 1280x1024, and my pc has a rating of 5.2 (medium settings). The ratings are quite good.

jjrambo, the scores are intended as a rough guide for how powerful your PC is. If Crysis' rating was incorrect, take it up with the people who rated it.

The system itself is fine, and makes perfect sense (as long as the ratings are worked out in a sensible fashion).

The idea is for it to be reasonably future proof - the ratings don't change as time passes. However, the upper bounds for the ratings increase. Hopefully the updated stats get backported to Vista (I don't see any reason why it wouldn't).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Go for a Echo Dot or Pop instead. These Echo shows just advertise to you.
    • NetSpeedTray 1.3.3 by Razvan Serea NetSpeedTray is a lightweight, open-source Windows network monitor that shows live upload and download speeds directly on the Taskbar. Designed for efficiency, it quietly sits in the system tray, conserving CPU and battery with dynamic updates. It blends seamlessly with Windows 10/11, adapts to light/dark themes, and auto-positions to avoid overlaps. Features include accurate interface detection, customizable display, optional mini-graph, color coding, granular font and unit control, detailed per-interface history graphs, safe data management, and easy CSV export—bringing the network monitoring Windows forgot. NetSpeedTray key features: Lightweight & Efficient Runs quietly in your system tray without consuming resources. Features a "Dynamic Update Rate" that lowers refresh frequency when the network is idle to save CPU and battery life. Native Look & Feel Blends seamlessly with Windows 10/11 UI. Smart detection for light and dark taskbar themes ensures text is always visible. Intelligent & Adaptive Positioning Automatically finds empty space next to your system tray and shifts to make room for new icons, preventing overlaps. Seamless OS Integration Behaves like a native Windows component. Hides instantly with auto-hiding taskbar Hides when a fullscreen app is active Smart Network Monitoring Accurate by Default: Auto mode identifies your main internet connection and ignores noise from VPNs or virtual adapters. Easy Interface Selection: Switch effortlessly between Auto, All, or Selected network interfaces via intuitive radio buttons. Total Visual Customization Free Move Mode: Unlock and place the widget anywhere on your screen. Optional Mini-Graph: Real-time graph of recent network activity with adjustable opacity. Color Coding: Customize colors and speed thresholds to quickly see network status. Granular Display Control Text & Font: Adjust font family, size, weight, and alignment. Units: Automatic (B/s, KB/s, MB/s) or fixed Mbps display. Precision: Set decimal places and always show them for uniform appearance. Detailed & Intelligent History Graph Smart Scale: Logarithmic scale shows low-level traffic and large spikes clearly. Per-Interface Filtering: View speed history for specific adapters (Wi-Fi, Ethernet, VPN). Safe & Efficient Data Management: Adjustable retention, automatic cleanup, optimized database. Easy Data Export: Export raw data to .csv or save high-quality graphs for reports. NetSpeedTray v1.3.3: The Updater Fix A stabilization release that repairs a critical regression in v1.3.2: the app shipped without OpenSSL, which silently broke every HTTPS request — including the built-in update checker (the "Could not check for updates" error many of you hit). This release restores it, hardens the build so it can't happen again, and fixes a startup crash plus four other reported bugs. Changes: Fixed update checking — Resolved a critical issue that prevented the app from checking for updates ("Could not check for updates"). Fixed startup crash with Auto-Cycling — The app no longer crashes on launch after enabling Cycle display mode. Fixed incorrect network speeds on 10GbE adapters — Multi-gigabit network cards now display speeds correctly instead of being stuck at 0. Improved color coding — Default color is shown when idle, and color/threshold changes now apply immediately without restarting. Fullscreen visibility fix — The widget now correctly stays visible over fullscreen apps when Keep Visible is enabled. Improved AMD Ryzen temperature detection — More reliable CPU temperature monitoring for Ryzen processors. Cleaner upgrades — Installer now removes outdated application files during upgrades, preventing DLL/version conflicts while preserving user settings. Improved stability — Fixed potential DLL loading issues by excluding critical OpenSSL and NumPy components from UPX compression. Better settings window — Scrollbars removed and layout improved for a cleaner experience. Localization improvements — Updated translations and completed missing UI text across all supported languages. More reliable releases — Added regression tests covering recent critical fixes, bringing the test suite to 196 passing tests. [full release notes] Download: NetSpeedTray 1.3.3 | 87.9 MB (Open Source) Download: NetSpeedTray Portable | 101.0 MB View: NetSpeedTray Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Why Delta Chat is the best decentralized messenger you have probably never tried by Paul Hill There is no shortage of messaging apps out there; we have WhatsApp, Messenger, and Telegram, just to name a few. While Meta has taken steps to incorporate encryption into Messenger and WhatsApp, they still leave a lot to be desired. If you are in the market for a messaging app that promotes security, privacy, and optional anonymity, you'll want to read what I have to say about Delta Chat. For those not familiar with Delta Chat, rather than relying on centralized servers as you do with Facebook Messenger, it relies on email. Essentially, it is a chat interface that feels like a messaging app, but secretly in the background, it is firing off emails. In the past, you used to have to sign in with your email account. When you sent messages to people, it would just be sending encrypted messages to their inbox, which their Delta Chat client would decrypt. When I first learned about Delta Chat, it required users to sign in with an email account, but I was pleasantly surprised upon trying it in 2026 that this is no longer a requirement, or the preferred method was to use the app. Recently, I’ve tried UAD-ng on my old Nokia 3.4 to disable most of the Google apps because the bootloader is locked, and this is the next best option. While finding replacement apps in F-Droid, I came across Delta Chat again, and it has undergone quite a big change since I last used it, with its new chatmail relays, which no longer require you to sign in to your own email account, providing anonymity, and they offer greater security. Android and Desktop Delta Chat apps. Not only does it run on my de-googled phone, but it also works on desktop computers and iOS, making it truly ubiquitous. For me, Delta Chat is a wonderful alternative messenger because it gives you more control. It supports switching between different profiles, which you can set up super quickly; you don’t register a username, you don’t register a password. The only thing you do have is a random string email address on a chatmail relay (which you don’t have to memorize). To maintain access to your profile, you just need to add a second device to your account via QR code or make a backup of your account, which you can restore later. Fail to do these, your account is gone - as it should be if you don’t want to leave accounts that could get hacked later on. My decision to block Google stuff on my Nokia was done for practical reasons; the device sucked when it launched, and it sucks even more now. The nice thing about F-Droid and the apps within is that they’re usually lightweight, free of bloat, and work well on that device. What was inconvenient for me was that it was hard to send messages from that device, say if I wanted to copy a code over to my main phone or send family members a link from that device. That’s when I decided to look at the available chat apps and saw Delta Chat. Another nice thing about Delta Chat is its notifications. Some messaging apps rely on Google’s ecosystem for notification transport on Android; however, with Delta Chat, it can use Google’s solutions if you have Play Services or MicroG installed. Otherwise, it is able to keep a background connection to the chatmail relay server so that you can get notified when you receive a message. As free software, the code of Delta Chat is open for all who want to take it and build upon it. In the future, if the developers of Delta Chat make a catastrophically bad decision and take the app in an undesirable direction, users can take the code and fork the project. This contrasts with closed-source apps from corporations that can take their products in any direction they like. By relying on free software instead of closed-source programs, you actually control your computing. I’ve spoken at length about how running this type of software is like owning your own home rather than renting it. The same applies here; if you use Delta Chat, you don’t need to worry about it going away in the future. Whether it is Telegram, WhatsApp, or Messenger, you are required to register a username and password to use these services. A major flaw in this design is that anyone can try various passwords and potentially break into your account with your complete chat history intact. Sure, there is encryption in Messenger, where you need a second PIN and two-factor authentication in Telegram, but breaches happen all the time. Unlike before, when you used to sign in to your email account to send and receive messages, the primary way to do it now is to create an account on a chatmail relay. The resulting email address is a random string followed by the name of the relay you pick. This means you can start and begin adding contacts Without a username and password, you either need to ensure you have a backup or at least one device running your Delta Chat profile. The primary way to log in on another device is to go to the settings and add a second device. Then, you’ll just scan a QR code with your new device, and it’ll log in to your account and sync all your chat history and contacts. To end users, Delta Chat just looks like any instant messenger; however, it is really sending your messages as encrypted emails to your contact. This is pretty cool from a censorship perspective, as it makes the service more difficult to block. Previously, the main way to use the app was by logging in with email, but nowadays, it’s recommended that you use chatmail relays. Chatmail relays temporarily hold messages in case your device is offline. They are cheap, simple servers that don’t store data as group states. Other information, like your name and avatar, only exists on your device and the devices of those you share your contact information with. The relays are also decentralized and operated by various groups and individuals. It is even possible to set up your own chatmail relay, but most people will want to use one hosted elsewhere. To keep your messages secure, Delta Chat uses a secure subset of the OpenPGP standard that gives you automatic end-to-end encryption. It also uses Secure-Join to exchange encryption setup information through QR-code scanning or invite links. Autocrypt is also used to automatically establish end-to-end encryption between contacts and all members of group chat, but sometime this year Autocrypt v2 will be rolled out, bringing post-quantum resistant encryption and forward secrecy. The Delta Chat FAQ is an interesting read that explains many more details about the app. Credit: Pexels Delta Chat is unique among messaging apps because it is built on email, a technology that’s decades old and isn’t going anywhere soon. What’s more is that email is not centralized either, so it’s far more difficult for any authoritarian regime to disrupt the Delta Chat app. I haven’t spoken too much about features yet, so I will do that now. Delta Chat allows you to do one-on-one chats, group chats, and create channels. It also supports file sharing and making audio and video calls when chatting one-to-one, but it’s not available for group chats right now. At the time of writing, the calling functionality is disabled and can be enabled in Settings > Advanced > Debug Calls. I have used the video calling feature, and the quality is excellent. It works over WebRTC, another open standard. The app also lets you send voice notes, enables disappearing messages, and has its own app ecosystem. I did try playing chess one time there, but it was a bit spotty; though, we did manage to complete the game with a victory for me. To add people to Delta Chat, you can either give them your Delta Chat link or your QR code to scan. These are the only ways to add users, so you won't have any spam bots bothering you. If the people you want to chat with don't have the app yet, just send them your link, and it will take them to a webpage where they can install the app and then add you. It's really quick for them to install it and get started, which is nice. Credit: Microsoft. The Majorana 2 quantum chip unveiled in 2026. I do not think quantum computers are too far out now, and I do hope that Delta Chat is able to push out Autocrypt v2 sooner, rather than later, so bad actors do not attempt to collect encrypted communications and then decrypt them in the future using quantum computers. By getting people’s messages post-quantum-safe now, users won’t have to worry when quantum computers start cracking legacy encryption. Overall, I would recommend this app to people who are already past WhatsApp and Messenger and have perhaps begun using apps like Telegram or Session. It shares a lot of characteristics with these apps and goes a lot further than Telegram in terms of security. By being based on email, it is also resistant to censorship, and the lack of a username and password makes you anonymous (if you want to be) and safe from brute force password cracking attempts. Let me know in the comments if you’ve tried Delta Chat recently. Do you think it's a good bulwark against governments that are tightening their grip on the internet?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      474
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      220
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      156
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      73
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!