Windows 7 Build 695x revealed at WinHEC 2008 China


Recommended Posts

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.

You're blowing this WAY out of proportion.

Number one, the 8800 GT isn't "absolute garbage" that can't run the game. I have one. It runs it fairly well on High and still manages to look good at 1280x1024. A friend which has a 9800 GT (which is more or less equivalent to a 8800 GT) runs it on Ultra High at 1024x768 and it runs well too.

Number two, just be patient - you WILL see a difference in the WEI score between the 8800 GT and anything above it. Obviously they didn't anticipate cards being this powerful in 2006, and the WEI, as others have already said, isn't suppose to replace 3DMark where there's no real upper value - but then again, explain to customers you need a score of 1800000 to run this game and they'll just look at you weird.

Really though, why does this matter to you that much? Unless of course you make a living by selling computer hardware and are a bit ticked off you can't upsell a better card to customers when they say both the 8800 GT and HD 4870 X2 get 5.9... so why should they pay more.

<snipped>

He's not leaking it, is he? 'Cause I heard that there's now zero tolerance for people caught leaking Win7 builds. If I had to pick between keeping a decently paying job or satisfying a bunch of whiny pricks who think a crashy pre-beta build is final code, I'd take the former. ;)

Edited by John S.
no warez talk

<thread cleaned - warnings forthcoming>

No Warez (links) & Cracks.

Help, requests or posts that discuss circumvention. This includes linking to illegally obtained software, movies & music files - posting about it, and suggesting obtaining it.

That might be a little harder in 7. All of the files that control the boot screen have a digital signature on them that if broken, breaks the boot screen (it actually reverts to the vista one).

Yeah but I think there is a certain someone out there that loves killing signature checks :whistle:

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.

Actually it's pretty good for its purpose, and Win7 makes some improvements here (in addition to the highers caps). Basically, it's there to help normal users identify the weak points in their system that will affect performance, such as a slow hard drive or video card. It does that well, and also helps publishers target a system rating instead of listing all the possible equivalent minimum or recommended reqs.

It is not meant to replace 3DMark. You suggested it work more like 3DMark, but the two serve very different purposes with very different audiences. You're clearly disappointed that WEI isn't 3DMark, but you shouldn't be - that was never its intention. It's like being disappointed that a boat doesn't work well on a highway.

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.

+1

I have build 6956 installed now on my system.

it's really beautifull and very fast!!

screenshot5122008pn9.th.png

Can you actually compare the speed improvements over the current 6801 build? What about stability, is there anything obvious wrong?

so can someone please clarify the behavior of the taskbar? how come some icons are just square and the icon only and other items are the icon as well as the name of the app running (like in Vista and prior)?

it is the new superbar changes

only when the program is running it showup the name/title of the program

if it is closed it show only icon without text

it is the new superbar changes

only when the program is running it showup the name/title of the program

if it is closed it show only icon without text

Pretty much like the 'Quick Launch' bar, but it changes when you open up the program you click on.

so can someone please clarify the behavior of the taskbar? how come some icons are just square and the icon only and other items are the icon as well as the name of the app running (like in Vista and prior)?

New Taskbar has grouping (icon only) group when full (once all applications have too many windows cluttering taskbar goes into grouping) and no grouping in which is shows text and icon similar to traditional taskbar i believe is answer to your Q.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
    • I had a feeling this was coming. Picked up my first Mac ever last Saturday. Glad I did.
    • In a major surprise there is actually some good deals for the first time in years. At least for me.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      419
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!