FANTASTIC: Windows 7 Build 6956 new boot screen video

[PGHammer]

Microsoft was getting concerned about the number of OEMs and third party developers adding their own "boot screens" onto the boot screens of prior Windows versions, as this was obviously causing slowdown during the boot process. Microsoft greatly encouraged developers to stop this practice, and to practice what they preach, Microsoft decided to do a very basic, "only show what's necessary, etc." boot screen. The progress bar and copyright information against a black background; this was all intentional.

Microsoft jazzed up the boot screen in Windows 7 likely to confirm that in fact, yes, your operating system is booting. I know my parents sometimes thought their computer froze when they saw how bare the Vista boot screen was, and I reckon that they weren't alone, as people were used to seeing more "pretty" boot screens.

Bare? OS X has more activity in its bootscreen than Vista does. (I'm talking about that gunmetal-gray Apple-logo'd bootscreen when OS X starts; it's been in very version of OS X since before the Intel Transition, and it's still there today.)

Also, starting with SP2, the bootscreen of every SKU of Windows XP is *identical*. (Home, Professional, Tablet PC, MCE, Professional x64, etc. Apply either SP2 or SP3, and you have to wait until the desktop loads to tell them all apart.)

[Quillz]

Bare? OS X has more activity in its bootscreen than Vista does. (I'm talking about that gunmetal-gray Apple-logo'd bootscreen when OS X starts; it's been in very version of OS X since before the Intel Transition, and it's still there today.)

Also, starting with SP2, the bootscreen of every SKU of Windows XP is *identical*. (Home, Professional, Tablet PC, MCE, Professional x64, etc. Apply either SP2 or SP3, and you have to wait until the desktop loads to tell them all apart.)

The uniform boot screen was intentional, also. The idea was that Windows XP is Windows XP on every machine, all that really differs between the SKUs is what programs are there by default. I guess Microsoft was more concerned about people understanding the OS as just "Windows XP," not "Windows XP Professional" or w/e.

[Denis W. Veteran]

Since 2006 or later, I have never encountered a machine with Home Edition. Everyone was suddenly on Pro. :ermm:

[The Rev]

I'm betting this is just a pre-final version of what they will end up using as the boot screen.... I mean, after all, it's still in ALPHA (almost beta but still not technically)..... They've never finalized the boot screen in alpha before, have they? (or at least put it into the alpha builds)

[rage710]

this is nice but having a progress bar wouldnt hurt either.

One that sweeps across the screen 10 times....no thanks. If it were a real progress bar, then yes of course..

However, this does look promising..

[PGHammer]

One that sweeps across the screen 10 times....no thanks. If it were a real progress bar, then yes of course..

However, this does look promising..

Something similar to the old Windows 2000 Professional or 2000 Server bootscreen (which has a progress indicator at the foot).

However, I can understand Microsoft's reticence.

First off, computers boot much faster than they did when Windows 2000 launched; in fact, boot times have significantly shrunk since Windows XP Service Pack 2.

Then, throw in other bootup-acceleration technologies that have been added just in Vista alone (Superfetch and ReadyBoost in particular), and the bootup screen is not as *long-lasting* in either Vista or 7 as it was in Windows 2000 or XP.

That means that the boot screen doesn't show as long.

[NEVER85]

Nice, cant wait for windows 8.

Fail.

Cool boot screen though.

[Mercellus]

The uniform boot screen was intentional, also. The idea was that Windows XP is Windows XP on every machine, all that really differs between the SKUs is what programs are there by default. I guess Microsoft was more concerned about people understanding the OS as just "Windows XP," not "Windows XP Professional" or w/e.

Not to mention that they didn't have a set color for those boot screens respective progress bar - Windows XP Professional had a blue progress bar, Windows XP Home Edition had green, but when Tablet PC and Media Center Edition got thrown in the mix it made it harder.

[Skulltrail-old]

Nice, cant wait for windows 8.

Good luck with the anxiety. Windows 8 doesn't come out for many many years. Hopefully it won't be named "Windows 8" otherwise it will send a numbers-are-kewl message across the market. :p

[non.sequitur2]

you mean 7?

No, pretty sure he was being cute.

[LiqHead]

No... let's worry about how the screen looks when booting up & not the actual useability and security of the OS. Damn people.

[Code.Red]

No... let's worry about how the screen looks when booting up & not the actual useability and security of the OS. Damn people.

The new boot screen is just one example of the kind of perfection and attention to detail that Microsoft are pursuing in Windows 7. Hopefully, anyway.

[toadeater]

The new boot screen is just one example of the kind of perfection and attention to detail that Microsoft are pursuing in Windows 7. Hopefully, anyway.

After seeing this Windows 7 wallpaper from the Build 6956 gallery, I think they've still got a lot work left to do.

At least the new taskbar isn't black anymore. I know they're still working on the GUI, I hope it's going to look more professional than flashy like Vista was.

Here's the rest of the screenshots:

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Windows-7-B...ts-100001.shtml

[Calum Veteran]

After seeing this Windows 7 wallpaper from the Build 6956 gallery, I think they've still got a lot work left to do.

That's one desktop background! :blink: Have you not seen the other beautiful photos they have as desktop backgrounds in the new build? Some of them look stunning!

Why would you judge an operating system on its default choice of desktop backgrounds anyway?

[Kyang]

That's one desktop background! :blink: Have you not seen the other beautiful photos they have as desktop backgrounds in the new build? Some of them look stunning!

Why would you judge an operating system on its default choice of desktop backgrounds anyway?

Because prettier wallpapers make the OS faster.

[Calum Veteran]

Because prettier wallpapers make the OS faster.

I do hope you are being sarcastic? :D lol. You seem to be agreeing with me basically stating the same point as me? :) : Why care about the default set of desktop backgrounds when the performance of the operating system is going to be the main concern of the consumer - it makes sense to develop a more efficient operating system than one which has nice looking desktop backgrounds :D