Thurrott dates Windows 7 Release April 2009 !

[afusion]

Vista is great on new hardware. That's my conclusion of it.

[winlonghorn]

Haha! He got told! :p

I really hope it is finished in April and then we will more likely get it in June! Sounds very good to me as I've heard it's very stable already.

I like the idea of having just the one beta and the one release candidate and I just love how the development is much more oganised than Vista's was.

It is stable for sure. I have played around with the 6956 build. Very good indeed! :)

[winlonghorn]

Paul is a man with sources. (that goes for any one w/ his dedication)

+1! I can't for the life of me see what everyone has against him. I have found 95% of his information quite accurate to be honest. Just another example of jumping to conclusions by some people. I am sure you agree. lol.

I'd just like to know WHY he blanked out the build number in his screenshots. It should be no surprise that a) any builds handed out to testers should come from winmain, b) if not, why does he have his hands on them anyway? and c) why is the build date and time that much of a secret?

And to be honest with you, for Windows 7 none of his screenshots are 'exclusive' builds that no-one but himself (and probably other respected MS-watching writers) has access to, as other random bloggers have done more than him. These bloggers, BTW, write as a hobby.

Just because his profession is writing about Windows doesn't make him infalliable. :huh:

So what about those tools that are on some anti-Vista campaign... and who happen to be writers and even editors of some high-traffic site?

Please show me where he blocks build numbers out!!??!! The way I understand it is that 69xx means the builds with that build number series!! Ugh!! Here we go again! :wacko: I wish people would use their brains and research things before jumping to conclusions! It really isn't rocket science unless we are in kindergarten you know!

[pyehac]

As long as MS brings out a worth while product, then its all that matters.

And if this is true, it'll be a hard sell for people to get a new computer with '7, much less upgrade from XP/Vista to it.

[sharp65]

Please show me where he blocks build numbers out!!??!! The way I understand it is that 69xx means the builds with that build number series!! Ugh!! Here we go again! :wacko: I wish people would use their brains and research things before jumping to conclusions! It really isn't rocket science unless we are in kindergarten you know!

Well you can easily tell from the desktop screenshots the line is missing under the windows 7 label where it shows the build string. But like you say it's really not a big issue.

[crazlunatic]

I didn't accuse him of pirating the VHD, but I did not like how he hid the build numbers 69xx because there is no build called 69xx. Does this perhaps mean that the screenshots are from multiple builds including 6951 and 6954 (not 100% sure if those are builds but I'm sure I saw them somewhere)

I've just entered the Windows scene not too long ago so I don't know much about him except that he has been controversial at times. But his latest simply vs easy post was a very goo done

[Brandon Live Veteran]

I didn't accuse him of pirating the VHD, but I did not like how he hid the build numbers 69xx because there is no build called 69xx. Does this perhaps mean that the screenshots are from multiple builds including 6951 and 6954 (not 100% sure if those are builds but I'm sure I saw them somewhere)

His screenshots/comments are from earlier builds than that.

[Windows7even]

I didn't accuse him of pirating the VHD, but I did not like how he hid the build numbers 69xx because there is no build called 69xx. Does this perhaps mean that the screenshots are from multiple builds including 6951 and 6954 (not 100% sure if those are builds but I'm sure I saw them somewhere)

I've just entered the Windows scene not too long ago so I don't know much about him except that he has been controversial at times. But his latest simply vs easy post was a very goo done

Thats funny... :laugh: Hes a techie at heart just like all of us here....You think he wouldnt jump on the bandwagon just like all of us did when this thing hit the web? Im sure he was waiting on that tracker to populate just like all of us did when this build hit the web

Bill gates and steve jobs didnt make it to where they are today by sitting around and doing nothing :)

[Calum Veteran]

So what you're saying, and please correct me if I'm wrong; if Paul Thurrott says how he sees it and post his opinion of a feature or product, then his knowledge of Windows is bad?! You do know he has a number of Windows books about Windows, he's a published author. Strikes me if he was as much a dope as you say, he wouldn't be a published author and an editor at Windows IT Pro.

No. When did I ever say anything like that? I was referring to the quote of his Brandon Live posted. What Paul Thurrott said in that quote was inaccurate. It was nothing to do with his opinions, it was to do with his so-called 'knowledge' of Windows. I'm not saying his overall Windows knowledge is bad - it's probably better than mine - what I am saying, however, is that he does make some mistakes sometimes, therefore his overall knowledge is not accurate. This is one of those mistakes and it is a very important one indeed!

I disagree on many of his opinions, but that doesn't mean I think his overall knowledge is bad. I think his knowledge his partly bad when he makes such drastic statements which are not true. I enjoy reading his articles actually, especially the ones about Windows Live.

Please show me where he blocks build numbers out!!??!! The way I understand it is that 69xx means the builds with that build number series!! Ugh!! Here we go again! :wacko: I wish people would use their brains and research things before jumping to conclusions! It really isn't rocket science unless we are in kindergarten you know!

When did rm20010 say he was on about the image which stated "69xx"? He didn't did he? What rm20010 was obviously referring to, when he stated his query about Paul Thurrott blanking out build numbers, what the screenshots. On Windows development builds, the build number and other information is always displayed at the bottom right of the desktop. Paul Thurrott blanked these out on his screenshots which is very suspicious!

So, before you become all big-headed and try to say others are wrong, why don't you take some of your own advice and "use [your] brain and research things before jumping to conclusions".

Thank you! :)

Edited December 7, 2008 by cJr.

[Denis W. Veteran]

When did rm20010 say he was on about the image which stated "69xx"? He didn't did he? What rm20010 was obviously referring to, when he stated his query about Paul Thurrott blanking out build numbers, what the screenshots. On Windows development builds, the build number and other information is always displayed at the bottom right of the desktop. Paul Thurrott blanked these out on his screenshots which is very suspicious!

So, before you become all big-headed and try to say others are wrong, why don't you take some of your own advice and "use [your] brain and research things before jumping to conclusions".

Thank you! :)

Thanks man. :yes:

[Calum Veteran]

Thanks man. :yes:

No problem :) I'm getting quite annoyed with all these new ignorant people who seem to be posting in the Windows 7 threads recently and his exaggerated, naive, comment was way out of order! :D

[NEVER85]

Actually Snow Leopard is exactly what Vista was not. 10.6 is performance oriented and not GUI oriented as was Vista.

Vista was security-oriented more than anything.

[JOHW]

Vista was security-oriented more than anything.

Just because the obvious changes to users are the GUI, people think that it's just a GUI tweak/graphics oriented and just putting lipstick on a pig :rolleyes: :no:

[Slimy]

I'm very surprised that this thread is still going on. Paul is making a baseless prediction and everyone is jumping on it like Bill Gates just announced an RTM date. He's making **** up, move on already.

[jjrambo]

So, Windows features set is completed. I suppose final look and feel wont be that much different then what is now. So, MS will release public beta on December 15th right?

April - June time frame is about right. In 6 months Windows 7 will be bugged out - case closed. WMP12, IE8, DX11 will be ready. .NET Framework 4.0 as well. I believe Windows 7 is going to be shipped with .NET Framework 4.0 along with Windows Installer version 4.5.

I think SP2 for Vista won't have WMP12, IE8, and DX11 but it will be available as separate download.

[Quillz]

So, Windows features set is completed. I suppose final look and feel wont be that much different then what is now. So, MS will release public beta on December 15th right?

April - June time frame is about right. In 6 months Windows 7 will be bugged out - case closed. WMP12, IE8, DX11 will be ready. .NET Framework 4.0 as well. I believe Windows 7 is going to be shipped with .NET Framework 4.0 along with Windows Installer version 4.5.

I think SP2 for Vista won't have WMP12, IE8, and DX11 but it will be available as separate download.

I still stand by June 9, 2008.

[Ryster]

Announcing how many beta and RC builds they're going to release is the biggest sign that Microsoft are still not taking quality seriously. The decision on the release of beta builds should be dictated by the quality of the previous build, and not by some arbitrary timetable.

[jjrambo]

Announcing how many beta and RC builds they're going to release is the biggest sign that Microsoft are still not taking quality seriously. The decision on the release of beta builds should be dictated by the quality of the previous build, and not by some arbitrary timetable.

They need Windows 7 as soon as possible. Vista created such a bad image for them, that they can't wait to get rid of it from business perspective. I believe we will never see SP3 for Windows Vista. After SP2 is released which is sort of MS due to people who bought it...Vista story is ending right there. Windows XP users will jump to Windows 7 or maybe they will still stay on Windows XP. Vista did not find its way to business for the past 2 years. Actually number of people using Vista is still much lower then number of people using Windows XP. Afterall, part of me is afraid that Windows 7 might be another flop. We will see...

As far as i'm concern i will stay with Vista after MS confirmation of getting DX11. Since I use Windows for gaming only, DX is my driving factor. Infact if MS magically releases DX10.0 for Windows XP i would revert back to Windows XP x64 in no time and be there as long as i can.

I still don't understand why so many Vista and Windows 7 versions. In my book there should be only one version of Windows and call it by any name you want. Instead of making so many versions, MS should make one which should be so modular meaning, during installation process i have option to choose to install or not to install, Media Center, Tablet PC, support for Touch Screen, even applications like WordPad or Paint.

[Calum Veteran]

Announcing how many beta and RC builds they're going to release is the biggest sign that Microsoft are still not taking quality seriously. The decision on the release of beta builds should be dictated by the quality of the previous build, and not by some arbitrary timetable.

Microsoft didn't say there was definately only going to be one beta and one release candidate, they just said that's what they are aiming for; that is their target. I imagine they will still test the beta as efficiently as they normally would and if showstopper bugs are found then they will release another beta.

The reason why they can guess and make targets like that is because the development of Windows 7 is going exceptionally well :)

[jjrambo]

Microsoft didn't say there was definately only going to be one beta and one release candidate, they just said that's what they are aiming for; that is their target. I imagine they will still test the beta as efficiently as they normally would and if showstopper bugs are found then they will release another beta.

The reason why they can guess and make targets like that is because the development of Windows 7 is going exceptionally well :)

I guess groundwork was done in Vista. They are not going to change but improve it. It's much easier to improve something then code from scratch, at least from my experience as programmer.

[Mikee99]

Announcing how many beta and RC builds they're going to release is the biggest sign that Microsoft are still not taking quality seriously.

How so? Microsoft has lots of internal knowledge regarding the current progress of Windows 7. If their internal information showcases that Windows 7 may only need 1 beta, before they even released a beta, then that's a pretty good indication that the quality is pretty good. By contrast, Vista had two betas, two release candidates, and was RTM'd two months before the main release.

Windows 7 is not a massive update, and based on the impressions from people who have used Windows 7, it may very well only require 1 beta. If major problems arise with the beta, then who says they can't release a second beta?

[Mr. Dee]

They need Windows 7 as soon as possible. Vista created such a bad image for them, that they can't wait to get rid of it from business perspective. I believe we will never see SP3 for Windows Vista. After SP2 is released which is sort of MS due to people who bought it...Vista story is ending right there. Windows XP users will jump to Windows 7 or maybe they will still stay on Windows XP. Vista did not find its way to business for the past 2 years. Actually number of people using Vista is still much lower then number of people using Windows XP. Afterall, part of me is afraid that Windows 7 might be another flop. We will see...

As far as i'm concern i will stay with Vista after MS confirmation of getting DX11. Since I use Windows for gaming only, DX is my driving factor. Infact if MS magically releases DX10.0 for Windows XP i would revert back to Windows XP x64 in no time and be there as long as i can.

I still don't understand why so many Vista and Windows 7 versions. In my book there should be only one version of Windows and call it by any name you want. Instead of making so many versions, MS should make one which should be so modular meaning, during installation process i have option to choose to install or not to install, Media Center, Tablet PC, support for Touch Screen, even applications like WordPad or Paint.

Businesses have always been slow when it comes to upgrading to new releases of Windows. They are not like you and me who run go down to the nearest PC shop every 2 to 3 years when a new version of Windows is released. A majority now invest in one of Microsoft's volume licensing programs which gives them discounted access to the latest versions of Microsoft software. Meaning, they upgrade at their own pace, not when Microsoft releases a new version. When Windows 7 is released, Windows Vista will be a proven product that is well tested, meaning businesses are likely to deploy it before Windows 7. Look at Windows 2000 vs XP. A Company I worked at didn't start deploying 2000 Professional until summer of 2003, that was two years after XP's release to market. The just started deploying XP a couple years ago. As most businesses PC cycle changes, I am sure Vista will be the first option and the cycle continues.

[Quillz]

Vista did not find its way to business for the past 2 years.

And XP did not find its way to most businesses until SP2, about three years after the release of XP. Obviously, it's because XP was a failure...

No, the reason Vista hasn't found its way to businesses yet is the same reason why a lot of businesses still run their servers on Windows NT 3.51. Because it works, and it's reliable. Guess what? Vista works, and is reliable. Many new businesses and new servers will have Windows Server 2008 on it. But older businesses with older hardware need stability, and if Windows Server 2000 still works for them, or even Windows 286, then they'll keep using it until it stops working.

I still don't understand why so many Vista and Windows 7 versions. In my book there should be only one version of Windows and call it by any name you want. Instead of making so many versions, MS should make one which should be so modular meaning, during installation process i have option to choose to install or not to install, Media Center, Tablet PC, support for Touch Screen, even applications like WordPad or Paint.

I would agree that it would be nice to just have "Windows 7," Microsoft is not Apple. They have billions more customers and therefore have to cater to many situations that will never been seen with other vendors.

By going into the "Remove Windows Components" dialog box in Vista and 7, you already get a similar setup to what you're looking for. And also remember that while Vista had a full 17 SKUs, only three were really widely used by most end users: Home Premium, Business and Ultimate. The multiple SKUs is really not all that confusing. Most end users will want the Home editions, while most businesses will likely just go with Business or the Enterprise edition. The other SKUs, like Starter, Home Basic, etc. are rarely sold in retail, and most countries won't even have the Starter editions.

[scrtsqurrl]

I care not when Windows 7 comes out. Unless it's offered with a huge discount (I can pay $50) or as a free service pack to Vista.

[Quillz]

I care not when Windows 7 comes out. Unless it's offered with a huge discount (I can pay $50) or as a free service pack to Vista.

Why would it be a free service pack to Vista? Was Windows 98 a free service pack to 95? Was ME a free upgrade from 98? It costs real money to develop Windows 7. It's quite a bit more than just "a service pack."

If Windows 7 was really just a service pack, then it'd be called "Windows Vista SP3."