What is Windows 7, really?

It’s not Linux, that’s for sure…

Lest we forget: Windows 7 is just like Vista, folks. “Windows 7″ is Microsoft’s attempt to re-brand the damaged “Windows” name after the extremely poor “Windows Vista” release. I love that you can still buy systems with Windows XP “downgrade” because Windows Vista still isn’t trusted 3 years after it was released….


Check out this commentary by Linux in Exile.

Comments

  1. #1 regis
    October 8, 2009

    In the end, does anything but performance matter? If so Windows 7 is getting excellent reviews.

  2. #2 dean
    October 8, 2009

    If so Windows 7 is getting excellent reviews.

    It may be much better than Vista – it would be difficult for it not to be.

    But, beta testers and magazine reporters are hardly an unbiased source of information.

    Let’s wait to see comments from people who buy new machines with it pre-installed, or from upgraders with the “first final” release, to get some other opinions one way or another.

  3. #3 Spiv
    October 8, 2009

    Vista is quite dead, it would seem. The only question is really why the hell did they release it in the first place? The only thing I can come up with is that it suffered some unfixable architectural problem, 7 was already underway, and rather than lose the whole project they decided to dump it on the street as a holdover. Just terrible decision making. There are many difficulties in transitioning to a 64bit architecture, but you can’t release a half finished product (that is, unless you have the fanfare apple does. In which case they will praise you then, and praise you again when you finish it. They have to, it cost a lot of money to be unhappy with.).

    7, it would seem, is not vista. Despite how the anti-windows crowd is pleased to spin it. I’m not saying there aren’t things I’m going to hate about it (the fact that step 1 is hacking classic start menu and quicklaunch back in, see here: http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2227/get-the-classic-start-menu-in-windows-7/ ). I stuck on win2k until xp64 came out, so I have no qualms with sticking where I’m at until the right thing shows up.

    If it wants my new business it better be a shooter on the backend game.

    There is without question some dolt in microsoft who thinks making things look fruity is better than keeping useful things in. See the office ‘ribbon’ for the most fktarded approach to application programming ever. I don’t want a fruity computer. I want one that does the things I expect it to do. It’s really something when I can figure out all the functions inside a google spreadsheet (online application, different author, etc) than I can switching between back to back versions of excel that I’ve been using for 20 years.

    (huff. /Windows Rant)
    (char rant[] = ‘linux_update_rant’, ‘linux_general_rant’;)

    And my ubuntu load now fails on updates. WTF linux. And likes minimizing windows at random.

  4. #4 jake
    October 8, 2009

    7 is what Vista should have been. It is much better in many regards. I haven’t used Vista, but 99-100% of the reviews have come down that way. I have the first release candidate on both an old Dell, and a brand spankin’ new system I put together the weekend before last. Smooth as butter on both, no problems, fun to use.

  5. #5 some guy
    October 8, 2009

    7 is what Vista should have been. [...] I haven’t used Vista.

    So, yours is a totally informed opinion, then? You’re basically repeating what’s been printed elsewhere. :-)

  6. #6 jake
    October 8, 2009

    @someguy
    But not here, until I came around. You’re just jealous that I beat you to it.

  7. #7 jj
    October 8, 2009

    “Windows Vista still isn’t trusted 3 years after it was released”

    Not relevant to Windows 7. The argument that because Vista was crap and isn’t “trusted after 3 years” (by the way, it is, granted it took 2 service packs to be stable) has NO relevance to windows 7. It’s a different OS!!

    But, beta testers and magazine reporters are hardly an unbiased source of information.

    First, why not trust beta testers? Do you know what we do as beta testers? We try to break an OS. We attempt to do things that will cause a kernel panic. We do things that the average user will never attempt, so we can find the wholes before the general public has a chance. It was the beta testing that kept me from moving to Vista. It’s what has made me so excited about 7. We have no reason to be biased, I was extremely ware of Vista, as were most testers and reporters – that’s why Vista did not sell well, everyone knew at launch that it was a failure, and needed a service pack asap.

    “Let’s wait to see comments from people who buy new machines with it pre-installed, or from upgraders with the “first final” release, to get some other opinions one way or another”
    Final release is out. RTM went out in September, and many people are already using it. MSDN has already got it, so many College students and Academics are already using it. If you were hosting a “launch party” (stupid marketing idea) you’d have a copy. Retail doesn’t start until 22nd, but the final release is in use and getting great reviews.

    I’ve upgraded from XP over to the RC (as close to the RTM I could get). And it runs perfect. I have brand new hardware, and drivers are already working (biggest concern was by ATI HD4890 video card and Haupaugge Digital and Analog TV Tuner). Those were working even with earlier builds.

    With windows, in never hurts to wait a few months for patches or service packs, but SP1 probably won’t be released for a year or so.

  8. #8 jj
    October 8, 2009

    @Spiv
    RE: Ribbon in Office -
    When office 2007 came out, I would have agreed with you. So would have my entire office. Now, a few years later, I’d say everyone here thinks it’s an improvement. We had to re-learn where everything was, and how to do even the most basic tasks, but once we got used to it, everyone likes it. We have 2003 on our Citrix server and 2007 on local systems, so everyone has a choice which they use. 2007 everytime.

    As for the start menu, going from XP (I always use the ‘Classic’ menu style) to 7, I actually like the new menu. now that’s personal preferences, but since I output my video to an analog SD 480i TV, I don’t have enough screen space to deal with an older style start bar (I can’t wait until I get an HDTV)

  9. #9 itzac
    October 8, 2009

    Vista fixed a lot of significant security flaws in windows, and made a lot of architecture decisions right. Unfortunately it also did everything wrong when it came to actually using the OS. Windows 7 seems to take all the good things that happened in the background in Vista and rebuild the user experience around it. I’m looking forward to it.

  10. #10 Irene
    October 8, 2009

    We do things that the average user will never attempt, so we can find the wholes before the general public has a chance.

    That’s the problem right there. You’ve been looking for wholes, but you should have been looking for holes.

  11. #11 jj
    October 8, 2009

    Wow, blockquote, spelling, grammar fail on my part.

  12. #12 jj
    October 8, 2009

    @Irene
    That’s my problem! No wonder I don’t get paid for beta testing, I’ve been doing it all wrong

  13. #13 rpsms
    October 8, 2009

    FWIW, I have had vista 64 installed for a long time now (pre sp1 IIRC), and have been a little bemused by the *decibel level* of anti-vista sentiment. My primary interest at home is games, but I do use quarkxpress etc as well, and it is “just as stable” for me as xp ever was. Then again, I don’t run the sidebar because that is an obvious point of failure, especially with real-time 3d applications, despite compositing.

    I hit up the site linked in the original post from time to time because I like to understand criticism (the inaacurate messages with respect to system updates for instance is a fair assessment), but I was dissapointed in that particular post because the “start menu being completely gone in windows 7″ is quite inacurate. Indeed, the main difference is that you must scroll through the menu, rather than have it fly out.

    My main complaint with vista is the folder views: I am a details only guy, I could care less what star rating my mp3s have and I definately don’t want to auto-preview 32MB CMYK TIFFs.

  14. #14 Greg Laden
    October 8, 2009

    A friend of mine wrote a science fiction story in which a character is put under a spell so when he talks about a certain topic everyone thinks he’s lying. This applied as well to his own personal computer, which is a very advanced sort of laptop with legs, arms, head, personality, etc. When he realized he could not get his laptop to believe him when he communicated about this particular topic using the usual user interface, he opened up a terminal and went to the command line. That worked.

    I’m just sayin’

  15. #15 Treppenwitz
    October 8, 2009

    Maybe it’s just because I waited until SP1 (and because I don’t use a lot of old proprietary software/hardware), but I had no problems with Vista. Nevertheless, 7′s definitely an improvement.

    I’ve been running Windows 7 x64 for a few months now, and I love it. I can’t put my finger on one big thing that makes the difference, but there are a lot of nice small changes, like the new taskbar (probably the most visible change), adjustable UAC settings, built-in wallpaper rotation (finally), replacement of fixed “My ____” folders with “libraries” that can point wherever, replacement of the sidebar with gadgets that can be dragged anywhere, etc.

  16. #16 Rorschach
    October 9, 2009

    As I said in the other thread, W7 seems to be doing what an OS is meant to be doing, be stable and just f’ing work.No need to praise it for that.I’ve had it for a few months now and it does that.

    Now Ubuntu seems to falter, the beta of Karmic is disgusting, I’m appalled actually.Been running Ubuntu alpha versions for 2 years and despite the odd hickup as to be expected, they ran well all in all. This beta is just awful.

  17. #17 dean
    October 9, 2009

    @jj:
    I don’t have an opinion on W7, because I haven’t tried it. My point was that neither beta testers nor reviewers can be viewed as any type of random sampling of users – they all have biases towards windows, have skills/experiences general users may not have.
    dean