Print 128 comment(s) - last by Harmik.. on Mar 10 at 12:10 PM

Microsoft is using the data it has collected from the hundreds of thousands of beta users to improve the metrics of common windows processes. To give on example of Microsoft's impressive attention to detail, in the beta only 85 percent of the time did the start menu open in the desired time of 50 ms (top). This has been upped to 92 percent of the time in Release Candidate 1, and the amount of critical failures has dropped to almost nothing.  (Source: Microsoft)
We delve deeper into the new features that Microsoft has in store for the Windows 7 Release Candidate based on user feedback

In the last installment of DailyTech's inspection of the Windows 7 Release Candidate 1 (RC1) changes, we discussed the changes to the OS's interface.  Microsoft has incorporated literally thousands of user suggestions into the RC1 build.  These changes affect many aspects of the OS from the interface to Windows software, hardware, and networking.  Today we'll look at a few more of these changes.

First up, the multi-touch functionality in the OS has been overhauled with several improvements.  When scrolling your finger across the taskbar, the OS now offers Aero Peek previews of programs for touch users.  The Show Desktop button also now offers a preview when pressed and held.  Clicking causes its usual functionality.  On websites with vertical and horizontal scroll, touch users can now user their fingers to select text, something not possible in the beta. 

Most important are the right click and touch keyboard updates.  Microsoft has invented a way to effectively right click using multi-touch, based on user criticism of its earlier single-finger implementation.  The new implementation right clicks an item when you touch it with one finger and click it with another  The touch keyboard also has received a significant update, as it can now support multi-touch, allow for key combinations like SHIFT + letter to be typed, something not possible in the beta.

Microsoft has also made some key changes to the Control Panel.  The User Account Control, as previously discussed, now supports warnings before having its settings changed, for security reasons.  In the beta, locking machines was only possible when a screensaver had been set -- the release candidate now supports screensaver-less locking.  A new power options fly-out menu now can also be enabled, which allow faster switching between standard and high performance power modes, an attractive feature for laptop users.  A tweak to themes rounds out the Control Panel changes, making it clearer whether a theme has been saved or not.

Windows Media Player (WMP) has been the target for numerous RC1 improvements.  One set of tweaks improve the reliability and resiliency of streaming internet radio.  Thanks to other improvements WMP can now seek within AVCHD videos from camcorders and has added support for .MOV video files from digital cameras for the first time. 

Microsoft has cleaned up the “Now Playing” view and made it lighter and more compact, based on user suggestions.  Also, non-compatible content like Apple’s lossless .M4A or .H263 MPEG-4 content will no longer show up in the library, and thus won't confuse users.  Resume from sleep has also been added and the jump lists have been improved.  Also, the users will receive less annoying messages as the USB sync prompts have disappeared.  The user now has to manually select to sync. Access to advanced options has also been improved.

In the realm of hardware, Microsoft has put a great deal of work into improving its promising Device Stage feature.  Microsoft is working harder to try to get more IHV and OEM partners to add compatibility for the feature, and Microsoft is adding extra support to make it easier for these partners to do this.  Microsoft also fixed a hardware bug involving audio streams not correctly switching from the default speakers to the headphones when the headphones are selected in the audio applet.  Another key hardware change is comes in response to complaints of beta installs without any audio support.  Microsoft has made changes to ensure at least base-level audio support is provided, and it is working to populate Windows Update with additional audio drivers.

Performance-wise, Microsoft has a few tricks up its sleeve with the release candidate as well.  Microsoft has stopped short of giving a lot of technical details, but it says that it has been using its data gathered from the traces on common Windows processes in the beta installs to speed the processes up.  What does this mean? Microsoft gives the example of the time it takes for the start menu to pop up after clicking the Windows icon.  Based on examination of the traces optimizations were made, which bring the total of acceptable results -- the pane opening within 50 ms -- from 85 percent to 92 percent.

For developers, Microsoft has added new headers to its libraries that will reveal subfolders in a library.  It also removed the drag and drop to create a new library feature.  This is now available from menu options, but Microsoft is avoiding drag and drop due to complaints that confused users were deleting their libraries, thinking that they were copied.  Microsoft also reintroduced Vista's familiar entry points, accessible via the Win+E key.  Microsoft has added library support for non-removable FAT32 and NTFS hard disk drives.  It has also made even more efforts to enhance its popular arrangement viewing system.

To wrap up this two part summary of Windows 7 RC1, it suffices to say that Microsoft has delivered a lot of impressive changes and appears to be working hard to fulfill the promise of Windows 7.  Look for these changes in the final versions of the OS, which will hit stores later this year.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By InsidiousAngel on 3/4/2009 10:37:40 AM , Rating: 5
This whole XP vs. Vista vs. Windows 7 argument should not even exist. Anyone who has been in this business since Windows 3.11 or Win95 understands that there are stop gap versions.

Windows 95 had 3 versions all with different changes/features; guess you almost could call them SPs. Version B introduced FAT32 to the world. Then you had Win98, which evolved into Win98SE. Next we have Win2000 that was solid, great upgrade from WinNT4 business were on, but not for home use. Win2000 evolved into WinXP, which is an amazing story in itself since so many people suddenly fail to recall how up until SP1, WinXP had so many security issues and bugs that it wasn’t till SP1 & a lot of video/audio/etc. driver revisions that Win98 gamers would even considered the move. I fully expect to be downgraded for this rant, but everyone on the repackage bandwagon just need to get a grip. Every other non-M$ OS does the same damn thing, but because it’s not M$’s ok. They are just making improvements.

RE: Evolution
By Belard on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 10:47:25 AM , Rating: 5
Yeah things like a completely rewritten kernel, adding of DX10(and soon DX11), all new user permissions implementation, all new driver model to allow better access to hardware, etc. are just stupid things Microsoft shouldn't have bothered with.

RE: Evolution
By therealnickdanger on 3/4/2009 10:55:55 AM , Rating: 2
Let me explain to you how this works: you see, Microsoft releases a shiny turd (Vista, duh) in order to make money (evil)... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporation-y... and they make money.

RE: Evolution
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 11:01:05 AM , Rating: 4
[cutaway to Stewie at Woodstock]
Stewie Griffin: Uh, excuse me, it's been brought to my attention that a few bad apples out there are smoking marijuana. Uh, I've got news for you, my friend. Marijuana's illegal. Not cool. [audience starts booing] Alright then. [Begins singing, to the tune of America the Beautiful] Establishment, establishment, you always know what's best...
Man in audience: You suck!
Stewie Griffin: Learn the rules!

RE: Evolution
By Dianoda on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 6:29:12 PM , Rating: 2
Haha! I have no idea why the Team America quote was voted down and the Family Guy was voted up. If ya love one, you have to love the other! (FG and South Park that is)

RE: Evolution
By Belard on 3/4/2009 9:42:09 PM , Rating: 2
Gotta love Quagmire having sex with Marge Simpson and ends up killing the whole family... :)

RE: Evolution
By therealnickdanger on 3/4/2009 11:43:02 AM , Rating: 5
I was being 110% sarcastic BTW.

RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 2:12:08 PM , Rating: 2
Don't worry I got it nick.

RE: Evolution
By therealnickdanger on 3/4/2009 2:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
That makes two of us... LOL

RE: Evolution
By on 3/6/2009 9:43:32 AM , Rating: 2
Don't worry I got it nick.

Lol that's what she said

RE: Evolution
By rburnham on 3/4/2009 11:58:06 AM , Rating: 5
Thank you for mentioning that. The new kernel and driver model are the two biggest changes I noticed, and I think it is great. I have read that a lot of early issues were from bad drivers from 3rd party companies, such as Nvidia. I like how the 64-bit version is available as a free upgrade, and that a lot of companies are supporting Vista x64. The new look of the OS is nice, but it is the under-the-hood changes that will have the most long term benefits. XP was great, but I prefer Vista now.

RE: Evolution
By poundsmack on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 2:13:35 PM , Rating: 5
I believe the number was somewhere around 90% of the code was completely new. Meaning that didn't just modify the existing code.

RE: Evolution
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:30:57 PM , Rating: 4
It wasn't a 90% rewrite. More like 60%. But still, very drastic rewrite. Now 7 brings that number up to around 80% when compared to XP.

RE: Evolution
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:52:43 PM , Rating: 3
I love being rated down for stating a fact! Tells me I did something right. It just wouldn't be Daily Tech without the needless downrating from the uninformed.

RE: Evolution
By jabber on 3/5/2009 7:18:00 AM , Rating: 2
The story I read was this -

Halfway through the initial Longhorn/Vista development things were not going very well. The code base was very buggy and frankly a mess.
Then the Dev manager stumbled across a small team that had been working on cleaning up the server 2003 code, almost as a pet project. It was found that their code was far far cleaner so thats when the initial Longhorn/Vista development was scrapped and re-started using the cleaner code base.

Thats what I read anyway.

RE: Evolution
By mindless1 on 3/5/2009 12:59:06 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, not even close. They "rewrote" almost nothing. Try redo, instead, taking what they had changed and reverting back to a prior version then starting at that point again with the old code being modified.

RE: Evolution
By Smilin on 3/5/2009 4:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
And you know this how?

RE: Evolution
By dagamer34 on 3/4/2009 1:05:46 PM , Rating: 3
While it may have been 6 years between XP and Vista, Microsoft restarted development using the Windows Server 2003 codebase in 2004, when they realized that tacking on features to XP and using .NET for OS code was horrendously slow.

I'd also say that it's not purely that the OS was rushed to market, but driver support wasn't ready, and Intel was peddling non-Aero capable chipsets in laptop PCs.

RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 10:45:03 AM , Rating: 2
Glad to see there's a few sane people.

RE: Evolution
By Drexial on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By tastyratz on 3/4/2009 11:49:08 AM , Rating: 5
I have been using XP (whistler) since EARLY beta stages (right right after alpha) and I remember hearing a little about Blackcomb at the time.

Blackcomb was what is now windows 7. Longhorn (vista) was turned into a stopgap spinoff of Blackcomb and rushed to market much sooner. Longhorn was supposed to be released very close to Blackcomb and be a standalone version of Blackcomb which was actually supposed to be a subscription based OS. Yes, you heard me... Microsoft was going to practically give the OS away and charge a la cart subscription rate based on your components. This obviously changed.

When XP came out it was a drastic change. It offered the multimedia capabilities of 98 with the security and stability of 2000. While it certainly had its share of bugs it was so much better in execution in comparison to what was out.

You remember how many bugs xp had, but seem to forget that windows 2000 was up to service pack 4 and last minute ditched sp5.

The longer a product exists and gets probed daily by hackers, the more holes your gonna find. Over time new holes develop and they patch them - its just how software works.

The problem with Vista is it was rushed to market, and it didn't bring enough to the table to entice people. Vista DOES have a few things in it over xp which are pretty neat, and pretty useful... but it was basically a stripped down pre-production version of windows 7 which was released as a stopgap and never should have hit the shelves.

Vista DOES have major things like directx10 - but that's only because MS refused to support it on XP to push their newest OS. That also only applies to new games and more dedicated gamers which is a small percentage of the market.

The rest of the stuff they offer just does not appeal well to the general public in an overpriced preproduction OS.
7 is great, they should have left it there or pushed off vista just a little longer.

Most people think 7 is based on vista since its coming out second, but don't realize vista was based on 7 in development.

RE: Evolution
By InsidiousAngel on 3/4/2009 1:21:44 PM , Rating: 5
Now color me impressed! I didn't think anyone still remembered all of that after all this time.

Regarding Windows 2000, prior to Windows XP releasing, it only had two service packs, with a total of 4 along with a major rollup which, as you correctly stated, was suppose to be SP5.

Regarding Vista being 'Rushed to Market', this is true and false. With all the project changes that did occur, Vista was the stopgap between the two OSs like you stated.

However, Microsoft came to realized after about 2-3 years into Vista's development cycle that their model of stitching the OS from code that different departments worked on with the same kernel was not working anymore.

That is when the decision was made to 'go to the drawing board' so to speak and take what they needed from Windows 7. So yes, in a sense they rushed it from that perspective.

Vista does have few things to make people switch, I'll give you that. I personally run it for the 64-bit support & several of the games I play do use DX10 and I'm an eye candy guy. And yes, the DX10 on XP should have happened.

And I will be honest coming from the tech world; I had a harder time finding certain settings under Vista than XP for a while. I still feel some of the settings require too many clicks to get to.

Oh, one more thing. For those who bring up Windows ME, I left that out for one reason. While contracted to a hospital in NC discussing licensing with MS when they went on a rampage sending proof of license letters, I had the MS rep point blank tell me they don't try to even acknowledge it ever was that bad.

BTW, Tastyratz great followup post.

RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By MozeeToby on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 9:23:41 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Evolution
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:26:23 PM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about? There are stable DX10 hacks out for XP. And they work great! So DX10 HAS been done for XP, just not by MS...

RE: Evolution
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:54:44 PM , Rating: 5
Again, downrated for stating fact... Gotta love it.

RE: Evolution
By xeroshadow on 3/6/2009 4:01:26 AM , Rating: 2
I just want to know when WMP will play an MP3 instantly. What is up when you first start WMP, start an MP3 and you get the little circle. Phenom II with 8Gb of RAM, why is there hesitation in playing an audio file? The same MP3 will start instantly in VLC player. Just frustrating when something so common has these annoying quirks(or imo useless overhead).

RE: Evolution
By StevoLincolnite on 3/4/2009 1:27:42 PM , Rating: 2
When XP came out it was a drastic change. It offered the multimedia capabilities of 98 with the security and stability of 2000. While it certainly had its share of bugs it was so much better in execution in comparison to what was out.

I was one of the early birds to XP, I jumped from Win98 to WinXP as soon as release day came around.

The biggest difference over Windows XP in comparison to Windows 98 was that... You saw allot less of the ill-fated Blue screen of death, if you were say... installing a program from a CD on Windows 98, and you ejected the disk during mid-installation it would crash the OS.

Windows XP offered better stability, that was one of the single largest improvements.

I was someone who always favored Windows XP over Vista, simply due to performance, I found that the programs I used ran better under Windows XP than they did under Vista.

However, I have been using Windows 7 for the last few months, and it's been great, I actually wish Microsoft used Windows 7's task bar in Windows Vista, Windows 7 is also more snappier and lighter on the Hardware requirements as well.

I tested out the Beta 7000 build on a Pentium 4 1.8ghz @ 2.4ghz, 512mb of ram and a PCI Geforce MX4000 GPU, and it was a massively improved experience over Vista for office duties, web browsing etc, still not as good as Windows XP speed wise, but still incredibly usable, and I was even more impressed by the fact it was still in Beta stages.

Perhaps all this Vista bashing may have done good for the consumer and Windows Operating systems after all, I don't know, but it's good Microsoft is actually listening to peoples input.

RE: Evolution
By Drexial on 3/4/2009 2:17:40 PM , Rating: 3
I'll reply to the string of comments that have followed since my response to the original.

I would first like to thank you for keeping them informative and not bringing any sort of "flaming" tone to them.

Its nice to hear about the OS releases from people that actually know what they are talking about. I too got wrapped up in a lot of the hype leading up to and after the vista release. I know playing with the RC's of Vista were a less then spectacular experience for me. It was like siting in a Mercedes engineered by Pontiac. It was very nice to look at, But it was bulky, everything looked nice but nothing was in a familiar or even ergonomic location like you would expect.

I also understand the trial and error with WinFS, that has yet to see daylight (available on technet... don't know what to do with it though). I think it was this mixed with a few other expectations that disappointed me the most with Vista. They had seemingly tried to spend so much time on something, then delivered half of what they said in twice the time.

All in all my opinion of Vista is all show, no go. At this point it is a few steps ahead in stability and security than XP. But not worth my time to upgrade. Hell I even have a copy at home that I don't care to install, it just wont offer me anything new to my aging system (last updated 2 years ago)

By the time I build a new system, Windows 7 seems to be the way to go for me though. Using the Beta was QUITE enjoyable, discovering all the little things they added that actually made sense.

I hope to continue into this enlightening conversations a bit longer.

RE: Evolution
By InsidiousAngel on 3/4/2009 2:35:30 PM , Rating: 2
Sadly, I don’t think WinFS will ever see the light of day. WinFS was Bill Gates original vision of creating a successor to NTFS and making its indexing & journaling SQL-based. Then it became an overlay to NTFS. Now it's in limbo. With MS investing more time and resources into Windows Search and other search technologies, it will stay in limbo till something forces them to move on.

RE: Evolution
By Drexial on 3/4/2009 2:48:31 PM , Rating: 4
I can only hope that something happens. The two things that I think hurt Windows the most are the FS and Registry. Of course these are by no means small things. I believe the interface is decent, barring some settings rearranged in Vista, and they do have simplicity for the end user in mind. Maybe its because of the registry and FS that this is possible. But I feel like if anyone had the resources to achieve great things it would be MS. Now I just wish they had the drive to do it.

Doesn't matter how many system resources you have, an unmaintained FS and Registry can make any system dog slow. And how many issues I have had removing some programs because of the cryptic nature of the registry has caused me so many headaches, It would have saved me DAYS at my job. How touchy feely Windows has to be with everything installed just creates more problems.

RE: Evolution
By tastyratz on 3/4/2009 3:23:56 PM , Rating: 4
I actually am going to go out on a limb here and I know I will probably get voted down like my original post was here.

I LIKE the registry.

Now this does not mean I think its great the way it is, but I like the registry in concept and thought. I think it is an excellent way to centralize settings for a myriad of windows functions as well as application functions respectively. It's a powerful tool. I would love to see applications cease using buried INI/CFG/etc. files and start using the registry MORE.


I think it is in dire need of a revamp. The structuring and naming needs extensive re-thinking. It should be made more user friendly and less cryptic (without making it computard compatible so people start bombing their systems when they aren't at all literate)
It has become very bloated over the years, and windows should have a much more tight control of it so it knows when a program goes, it's registry settings go too - period.
In theory application developers should make their install and uninstall files much more aware and complete but you cant always rely on that when people use such a range of applications and quality (from basement born to wide scale commercial)
Its time Windows stepped in, monitoring and logging the source for any and all registry creations.

RE: Evolution
By Jedi2155 on 3/4/2009 10:07:52 PM , Rating: 2
There should also be a simple way to backup registry settings from install to install for specific programs...but I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon...

RE: Evolution
By Belard on 3/4/2009 10:17:28 PM , Rating: 2
The rigisty has some interesting things about it in that it does allow you to change aspects of the OS-somewhat. But many of those things are hidden. The Reg was designed to make life harder. More control of the OS to MS.

How big is your REG file? If it gets corrupted, what happens to your computer. No other OS but MS has a registry.

As someone who didn't learn computing on Windows, the reg is a horrible way of controlling your software and settings.

In other OS, the settings for the software would be in the properties of its short-cut-like icon. Gee, that would be a simple way of knowing how to control how a program work. Rather than digging out dozens if not hundreds of reg keys for a single program.

Also, it means that software like IE and others aren't tied to the OS. This is one of the reasons that Windows is a weak OS because of its faults.

The reg is a problem that will most likely never go away from an MS-OS. Much like how ALL info in people's outlook is shoved in to a single HUGE PST file. Every in, out, saved, attachment, info, trash and deleted item is in that 1~5GB file. That is a sloppy way of doing things.

RE: Evolution
By xxeonn on 3/4/2009 11:29:38 PM , Rating: 2
In other OS, the settings for the software would be in the properties of its short-cut-like icon. Gee, that would be a simple way of knowing how to control how a program work. Rather than digging out dozens if not hundreds of reg keys for a single program.

Ok, I do understand what you are saying about storing setting of the program in a file personal to each, But the registry also stores settings for the operating system itself.

For the sake of a little clarification of your idea, how will the OS now how to behave in certain situations like user permissions on a corporate network? Where will the settings of these permissions stored?

RE: Evolution
By tastyratz on 3/5/2009 12:28:48 AM , Rating: 3
Your whole post is full of F.U.D. - there is no real backing substance of quality for any of your arguments.

Outlook personal folders are a perfect example of pst files (like the registry) getting out of control when left up to user control (applications).

The registry now lacks discipline and is far too passive. It relies on someone or something else to maintain it, and it just exists. This doesn't fly with the TONS of sloppy developers who leave a trail behind as well as the many major vendors who think you want to keep your settings "just in case" you want them after uninstalling.

What if windows had a better way about doing it? The registry can be fined tuned to become a leaner more valuable resource.

What if it had discipline and took a more active role in maintaining and trimming itself? Any time an installer is triggered it tracks any entries created. MS also watches any applications that make registry changes and references - which then binds that change to the respective executable(s). When an application is removed and no more bindings to that key exist it is auto pruned either completely out, or to a non paged (resource nonexistant) secondary registry which becomes a "holding area" or basically a time limited registry settings graveyard.

Another way to do it is to use the registry for core Microsoft OS settings only. Application entries are virtualized. ALL applications when installed have their own file (like their own hive if you will) which is stored in the program files or application data directory. When installed the installer requests an entry in the registry for all of its settings. This creates a modular registry with a centralized management source transparent to the user. You get to have your cake and eat it too that way from an administration standpoint when you want to push changes out. This also creates a sandbox effect where a malicious program is limited in its registry capabilities under normal circumstances to only its own individual "hive" unless explicitly granted otherwise from UAC.

Fear of a registry file becoming corrupted? MS can run 3 reg files; A regular, a shadow copy, and a parity copy. This creates redundancy and consistancy while again remaining transparent to the user (essentially a file based software raid 5). Hell even 2 reg files and a CRC check could do the duty in a lighter packaging.

There are plenty of ways to get around these problems, and all it takes is a little short thought. It's about time MS seriously thought about looking into these things.

To say the registry was designed to make life harder means you truly don't understand it. The registry was designed to be exactly what it is - a centralized place for a myriad of windows core settings and program settings. It was never meant for normal user intervention, its only something a true power advanced user should even be looking at. How else do you propose they do it, 1500 INI files littered across the drive? Gotta save the settings somewhere... at least I know I can consistently find it all in one place. How do you think those other operating systems do it? The settings have to be saved in SOME file in SOME place- they don't just save in the "shortcut".

The registry is also not the size you seem to think it is. I have probably a hundred programs and several terrabytes of junk on my pc and I haven't reinstalled xp in YEARS. I install and uninstall new programs on a regular basis and know how big my registry is? according to its 20mb or so right now. A file that small is barely worth a sneeze.

RE: Evolution
By jjmcubed on 3/4/2009 5:57:50 PM , Rating: 2
This is why I read DT comments. It isn't someone ranting about how much they THINK ones product is better, but interesting information. Thank you.

RE: Evolution
By Harmik on 3/10/2009 12:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
Hello I just found this site for the record I use Vista and like it. I find the history of Vista interesting and the bit I have read here is quite interesting, is there a site that has more detail. But is that basically right Vista is kind of like an early build of 7 rather than 7 being a refinement of Vista.

(Sorry I think I should of posted here in the first place)

RE: Evolution
By MRwizard on 3/5/2009 8:25:31 AM , Rating: 2
ummm, didnt windows 2000 come out after ME?

RE: Evolution
By walk2k on 3/4/2009 12:51:37 PM , Rating: 1
There's only 1 major thing left they need to fix, and that's windows not remembering their size & positions on the screen. VERY annoying.

A few minor things too, like when I select "eject" on my cdrom I get the "safe to remove USB" popup, and the fact that I can't see battery levels remaining on my UPS like I can in XP.

Otherwise it's been a pretty amazing beta. Certainly is worlds better than Vista RC1 (the last version I used). UAC is still lame but at least you can turn it off easily.

RE: Evolution
By plonk420 on 3/4/2009 5:11:01 PM , Rating: 2
that sounds like an app issue .. or the app not storing/reading the proper data. i have an app that dates back to 2000 or even before (LameDrop, not LameDrop XP) that always (even to a detriment when i rotate my monitor and that position is off-screen) remembers its position.

RE: Evolution
By walk2k on 3/4/2009 5:34:43 PM , Rating: 2
I mean Windows(tm) windows. Like folder windows. If you open 2 at a time, re-arrange them how you want, then close them both, it will only remember the position of the last one you moved.

RE: Evolution
By GotDiesel on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Evolution
By plonk420 on 3/4/2009 4:13:52 PM , Rating: 1
Anyone who has been in this business since Windows 3.11 or Win95 understands that there are stop gap versions.

...and microsoft did no free upgrade for any of those...

RE: Evolution
By leexgx on 3/5/2009 1:13:38 AM , Rating: 2
mostly SP2 on XP

Vista only fix thay need to do is sound driver vol levels rembering when creative drivers are used
and related to the New sound system driver model in vista haveing to modify my reg to get my network to full speed ()
(ignore the first blog post it self as he is talking about Turning off some service thats not recomneded its the comment that that user posted that fixed mine it is allso on M$ web site someware on you to edit that reg key as well to fix the networking speed)

all i modifyed was the below to fix network speed (backup reg before messing)
------------- networkfix.reg -----------
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Multimedia\SystemProfile]
------------- end -----------------
but the above into an reg file (not -- in there) run it and reboot start some music and copy an 2-3 gb file and watch it go at disk speeds come from remote computer connected via gigabit network both ends (70MB/s in my case was doing max 11MB/s before when haveing Any audio app teamspeak for e.g. thats just it Open not even talking)

RE: Evolution
By misbfa1 on 3/9/2009 2:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
I wanted to read your post, but couldn't. Simply because it is totally incomprehesible! There is not one single period or comma in the entire post! The whole thing is one giant run on sentence.

Call me a grammar Nazi if you will, but why post at all if you're not going to make it readable?

RE: Evolution
By Harmik on 3/10/2009 11:51:29 AM , Rating: 2
Hello I just found this site for the record I use Vista and like it. I find the history of Vista interesting and the bit I have read here is quite interesting, is there a site that has more detail. But is that basically right Vista is kind of like an early build of 7 rather than 7 being a refinement of Vista.

By fifthlake on 3/4/2009 2:57:01 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone know why the "New Technology File System" will still be in place? I was hoping for improvement.

By kattanna on 3/4/2009 3:14:33 PM , Rating: 2
simple legacy support.

the new file system will break all apps that deal with the file system now on a direct level.

By Drexial on 3/4/2009 4:08:27 PM , Rating: 2
Not entirely true. I can still use Fat16/Fat32 and DOS based applications in XP. While its not 100% its like 95%

By freeagle on 3/4/2009 6:26:36 PM , Rating: 2
because FAT has nearly zero features compared to NTFS that the "new" apps make direct use of and thus rely on

Tweak UI
By Kaleid on 3/4/2009 6:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
Was very useful for XP. Can we have it for Windows 7 too?

RE: Tweak UI
By lco45 on 3/5/2009 12:52:12 AM , Rating: 2
As I'm sure you know, everything in TweakUI is accessible, buried in various spots throughout Windows and the registry.

Windows really should make this more accessible, eg. if a user ticks and 'advanced options' in the display properties dialog.


By bluetickle on 3/8/2009 5:37:35 PM , Rating: 2
Vista / Win 7 - networking is hell and broken.

Doesn't work with WinXP, Linux-samba.

Audio Passthrough
By teldar on 3/4/2009 7:18:34 PM , Rating: 1
All I want is audio pass through. An OS where they are not compelled to screw with digital audio at all if that is what the user wants. That it goes from the source to the output without being down and upmixed.
Is that too much to ask?
Apparently so....

Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 9:39:35 AM , Rating: 5
The obvious reasons? oh right you mean that you don't know what you are doing or talking about, much like your friends who are "in tech". Gotcha.

Good thing Microsoft is repackaging and refining Vista as windows7 for people like you so you can manage to get past your own stupidity by believing it's something other than further evolution of Vista.

RE: Looking good.
By luseferous on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By Mithan on 3/4/2009 10:09:15 AM , Rating: 5
Vista is better than XP. Just because you can not come to terms with that doesn't change the fact.

RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 10:21:36 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Anyone who does even the slightest bit of work in the PC realm knows that Vista is a great OS. Sure XP is great too, but Vista is quite a bit more secure than XP and more user friendly in my opinion. But, all things aside, Vista is NOT MEv2.

RE: Looking good.
By Maximilian on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 10:45:38 AM , Rating: 5
Windows 7 is Vista, the end.

The only problem Vista has is negative name association due to the torrent of false bashing it got right out of the gate. They know they can never go back and change that negative name association cause by VERY vocal idiots who had in many cases never even used the OS.

Vista is an example of how effective FUD really is in this day and age.

If you think windows 7 is some magical minwin based Linux like OS like the wannabe's would have had you believe when it was still in the realm of speculation you have a surprise coming.

In the end you are going to be using Vista and liking it, because Microsoft rebadged it, refined it, calling it Windows 7 to get around the mental block of idiots everywhere.

RE: Looking good.
By yacoub on 3/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Looking good.
By Reclaimer77 on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 12:00:51 PM , Rating: 5
You should feel like an idiot if you ramble around message boards posting trash that is based in fantasy about an OS that you know little about.

Which describes the majority of Vista bashers that lurk out on the forums and message boards as far as the eye can see.

Anyone that cannot see the ridiculous levels of exaggeration going on with any disliked feature in Vista is blind. UAC was the work of satan himself even though you could disable it in three clicks, needing more than 512 megs of ram, surely designed by Adolf Hitler in an evil scheme to make you buy an extra 20 dollars worth of ram. Nvidia's driver problems, Bill Gates stayed up late thinking up that one just to punish us for sure.

You don't want to jump on Vista that's great and always has been. Noone should pay to upgrade to something they don't need. Making up stupid falsehoods to perpetuate existing falsehoods is what makes someone an idiot. It just doesn't fly any more. The people that know what they are doing can look at things and see reality, the days of making up stories of a hundred ways Vista wronged you and garnering instant rate ups are over, and people that aren't afraid to call it as bullshit are more common.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 12:11:03 PM , Rating: 2
Savage I feel like I know you do you live in the UK.

RE: Looking good.
By William Gaatjes on 3/4/2009 12:41:07 PM , Rating: 1
Bill Gates stayed up late thinking up that one just to punish us for sure.

Hello !

Leave me out of it !

RE: Looking good.
By General Disturbance on 3/4/2009 3:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
Nice one Savage!
I'm copying and pasting your post into my collection of all time best quotes ever read on the internet.


RE: Looking good.
By Reclaimer77 on 3/4/2009 4:50:58 PM , Rating: 1
You should feel like an idiot if you ramble around message boards posting trash that is based in fantasy about an OS that you know little about.

Are you talkin' to me ?

You don't want to jump on Vista that's great and always has been.

Good, glad we got that worked out.

RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 5:03:45 PM , Rating: 2
Figure out for yourself If I am talking to you, or if what I say applies to you.

Do you ramble around message boards posting false statements or stupid one line critiques like "vista sucks because everyone says so"

If so that would make you an idiot.

RE: Looking good.
By 67STANG on 3/4/2009 5:27:01 PM , Rating: 2
It's all a matter of preference. I'm not going to get drawn into another XP vs. Vista argument with you, as there's no need to reinvent the wheel.

I think what we can all agree on is that Vista, beit a flop or not, has inspired Microsoft to actually listen to the people that use their OS for suggestions and fixes *before* their next product ships. And that is definately a good thing.

RE: Looking good.
By DeepBlue1975 on 3/4/2009 1:07:52 PM , Rating: 2
I liked vista quite a bit...

But win7 is indeed a better, evolved Vista.
The changes to the UI are almost pure greatness... Had a minor problem with my win7 beta setup and had to revert back to my main vista install for a few days, and boy... It felt like I was using a pretty old, obsolete, bad looking and jerky OS in comparison.

Again and again I tried to drag windows to the side, use the preview thumbnails like in win7, shake a window to have others minimized...

I realize how simple in concept win7's changes to the UI are, but the usability of the OS gets so much better with them for me, that even though I liked Vista quite a bit, after using win7, I don't want to touch vista ever again.
It just feels lacking. Even so much more so than coming back to xp from vista.

RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 10:54:34 AM , Rating: 2
Make a list for me.
What is so horrid about Vista?

RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 11:43:14 AM , Rating: 3
I'll make the typical Vista basher list for you.

"It haz drm, omgzorz!!oneoneone, Screw you M$"
"it takez too much rams!! i doesn't afford an extra 20 dollars"
"other techs of amazing tech skillz told me it was crap!"
"my grandma doesn't like it cuz she saw the mac commercial"

Did I miss anything?

RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 11:48:46 AM , Rating: 3
Yeah, you missed one. "UAC IS UBER ANNOYING!"

Add another M$ reference and for good measures also add Micro$haft and I think you will have it all down. lol

RE: Looking good.
By walk2k on 3/4/2009 5:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't say "horrid" but the reasons I haven't swtiched from XP yet are simple:

1. expensive
2. not needed
3. resource hog / actually slower than XP

That's basically it.

Until I recently got 4GB of memory I didn't need Vista x64 (and XP x64 isn't quite a real option).

I'm a gamer but very few games up until now even take advantage of new DX10 features and absolutely ZERO games require DX10 to run. Plus benchmarks usually showed better FPS under XP.

Nothing there worth the $200+ for me (non-upgrade for Home Premium - I can't upgrade from my upgrade version of XP).

RE: Looking good.
By Gravemind123 on 3/4/2009 6:33:10 PM , Rating: 2
Point 1: Don't buy it. Microsoft isn't going to disable your current copy of XP.

Point 2: This is almost true, except that it was time for a new OS. They can't just keep patching XP forever, and they need to sell more OS copies to keep up profits.

Point 3: Have you used Vista(x86-64) with 4GB of ram? It is the same speed as XP, if not faster due to its caching of commonly used applications in ram.

If Vista isn't worth buying for you, don't buy it, but that doesn't mean it is a bad operating system, just not one that is worth upgrading to.

Personally I won't go back to XP again after having used Windows 7 Beta and Windows Vista SP1. The only thing that keeps my desktop on XP is that nVidia's drivers were so terrible for Vista last time I tried them on this computer that I haven't switched yet.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 10:38:18 PM , Rating: 1
Point 1: Don't buy it. Microsoft isn't going to disable your current copy of XP.

I doubt it that they well, but they do have the ability to do so. What happens after 2014? Do they continue the activation servers? Do they give out a code / patch to de-activate the DRM Activation? And no, I don't have plans to be using WinXP as my primary OS in 2014.

Point 2: This is almost true, except that it was time for a new OS. They can't just keep patching XP forever,

MS sells copies of XP or Vista, MS makes $$$ from the sale. If anything, MS made money with people buying WindowsXP to replace vista. XP doesn't need the "patching", but the standard security updates that will continue for the next 6 years.

Point 3: Have you used Vista(x86-64) with 4GB of ram?

So... with 64bit vista with at least 4gb of RAM, its as fast as a 1GB XP computer with same CPU/mobo? (64bit OS is best with 6~8 GB of RAM)

One of the issues with some of these vista users is their violent reactions to those who HAVE THE RIGHT to not like Vista, opinion or issues based on facts - to call us "idiots" is childish. Make me think they work for Microsoft and the monkey man.

RE: Looking good.
By michal1980 on 3/4/2009 10:18:25 AM , Rating: 1
And you live on planet stupid.

Using both Vista (Since RC1) and Win7, the general exeperance is the same. Win7 does somethings better (starting, resume from hibernate). But after that, with my pc's, I see no difference in terms of performace and/or stability.

The people that think Win7 is some new godsend are the ones blind. Its a re-tweaked Vista. Actually its Vista SP2. But since Vista is so tainted because of stupid people. They renamed it.

And finally. The only reason Win7 is where it is, is because of Vista.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:28:00 AM , Rating: 3
If he lives on planet stupid, then aren't you living on the same planet?

And finally. The only reason Win7 is where it is, is because of Vista.

That's for sure. And for that, Win7 is perhaps a better OS because of it. But I don't think SP2 of vista is going to turn it into Win7. There is functionality that is not going to ever be a part of vista.

You could path the hell out of Win95, but it would never be a Windows98.

RE: Looking good.
By FITCamaro on 3/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Looking good.
By on 3/6/2009 9:48:47 AM , Rating: 2
Dumb. Just dumb.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 10:59:23 AM , Rating: 1
So with what you don't know about me, you're going to insult me and some friends who are beta-tester?

Gee, the stats in the computer industry don't LIE. Majority DOES NOT LIKE VISTA. Many of those "vista" sales where machines that ended up having XP installed over it... since companies who buy Enterpise version of MS products have their own XP licences and Dell/HP/etc sells them a PC with Vista pre-loaded.

You have no business calling me "stupid" like some 6year old because you have an OPINION on a product that is considered to be CRAP by the majority. How dare someone say otherwise that you feel the need to rip off their head and take a dump.

Duh- Win7 is based off of vista. But DUH - people like you get to beta-test it and deal with its issues. The crap called vista has allowed Win7 to be a better OS and support for 64bit to be stronger and better.

Vista is crap because a typical low-end $500 PC has 3~4GB of RAM. With many low-end $300~350 having 3gb! Who the hell needs 3GB of RAM to view MySpace, play MP3s or youtube and check their mail? When the previous OS could do the job just as well with .5~1GB of RAM with the same performance? Oh but you get transparent windows...! whoopie-do. XP can do that too.

I don't call people who love vista "idiots". But fine - good for you. Whatever, get a life. Most of us got work to do.

RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 11:11:20 AM , Rating: 3
That's because we (the real service technicians) are tired of educating the general public that Vista isn't a piece of junk.

I'm sure Apple had a good celebratory party when its FUD war succeeded.

RE: Looking good.
By walk2k on 3/4/2009 1:24:38 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sure Apple had a few laughs at Microsoft's expense, because that seems to be their M.O. instead of you know, actually innovating or improving their products... It's not like the vast majority of people who avoided Vista switched to Mac anyway, most of them just stayed with XP.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 11:14:27 AM , Rating: 2
My granma is a beta tester do you think her opion counts.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:22:48 AM , Rating: 1
I don't know? Does your "granma" know how to spell better than you? If so, then she is more qualified than you are.

And yes, why shouldn't her opinion count if she uses a Windows computer?

RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 11:30:56 AM , Rating: 2
After that blowout of spelling and grammar awesomeness you just did above, I think you should refrain from critiquing others.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 11:41:17 AM , Rating: 2
To be fair what does spelling have to do with my knowledge of IT or the stuff said here. Meny of the greatest minds have problems with something spelling is mine.

Glad I can see marketing bull though.

RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 11:45:39 AM , Rating: 4
When you type like a mongoloid gorilla wearing mittens, people tend to put less weight in your thoughts.

Go figure.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 11:55:25 AM , Rating: 2
Shame really. Ohh well if they want to be a sheep and not educate themselves nor listen to the technitions that do this for a living who is more the fool.

The one that can't spell or the stubborn half witt that thinks they are right all the time.

Mircosoft said it didn't go as smooth they never turned round and said yerr Vista is rubbish. More to the point a small select few bought into the Apple marketing stuff and tainted Vista and that made deployment hard. Thus making it less smooth of a release.

But hay you can read into these things in all different ways. All I know is that this release has been no different to when XP came out. Might point out that not all here are at an age to know about that though.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 12:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
just to point out granma is slang for grandma so hay.

RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 11:33:57 AM , Rating: 3
You are starting to sound like one of the many college know-it-alls (and others) that swore allegiance to Obama. When asked what they thought about his previous legislation decisions and policies, they answered with... uh... um.... because he's going to make change!! YEAH!! CHANGE!!

Like them, you have no idea what you are talking about. And by resorting to pointing out spelling errors in hope of sounding right, you have now effectively ended all merit of your argument.

The one that yells the loudest wins the argument right?

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Looking good.
By RandallMoore on 3/4/2009 11:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
Of course people like him/you hate the Constitution.

WTF? Are you on crack or something? How in the hell can you come up with a statement like that from this conversation? It would probably be best if you tried to never have an intelligent conversation again because it seems like you are completely unable to do so.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:34:06 PM , Rating: 2
Er.... you bought Politics into this. So who the hell did Obama get involved until you posted your message?

Shesh. okay, whoopie - I don't like vista. But hey, I give some good marks on Win7 and I'm an idiot?

Vista will never be Win7. Sure they share the same driver model. But so did Win95~Me. And most drivers for Win2000 worked with WinXP. But adding SP3 to Windows2000 didn't turn it into WinXP. So SP2 is not going to make vista into Win7.

Sometimes you guys sound like rabid Win2000 users attacking WinXP users. :)

RE: Looking good.
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:38:58 PM , Rating: 2
Political debate in a technology forum. Can the two of you be anymore retarded? Grow up a bit.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 11:37:52 AM , Rating: 2
My point is you twit is everyone pritty much can be a beta tester.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:17:07 PM , Rating: 2
My point is you twit is everyone pritty much can be a beta tester.

Lets try it this way:
My point you twit is that everyone is pretty much a beta tester.

Guess what? The people who spend $100~400 for an OS are paying that money to NOT BE A BETA TESTER!

I thank folks like you for beta-testing vista so that I and others had NO driver issues, security issues, head-aches, lock-ups, shut-down issues, slow performance, high-price hardware problems for the past two years while we continue on our solid functional older operating system.

It's my privilege to present a laurel and hearty handshake to our new town... beeeeeeta-testers.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/5/2009 3:23:34 AM , Rating: 2
Look dude the point is that as any old joe can be a beta tester that doesn't make them right. Also it was a beta it's going to have problems. So the whole statement that you mates are beta testers and they say this is totally void. Now if you said they have been IT technicians for such a company or they were some Uni teacher maybe so.

Your argument makes you sound like you are very uneducated to what Vista actually has to offer as a benefit over XP (and I am not counting the 64bit in this).

Rather then getting all fired about it go read a couple of info sheets. You could start here

RE: Looking good.
By SavagePotato on 3/4/2009 11:28:24 AM , Rating: 4
Form a coherent thought much?

Vista is only considered to be crap by imbeciles like you who would come up with idiocy like...

"Vista is crap because a typical low-end $500 PC has 3~4GB of RAM. With many low-end $300~350 having 3gb! Who the hell needs 3GB of RAM to view MySpace, play MP3s or youtube and check their mail? When the previous OS could do the job just as well with .5~1GB of RAM with the same performance? Oh but you get transparent windows...! whoopie-do. XP can do that too."

In the first place...

For a "tech" you sure fail to understand the underlying kernel and driver model changes in Vista that were both necessary and in the end a very good thing. As well as being the source of a great deal of driver issues for companies like Nvidia who just didn't have their act together.

I not only would call you an idiot, but a simpleton for not being able to grasp the basic concepts behind the underlying architecture changes in Vista, as you go off spouting stupidity about how it is a skin job with drm.

Think about it for a second and you might realize that Windows 7 is benefiting from all those changes and refining the rough edges of Vista. Sort of like win 2000 and win XP's relationship.

Though based on this incoherent rambling mess I am going to wager like most Vista bashers thinking isn't your strong suit.

RE: Looking good.
By lexluthermiester on 3/4/2009 11:49:10 PM , Rating: 1

"Mr. Potato Head!.. MR. POTATO HEAD !!! Back doors are NOT secrets!"

Sav, If you do not understand the purpose of stated quote, then you have the pity of many...

RE: Looking good.
By lexluthermiester on 3/9/2009 11:37:03 AM , Rating: 2
Aww, come on folks that was funny! Damn funny. Posters on DT are just a tough crowd.

RE: Looking good.
By TSS on 3/4/2009 12:37:26 PM , Rating: 2

go define majority. is it the same people of which i ask, "which CPU do you have", and they respond, "saywhat?"?

when i was doing my internship at the end of my system operator's education, around the time Vista Business came out, i was at a company doing remote system management. they, as system operators, made the call to downgrade most of the PC's to XP. most people never even saw vista, because by the time they got their PC's, we had downgraded it.

in fact, i did install 1 Vista laptop, after a client had subbornly refused our system operator's advice to downgrade to XP, becaue vista wasn't worth the effort of redesigning all our images and install procedures. i figure the most of the personell working on PC's thought "well they say its bad so it must be bad right?".

on the 64-bit thing, you can same the same thing about vista. " The crap called XP-64 bit has allowed Vista to be a better OS and support for 64bit to be stronger and better."

on the memory issue, is that because of Vista, or is that because of insanely cheap memory prices?

I don't call people who love vista "idiots"

they aren't idiots, but what they use is utter and complete crap? how can somebody who uses crap while something much better is out there, not be an idiot? how *do* you call them? uneducated? not conforming to majority oppinion (outcast)? the majority?

RE: Looking good.
By ezodagrom on 3/4/2009 5:23:52 PM , Rating: 2
Vista is crap because a typical low-end $500 PC has 3~4GB of RAM. With many low-end $300~350 having 3gb! Who the hell needs 3GB of RAM to view MySpace, play MP3s or youtube and check their mail? When the previous OS could do the job just as well with .5~1GB of RAM with the same performance? Oh but you get transparent windows...! whoopie-do. XP can do that too.

When I first tried vista, it was on my notebook, on july 2007. Back then it only had 1GB ram, and it was more than enough to run vista well. Several months later I added 1GB more ram, and didn't noticed any major improvement in performance.
Since I started using vista, I never went back to XP. Before I tried it I was a bit unsure if I should get vista (mainly due to all the criticism), but now I can say that vista is better than I expected...
Even though it requires better hardware than xp (well, xp requires better hardware than win98, right? :>), I find vista more stable, secure and it's prettier than xp.

RE: Looking good.
By Screwballl on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/2009 10:22:08 AM , Rating: 3
Well ME was out on it's own. XP was based on NT with a lot of improvments. Vista was a compleate rewrite new kernal etc and Windows 7 is based on Vista, hence the quick release.

In all though Windows 7 is just basicly Vista re baged as Windows 7 with bug fixes. I have been using Vista since beta but yes the default settings slow your machine down and you have to optimise it.

The stupid thing is people slated XP but since new service packs etc that has mostly been forgotten not to mention you can't take and old S**T box and put a new os and expect it to be like a new PC which alot of the Vista haters have done.

Just face it Windows 7 is Vista but without all the bits people have complained about (along with a few improvments). Prob most of it could be done with a service pack, but that won't do in Microsoft's marketing spin.

RE: Looking good.
By Alareth on 3/4/2009 10:44:06 AM , Rating: 3
For all the praise XP gets these days, people seem to have a very short memory about the fact it received just as much hate as Vista does when it was released.

The difference is that XP is now a mature OS with years of patches and improvements. If Win 7 were a few years down the road and Vista was on the market as long as XP has been IMO, we'd be seeing the same reaction and praise for Vista.

RE: Looking good.
By Mr JB on 3/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Looking good.
By dubldwn on 3/4/2009 12:33:54 PM , Rating: 4
Look dude, your spelling is a disaster. Copy and paste your posts in Word. It will underline the misspelled words and grammar errors. And you misspelled “college”. That looks really bad.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:07:17 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't trust that guy to work on computers. Someone who calls college people "know-it-alls" has some self-esteem issues. Guess we can call him "JB the I.T. Guy"

Note: I don't use a speellchecker, and a typo or wrong word here and there is no big deal from other posters or myelf. But JB the IT guy really stuck out. And even insulted his granny.

RE: Looking good.
By napalmjack on 3/4/2009 1:39:11 PM , Rating: 2
Firefox spell check FTW.

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/2009 11:09:58 AM , Rating: 1
But XP came out about a year or so after the release of Win2000. It was designed with many elements of (functionality) of Win9x with the some-what flashy look of Aqua. (Compared to the drab of Windows 3>9x>2000)

The Vista kernal isn't all new. It's still XP/2000 tech. And it still took 6 years to be what it is.

And no... many of us have seen / used Vista on a new computer, installed and it run like utter crap out of the box.

Those in the business world is NOT touching vista. They are waiting for Win7. Sure vista may/can be made better with SP2 or whatever. Who cares. Those business are not going to waste their time buying and setting up vista boxes today (which there is still plenty of software that IS NOT vista compatible) just to have to re-patch to SP2 or go with Win7 and be done with it.

That is stupid. Kind of like only an idiot would buy a GeForce 8800Ultra for $600, knowing that in 2-3 weeks the GTX 280 is coming out for $400.

I bet you, when 2014 comes along the year that XP support offically ends, there will be more XP users out there over Vista. Windows8 or Windows7se or who knows what should be out by then.

RE: Looking good.
By DrKlahn on 3/4/2009 11:18:33 AM , Rating: 2
which there is still plenty of software that IS NOT vista compatible

Then it won't work on Windows 7.

just to have to re-patch to SP2 or go with Win7 and be done with it.

Most I know in IT will wait for at least the first service pack before considering an OS for deployment. So yes Vista SP2 will make an impact on businesses considering what to deploy and Windows 7 will probably not be considered until it's first SP is released. My guess is that Windows 7 SP1 will be what many companies deploy due to the short cycle between Vista and Windows 7. But shops like ours that get the OS license with the machines will likely start deploying Vista alongside XP.

RE: Looking good.
By Master Kenobi on 3/4/2009 3:04:57 PM , Rating: 2
Since Vista and W7 share the same driver and software model application testing done to make sure it works with Vista is still relevant. If it works with Vista, it will work with Win 7.

RE: Looking good.
By Radnor on 3/4/2009 10:44:26 AM , Rating: 1
I like windows Vista 64x. If you know how to tweak it ( if you don't, Google is your Friend ) and becomes a really fast OS.

And i don't have a top of the line system. a 4800+ X2 with 4gb ram.

You really should care less for blogs, and test it yourself. I have yet to found a incompatibility i can't solve.

RE: Looking good.
By DrKlahn on 3/4/2009 11:01:29 AM , Rating: 2
Vista is simply just Windows ME version 2

It would appear you never used or supported ME to any extent. ME was problematic to the point of being useless. Vista, on the other hand, has had the same teething problems XP did. It uses more memory, it was slower in some cases, driver support wasn't there, and early device drivers could cause instability. These same complaints were voiced when XP was released, it was simply so long ago people tend to forget. I stuck with Windows 2000 Professional until at least SP1 was released for XP for these very reasons. To clear up some confusion you seem to be having, ME was built on the 9x kernel and was not part of the XP codebase. XP was built upon Windows 2k (which was built on NT4 and so on).

We deploy more Vista machines as we get in new machines. In it's current state it's been as stable as XP in our environment. A lot of it's administrative features make it a better client than XP is. Is Vista perfect? No. But ME it is not.

Windows 7 will be a further evolution of Vista in the same way Vista evolved from XP. If you have unsupported or buggy hardware that causes issues in Vista, then you will have these same problems in W7. The driver model is not changing.

RE: Looking good.
By therealnickdanger on 3/4/2009 10:21:33 AM , Rating: 2
Hey, if you're interested, I'd like to show you the top secret "Mojave" OS. It's Microsoft's next OS and it's a lot better than Vista, you should try it!

RE: Looking good.
By FITCamaro on 3/4/2009 10:53:25 AM , Rating: 1

RE: Looking good.
By Belard on 3/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Looking good.
By LumbergTech on 3/4/2009 5:14:48 PM , Rating: 2
I completely agree, I'm not against vista, but the way they carried out this so called experiment is ridiculous.

RE: Looking good.
By Malhavoc on 3/4/2009 11:20:12 AM , Rating: 3
Look at me ... I say things suck because my friends do and we all want to be cool like all the people who haven't tried Vista again after some crappy pre-alpha version!

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki