Print 110 comment(s) - last by kalak.. on Nov 10 at 2:51 PM

Microsoft's Windows 7 was looking good running on an ASUS laptop (with bamboo paneling) at WinHEC. The OS is set to ship in mid 2009, much earlier than expected.  (Source: Ina Fried/CNET News)
Windows 7 is set to drop mid-year 2009, says Microsoft

At Microsoft's Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC), an important yearly event for the tech giant, new hardware details on the upcoming Windows 7 weren't the only revelation that Microsoft had in store.  Perhaps the most significant development of the conference came as a minor clarification -- Microsoft set a solid timeframe for when it plans to release Windows 7, barring unforeseen problems.

Originally, speculation was that Microsoft might field a Windows Vista successor in 2011 or 2012 as there was over 5 years between the release of Windows XP and Windows Vista.  However, with less than glowing reception of Vista, largely due to poor hardware partner support and a large footprint, Microsoft stepped up its efforts to launch its new Windows OS, which would set right the places where Vista went wrong.

Early this year, 2010 was what some Microsoft executives were saying to expect for a release date.  However, as the year progressed, Microsoft's top executives became increasingly optimistic that the OS could be delivered in late 2009.  Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer first floated the possibility of a 2009 release earlier this year.

Microsoft director Doug Howe showed slides in a WinHEC presentation that all but confirmed a 2009 release -- and even earlier than expected.  His slides stated that Microsoft will be releasing Windows 7 mid-year, in time to be included on the machines to be sold during the holiday buying season.  Mr. Howe stated, "Definitely the holiday focus is going to be on 7."

Also revealed by Mr. Howe were more details on Microsoft's secretive Velocity program aimed at improving Windows Vista PC quality.  The program, according to Microsoft, will run through next spring, conveniently terminating at about the time that Windows 7 will be preparing to ship.

The new program was initially only open to select computer manufacturers, but will now be opened to select software and hardware partners as well.  The basic premise is that the partners will have to engineer their products to work optimally with Vista and will have to undergo rigorous certification testing.  Partners will benefit from the good publicity, and Mr. Howe revealed in a slide that Microsoft might do some advertising for their products first-hand.

No list of the criteria was given, but one of the criteria, confirmed by Mr. Howe, was the ability to boot Windows Vista and have it ready to run within 50 seconds.  Many of the Velocity-certified machines boot significantly faster than this, according to Mr. Howe, but Microsoft wanted to set a widely obtainable goal.

After the debacle of Microsoft's "Vista Capable" program, which saw the company's stickers placed on underpowered bargain machines clearly not Vista ready, Velocity is both an effort on Microsoft's part to show that it's turned over a new leave and an effort to overall improve Vista machine quality.  The program launched in July 2007.

The program targeted the sluggish system performance that was plaguing many Windows Vista machines.  Originally intended as a three month program, it was extended far past the planned termination, due to Microsoft realizing there was still much work to be done.  In particular the program aims to speed up the time it takes for Vista computers to start up, shut down, sleep, and wake up.  Other goals include that all the hardware and software is completely compatible with Vista, as compatibility is a perennial trouble-spot or Vista.

Microsoft's labs in Redmond, Wash. are in charge of the Velocity testing.

Overall, Windows observers should be able to appreciate that Microsoft sincerely seems to be trying to improve the OS.  However, what it can't improve like memory and processing footprint, should be remedied with the release of Windows 7, which has now been all but confirmed for mid next year.   

One last interesting note -- Microsoft previously stated that it would release Vista's Service Pack 2 before Windows 7 -- so that means that if it sticks with this plan, Vista SP2 is likely coming in Spring of 2009.  Stay tuned for more details on that one.

Comments     Threshold

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

I'm excited
By DEredita on 11/7/2008 10:29:12 AM , Rating: 2
I would love to hear about their plans for Windows 7 (64-bit), since most manufacturers are now pushing Vista 64- bit on most of their budget retail store laptops and desktops.
Since Microsoft is claiming Win 7 will use half the memory of Vista, should be interesting for those of us who are running Vista 64-bit now with 8GB of ram, if we decide to jump to Windows 7.

RE: I'm excited
By Spivonious on 11/7/2008 10:45:16 AM , Rating: 2
From what I've heard, Microsoft is "strongly encouraging" OEMs to go 64-bit. This is the last consumer OS from Microsoft that will have a 32-bit version.

RE: I'm excited
By StevoLincolnite on 11/7/2008 11:21:12 AM , Rating: 1
Not sure if they will Ditch 32 bit just yet, there is still Athlon XP and Pentium 4 as well as Pentium M rigs which can handle Vista just fine, and if Windows 7 will be lighter...
Which then I would imagine Windows 8 to be a little heavier... Well I think we may have another few releases with 32 bit support as of yet.

However I would love the move to 64bit everything, But when I tried Vista x64 I had nightmares of some programs having compatibility issues even while running in compatibility mode. - Mind you those programs were several years old but still handy.

RE: I'm excited
By Spivonious on 11/7/2008 11:27:15 AM , Rating: 2
Interesting. I've been running Vista x64 at home for almost a year now and have had zero compatibility problems that were due to 64-bit. A few Vista-related problems, but it was software that was originally programmed for Windows 95, so I'm not complaining.

RE: I'm excited
By StevoLincolnite on 11/7/2008 11:38:07 AM , Rating: 2
Well I had issues running: Dungeon Keeper 2 - Which worked fine in XP and Vista 32bit for me, 64bit was a no-go unfortunatly.

Plus my compiler had issues also, then again it had issues with Vista 32bit also, so that's not saying much.

And at the time the Intel IGP drivers for Vista was like Molasses, where the XP versions were head and heels above it. (although the quality has increased now somewhat...)

And it has hated all my older printers because the Manufacturers refused to update drivers!

WarCraft 2, WoW would randomly Blue Screen of Death randomly for me also, this didn't happen with Vista 32bit, so I'm guessing it was a combination of Hardware/Drivers in that regard.

Vista x64 is great for some users, it's just not for me at this stage.

RE: I'm excited
By Klober on 11/7/2008 1:48:38 PM , Rating: 2
I have a feeling there may have been other issues at play on your x64 system. WoW runs great on Vista x64 - not just for me but for several people I know who also run Vista x64. The only program I've encountered that would not run on Vista x64 was the original Lineage, which isn't a huge surprise since it was released in 1998. However, even Lineage will now run fine on my Vista x64 after a couple of updates. :)

RE: I'm excited
By Lerianis on 11/8/2008 1:57:20 AM , Rating: 2
What? How old are your 'older printers'? If they are anything less than 7 years old, Vista should have a driver for them, unless they are some 'bargain basement' brand like Koneko (yes, that is a real name of a printer maker, I saw a 'Koneko' online that someone was trying to get Vista drivers for, even had a PICTURE of the name).

Dungeon Keeper 2 also runs fine on Vista 64-bit, I've played that game myself on it.... there's got to be some incompatibility issue with your hardware somewhere, or you haven't installed the latest update for it (which fixed some 64-bit compatibility issues a long time ago).

RE: I'm excited
By TomZ on 11/7/2008 12:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting. I've been running Vista x64 at home for almost a year now and have had zero compatibility problems that were due to 64-bit.

The biggest problem for me, and which keeps me running 32-bit OSs, is that the 64-bit OS will not load 32-bit drivers, and I have certain devices that don't have 64-bit drivers available.

RE: I'm excited
By Pirks on 11/7/2008 4:36:53 PM , Rating: 2
Throw away that ancient webcam

RE: I'm excited
By TomZ on 11/7/2008 5:18:58 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I have some engineering tools that require device drivers because of their USB interfaces. And even the latest driver version doesn't support 64-bit.

RE: I'm excited
By Pirks on 11/7/2008 7:44:58 PM , Rating: 2
Ever tried to complain to their support?

RE: I'm excited
By TomZ on 11/7/2008 7:50:06 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, actually I do put in a request a couple of times a year. I wrote annother request today after writing the above post.

RE: I'm excited
By Lord 666 on 11/7/2008 4:25:54 PM , Rating: 2
The Cisco VPN client will not work on either XP or Vista x64... This is preventing me from migrating.

RE: I'm excited
By Jimbo1234 on 11/7/2008 10:52:45 PM , Rating: 2
I've been running it as well for about a year with some good surprises, and some bad.

Bad: Ancient webcam no longer works - had to buy a new one.
Bad: Logitech mouse buttons cannot be programmed - purchased new mouse
Bad: Wife's hospital VPN does not work - use Virtual PC with XP32.
Bad: Sony Vegas 9b Plainum (I'm not buying the $400 pro version) crashes every few minutes in the trimmer (tried compatability mode, etc). Vegas 8 ran fine.
Bad: Autodesk Inventor and Adobe Acrobat crash the print spooler when trying to print to a Sharp MX2300 color laser copier. Tried PCL as well as postscript drivers. Black and white Sharp copier works perfectly - go figure.

Good: Diablo II is lightning fast on my hew hardware and doesn't even need compatability mode with their latest patch.
Good: Superfetch kicks ass with 8GB of RAM.

So, it's mostly, if not all, the vendors' fault for not providing adequate drivers and / or crappy programming such as Vegas 9 Platinum which was just released. It was a waste of my $60 for the upgrade from 8.

RE: I'm excited
By Dribble on 11/7/2008 11:48:04 AM , Rating: 2
I hope there is no windows 7(32 bit). One of the problems with vista is they kept both 32 and 64 bit versions - meaning most companies then had 2 sets of drivers to write.
Partly because it was easier most concentrated on vista 32 bit drivers, and hence 64 bit ones suffered.

Now I see lots of machines out there with 32 vista and 4 gig of memory - which is silly as you can't use all the memory - but manufacturers do it because 32 bit is so much more stable, and hence means many less support problems.

Only 64 bit means companies only need to write one set of windows 7 drivers, which should hopefully mean it all works better.

RE: I'm excited
By TomZ on 11/7/2008 12:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
Only 64 bit means companies only need to write one set of windows 7 drivers, which should hopefully mean it all works better.

That's not relevant, since the same source code for a particular driver can be used to compile both 32-bit and 64-bit drivers. In other words, write once, compile twice.

The only additional effort is that you need to validate your drivers in both 32- and 64-bit environments. For small companies, I can understand the burden, but for large companies selling thousands or millions of a particular product, it really is inexcusable, IMO.

RE: I'm excited
By Dribble on 11/7/2008 1:07:21 PM , Rating: 2
There's a whole host of reasons why that's not true:
-driver code contains stuff that won't work in 64 bit - typically passing around pointers in 32 bit variables which don't automatically become 64 bit.
-driver relies on other drivers and libraries that don't exist for 64 bit.
-Vista 64 bit's additional security (Vista 32 bit is a bit of mutant child of XP and full Vista 64, and does not fully implement everything Vista 64 bit does specifically so it is more compatible with XP applications and drivers).

Proof is in the fact that most companies released 32 bit drivers long before they released any 64 bit ones (if at all), and when the 64 bit ones arrived they generally worked worse.

RE: I'm excited
By TomZ on 11/7/2008 1:30:55 PM , Rating: 2
I agree that poor programming practices and assumptions will make it impossible to use the same source code base for 32- and 64-bit. But by following Microsoft's best practices and programming conventions, it is easy to have a single source code base for both.


Also: The 64-bit version of Microsoft Windows is designed to make it possible for developers to use a single source-code base for their Win32- and Win64-based applications. To a large extent, this is also true for 32-bit and 64-bit Windows drivers .

RE: I'm excited
By emboss on 11/8/2008 2:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
The key part, which you forgot to bold, was "To a large extent". For most non-trivial drivers, there is additional twiddling that needs to be done in the 64-bit code to handle 32-bit processes. Conversely, a good 32-bit driver will handle PAE, which doesn't exist in 64-bit mode. There's also subtle differences in how DMA is handled in both platforms. And IA64 is another whole can of worms, especially with regard to memory ordering semantics.

Of course, there's a lot of code in drivers that is (or should be) 32/64-bit agnostic. But when you're hitting the hardware, or shuffling things between kernel and user space, there's different issues to take care of on the different platforms.

Things are getting better, though. The x64 support in XP/Server 2003 was a hack on top of a kludge on top of spaghetti code. Vista/Server 2008 (and the supporting DDKs) really cleans things up, and introduces a number of interfaces that are 32/64-bit agnostic, which means that if you drop support for (32- and 64-bit) XP you can reduce the amount of architecture-specific code needed in your drivers. I expect Windows 7 will improve this further, though obviously the full benefit of this new functionality will only kick in once it's acceptable to drop support for XP.

RE: I'm excited
By epobirs on 11/8/2008 4:38:33 PM , Rating: 2
There are going to be 32-bit only systems to support for a good while. Especially the highly power conscious chips going into netbooks. Likewise, the footprint for a 64-bit version of the OS (plus any 64-bit native apps) is unavoidably larger and a serious obstacle to use in systems with very limited storage.

I disagree about putting 4 GB in a 32-bit system. First of all, when I can get 4 GB of RAM for less than $50 to put in a new system, I'm not going to whine about half a gigabyte not being available. It's worth it to make the other half of that gig usable. On systems with integrated video the penalty is reduced because the memory mapped to the video is outside the addressable range. At least that is what appears to be happening in the machines I've examined.

So, at $10 a gig for the first three gigabytes, I don't mind paying another $10 for an additional 512 MB. It's a transitional thing. Eventually it'll be 64-bit almost everywhere but we aren't there yet.

“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith
Related Articles

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