backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 139 comment(s) - last by hemmy.. on Jan 15 at 10:40 AM

Users can now download unlimited copies of the Windows 7 beta.  (Source: Microsoft)
Why have just one install of Windows 7, when you can have, say, a dozen for free?

Microsoft's Windows 7 beta has been on torrents since a couple weeks ago, but last week at the Consumer Electronics Show 2009 in Las Vegas, the Windows 7 beta went official and was released to the general public.  Initially, there were 2.5 million copies available for download.  The public went wild with enthusiasm, racing to download copies, placing so much strain on Microsoft's servers that they crashed. 

Rather than responding by further limiting downloads, Microsoft decided the wild demand is a good thing and it has moved in the opposite direction, dropping the download limit entirely.  Says Microsoft Windows communications manager Brandon LeBlanc, "Due to an enormous surge in demand, the download experience was not ideal so we listened and took the necessary steps to ensure a good experience.  During that time you will have access to the beta even if the download number exceeds 2.5 million."

Users can now download and test as many copies of the Windows 7 beta as they want.  The beta brings many improvements over Vista's user interface, including jump lists, a revamped task bar, and easier networking.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer could not hide his enthusiasm for the product at CES 2009, stating, "We are on track to deliver the best version of Windows ever. We're putting in all the right ingredients -- simplicity, reliability and speed, and working hard to get it right, and to get it ready."

In addition to an improved user interface, Steve Ballmer says that Windows 7 "should boot more quickly, have longer battery life, and fewer alerts."

Microsoft is hoping the excitement surrounding Windows 7 will reinvigorate its sales.  Microsoft saw its operating system market share drop below 90 percent for the first time in many years, while Apple's OS market share, fueled by strong sales continued to grow, almost reaching 10 percent, according to a recent survey by Net Applications.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Windows 7 good so far
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/12/2009 2:10:06 PM , Rating: 5
I downloaded the beta and installed it on my X300... it recognized all of my hardware except for the fingerprint reader. I used the troubleshoot wizard and Windows 7 directed me to the place to download the driver/utility straight from the manufacturer's website -- nifty.

So far, I haven't really noticed much difference from Windows Vista Business as far as speed goes, but I have run into an EXTREME annoyance -- Paul Thurrot has talked about this in length -- it's the damn taskbar areas.

Microsoft has made the lame move of tossing taskbar icons and running applications into the same area/space with no differentiation in icons. So if you have a taskbar icon set in the bottom left for Firefox, IE, and say Thunderbird or Outlook (like in previous versions of Windows), you cannot tell them apart from running programs without at first rolling the mouse over it.

Even after a few days of TRYING to get used to it, it's STILL annoying.

Paul Thurrot describes it much better than I can here:

http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_simple.asp




RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/12/2009 2:12:55 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, I turned on the text labels very soon after installing Win7. I disliked the grouping icon only method in the Dock and I dislike it just as much in the taskbar.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By GoodBytes on 1/12/2009 3:36:32 PM , Rating: 3
Yea I did this as well.

One thing that prevents me from jumping on it, is that when you maximize a window, the new taskbar and windows boarder don't turn black/opaque. This transparency boarder when a window is maximize is not nice, it ads an amateurish touch to the OS UI, and most importantly it's useless and distracting, especially if you have an animated, bright or switching background.

I understand if people don't agree with me, we are all different, but it would be great to have an option to be able to do this.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/12/2009 3:55:18 PM , Rating: 4
An option would be nice.

In fact, MS had it opaque in Vista because they decided in terms of usability it was better (and I agree!). However, they got huge volumes of feedback from users asking why it went opaque so they changed it for Win7 lol.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By erikejw on 1/12/2009 4:49:10 PM , Rating: 1
They have gone for "simplicity".

Does that mean they have scrapped all DRM that was built in in Vista but not in XP?


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/12/2009 4:57:00 PM , Rating: 4
Why would they remove the ability to properly playback things like bluray discs while still allowing normal playback of non-drm'd media?


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By bfonnes on 1/12/2009 6:01:04 PM , Rating: 2
It's all about reducing service calls... If you've been using Microsoft software for long, it's easy to see the after effects of the bean counters they employ.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By AntiM on 1/12/2009 3:55:13 PM , Rating: 5
If they're smart, they will only have 2 versions, "Business" and "Home". None of this "Ultimate", "Business", "Home Premium", "Home Basic" , "Media Center" crap.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/12/2009 3:56:06 PM , Rating: 3
Supposed to be three primary versions this time:

Home Premium, Business (Enterprise), Ultimate. Seems fair enough.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By semo on 1/12/2009 5:11:41 PM , Rating: 5
if there's going to be only one home version why call it premium. premium compared to what? are they trying to make things simple or for simple people?


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By 9nails on 1/12/2009 9:39:50 PM , Rating: 3
What really is the difference between these? Application licenses? Performance? Stability?

I mean, for all intents and purposes, they're the exact same thing with very minor distinctions (beyond cost). If home got Xbox Live and Halo 3; or Business got Office 2007 Std; or Premium had Office 2007 Pro, Expression, and Visio then I'd understand more about the need for multiple SKU's.

As it is, I see no reason why they cannot be the same install DVD and you check on/off what portions of Windows 7 that you like.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Diesel Donkey on 1/13/2009 12:12:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
As it is, I see no reason why they cannot be the same install DVD and you check on/off what portions of Windows 7 that you like.


Well, with Vista all the versions were on the same DVD, and the product code enabled the version you had paid for. I suppose that's different, though, from the modular approach you are suggesting.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By RamarC on 1/13/2009 10:45:51 AM , Rating: 3
"business" has certain features that most home users don't need (ability to login in to domains, iis, etc.). "business" also lacks certain features that would be considered a distraction in the workplace (such as media center). "ultimate" merges all the features of "home" and "business".


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Spookster on 1/13/2009 11:30:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Supposed to be three primary versions this time:

Home Premium, Business (Enterprise), Ultimate. Seems fair enough.


I feel like i'm buying gasoline. I'd like a tank of regular please.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By spread on 1/12/2009 5:44:53 PM , Rating: 2
There's also "Enterprise", and the N & K versions of everything that deal with the Windows Media Player 'issue'.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By crystal clear on 1/13/2009 2:47:40 AM , Rating: 2

Windows Vista Home Premium Edition => Windows 7 Home Premium Edition
Windows Vista Business Edition => Windows 7 Professional Edition
Windows Vista Ultimate Edition => Windows 7 Ultimate Edition

http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008...


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By PAPutzback on 1/12/2009 2:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
I just decided not to pin anything down there.

But I don'y like the fact that there is an extra step to see all your drives in my computer\explorer now when you access it via the Windows + E shortcut. Now you get the libraries by default and have to click on my computer in the left frame. Maybe there is some setting somewhere to set the preferred library to My Computer.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By jcampbell on 1/12/2009 2:19:15 PM , Rating: 3
Actually there is a way to tell what is running and what's not...check the bottom of the page:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/windows-7-b...
I agree though, it's not the easiest thing to see or get used to.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By 306maxi on 1/12/2009 4:36:52 PM , Rating: 4
Rather than pinning things I've just brought the good old quicklaunch toolbar back

See below for how to do it.

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/archive/2009/01/0...


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By omnicronx on 1/12/2009 2:49:31 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Microsoft has made the lame move of tossing taskbar icons and running applications into the same area/space with no differentiation in icons. So if you have a taskbar icon set in the bottom left for Firefox, IE, and say Thunderbird or Outlook (like in previous versions of Windows), you cannot tell them apart from running programs without at first rolling the mouse over it.
Wrong, programs that are open are highlighted with a box around the icon, and if you have multiple instances of this program it shows two boxes around it. I thought the same thing at first, and then noticed this after using it for around 30 minutes. It could be a bit more obvious, but people have got so used to windows that these changes are easily overlooked.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/12/2009 3:07:20 PM , Rating: 2
I realize that now, but the difference is so slight that is a worthless distinction.

It's like saying, "My car isn't white, it's Arctic White Pearl". It's not a distinction that can be made quickly on the fly like separate Quick Launch/running taskbar icons.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By inighthawki on 1/12/2009 4:31:08 PM , Rating: 2
I guess its not the case with you, but i myself can EASILY see an immediately notice the difference between running programs and the links. If you cannot tell if the taskbar icon has a big glowing box around it then I'm truly sorry to hear that...

And if you don't like it, theres a way to change it back to use labels (and optionally small icons) for a classic feeling, just with some enhanced functionality.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By TomZ on 1/12/2009 4:35:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think it just takes a little getting used to. I'm not sure whether I like it or not yet, but it is certainly better when you have 10-20 windows/apps open like I typically do throughout the day.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Spivonious on 1/12/2009 5:17:47 PM , Rating: 2
I can easily see it too. I still don't like it though. Opening a new instance of an already open app now requires two clicks. (unless you're clever enough to try middle-clicking).

I hope everyone is taking advantage of the "Send Feedback" tool included with the Beta.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By TomZ on 1/12/2009 5:23:45 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Opening a new instance of an already open app now requires two clicks.
Shift-click does the same thing.

Also, Shift+Ctrl click launches the app as Administrator. Kinda cool.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By inighthawki on 1/12/2009 5:29:42 PM , Rating: 2
In response to both posts below me, thats cool! I didnt know of that feature until just now. Seems like an excellent way to open new instances if you ask me.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/12/2009 5:33:39 PM , Rating: 3
Even better you can just use the middle mouse button like in a web browser =)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Chocobollz on 1/14/2009 1:54:59 PM , Rating: 2
Or.. using mouse gestures like in Opera :-)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By omnicronx on 1/12/2009 4:37:31 PM , Rating: 2
I understand how you may have missed it initially, I did too, but thats because I was not looking for it, not because the difference was minimal. Once you know the difference there is no mistake of which programs are open, and which are not, i.e there is very much so a distinction that can be made quickly on the fly. OSX does something very similar and as such seems to work pretty well. In fact I think its much more obvious than OSX.

And then of course there is always the option of turning it off completely.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By OCedHrt on 1/13/2009 12:38:26 AM , Rating: 5
Personally, I think you were so intent on finding something wrong with the task bar you didn't even look :)

It is ridiculously obvious and was the first thing I noticed about the task bar. But keep in mind, the concept that Microsoft is trying to push here is that there shouldn't be any difference to whether it is just an icon or it is a running instance.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:22:28 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, im sorry, but i guess its not designed for blind ppl and retards. So sad... to oslight to tell the difference? you just look for reasons to bash windows? I have not once had issues with the taskbar. and though i found out about the multiple window box just a couple days ago, i still never had any issues with that.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:27:14 PM , Rating: 2
*too slight


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By gmyx on 1/12/2009 2:54:26 PM , Rating: 2
I've been using 7 as well for a couple of days. Other than major crashes with my Creative Card that Creative refuses to support, I have no complaints.

As for the task bar, I love the changes. And there is a very slight visual indicator of what is running. I never used to use the quick launch because it took too much space but I love the pin / task bar merge because is make it more clean. I just put there what is in use most of the time.

So far, so good. It may even make me re-convert from Ubuntu.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Chudilo on 1/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: Windows 7 good so far
By UNHchabo on 1/12/2009 4:08:27 PM , Rating: 2
Good luck with your out-of-date kernel. Get exploited much?


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By omnicronx on 1/12/2009 4:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
I've used Ubuntu for a long time now, and uptimes compared to other distros just plain sucks, so I really don't know what you are talking about. There is a reason its rarely used as a server OS, the field in which nix OS's traditionally dominate.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By UNHchabo on 1/12/2009 5:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
Very true. Ubuntu does offer a server install, but it's meant as a desktop OS.

Now if you want to see crazy uptimes WITHOUT sacrificing security (at least two Linux kernel updates in the past year have been critical security issues), then check out the various flavors of BSD.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Yawgm0th on 1/12/2009 6:05:29 PM , Rating: 2
Just use Slackware. FreeBSD is the way to go for ultimate security, but Slackware is ten times easier and is still a very stable and secure Linux environment.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By omnicronx on 1/13/2009 11:11:19 AM , Rating: 2
I used slackware exclusively before ubuntu was released ;) Great OS, I could keep my box on for a 6 months and it would perform the same as day one. Its just too bad they have not kept up with the features of other distros.(although this was somewhat the point of slackware, only the basics)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By gmyx on 1/13/2009 8:33:13 AM , Rating: 2
Two words: WINE and games. Many OSS games are available on the windows platform and WINE just doesn't cut it if you're not playing what the devs play. I've got an huge collection of games that refuses to play under wine.

Aside from inherent better security, linux does not have much to offer me besides too many google searches because you need to modify yet another somewhat obscure config file. That is my biggest gripe, Ubuntu has a nice GUI with some configuration, but anything more than basic config requires modifying config files. In windows, most important config can be done in the GUI. This is something that Vista achived and Windows 7 improves on.

In my opinion, Linux is too *techky* for the average user. Hell, have a file system error and all ubuntu does is give up and tells you to run fschk (i think) and not in a certain way, but we wont tell you the right way of doing it or hell, even do it ourselves. An OS should not rely on googling your answers but rather make a system that can self-recover and be easily administered without the need modify config files (or registry in win).

End rant

P.S. I have been using Ubuntu exclusively for about a year now.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Chaser on 1/13/2009 9:02:40 AM , Rating: 5
I fell into the Unbuntu hype. Tried it. Not all my hardware worked after I ran the installation. Trying to locate resolutions or workarounds gives you these vague references worded with techky speak.

I can't speak for everyone but I need an OS to work out of the box. I have work to do. I don't have the time or patience to nurture my little fashion statement that no one cares about.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/12/2009 5:41:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Other than major crashes with my Creative Card that Creative refuses to support, I have no complaints.


LMAO! It's nice to see that some things never change :-)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By gmyx on 1/13/2009 8:36:27 AM , Rating: 2
Yup. It barely works ATM (horrible sound). time for open heart (case) surgery.

Thanks to creative, there is now to manufactures that I refuse to buy stuff from: ACER and creative. ACER is because of support (re: no bios updates after 6months to a year after release and horrible support)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Dark Legion on 1/13/2009 2:25:42 AM , Rating: 2
Try the Daniel K driver. Since Creative wouldn't release a good sound driver for Vista, he wrote his own, and I have been using it since I read the DT article about it. I'm also using it now in Win7, and it works just as well as in Vista.

http://www.mininova.org/tor/1281389

(If you don't have Audigy there should also be some for X-Fi and others.)


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By gmyx on 1/13/2009 8:40:51 AM , Rating: 2
My card is even older than that! SB Live Value. I'm slightly hearing impaired so 'high quality' means nothing to me. I can hear and understand it: good enough.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By omnicronx on 1/13/2009 11:15:44 AM , Rating: 3
Still better than onboard ;) Little trick about the SBlive value though, the rear speaker port (or black port on many models) actually has a better DAC then the fronts, which was done to save on costs ;) So if you can run on dual stereo, or if the KX audio driver(switches fronts out output to rears) works on Vista/7, you will get better sound quality.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By walk2k on 1/12/2009 5:08:16 PM , Rating: 2
You can download it as many times as you need but I think you only get 1 CD key per MS Live/whatever it's called login/ID.

I know when I tried to download it the 2nd time it just gave me the same CD key.

I guess you could create multiple dummy accounts though.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Diesel Donkey on 1/13/2009 12:24:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can download it as many times as you need but I think you only get 1 CD key per MS Live/whatever it's called login/ID.


I don't think that's true in all cases. The download link wouldn't work for me in Firefox, so I went back in with IE7. In so doing, I got 2 product keys. It's true, however, that I only actually successfully downloaded it once.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Screwballl on 1/12/2009 7:54:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft has made the lame move of tossing taskbar icons and running applications into the same area/space with no differentiation in icons.


That is an area/option that I absolutely love, as I tend to have 5-10 windows open at the same time, this cuts down on the clutter and space used on the ever shrinking taskbar. Better to have it the way used in Windows 7 than to have "Internet Explorer 7^", "Firefox 4^" (as examples) and trying to pick from similarly titled windows.
Yes it will take some getting used to... but I used a similar setup on linux for the past year or two so it is not really that different for me.

I like the "Quick Launch meets Taskbar" setup they used.

As an anti-Vista tech since beta, W7 is just different enough that I may end up suggesting it, pending they fix a few real annoyances.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By jonmcc33 on 1/12/2009 9:09:42 PM , Rating: 2
I don't agree with anything Paul Thurrott says. He cannot tell what applications are what and which ones are open in the new taskbar? Hello! Only applications YOU pin there or YOU open are there.

Anyway, to Jason Mick, I wonder how long it will be till Apple allows 2.5 million people to best test the latest and greatest Mac OS X...


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By cyriene on 1/12/2009 10:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
You can tell if the icon is an open program or not by looking at the outline around the icon. The icon will be 'boxed' if it is open, an not if the program is not open.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By OCedHrt on 1/13/2009 12:35:04 AM , Rating: 3
You can tell the difference. Easily. If a program is running, then the taskbar shows it as a button (bordered, and kind of bulging out), if it is not running, then it is merely an icon. It is SIMPLE to tell the difference.

I really don't know why so many people are saying they can't tell the difference unless they didn't even try it.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By androticus on 1/13/2009 1:19:35 AM , Rating: 2
They need to do what MacOS does: put an always-on indicator on the icon to show it is active -- I actually liked this feature of the Mac (moving from Windows) -- I just put all my most frequently used apps there, and the less frequent ones I look in the app menu.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Josh7289 on 1/13/2009 3:00:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft has made the lame move of tossing taskbar icons and running applications into the same area/space with no differentiation in icons. So if you have a taskbar icon set in the bottom left for Firefox, IE, and say Thunderbird or Outlook (like in previous versions of Windows), you cannot tell them apart from running programs without at first rolling the mouse over it.


Um, yes you can. Running programs have a glass-looking square surrounding their icon.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By Domicinator on 1/13/2009 4:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
You're really having that much trouble using the task bar? I hated it the first night, but this is day 3 of the beta for me, and I am using the task bar CONSTANTLY. It more or less eliminates the need to constantly go to the start menu and find what you need. And I find it quite obvious to tell what's going on with each app you have pinned to the task bar. If it has a box around it, it's in use. If it is tabbed, there are multiple windows in use. If it is partially green, that means it's downloading something. What's so confusing? I think it's great. It allows me to do more stuff with my windows yet maintain a "clean" desktop.

I also like how the windows themselves behave. Just today I used the left and right windows concept (drag one to the left for half the screen and one to the right for the other half) so that I could check some websites while watching a movie at the same time. Yes, this could be done before Windows 7, but not this easily. I also like the "shaking" motion that puts the window on top and the concept of dragging the window to the top of the screen to maximize. I'm already using all of these things regularly and they really seem to make things flow better.

I am really behind this product. It is running WAY WAY WAY better on my laptop than Vista did, it recognized all the hardware on my laptop right away except for the Intel RAID controller. It's running all my software with no problems. Even my new web cam is working fine. Boot ups are a breath of fresh air. On Vista when booting up on my laptop, I would literally get home, boot the thing up, and then go change clothes and put all my stuff away. When I got back from doing all that, Vista would be up and running and responsive. Windows 7 is up and ready to mere seconds after I log in.

I am loving it so far. I hope the public gives this OS a fair chance. I hope it doesn't become a whipping boy like Vista did. (Vista didn't even deserve 90% of the criticism it got.) I hope it's a success for Microsoft. I do not want to live in a world where my only two choices are OSX or Linux. I think Windows 7 is a strong candidate for a return to OS glory for MS.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By ChronoReverse on 1/13/2009 5:04:54 PM , Rating: 2
I've put the taskbar back to the default mode in accordance to my policy of giving new things a chance. Still, it would be a great usability improvement if left-clicking the "stack" in the taskbar immediately brought up the top-most window of that stack.


RE: Windows 7 good so far
By scrapsma54 on 1/13/2009 10:20:20 PM , Rating: 2
I Have to say Windows 7 feels absolutely solid. Other than the fact that I run into a couple snags like my ipod and zune not wanting to connect or Ati software not wanting to install but everything was fixable. Performance is solid and my games perform noticably better. Hmmm. I see promise.


Great PR Move by Microsoft
By chizow on 1/12/2009 2:38:47 PM , Rating: 3
This will really help MS shed some of the negative image and publicity of Vista, as you'll have the Mojave-effect by allowing Vista-haters to try the new OS for free. I'd expect the openness of this Beta also comes from Microsoft's confidence in Win 7, which is a stark contrast to Vista's launch.

If Microsoft really wants to increase Win 7's acceptance and adoption rate of legitimate OS copies, they'll offer full license at RTM at significantly reduced prices, say $100-150 to fully activate a Beta copy. This would also help them in the long run as they shift back to a strategy of releasing a new OS every 2-3 years.




RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By anotherdude on 1/12/2009 3:03:09 PM , Rating: 3
Yep. It looks like MS is going to win the PR/perception battle before 7 is ever released and the Apple propaganda machine, er, the Mac vs. PC ads, can even rightly comment on it (the inevitable 'lipstick on a pig' maybe?).

In fact, the early reviews have so far been so positive it looks like the momentum is decisively in 7's favor and even the ABM blogging crowd is having a hard time getting any traction.

As for giving beta users a reduced cost, nice idea from a marketing perspective, at least for the beta users, but a little hard to justify to others I think.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By UNHchabo on 1/12/2009 4:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As for giving beta users a reduced cost, nice idea from a marketing perspective, at least for the beta users, but a little hard to justify to others I think.


I think it would make it seem like they were actively encouraging regular (non-technical) users to try the beta, which would likely be a bad idea.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By Spivonious on 1/13/2009 10:41:48 AM , Rating: 2
Didn't they give Vista beta testers who reported 5 or more bugs a free license for Vista?

I imagine they'll do the same for 7(6.1).


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By Denithor on 1/12/2009 3:06:46 PM , Rating: 3
First part, yes, being able to test run the new hotrod before having to buy it is nice. I have to wonder though - if there's enough outcry about certain features will they make any changes or just ignore the masses?

Second portion of your post - not gonna happen. M$ has a pricing strategy in place and I seriously doubt they have any intentions of leaving a crumb of potential profit on the table.

Their pricing does piss me off. I mean, buying even an OEM copy of their OS costs 1/4 of a complete cheapo build (4850e/780G/4GB/500GB/case/LCD/keyboard+mouse = $350).


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By chizow on 1/12/2009 3:44:11 PM , Rating: 2
Well there's a few ways to look at it, you can charge high prices and reduce adoption rate as users cling to their legacy OS (ex: XP to Vista) or you can charge much less and have users more users willing to embrace a new OS every 2-3 years.

MS has said numerous times that they want to get back to releasing new OSes every 2-3 years (95,98/SE,ME,2K,XP) and that they made critical mistakes with the transition and development time of Vista and that Win7 was going to be a step in that direction to fix their release schedule.

They've also shown they're willing to change some of their pricing models to increase market share, as they recently did with their Office Home/One Care bundle for $60-70. I believe they've also looked at doing some subscription based payment models, like cheaper versions of MSDN/Technet subs. Similarly, its not uncommon for MS to bundle additional licenses at much cheaper prices (they offered Vista HP licenses for $50 to anyone with a copy of Ultimate). In the end all the alternatives would be better than the bootleg alternative of people just pirating their software from Microsoft's end.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By Bateluer on 1/12/2009 4:10:21 PM , Rating: 4
Agreed. The license for the OS shouldn't cost more than 100-150 for a full retail license, and half that for an upgrade/OEM license.

With so many free alternatives that improve multiple times a year by leaps and bounds, and with stiff competition from OSX, MS cannot charge 400 for their full fledged OS.

I would like to say, thought, that I have been impressed with Windows 7 in my 18 hours of use. And that, while OSX seems to be cheaper than Windows, Newegg has Leopard for 155, the vastly inflated cost of a Mac completely negates that advantage. Sure, there's the hackintosh, but thats not exactly supported. Apple could sell a lot more copies of OSX by selling it for PCs as well as Macs.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By Spivonious on 1/13/2009 12:50:00 PM , Rating: 3
They could, but then they'd have to support more than three hardware configs. People would be complaining left and right about how OS X doesn't support their 6 year-old sound card, or runs like crap with 128MB of RAM. Apple's not stupid.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By omnicronx on 1/13/2009 4:05:36 PM , Rating: 2
Its kind of a double edge sword though..

Market share vs increased profits..

Apples own business model limits how far they can go, while they are currently hovering at around 10%, I just don't think it is possible for them to get above 15-20% with their current model. (i.e proprietary hardware)

When you can buy 2-3 business computers for the price of one Mac, you can see where problems may arise.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By Spivonious on 1/14/2009 9:46:57 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly, and I don't think Apple is willing to invest the time in testing that allowing other OEMs to sell OS X machines would require.

It seems that computers aren't Apple's main focus anyway; the iPod/iPhone seems to be their main money-maker.


RE: Great PR Move by Microsoft
By omnicronx on 1/13/2009 4:00:20 PM , Rating: 2
OEM = one system only..

People forget this sometimes, although you can obviously install it on as many computers as you like, legally you are only suppose to have it on one.

I'm pretty sure retail has a limit of 3 (not sure though)


Upgrading
By Sulphademus on 1/12/2009 2:02:31 PM , Rating: 3
The real test for me will be how smoothly an upgrade install from Vista to 7 is. We shall soon see.




RE: Upgrading
By ebakke on 1/12/2009 2:27:50 PM , Rating: 2
Or from XP to 7


RE: Upgrading
By Joey B on 1/12/2009 2:46:37 PM , Rating: 2
From what I have read, there is no direct upgrade from XP to 7. You will have to upgrade to Vista first, then 7, or install 7 over XP.


RE: Upgrading
By techone on 1/12/2009 3:32:24 PM , Rating: 2
If you have trouble you can do a install over the top of XP as a fresh installation. Windows 7 will mark your old OS as .old but still keep it on the drive.

I am dual booting Windows 7 and XP Pro right now. Works really slick - playing with Windows Media Center Gadget mostly.


RE: Upgrading
By Bateluer on 1/12/2009 3:35:32 PM , Rating: 2
Ugh, I never bother with upgrade installs. I back up crucial data and wipe my C: partition, and sometimes my app partition too, depends.


RE: Upgrading
By tdawg on 1/12/2009 3:36:07 PM , Rating: 2
I upgraded my laptop from Vista HP to Windows 7 and it went smoothly. It takes longer than a fresh install, since it migrates settings and apps to the new install, but once it's up and running, it works just as well as a fresh install, as far as I can tell (I did a fresh install of Windows 7 on my desktop).


RE: Upgrading
By joex444 on 1/12/2009 5:40:46 PM , Rating: 3
I tried this from x64 Vista SP1 to x64 Windows 7. Total fail. It would get done with the last item (Completing Windows Setup), then give a BSOD. When it reboots, it said a service could not be started, press OK to reboot and try the installation again. Except when it reboots the boot options screen only has Windows 7, as now Vista is gone, and theres no option to restart the install. It will again give that error message and restart.

Thinking this was just a glitch, and since I had made a backup of the drive before installing Windows 7, I restored Vista and tried again -- same thing. I tried it again, except when I restored Vista I disabled all non-Microsoft services and startup options, rebooted, and then tried the Windows 7 install -- no luck!

The only way I did get this to work was to do a clean install. After finding that the phone driver does not recognize Windows 7 as a valid OS (its looking for XP or Vista x64), I was unable to charge my phone so I had to go back to Vista. However, on my secondary PC I have Windows 7 and I do like it. At the moment, I can't say if I like 7 or Vista better.


RE: Upgrading
By GeorgeH on 1/12/2009 5:47:06 PM , Rating: 2
For my laptop, a Vista (actually Server2008) -> Win7 install was the only way to go. Multiple fresh install attempts (using both x86 and 64) all failed, but upgrade attempts from Server2008 worked flawlessly.


Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By kilkennycat on 1/13/2009 7:01:19 PM , Rating: 1
Microsoft is taking us on a carefully-orchestrated marketing and money-grubbing ride. Please tell me what is in Windows 7 that cannot be provided FREE in a Vista update? For the long-suffering Vista users, many of whom had Vista thrust on them when they bought their computers, (and the few Vista fans) a FREE update to Windows 7 would be just compensation. You can bet that the upgrade path to the next Microsoft Holy Grail ( er, Windows 7) is going to cost all upgraders a big bunch of money. And there seems to be plenty of followers of Pied Piper Ballmer....

As for penetration into those Business, Government and Educational areas that have resisted the adoption of Vista because of incompatibility with XP apps, regardless of Vista's emulation modes, forget it.... Windows 7 brings nothing in the way of improved XP backward-compatibility.

Bill and Stevie have forgotten that during the 6-year life of XP there was the biggest boom ever in the business and industrial penetration of PCs and in the development of thousands of XP-compatible applications. Quite a few of these programs in professional applications also have custom hardware peripheral support and drivers. Since Vista SP3 (er, I mean Windows 7) does not offer a user-selectable 100% XP-backward-compatibility mode for 3rd party applications, any incentive for customers with incompatible XP-apps to "upgrade" from XP immediately vaporizes. The upgrade paths to compatibility with Vista/Win 7 for many of the applications themselves are either horrendously expensive or do not exist. And any such upgrades usually mean a complete re-evaluation (and costly) cycle by a professional customer before release to the customer's organization. Many US and UK government agencies and educational organizations have refused to adopt Vista because of such incompatibility issues. I believe Intel has not generally adopted Vista for PC workstation use as an alternate to XP because of compatibility issues with third-party and custom applications.

And citing from my own personal experience: I own Premier Pro 1.5, with a Matrox hardware accelerator as a plug-in for PP1.5. Works excellently on my quad-core machine. Does everything that I need. However, it does not function under Vista. Adobe has seen fit to never update PP1.5 to run under Vista. They only offers the CS4 video software tools at a minimum of $700 upgrade fee. CS4 does not support the Matrox device, which has both real-time digital and analog video and audio i/o. I have zero current need for the extra "bells and whistles" of the Adobe CS4 Video Tools. Maybe when Adobe evolves to CS6 or CS7.... Hence no Vista/Windows 7 for me in the near-term.

My personal scenario gives a picture of some of the issues behind the reluctance to adopt Vista (er, Windows 7) by the users of many "professional" and "semi-professional" 3rd-party XP applications. The upgrade cost and the cost of re-evaluating the upgraded application, just for an OS change, does not make financial sense - even more so in these recession times. Imho, Windows 7 can only truly be called "Windows 7" when it embraces current XP applications by embedding user-selectable 100% XP-compatibility (including XP hardware driver compatibility) for third-party applications. Otherwise, I predict a huge wave of discontent from current still-XP professional users, demanding the continued availability of XP and with threats otherwise to move to Linux on the PC for future applications.




RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By Domicinator on 1/13/2009 8:27:50 PM , Rating: 2
I partly agree with what you're saying. At its core, Windows 7 is Vista. But to discount it as simply a service pack is ludicrous. The performance gains for me so far just in the beta have been enormous. My laptop that could barely handle Vista is handling Windows 7 without breaking a sweat. They have done things under the hood to Windows 7 to make it better than Vista. They have also integrated new organizational things into the OS that appear to be laying the framework for the new WinFS file system. I'm not sure that some of this stuff would have been easily slapped into a service pack. Maybe I'm wrong.

And what would you have Microsoft do? Just keep flogging people to death with Vista? Exit the OS market altogether? Keep trying to tell people like yourself that Vista is good? How has that worked out for them so far? If you ran a business, would you continue on that course? What Vista really is and what the public perceives it to be are two WAY different things. The problems you're having personally: are those Microsoft's fault or Adobe's fault? Is Microsoft supposed to never change one thing about their software just so other companies don't have to change theirs? Or is it possible that Adobe is trying to take advantage of the situation and charge you to upgrade using Vista as the scapegoat? Vista's already the whipping boy, right? Might as well blame your upgrade costs/woes in Adobe applications on Vista too. Please.

I can't blame Microsoft for trying to shake the Vista moniker. Whether it's all warranted or not, the bad press surrounding Vista has turned it into an albatross. In my experience, Vista has been stable, secure, and reliable after the first two months of its release, and especially after SP1. For the rest of the planet that only seems to listen to Apple commercials, I guess Vista is just crap without anyone even trying it. But in the effort to shed the bad press and get Windows 7 out to market (offering a wide open beta is a good start), I feel that as the owner of a retail copy of Vista Home Premium AND a beta tester for Windows 7, I should get some kind of break on price considering the little time Vista was the flagship OS. I would like to see Windows 7 have the longevity of Windows XP. There are some good ideas in there that will only get better with age.


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By kilkennycat on 1/13/2009 10:02:04 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The problems you're having personally: are those Microsoft's fault or Adobe's fault? Is Microsoft supposed to never change one thing about their software just so other companies don't have to change theirs?


You ignore a key issue in Microsoft's on-going "force-our-OS-down-the-customer's-throat" strategy. XP has been FORCIBLY discontinued by Microsoft (except for OEM installs), thus applications that run perfectly well under XP have to be then considered for expensive, forcibly-timed (by MS) counter-productive upgrades to run under Vista, especially apps that have been widely distributed within professional organizations. Expect the real backlash from professional volume XP users when Windows 7 is released and they discover for themselves (if they have not downloaded the beta) that Windows 7 XP compatibility is as poor as with Vista.

My issue with the Adobe software was given as just one example of the screwing of users by MICROSOFT. The application runs perfectly satisfactorily under XP. And I am sticking with XP for this workstation, so the issue is not at all a problem for me. In fact, I acquired a couple of spare retail copies of XP Pro before Microsoft forced it out of fashion. Never know when I might have occasion to install XP on more PCs.....or sell them at a large profit :-) :-)

Why a mere ** OS ** change, regardless of an Aero UI and all the other Vista bells, should cause an application to cease functioning is a reflection on the poor core structure, lack of OS design discipline and utter customer-disdain that Microsoft has these days with regard their operating system product iterations. And they expect the silly customers to come along for the ride by also deliberately witholding upgrade features with no bearing on the OS itself from the previous generation of OS currently in use by millions ( e.g: the disgusting $$-self-serving witholding of Dx10 from Windows XP)

From the past, the transition from Win 98 to XP was far less painful than XP to Vista in terms of apps that failed to function properly. Vista/Windows7 is a poor excuse for an Operating System. Yes, it has a nice wrapper of a pretty UI and useful MS-developed applications that should be available separate from the OS itself, but MS knows perfectly well that separation of this wrapper means the death-knell of its OS business. Integration of the wrapper bloats the OS, but, hey no surprise, we all know that MS specialises in writing memory-consuming inefficient code.


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By Domicinator on 1/14/2009 12:02:57 AM , Rating: 2
I see. You really DO believe that Microsoft should never change their kernel, should never change their UI, and should never put out a new product again. If they were not such an evil company, they would just stay with XP for the rest of eternity.

When is the last time you even used Vista? You do realize that the compatibility is WORLDS better than it was at launch, right? Yes yes, I know, your Adobe software doesn't work. Well, is Microsoft forcing you to stop using XP? No. Keep using XP. If I had software I needed I would do the same. But don't act like Microsoft is somehow "forcing" you to use Vista or Windows 7.

Both Windows Vista and Windows 7 are using a more stable and more secure kernel, improved audio stack (one of the biggest culprits of security holes), and more modern UI. If you don't like it, keep using your XP. But the world around you IS going to move on. The evidence from the short time Windows 7 has been in beta is pointing to users being a lot more impressed than they were with Vista. Why? Performance and compatibility. I'm seeing several stories out there just like mine: I had a new laptop that struggled with Vista. I loaded Windows 7 beta which recognized all my hardware instantly and ran faster on my machine. Therefore, I am incredibly happy with Windows 7 so far.

Microsoft knew they made a big improvement here that would speak for itself. They put it out in a wide open beta because they knew it would get people buzzing. Mission accomplished. I'm not falling for some marketing scam, I'm simply going by what's in front of my own eyes. Windows 7 runs faster and is more compatible out of the box on my laptop than Vista was. In fact, aside from the RAID controller that doesn't have a driver yet, it's COMPLETELY compatible.

So you sit there and call shenanigans all you want. Until you actually try Windows 7, you have no credibility on the subject. Judging by my own 3 day experience with Windows 7 Beta, it's a winner.


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
as far as compatibility. I run windows 7 with (just for the heck of trying things, that's what betas are for, to be broken) xp drivers, xp software and all sorts of home brew software mixes. so far only creative has given me some issues that were quickly fixed by switching to compatibility mode.

and everything actually does run faster in windows 7.

i say win 7 would be the mathematical mean between vista and xp + awesomeness. in the sense, it has a fresh look, nice UI, great security features but second to none performance and compatibility, not to mention a complete under the hood overhaul.

Yeah, so microsoft discontinued XP. Do you think that they do that out of spite or something? consider yourself lucky they still do updates for it. I mean, really, do you have any idea how expensive i would be to have a huge staff for like 3 major consumer OSes and several enterprise OSes?

You sound like your the god of programming, you should apply to work at MS and make an amazing OS that uses no ram and runs every program ever written and is compatible with everything ever.

I have a feeling you are 12 years old, have never even written something in HTML, think that CPU is the thing you set to play with someone in some lameass barbie game.


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By TomZ on 1/13/2009 9:20:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft is taking us on a carefully-orchestrated marketing and money-grubbing ride. Please tell me what is in Windows 7 that cannot be provided FREE in a Vista update?
Idiot. I had to stop reading your post after the first two sentences. Did it ever occur to you that Microsoft is a business, and that business involves investing time and money to develop new software functionality followed by selling that functionality?

After you and everyone else is willing to work their jobs for free, then we can talk about giving everything away. In the meantime, money is what gives us all the ability to provide for ourselves and our families.


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:44:07 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Im sure you would also be up for a 5GB SP that takes like 8 hours to install and makes most everything you have become incompatible due to so much software change.

Ill keep the new OS thankyouverymuch


RE: Windows 7 === Vista SP3
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:44:22 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Im sure you would also be up for a 5GB SP that takes like 8 hours to install and makes most everything you have become incompatible due to so much software change.

Ill keep the new OS thankyouverymuch


How long?
By UNHchabo on 1/12/2009 2:35:20 PM , Rating: 2
I think I heard someone say that a beta install will expire after a certain number of days... how long is that time frame?




RE: How long?
By chizow on 1/12/2009 2:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
I've read its 30 days without a key to activate, but this Open Beta is supposed to continue until June/July 2009. Hopefully they extend the licenses all the way up to RTM or offer an early purchase option for Beta testers. RTM launch is expected to be late Q4 or early 2010.


RE: How long?
By gmyx on 1/12/2009 2:56:42 PM , Rating: 3
30 days to activate, time bomb on August 1st 2009.


RE: How long?
By phxfreddy on 1/12/2009 3:26:08 PM , Rating: 2
Sometimes I get the feeling windows is dying.


RE: How long?
By ninjaquick on 1/14/2009 10:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
Thats just the 7 inches of meat in your mouth with an apple tatooed across it.


A work in progress
By Vyetr on 1/13/2009 9:24:19 AM , Rating: 2
After quite a bit of testing, I found that Vista Home Premium (and above) along with SP2 Beta offers far more compatiblity and is just as good as Win XP. I often wish that the more talented forerunners of computing had prevailed instead of Bill Gates and the crude lump who will succeed him.




RE: A work in progress
By TomZ on 1/13/2009 9:33:35 AM , Rating: 2
Did you try the Windows 7 beta?


RE: A work in progress
By UNHchabo on 1/13/2009 11:58:37 AM , Rating: 2
I think he was making a joke. He said he had Vista SP2, which I think means Win7.


RE: A work in progress
By TomZ on 1/13/2009 2:52:01 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, no - Vista SP2 is in Beta now (for real):

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?fa...


Piracy
By chmilz on 1/12/2009 2:30:15 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't someone from MS once suggest that if an individual is going to pirate an OS, they'd like it to be Windows?

I guess an unlimited open beta will do well to ensure that everyone that's interested will either purchase or pirate a copy. At the end of the day, marketshare is marketshare, I suppose.




RE: Piracy
By chmilz on 1/12/2009 2:31:17 PM , Rating: 2
Found it. Jeff Raikes, business group president.

http://www.atsutane.net/2007/03/microsoft-wants-yo...


RE: Piracy
By Denithor on 1/12/2009 2:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At the end of the day, marketshare is marketshare, I suppose.


You just hope enough people pay for their copy to keep that marketshare profitable. No matter what you think of M$ as a company, there's a whole boatload of people who get their paychecks there.


RE: Piracy
By FITCamaro on 1/12/2009 3:51:25 PM , Rating: 1
15,000 less soon. :(


defect