Skip to content

Rough Book

random musings

Menu
  • About Me
  • Contact
  • Projects
    • bAdkOde
    • CherryBlossom
    • FXCalendar
    • Sulekha
Menu

There is no Windows 7

Posted on December 28, 2008September 9, 2009 by vivin

Here is a first look at the Windows 7 beta. All I could really get from the review was that "it's done", and that it "feels snappier" and that it is "more responsive". In the screenshots it still looks like Vista. The taskbar reminds me of KDE. A bunch of torrent sites have the beta up for download. Microsoft is expected to announce the build's public availability in January. So you can get a copy of it and try it out, but to do so might be "breaking the law". But that hasn't deterred a bunch of people who're out downloading it. Right now, piratebay's torrent for the beta is showing 2,503 seeds and 8,137 peers.

On another note though. People seem to think that this is a new operating system from Microsoft. It isn't. It's just Vista Service Pack 3, in my opinion. I mean, how long did it take Microsoft to come up with Vista after XP? I seriously doubt they got a brand new operating system out in about a year and a half. The name is just a PR campaign to bury the name "Vista". There is so much bad press and publicity surrounding the name that Microsoft has to get away from it, if they want the Vista codebase to be successful.

I had Vista on my laptop. It was alright; I didn't use it long enough to run into too many issues. The UAC prompts were pretty annoying though. Also, compiling anything on it took forever. I'm running Ubuntu on it now, and it's way faster. My sister and my dad both run Vista, but I haven't heard of them having any problems. If Windows 7 really is good, then I might actually consider running it. I currently have only one Windows machine and that's running XP. Everything else is either running FreeBSD or Linux.

6 thoughts on “There is no Windows 7”

  1. Cody says:
    December 29, 2008 at 6:49 am

    it is not Vista SP3. it is built on the Vista kernel, yes. but XP is built on the windows 2000 kernel and is that the same OS? for one thing, Windows 7 doesn’t even use NTFS (it can but it won’t on most machines).

    Reply
  2. vivin says:
    December 29, 2008 at 9:37 am

    Cody,

    Looking at Features to Windows 7 on Wikipedia, I don’t see any major changes to the kernel. Windows 7 does use NTFS and it will install to an NTFS partition without any problems. What Windows 7 has is support for new filesystems.

    I’m just saying that considered MS’s previous track record I find it highly unlikely that they’ll come up with something brand spanking new, this fast. It’s more like a 95->98 shift.

    Reply
  3. Chris says:
    December 29, 2008 at 10:32 pm

    This article, http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=361, has some nice charts showing the number of days between releases. It assumes that Win7 will be released Sept 30, 2009. The article is pretty old (Jan 08), but the charts are worthwhile I think. From what I read the other day from another source I think a Sept 09 release is a pretty good estimate, so this shows development time is almost 1000 days since Vista RTM, maybe he should have included Vista SP1 on the chart though, which was Feb 4, 2008. Considering he listed XP SP2 as a release I think its valid to list Vista SP1 as a release as well… this greatly reduces the development time and brings up the concern you have. I really hope Win7 is a successor of Vista and brings something new to the table, but my next computer purchase is still a MacBook Pro 🙂

    Also just to note, I’m not a fanboy of any OS, I enjoy and use them all (Win, OSX, Linux) for different purposes.

    Reply
  4. vivin says:
    December 29, 2008 at 10:53 pm

    Hey Chris,

    Thanks for the link to the article! Pretty interesting stuff. I heard that Microsoft was pushing for an earlier release – perhaps as early as March of ’09.

    I’m also hoping that Windows 7 does turn out to be better than than Vista. Although to be honest, I haven’t had near the number of problems with Vista that I hear about. I did feel it was a little slow though. I’m currently playing around with the beta. I’m actually pleasantly surprised. I have been playing around with the beta (I guess it’s shady, but I really wanted to give it a try heh) and I have to say I am pleasantly surprised. I’m running it on a system with a P4, 3.4Ghz and 3Gb RAM. The installation was fast, and on initial startup, Windows 7 went out and found the appropriate drivers for most of my stuff, including my nVidia video card and my Audigy sound card. It also seemed quite a bit faster. However, I wasn’t really able to get it to see the workgroup on my network. I have four other (three FreeBSD, one Linux) machines on a Samba workgroup that XP sees fine.

    I’ll play with it more once I get back from my New Years holidays and maybe write up a quick review. If anything, I hope the Vista debacle has made Microsoft sit up and take notice. I really hope it forces them to think about security and interoperability more, especially now that Apple is getting market and mindshare, and with (Ubuntu) Linux being a decent alternative.

    Reply
  5. Chris says:
    December 30, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    Hadn’t seen this quote before… "Windows 7 will be Vista, but a lot better" – Steve Ballmer

    Hmmm?

    Reply
  6. vivin says:
    December 31, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    Interesting. I’m not that surprised, really. The UI doesn’t look very different from Vista, except for the task bar and boot-screen (based on my 20-minute test-drive). I’ve heard it runs a lot faster on machines that can’t even run Vista that well. So I guess they removed a lot of extraneous crap out of the OS.

    Google Apps may not be as full-featured as Office, but it’s still convenient. I find it interesting that he openly mentioned OpenOffice and StarOffice and that he considers them to be competition.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Archives

  • February 2023
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • June 2017
  • March 2017
  • November 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • February 2016
  • August 2015
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • March 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • October 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • August 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • November 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • March 2007
  • December 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • June 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • February 2005
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003
  • December 2002
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
  • June 2002
  • May 2002
  • April 2002
  • February 2002
  • September 2001
  • August 2001
  • April 2001
  • March 2001
  • February 2001
  • January 2001
  • December 2000
  • November 2000
  • October 2000
  • August 2000
  • July 2000
  • June 2000
  • May 2000
  • March 2000
  • January 2000
  • December 1999
  • November 1999
  • October 1999
  • September 1999
©2023 Rough Book | Built using WordPress and Responsive Blogily theme by Superb
All original content on these pages is fingerprinted and certified by Digiprove