[WIN7] Dedicated Windows 7 Discussion

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by romanx

It might be, but then you might need to explain to the manufacturers like Dell, HP, and Acer who insist on selling a laptop with Windows Vista Home Basic on a 1.7ghz Celeron with 512mb ram and 64mb shared graphics. Sure it runs, but if you want to use it that's a whole different ball game. Not only that, but most of them won't make Windows XP drivers for a year until they've sold enough laptops to make profits, then the people who do want functionality will either bail to Linux or put XP on because it works.

While the I.T. department in our office like Vista and use it at home a lot. They won't touch it in the office.

When did you last look at laptops? 2006?

Sure they still insist on the shitbox intel graphics, but I'm not seeing laptops in stores anymore under 1GB of memory, quite commonly with 2GB standard now too. Plus it's only $100 at the computer shop to get 4GB of the stuff, so you may as well get the lowest amount you can because the price difference in doing so exceeds that of buying the 4GB at the store later.

The major thing that is holding up advancement and adoptation of the next generation of computing systems and programs from these vendors is their insistance on using 32bit versions of vista.

[foxmulder881]

Originally Posted by MR CHILLED

Don't look at me. Legitimate posts don't just get removed on a whim fox.

Yeah sorry, my fault. I was getting this thread confused with another one. Sorry.

[hosh0]

Originally Posted by Reaper

When did you last look at laptops? 2006?

Sure they still insist on the shitbox intel graphics, but I'm not seeing laptops in stores anymore under 1GB of memory, quite commonly with 2GB standard now too. Plus it's only $100 at the computer shop to get 4GB of the stuff, so you may as well get the lowest amount you can because the price difference in doing so exceeds that of buying the 4GB at the store later.

The major thing that is holding up advancement and adoptation of the next generation of computing systems and programs from these vendors is their insistance on using 32bit versions of vista.

Work for a retailer and we have plenty with vista with 1gb or less.

[Aetherone]

Originally Posted by higherdestiny

I'm not acually sure what exactly needs to be "Fixed" in vista.

Well for starters the way it behaves on a network when it doesn't have a DC/AD is totally obscene.

[Sniper]

Originally Posted by zef.

Because a microsoft operating system that is easier to do anything with (than the previous generation) is an oxymoron?

98SE was easier too use then 95, XP is/was easier to use then 98se, Vista is easier to use then XP, Windows 7 will be easier to use then Vista.

on the RIGHT hardware for each OS.

[foxmulder881]

And linux is easier to use compared to... oh... sorry... this is a Windows thread!

[romanx]

Originally Posted by Reaper

When did you last look at laptops? 2006?

Sure they still insist on the shitbox intel graphics, but I'm not seeing laptops in stores anymore under 1GB of memory, quite commonly with 2GB standard now too. Plus it's only $100 at the computer shop to get 4GB of the stuff, so you may as well get the lowest amount you can because the price difference in doing so exceeds that of buying the 4GB at the store later.

The major thing that is holding up advancement and adoptation of the next generation of computing systems and programs from these vendors is their insistance on using 32bit versions of vista.

I bought my laptop about 4 months into 2007, those were the specs with Vista Home Basic on it. Then it ran Ubuntu fine for most of the time, now the laptops have XP drivers available and I'm running that with another gig of ram I bought for $25.

Might as well put a Vista theme on XP and call it Vista Lite.

[simboes]

if that pic is real, i hate how they are moving more and more towards MAC in looks. hopefully you can keep it as vista style if you want

but heard many good things about performance etc with this OS. might give it a bit though, still settling into vista

[Aetherone]

Originally Posted by Sniper

98SE was easier too use then 95, XP is/was easier to use then 98se, Vista is easier to use then XP

You'll have to define "easier to use".
More UAC prompts, more mouse clicks and more windows to get anywhere under the hood and configure anything does not equal "easier" in my lexicon.
A few dozen Vista boxes on a network "discovering" everything in sight and preferentially using discovered resources instead of the correct DHCP informed ones (like DNS servers) does not equal "easier" in my lexicon.
Failing to enable things like Remote Desktop because windows firewall isn't running and it can't automatically configure it does not equal "easier" in my lexicon.
The "prioritization" of network performance to SFA when playing media does not equal "easier" in my lexicon.

The additional stuff in MSCONFIG *is* kinda nice though.

[DanWA]

Some people just can't get over the fact XP is going... Get with the times!

[Vampire]

Originally Posted by hosh0

ROFL, that screenie is Vista hence V 6.1.

Yep its vista made to look like Windows 7. This is clearly shown on the install package!

[foxmulder881]

Just for those who may not have seen them yet. Here's some more screenshots of Windows 7 current state.

Source softpedia.com

Well I guess it was only a matter of time. Microsoft has already shipped the first testing builds of Windows 7, the successor of Windows Vista, to key partners. The Redmond company will not of course, under any conditions confirm this detail, or breathe a single word about the early testing development milestone of Windows 7, but various third parties were not as shy as Microsoft when it came down to sharing details about the next iteration of Windows. But despite the deafening silence from Microsoft around the next version of the Windows operating system, Windows
7 Milestone 1 Build 6.1.6519.1 indeed shipped outside of Redmond.

Included in this article are the first leaked screenshots of Windows 7, courtesy of ThinkNext. As you can see from the image at the top of this article Microsoft has dropped Windows 7 ULTIMATE into the laps of its selected pool of partner testers. Windows 7 Ultimate is version 6.1 (Build 6519.1.x86fre.winmain.071220-1525).

Windows 7 features support for multiple video cards from different manufacturers running simultaneously and comes with a new Windows Media Center. With Windows 7 M1 already available, Microsoft is now planning to drop M2 in April/May 2008 as well as M3 in the third quarter. At the same time the Beta, Release Candidates and RTM dates are yet to be set. However, Microsoft did indicate to its partners that it is looking to the second half of 2009 for the release to manufacturing of Windows 7.

Windows 7 M1 ISO is 6519.1.071220-1525, and was served in both 32-bit and 64-bits flavors. The installation experience of the operating system is very similar to that of Windows Vista, offering various versions including Home Premium, Business and Ultimate. Windows 7 delivers support for Extended Firmware Interface (EFI). And as you can see from the start menu, the XPS Viewer is right there.

[HyDrA]

Not sure I quite believe that they have released a test version just yet, but they should just do away with the 32-bit version. The only way the PC world will migrate to 64-bit is if there is no choice.

[dahurldog]

eh i know there is prob some background changes and i know they dont implement the gui changes for awhile but fuck lets get some new designs out for windows. its been the same since 1995.

thats the only stuff that gets me excited about a new OS, i dont give a shit about a different registry or a different security setting - im just interested about the change in looks.

[foxmulder881]

Originally Posted by dahurldog

eh i know there is prob some background changes and i know they dont implement the gui changes for awhile but fuck lets get some new designs out for windows. its been the same since 1995.

thats the only stuff that gets me excited about a new OS, i dont give a shit about a different registry or a different security setting - im just interested about the change in looks.

Unfortunately one of the main complaints about Vista was the gui changes. Which were only basic changes at best. (But I think the changes that were made were for the better).
If Microsoft changed the gui on a large scale, the (supposed) 95% of the computing community who use Windows as their operating system would no doubt complain that "Windows X is too hard because it looks different".
It's a no-win scenario for Microsoft. So they're really forced to keep the GUI quite similar between releases.
Office 2007 GUI changes are a prime example of what I mean. Users are already complaining that Office 2007 is crap because their precious menus have gone and replaced with the ribbon which has much better functionality and looks compared to a clunky old menu system.