Windows 7 arriving early - M$ to show off OS on October 28

And your point was? I see you have a selection of who gets your creds when he started the insults by saying people devolve if they choose XP over Vista. Nice try m8.

 

You can use XP if you want, in fact if I didn't need Vistas text features I would use it on my laptop too. What I have no tolerance for is people that bash Vista for no good reason and people that aren't willing to elaborate legitimate reasons. Also, people that are completely childish about this discussion should stay out. Its a waste of peoples time to have to wade through all the crap. And thank you, from all of the people that wan't useful information, for wasting more of their time.

 

The fact that Win7 is based on Vista; they aren't promising a "major" jump.

 

They used to say that Windows 7 would be the next major jump, I even heard that there were going to rewrite Windows for the release instead of just building on what they have, which they say makes most of the problems with Windows. Maybe they still are working on a complete overhaul of Windows, but I've been pretty underwhelmed with all of their latest releases. That's one of the reasons that I think my first laptop is going to be a MacBook Pro. Apple releases great updates every year or two. Snow Leopard is sort of like the jump from Vista to Windows 7, but Apple has released a lot more updates between XP and Vista.

 

What does this mean for people looking for a laptop (like me)?

Both my friends have Vista laptops, and the main reason I want to get a laptop is to have LAN parties with them.

What does Windows 7 mean in terms of compatibility? Should I get a laptop while they still have Vista?

I ask because I have heard that XP and Vista are incompatible as far as LAN setups?

In which case do I need to hurry up and come up with the money before MS ships Windows 7?

Thanks

LC

 

Win 7 will have the same compatibility as Vista it's the same kernel. XP and Vista aren't incompatible on LANs either.

 

since this is a notebook forum, the disk and RAM space used by the OS is very much a legitimate issue ...but then, i just look at the pictures lol

 

Disk space usage huh? Seriously, Vista uses like 5-10 gbs of disk space, which amounts to about $2 to $5 worth of disk space. And overall, it uses at most 2 GB of RAM, which amounts to about $100. I know. XP uses about what $50 less. OMG, fifty friggin dollars. You spend more on coffee over the life of a laptop than you do on the hardware to run Vista. The marginally increase in processing power isn't the big disadvantage about Vista. The security features alone will save you more time.

Yeah it is a legit issue. But is it more of a legit issue than say security, connectivity or app combatability? They all require processor power, disk usage and ram.

They both use the TCP/IP protocol so they are very compatible as far as LAN setups. It will be irrelevant whether you bring a Vista or Win7 laptop to a lanparty.

I'm curious who you are citing. You should considering most journalist have commented the relatively LACK of information released about Win7. What has been well published was the fact that Microsoft has never planned on rewriting Windows for release 7.

 

Yeah, Win7 is definitely going to be based on Vista, which is a great idea IMO.

 

What I want to see is a return of the old Monopoly Microsoft.

Remember back in the heydays before browsers? What catapulted graphical browsers into our world? Internet Explorer.

With the addition of Windows Media Player, the computer started to turn into a legit media storage unit. Before, everyone would keep hoards and hoards of books of CDs.

If you remember back in the heydays of Microsoft Word vs Wordperfect, what pulled MSWord ahead? Suite integration. Word, Excel, and Powerpoint all had the same seven menu items at the start of their menu bars, which was a breakthrough. The Office suite also allowed you to cut and paste charts, tables, and graphics back and forth between the different programs. My, my, what we take for granted.


My point is screw the size of the software. Screw the hardware requirements If an OS that somehow seamlessly merged your growing home network with your mobile devices with your printer with your email account with your GPS in your car, etc etc somehow appeared, people would be lining up to buy it. Forget the cost. People scoop up Macbooks and Macbook pros left and right for a simple reason outside of cost. It provides seamless integration between the different pieces of hardware and the different pieces of software.

Seamless integration at a time when more people are placing more of their data in more places, we desperately need a company that can string all our data everyone into one place where we can access it from one program.

If a device increased your productivity by 50% and decreased your headaches by 50% at a 50% increase of the initial cost, I'd take it any day and force my company to adopt it. Microsoft, screw the DOJ. Time to force the industry to quit draggin their feet and give me the gadgets I want!! Where is my personal rocketship? Where is my robotic maid? Where is my flying car?????

 

You know, as absurd as that sounds surfasb...

I completely agree with it. MS is a huge reason why computers and notebooks are where they are today. And the same goes for the software for these computers and notebooks.

Software advances hardware, not the other way around.

 

This has been the constant trend in the IT industry. What made the original PC a true business tool? It wasn't fancy games or lightsaber applications.

Lotus 1-2-3.

What drove the adoption of Plug and Play? When Microsoft included it in the Operating system. What drove the standardization of TCP/IP over IPX? When Microsoft included it in their operating system. While people bash Microsoft all the time, they have shown they can be quite innovative.

Take the latest Office 2007. With no other productivity suite that can even compete with Microsoft, they still make a daring and innovative product move that was risky. Seriously, how many people predicted the hesitant but overwhelming adoption of the new UI?

The government just needs to stop stifling innovations. And I still want my personal rocket ship.

 

Um, about the rocket ship. Yeah, I took it.

 

But you also have to calculate in the money making as well. After all, Microsoft (and any company) is in the game to make money first and foremost. They will at some points move the industry forward, however they want to milk as much money out of the industry first before that. That's just how companies think...its ridicules to me when people only think Microsoft is the only company that thinks like that.

It's sorta like 1st generation products. They're always designed with some kinda of flaw, otherwise there's nothing to build on for the next generation. And if there's nothing to build on for the next generation, there's no incentive to make it/improve it. So ironically, the flaws of a product allow the industry to move forward. Though, companies may also opt to purposely create flaws in products as well. The 1 gen iPhone, and Sony Viao SZ come to mind.

 

There will always be flaw. They are designed by Humans. The last time I checked, I have yet to meet a perfect human. I have yet to meet a perfect products. Of course a product will be flawed. If they hammered out every flaw, product costs would skyrocket astronomically. The conspiracy theory about big businesses purposely releasing flawed products just don't pan out and is an incomplete story. Anyone who has designed a product, nurtured the project to the end know compromises MUST be made, otherwise the project will forever be in development.

Again, look at Office 2007. Regard the absence of any real competition and Microsoft yet creates a truly innovative product.

Monopolies aren't always a bad thing. Not all people rest on their laurels after they get to the top. The drive and will that drove them to the top doesn't just disappear just because there is no one else to beat. Rather, people will continue to raise their own standards and compete against their own egos.

Don't I sound like a die hard Conservative there??

Nope. I blame Powerpack for killing off all the engineers! Or it must be a NBR conspiracy.

 

That doesn't mean I didn't take it. Let me tell you, it was hard sneaking that into a dorm room.

 

Well, I'm not arguing here that there's a huge conspiracy lol...just pointing out the fact that products need flaws in order to get better. But your right, Monopolies aren't always bad, just look at the diamond industry (Okay, that's a bad example). But anyway, I wasn't trying to disagree with you there haha.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Monopolies are like dictators. Kingdoms would flourish under good kings and crumbled under bad ones.

 

Windows 7 Will Be Less Annoying Than Vista

http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Windows_7_Will_Be_Less_Annoying_Than_Vista

 

Btw, does anyone think M$ might come up with some free upgrade of windows 7 or at a reduced cost, for Vista users? Or at least the Vista Business or Ult. users??

 

I dunno if it's going to be less annoying, or just annoying in different ways. I've heard some scuttlebutt that Microsoft is really pushing to make Win7 all "touch" interaction - in other words, the little dog-and-pony show from a few months back really was supposed to be a sample of the meat and potatoes of Win7, not just another neato "feature."

Now, that's just scuttlebutt, not anything official, so take it for what it's worth; however, it strikes me that Microsoft is just pushing to make the inner workings of its OS (at least its consumer OS) more and more opaque - sort of like how DIY auto diagnosis has gone from nothing more than a good ear, some knowledge, a timing gun, and some hand-tools, to needing a $1k, plus handheld device to read and interpret obtuse, opaque diagnostic codes from the onboard computer, and to reset the little devil once the repair's been made.

 

Nope, I doubt they would.

 

History says they will have an upgrade path at a reduced rate, but not free.

 

Yeah, probably...

I don't know about the history part, but considering all the bad press Vista received initially, and considering how M$ wants to get Windows 7 out earlier than planned before, I was thinking if they would try to please the customers with some limited time offers or something like that.. was just a thought.

 

I have wondered this for a while, what does the different editions of Windows do, apart from making Microsoft richer. I have used XP Home and Professional versions but I have never noticed anything different.

 

Really? XP-Pro has full networking capabilities (to the extent MS can provide such); XP-Home, on the other hand, has a half-pithed set of networking capabilities that make it a royal pain in the tukkus to try and do anything remotely resembling real networking.

 

Go check out a site like newegg - upgrade to Vista ultimate $190is, while straight license is $260. See what I mean about history.

 

The OEM is the best price point in my opinion. On Newegg Home Premium OEM is $100 while the retail copy is $212. So you can buy two OEM copies for less than the price of one retail copy. Albeit you can't move the OEM copy around, but still how often are you going to be moving it?

 

lucky to be a college student.
can get vista & office ultimate full ver. each for $60 from theultimatesteal

 

Lucky to have been associated with the computer department at my University, I got office Enterprise free, and Vista business free. The upgrade to ultimate only cost $20.

 

FOr the same reason why the release XP SP2 when SP2 was supposed to be a totally different OS.

 

Free Upgrade? That will be something.

Not like Vista was expensive to begin with.

 

I don't see any reason why they should give a discount on Vista users outside of the regular upgrade disk (and it's not worth it, get the OEM instead)

 

Jump on Youtube and take a look at some of the preview vids. Pretty much a Vista twin, with more glorified Aero effects. Big deal.

 

XP was a Windows 2000 twin with more glorified GUI effects.

You won't find many people using Windows 2000 anymore.

Oh, did you say the underlying code improved dramatically and offered far more capabilities?

 

If microsoft wanted to make people happy, they should've stuck with what made xp work. High compability, ease of use, and lots of control over all the features we want or don't want. Vista dropped the ball on those, and i'm hoping they'll look back and see why people still like XP. Maybe they can build a more inviting and exiting OS. If it ain't broke..don't fix it, right?

 

XP wasn't all that and looks pretty horrible when compared to Vista. I have no idea how I dealt with XP.

Vista makes networking a lot of easier IMO. Even my mom finds Vista easy to use and she's completely illiterate when it comes to computers.

I look forward to Windows 7. Although I think they should go with a name instead of the number 7.

 

I agree w/ you my friend!

Really? ***! I'm baffled w/ all you've said here. Seriously!

 

XP is more user friendly. Vista is a little more complicated to navigate thru. Vista does look better.

 

I'm being honest here. I mean I look at computers with XP and it makes me shake my head everytime cuz I think about my experience with Vista and just how Vista feels and looks a lot better than XP.

Seriously looks aren't everything but XP by far looks ugly when compared to Vista. And Vista performs a lot of faster for me on the computers I've used it on as opposed to XP.

And I find Vista very easy to navigate thru. Whether it's going thru my huge music folder, documents, etc. Networking is a lot easier for me.

That's just me however. I hope Windows 7 continues forward. XP wasn't bad but it certainly isn't better than Vista in my opinion. I just think people are afraid of change in any form and so they cling to old things all the time because they're comfortable with them.

 

You have to keep in mind that Windows 7 hasn't even reached beta 1 status yet, so the UI design isn't set in stone yet. During the development of previous versions of Windows, particularly Windows XP and Vista, the UI changed dramatically multiple times before the final product was released.

 

Hmm...well I can't argue w/ you...everyone's experience is different. But I only agree w/ one thing...Vista does look better yes. Other than that XP is still King IMHO. Vista is a System Resource Hog and has it's issues... [especially when it comes to Networking]...that's my findings..so you see we are opposite here but that's okay. Whatever floats or boats....And just so you know...I am looking forward to Windows 7; I'm not afraid of or hate change; I just want to change for the better, not for the same or for the worse.

 

I gotta say; I respect you greatly for that answer. This is a prefect example of different user experiences, and for once the two people aren't trying to kill each other over their opinions.

Bravo and well done, mate.

 

I agree. I hope Windows manages to refine/streamline Vista, and it's fine with me if they use a different name. Just get on the ball, Microsoft!

Or else you'll find me camping in XP or, better yet, running a DOS machine for my DOS games! And the rest will be Linux.

Yeah, when pigs fly. LOL.

QFT!!! :laugh:

 

Another great reason to use Vista? Vista tablet PC > XP Tablet PC.

 

Vista is easier.
You've just been doing things the same way for 6-7 years.

 

imo, I think the drive to Vista (and beyond) is more of Microsoft's way of re-branding itself as if say "don't take our operating system for granted". I just want to make a quick observation:

The start button on the desktop and in Office 2007 are now just the windows logo. Microsoft wants you to think of them every time you save a document or run msconfig

As Web 2.0 and the younger generation types demand better looking and more function websites, I see Vista as that awkward but necessary go-between leading to Windows 7. That being said, I'm still with XP all the way for functionality. I trust Google for the rest of my computer needs

 

XP had a Windows logo....
And every other OS has there logo slapped everywhere,

 

IMO everyone loves XP because it was around for 7 years, therefore had a lot of time to improve and a lot of time for people to become used to it.

If Vista or something else came out in 2004, it would be the bee's knees today.

 

Yes and I am pretty sure 95/98 had the Windows logo next to "Start" too. Nothing new there.