Windows 7 Is Simply A Warmed Version Of VISTA

[>HyperlogiK<]

It's hard to be truly innovative when you *have* to support legacy apps to keep corporate users happy.

They could run them in a virtual machine.

I haven't seen much that's mind blowing from any O/S(MS, Apple, Linux) since the win 3.1 days. It's all been made incrementally better with each release. Some increments have been bigger than others, but nothing really huge.

I agree, there have been some much touted technical developments behind the scenes but the improvements as far as the end user is concerned have usually only been incremental.

Well that is the thing. there is no change in people's view. Its the same exact thing that has been going on for years.

There is something of a change. In the Windows 3.1/95/98 days people would ***** about the os, maybe not upgrade, but then start using it as soon as they bought a new PC with it preloaded. With Vista there was more opposition than ever before (including the release of 95a) OEMs actually fought to keep offering XP and a significant number bought Macs instead.


and then use it anyway, with the launch of Vista far fewer

 

[wolfy1220]

I just started using vista a few days ago, I was not really hesitant to use it just didnt have the money for the upgrade. I always ignore the idiots that say ah that sucks dont buy it...
Most of those people cant even partition a drive with a simple partitioning program.
I personally love vista, I only have 1 problem and I am not so sure that it is even worth mentioning. It is a very fast os, very clean looking.

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

I agree that most of those that dislike Vista are fairly ignorant about computers, but that isn't anything to do with the merits of Vista; it's because most computer users are ignorant, but it doesn't stop them from having opinions.

I think you will find that opinion amongst geeks is actually fairly evenly divided, a lot like it, a lot prefer XP, and a fair number won't use anything other than Linux.

 

[ppe1700]

I dont recall people complaining that XP was just windows 2000 with a pretty GUI..

Although I do remember reading "I will never switch to XP.. .its suX0rs for gmaing!" lol
And all the driver issues and networking problems and so on and so on

exactly.

windows 95, nt, 2000, 2003 all had a similar gui, then xp with its fancy colours.

vista is a newish sort of step?

if the people who said "i will never go to xp" really stuck to their word then they would be on linux now.

 

[Edward78]

I dont recall people complaining that XP was just windows 2000 with a pretty GUI..

What pretty GUI, the "playschool theme"? If anyone thought that was pretty they have probs.

 

[johnz]

What pretty GUI, the "playschool theme"? If anyone thought that was pretty they have probs.

Well, at least it was different. The gui hadn't had any major changes since 3.1. I agree though, I thought the colors were terrible. I rather like the Zune theme, and Royale.

 

[Oroka Sempai]

It is kinda dissapointing. For a while, everyone thought Win7 was going to be based on the MinWin kernal, and I had hope for Win7. Now we know it will be based on the warmed over Vista kernal, which is a warmed over XP kernal, which is a warmed over win2k kernal, blah blah blah NT.

IMO the biggest change to Windows was when they dropped the Win9x kernal and went all NT. M$ NEEDS to drop the old NT kernal and build something new. If M$ dont, someone else will, and my guess is it will be Google.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

IMO the biggest change to Windows was when they dropped the Win9x kernal and went all NT.

I definitely agree! Vista is more like a refinement of XP.

 

[Oroka Sempai]

Not more like XP, it IS XP. If you seen any of the Long Horn Builds, right up untill Vista betas, it WAS XP with some tweeks. M$ just slapped a new look on the GUI and finished the loose ends.

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

M$ is done being innovative and it will be their downfall.

I simply cannot wait for another OS to surface that just embarasses them and revolutionizes programming / computing. It's coming soon imo.

wasn't that OS called Linux?

So i am curious, when did Charlie get to use Windows 7 to make all these great calls on it?

 

[gangaskan]

I dont recall people complaining that XP was just windows 2000 with a pretty GUI..

Although I do remember reading "I will never switch to XP.. .its suX0rs for gmaing!" lol
And all the driver issues and networking problems and so on and so on

but you know what Neur0 everyone said that about vista


granted, this happens with EVERY consumer OS out there, they have their pitfalls just like everything else.

edit: and those pitfalls get fixed over time, thats not the issue at hand though, people expect a 100% bug free OS to the consumer there is just no way to massively TEST every single minor thing when you're on a deadline to rush this product out, however, would i like a clean finished out OS? yes, but expecting it is a diffrent story

 

[FudgeNuggets]

Very disappointing, I was hearing that Windows 7 was supposed to be MUCH close to OS-X. The bit about copying Apple quicker was all too true

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

You know what, we should get together with a guy from Finland and make our own operating system. It would be completely open source and use lots of tools developed by the FSF. We could call it... er... Findows.

 

[Oroka Sempai]

You know what, we should get together with a guy from Finland and make our own operating system. We could call it... er... Findows.

I Lawled at that one!

On a side note, M$ is saying Win7 Beta1 may be out as eairly as the middle of December. So, anyone who finds out where to sign up for the betas, TELL US!!!

 

[FudgeNuggets]

You know what, we should get together with a guy from Finland and make our own operating system. It would be completely open source and use lots of tools developed by the FSF. We could call it... er... Findows.

I can just see the interewebs going mad with speculation that the amalgamation was not that of Finland and Windows but F*!k Windows.

 

[Sorin]

Windows 7: Straight from the VPs Mouth

While the blog itself dates back to August 14th, some of the newest posts reflect how Microsoft, specifically these two SVPs, are attempting to get an idea from the public about what they want in their next OS.

Ok, let's see. What do I want from Windows 7.

• No promises of huge, major features that are just going to all get removed one by one so that by the time the OS comes out, it's just 5 years worth of tweaks and GUI changes.
• No 10GB installs. Much, much less please. I want a lean, fast Windows.
• I don't want graphics and chipset drivers to suddenly neuter the boot time once they're installed. Not sure if Windows has anything to do with this, although I'm sure it's at least part of the problem.
• I don't want to have to reboot Windows for every little minor thing. Installing drivers for hardware, maybe, anything else, no. The things that you have to reboot for have long since gotten asinine.
• Cut the 32-bit world off already. Did 16-bit take as long to die as 32-bit is taking? (yeah I know the computer world is a lot bigger now than it was then).
• Stop burying the places to change settings for the OS deeper and deeper and making them harder and harder to find and change. And stop making the options, once we find them, leaner and leaner with each OS. I know you have your ideas of what you think is best for me, but stop forcing it on me. If I want to change something, let me change it. I don't want to have to hack the registry or install third party software just to change or set something.
• Don't axe the profile-based setup idea. I question your methods for the "study" that led you to conclude this wasn't a good idea. The least you can do is give us an option somewhere to activate gaming mode. I absolutely would not mind rebooting for that, if it meant Windows was going to be super lean and fast for that session.

 

[Stratus_ss]

sounds like you more want Lindows then Windows... not that i necessarily disagree but M$ is all about controlling your pc and linux about freedom. Not that one is better then the other, but the customization cannot be beat in linux just as application and driver support (although this is changing) is superior in Windows.

Maybe ReactOS will rectify this if it ever actually makes it to beta stage

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

Not more like XP, it IS XP. If you seen any of the Long Horn Builds, right up untill Vista betas, it WAS XP with some tweeks. M$ just slapped a new look on the GUI and finished the loose ends.

Hardly

Vista had %60 of it's code written from the ground up.. that is hardly XP with a new GUI and some ends cleaned up..

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

Hardly

Vista had %60 of it's code written from the ground up.. that is hardly XP with a new GUI and some ends cleaned up..

The problem is that you wouldn't know it in most cases. I know they tried to make it feel similar, so as not to put off too many 2000/XP users, but thats not what I'm talking about.

Other than a few things like memory management, networking and the GUI, it doesn't seem much better. I don't care if they spent $5BN writing new and more elegant code if it doesn't seem to have improved the user experience much.

It's like making a high tech fuel cell powered car that happens to be just as noisy and polluting as any other. The 'new technology' isn't much to brag about if it's barely doing anything more than the old.

 

[David]

I dont recall people complaining that XP was just windows 2000 with a pretty GUI..

Although I do remember reading "I will never switch to XP.. .its suX0rs for gmaing!" lol
And all the driver issues and networking problems and so on and so on

The drivers are the major issue for me - 98 to XP and XP to Vista.

I do remember XP getting trashed when it came out. Gamers especially hated the number of processes running and said they would run win98 till the next OS came out LOL Know that you mention it "Fischer Price GUI" does trigger some memory of it, thanks.

First thing I do on ANY XP machine? Set the GUI to look like Win2k....