Windows 7 discussion(61 posts)
I am not getting my hopes up about windows 7. It has not occurred to MS yet that the User Interface has matured. They keep screwing with the interface, which was a huge complaint about Vista. Fine, let them fix all the stuff under the hood and add more power and useful accessories, but leave the damn doors and windows where we are used to finding them. Changing the User Interface FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE ALONE alienates your customers who invest a lot of time learning and getting accustomed to the subtleties of an operating system. New things, fine, old things should work the same as or easier than they did in the previous version.
You make a good argument (and humorous I might add . . . "leave the damn doors and windows where we are used to finding them") for keeping the GUI essentially the same.
But I would have to disagree with you on the backwards compatibility issue ("hope they pay better attention to backward compatibility"). While I myself get infuriated with the upgrades in software necessary to keep pace with a new OS, the reality is that sooner or later backward compatibility is going to have to be dumped entirely.
That's because the coding space that has to be devoted to backwards compatibility (and it's a vicious circle/cycle when software is upgraded . . . usually becoming bloatware at some point . . . it then requires more coding space as it becomes the "backwards compatible" candidate to the new OS) can better be devoted to new OS features. Backwards compatibility is one of the reasons that each new OS release becomes bigger than the last (certainly new features account for that too).
Someday soon, as painful as it might be to some users (myself included), backward compatibility is going to have to be eliminated. We all have our favorite legacy programs, and will lose them kicking and screaming. I am not looking forward to the day that I'm going to have to buy new software for everything I do, but it will come.
Some of us will cling to an old OS . . . there are still ME and 98 users out there. But there will come a time when those users will no longer be able to communicate with users of a new OS, and then they'll HAVE to switch just to maintain connectivity with all their friends who have put down their stubby pencils.
May not happen in our lifetime, but some generation is going to have to deal with it.
The problem is not so much with compatibility but MS never has finished a product before they introduced another unfinished product.
Let's just take a few products for instance.
Win2K (4) Service Packs and needs a 5th.
WinXP (3) Service Packs and needs a 4th.
Vista (1) Service Pack and needs a 2nd supposedly on the way.
Win7 Betas begins in January 2009 and there may be even public Betas soon.
The same goes for their other products like Office.
Office 98 (2) Service Releases plus needs a 3rd.
Office 2K Different Modules changed and never figured what was what.
Office XP 2002 Never figured out how many Service Packs needed.
Office 2003 (3) Service Packs and needs a 4th.
Office 2007 What Service Pack is available today ??
One can't really say an MS Product is obsolete because they have never finish any product.
It's akin to selling customers (4) legged tables always with one leg missing.
Then send the customers 2X4s to prop the table up until another table can be designed with a 4th leg missing again !!
This is NOT to say that MS has not made HUGE sums of money by engaging in this business model or strategy. (LOL)
I'm with BobJam on this one -- backward compatibility causes bloat and inhibits progress. I'm all for burning bridges. There's a relatively easy solution to backwards compatibility.
First, remove all (well, most) of the backward compatibility mess so that the OS is lean and fast. All well-behaved programs that use the established APIs will run just fine and those developers will get a gold star. When a user must run a program that is not well-behaved and compatible, they then have to install the "Compatibility Package". This runs as a virtual machine on the primary OS and contains all of the legacy code. The old programs will run just fine here, but the users will start to see that they are devoting tons of resources to the Compatibility Package just for a few poorly written programs. They will start looking for alternatives that run native and the gold star developers will win more customers. The forums will fill up with questions such as, "what's a good alternative to (some program) so I don't have to run that stupid Compatibility Package?"
In Microsoft's case, they already have the Virtual Machine technology and a fairly stable OS in WinXP to run as the compatibility platform. As an alternative to VMs, they could implement a hypervisor-based OS and logically partition the user's machine. With new CPUs having multiple cores and logical processors, there is plenty to go around. MS has hypervisor technology as well.
> "They keep screwing with the interface, which was a huge complaint about Vista. Fine, let them fix all the stuff under the hood and add more power and useful accessories, but leave the damn doors and windows where we are used to finding them. Changing the User Interface FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE ALONE alienates your customers who invest a lot of time learning and getting accustomed to the subtleties of an operating system."
While I agree that the changes take some getting used to, I don't think all the changes were just for change.
For instance Windows Explorer in Windows Vista has a details pane that displays the metadata in a file and lets you change some of it.
Also renaming "Add/Remove Programs" to "Programs and Features" makes sense as that Control Panel item now lets you change programs features in addition to removing them.
This really stinks. My laptop came with Vista Ultimate, it took months to get it just right. Had to buy Notebook Controller to get it stable, now it runs great. This new OS isn't being released to make life easier as they claim, it's for them to make money. I remember when 95 came out, then 98 and finally a decent OS XP, now several versions of Vista (with tweaking can work nicely) now it's Windows 7? How I miss the days of 3.1.
You raise an interesting point. Seems as though when we finally get the OS the way we want it, M$ comes out with a new one and we have to learn/configure all over again.
When new OS's come out, we all go kicking and screaming to it, firmly convinced that the last was better.
In the old DOS days, when Windows 3.1 came out, I was firmly convinced for the first several months that DOS was better. Since the IT guys at work transitioned to Windows 3.1, I HAD to get used to it. And eventually I did. Then M$ came out with 95 (which I'm still convinced was the crappiest iteration). So I went kicking and screaming to 95, but eventually when the "b" update came out, I got it the way I wanted it.
But then 98FE came out just when I had finally gotten 95b the way I wanted it.
In that particular instance, I was glad that 98FE had come out and embraced it. However, they soon came out with 98SE, and that, as far as I'm concerned was the most stable, with the exception of XP.
I was very pleased with 98SE, and fortunately I didn't go to ME, which IMO was a disaster.
But then XP came out, and again I went kicking and screaming to it, and for the first few month I didn't like it at all. Finally, I got XP the way I wanted it and am still happily camped with it.
I haven't yet gone to VISTA, but will be forced to it when I get a new machine. Likely I won't like it at first, and will become one of the many VISTA bashers. But I suspect I will get used to it . . . maybe even like it . . . and then just as I get VISTA configured the way I want it, 7 will come out for public use, and that painful cycle will start all over again.
It's human nature to always fantasize about the "old days". Somehow we always think they were "better", but that often turns out not to be the case.
"I don't know what's wrong with these kids these days . . . I don't know what this world is coming to."
My parents said that about my generation when we watched Elvis Presley on the Ed Sullivan show. And I said the same thing when my kids were growing up. Now my kids are saying it about their kids. Seems as though every generation says it about the next.
In reality, things always wind up better, though they do take a crooked path sometimes.
As an addendum to what I said above . . . and I know I'm morphing WAY off topic here, but this little factoid seems worth it:
Does this complaint seem familiar? "Today's young people love luxury. They have bad manners, scorn authority, have no respect for their elders and gossip when they should be working. Young people don't stand up any more when older people enter the room. They contradict their parents, swagger around in society, gobble up all the sweets on the table, cross their legs and tyrannize their teachers." How old is that quote, and who said it? Socrates, (470-399 BC). So, this problem is not new at all, probably been around since the dawn of time.
From the AskWoody site:
"Paul Thurrott has weighed in with a surprising prediction for the release date of Windows 7:
'It's pretty widely known that Microsoft will ship a beta release (and a public one at that) of Windows 7 in January. This beta will be the only beta and it will be followed by a single release candidate build, and then the final version, all in quick succession. I expect Windows 7 to be finalized by April 2009 at the latest, and to be completed simultaneously with Windows Vista/Windows Server 2008 Service Pack 2 (SP2), which is also due in April. (Windows 7 and SP2 share more code than people realize as well, by the way.) Windows 7 will be made broadly available to consumers and business customers no later than June 2009.'
Many months ago, I guessed September 1 as the shrinkwrap-box-on-store-shelves date. Now I'm not so sure.
Steve Sinofsky shipped Office XP before it was fully baked, and he still thinks he did the right thing. He has a history of shipping early on all of his products: he puts them through very rigorous internal testing, but doesn't worry too much about testing outside of Redmond. The result is lots of incompatibilities, which he promptly patches - consumers turn into beta testers - and his sales don't suffer. I expect he'll do the same thing with Win7.
The move to unlink the Live Essentials was brilliant. Many of the cantankerous Windows programs can be released four or six months after Win7 ships, with new "beta" versions every month. Sharing the code base between Vista Service Pack 2 and Windows 7 means we get more glitz with the same old plumbing - but it's new plumbing.
The current pre-beta of Win7 is remarkably stable. I wouldn't be surprised if Win7 went gold in June."
Another tidbit from the AskWoody site:
"Windows 7 Beta 1 has leaked
Posted by woody on 28 December 2008 - 07:31:20 Windows News
And I can see it right now on the alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc.me-beta newsgroup. It's called working.one_microsoft.windows.7.beta.1.build.7000. I can't vouch for the file's authenticity - make sure the copy you get has an fsum of f9dce6ebd0a63930b44d8ae802b63825 - but it sure looks like the "gold" version of Win 7 Beta 1.
The warez sites get it before the beta testers, and Torrent traffic is undoubtedly up because of the beta. On the one hand, I bet some folks at Microsoft are furious. On the other hand, it's a very efficient and egalitarian distribution method."
Have only (not) used one version of windows.
That was WinME. A real looser.
Went directly from Win98SE to Win2K because there was rumor on the net that MS would start using PA if one didn't early adopt Win2k.
Stayed with Win2k until XP2 was released.
Think XP2 has a "Comic Book" looking GUI so have always run it in Classic Mode.
Was a tester on early Vista.
MS didn't like an article I published on Vista so they pulled my Tester Status but left my MS Partnership alone.
Will skip Vista altogether as it still has too many problems as can be seen from on-line Forums and Tech Articles.
Plan to migrate (Directly) to Windows7 from XP3 because of new hardware needed plus Windows7 is being built on more Mature Vista Code.
Plan of attack is to implement Intel i7 Hardware and Windows7 Software in a somewhat concurrent manner on the network so as to minimize the cost of change over and still maintain reliability plus speed. Probably will use Open Source - Open Office - as retired and don't need MS Project and the bells & whistles of (Complete) MS Office Suite anymore.
If you're hanging out on the ALT and WAREZ Sites, Good luck !!!! :) :) Hope You Have Clean Installs Archived. (LOL)
Best and Kindest Regards,
My point is that MS has been taking advantage of people's wants for the latest and greatest. People are willing to dump millions to get the latest gadget. So manufacturer's and software developers use timed obsolescence so that they can continue to squeeze money out of people. Then they advertise that this new and improved product will be the ultimate version. When in fact it's just another product with different issues that need improvement on, this gives them reason to come out with another improved ultimate version of the product...and the story goes on. We buy the junk, they make improvements, we buy the improvements hoping this with solve our problems with the product, the product is lacking and has other problems and the cycle keeps going. And another thing, if MS makes major changes then that means we have to now get all new software to run on that new OS or wait for months before the program manufacturers have patches available. Now people get angry with MS because they didn't make the OS right to begin with. Well, that's really not the idea, can't make a lot of money off of a truly stable OS, look at Linux, simple and stable. I don't think anyone made billions off that OS. MS may actually hit upon a decent OS, but they really don't want anyone to be satisfied, otherwise no one will want the next generation of OS. My bottom line is, it's all about greed. OK now I will step off my soapbox!
LittleToucan said: "Well, that's really not the idea, can't make a lot of money off of a truly stable OS, look at Linux, simple and stable. I don't think anyone made billions off that OS. MS may actually hit upon a decent OS, but they really don't want anyone to be satisfied, otherwise no one will want the next generation of OS. My bottom line is, it's all about greed."
In my opinion, it's not that simple. Linux has problems just like Windows. There are some parts of it that crash or don't work a lot of time and interface problems.
With Linux, you can have about as many issues getting compiz to work as getting Windows Aero to work right on Windows Vista.
There are some things that Windows just does a lot better then Linux. Like for instance it seems to me that there are far better DVD Video authoring and burning programs, picture management programs and Office suites on Windows.
Now, of course I'm not saying that Windows Vista is the best or that Linux sucks.
I happen to think that both Windows and Linux have their own strengths and weaknesses.
I use Linux on some of my computers, Windows Vista on others and Windows XP on ones that don't run Windows Vista.
I think that no OS is perfect and no OS can be when it is programed by humans who are flawed in their own ways (Forgeting things or not always looking at the long term).
As for Microsoft saying it's the best version of Windows, that is true at the time it comes out. Just because they release a newer version later that is better doesn't mean that is a lie or misleading.
And if it was misleading, it's important to remember that it's Microsoft's marketing department that says that, not the Windows development team. Microsoft is made up of many different departments and not all of them think the same way. It just happens to be that Microsoft's marketing department is the one speaking on behalf of all the departments most of the time.
Well 7 is much faster than Vista. As far as a new kernel, we will just have to wait for Midori, but so far I am really satisfied with 7 (typing this on 7 now). I tried Linux (specifically Fedora 10 and Yellow Dog on my PS3), but, in all honesty, they simply take too much work and are actually slower than Windows, even Vista. It might just be because of my hardware, but yes, Compiz is a real pain to get working, and installing software is not merely download and click install; no, I had to do all software installs in Terminal because of "Authentication Fail" issues. And my Wireless-N worked only at 1/10th of its full potential. Needless to say, when I heard there was a leaked version of 7, I became wary of Linux and finally caved to going back to Windows. It really is much better, and even in its prebeta state I have fewer problems with it than with Linux. Not exactly sure what an "ALT" site is, but if you mean torrent sites, you just need to have a good one that allows comments and know how not to get fooled and they really are safe for use. I only really use it to try out software and music before I buy it if, as is the case with 7 now, it is not readily available, although I have pirated a couple things entirely. Anyway, I found out about this site merely from looking for html wallpaper on 7, but the *awesome* Vista utility here for some reason doesn't work on 7, so does anyone know of any others, or (less likely) how to make this one work on 7? Could it, perhaps, be that I have an x64 processor? Thanks!
Relief may be on the way.
(Information Sourced From Internet)
Microsoft has promised to open the beta to all users in early 2009, the company has been mum on an exact release date. Information published on its own Web site earlier this month, however, hinted that the beta will be available
(( No Later Than Jan. 13 )).
Some commentators and bloggers have maintained that Microsoft may release the beta
(( As Early As Jan. 7, ))
after CEO Steve Ballmer delivers a keynote that evening at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, where he is expected to talk about Windows 7.
(( Emphasis Added by Poster ))
This topic has been closed to new replies. Please create a new topic instead.