What Vista should have been.

This doesn't change the fact that there is very little new. I'm more excited about what will be in NT 7.0 (Windows 7 is ironically NT 6.1).

Amusing since I had to get a torrent version as the one from Microsoft kept crapping out during download.

Looking at what I see, the speed at which they release new versions, I am hoping that Windows 8 will be more to my liking. I am sticking with XP until I can no longer play the games I like on it. They will probably be releasing a windows 7.1, 7.11, 7.5 and 7.999 between now and when when they actually make a new OS and charging for each service pa.. um new release.

Mine downloaded fine actually. Finished it in about two hours I believe, no hiccups.

Like I've been saying on my blog, I really like what I've seen so far. I hope I can have enough cash to buy the Ultimate, but Home Premium wouldn't be too bad for me either.

The best Windows yet

I put it on my new built machine and am loving the faster boot and shutdown times. This looks like it should be a hit, (slicker and faster). I like the new task bar. I will be switching all my Vista machines over to this when released.It will make my laptop respond faster and leaner.

for those who can't wait, try windows server 2008 R2.

How can you trust a company that treats its customers like this? I feel sorry for all the people that invested in Vista. XP is working fine for me. I just don't see that a need has been created to upgrade. Why should I? My favorite games still play (rock solidly I might add) on XP with very minimal penalties in graphics. It just seems like a bunch of marketing bullcrap.

I just find it amusing that in the Screenshot in the article, if you zoom in on the Computer Basic Info screen, it shows Copyright 2007.

LOL Here we are in 2009, and their latest Beta Windows 7 still shows a Copyright of 2007. But, then again... perhaps Microsoft is just admitting what everyone else already claims. Windows 7 is just Vista with patches...?

Hi everyone

About Windows 7, It's a Vista with new look and with some reprogramming and solving some vista bugs that results ====> New OS with XP speed!!! (and little up!) so until now, no revolution happened here!

About Download! I was downloading it through torrent, coz bad Microsoft server problems!

Good Lock
IgImAx

If you look at left windows you can see Build 6801 and it is not the final one! (right now is 7000)

I'm running some test on XP SP3 and Windows 7 Build 7000 to find out new OS performance and here their results:

* My System Specifications(I know it! Its too old!)
Processor = ...... Intel 3GHz HT - 1MB Cache - Socket 478
Phy. Memory = .... (512MB * 2) 1024MB
VGA = ............ MSI NVidia Gforce 5600 * 256MB


1) Boot time (from Start until desktop appear)
Windows XP SP3: .... 30.25
Windows 7: ......... 40.04 (By Disabling Network = 38.31 + also By disabling Aero = 37.63)


2) Start and Completely load time of "Office Word 2003" and "Adobe Photoshop CS2"
Office Word 2007 @ XP SP3 : ................................ FS(1) 6.80 .. SS 1.86
Office Word 2007 @ XP SP3 with Super Cache enabled (2): .... FS 4.35 .. SS 1.92
Office Word 2007 @ W7beta : ................................ FS 6.08 .. SS 1.09

Adobe Photoshop cs2 @ XP SP3 : .............................FS 16.60 .. SS 6.39
Adobe Photoshop cs2 @ XP SP3 with Super Cache enabled : ... FS 13.12 .. SS 5.99
Adobe Photoshop cs2 @ W7beta : .............................FS 16.64 .. SS 10.43


3) Compressing a 108MB text file (using WinRAR v3.80)
Windows XP SP3: ... 1:07.07
Windows XP SP3 with Super Cache enabled (2) .... 1:06.31
Windows 7: ........ 1:19.54

(1): FS = First Time Start & SS = Second Time Start (to test Windows caching capabilities)
(2): Super Cache is a great caching program from SuperSpeed company.

What about yours!?

yeah vista really ate up my resources i was getting a 3d Mark score of 12600 with XP pro its a score of 13200, Vista really eats up more resources some are fine with it, And some want optimized performance. I like the optimized performance i get with XP, vista really used my CPU to, 5-10 percent moving mouse, XP stays at 0 percent, I like XP Sp3 for now it runs faster and eats less resources, And updating is so much faster on XP, some like vista and how it looks but your taking a real performance hit with vista, Some can deal with it And some dont notice due to a high grade setup, Windows 7 is probobly gonna be my next upgrade

@igimax: check out your second start times. the way vista was designed is to keep programs in RAM unless something else needs it, whereas XP dumps everything and leaves you with a bunch of free RAM (*not* being used). This shows up in your word 2007 SS scores -- 1.09s is just under twice as fast as XP. the reason it doesn't translate in photoshop is 1GB of RAM is insufficient. with a more reasonable 4, 6 or 8GB setup you would notice photoshop starts up much quicker on windows 7 (vista architecture) than on xp the second time. also, given your aging hardware i'm willing to guess your hard drive is a major bottleneck unless you have a 3 or 4 drive raid0 array (4 old drives in raid0 is still faster than 1 new drive with a decent controller).

obviously with faster cpu, the differences in speeds would be much less apparent. 10 seconds difference in bootup time is noticeable, but consider it on a quad core 3ghz core 2, that gap should translate to around 2 seconds or less if it scales linearly with processing power (netburst was garbage), even with your old ram. my basic point is that i would expect windows 7 vs windows xp comparisons to reveal very little difference in performance, even if xp has the edge it is so minimal with modern hardware i don't find any rationalization to run an antiquated os. fact of the matter is vista is very mature and stable, windows 7 builds on this. i believe the initial driver issues nvidia had with vista have tainted its reputation -- you still hear people afraid to use vista because of driver issues and these were resolved nearly 2 years ago. that also plagued gaming scores and stability, but none of it was MS's fault -- it was nvidia's. now with stable drivers i think people will adopt windows 7 more than vista and we can actually get people to ditch xp. there's no reason to use an 8 year old os. in fact, i bet a comparison between xp and windows 2000 would reveal that win2k is faster -- we should all switch to that and get it to load 400ms quicker and play games with 0.8fps more!

Also 1 comment about the complaint of vista hogging resources...
I read that vista uses free RAM and CPU cycles to preload and cache apps and data. So even if vista uses 5 to 10% of cpu when moving a mouse to me that is fine because when vista loads an app like a game it puts all of the computers resources into the game.

Win 7 is nice. I'm getting used to the start bar, and actually prefer it over xp/vista. Makes things a ton easier.

Aside from startup times, I've not noticed a difference in speed. But from the beggining, I've thought it was a placebo effect. Windows Vista used a 3d desktop with a hardware driven GUI, and precached and shared the precached memory and CPU cycles. Everyone seen 40-50 percent resources used on startup and shouted OMG!!!ONEELEVEN, Resource Hog Vista!!! But with today's standard hardware, it performs on par, if not faster than XP, with direct X 10 and better tools/usability.

Do I think Windows 7 is nice? Deffinately. It will reface Vista's fugly public image.

Will I be Getting Windows 7 on release? Yes, but only because of the Handy MSDN network that provides me with a free copy.

[citation]Will I be Getting Windows 7 on release? Yes, but only because of the Handy MSDN network that provides me with a free copy.[/citation]


Nice, I hadn't thought of that!!!!

It's what Vista should have been!!! I havw Vista Ultimate 64 bit. I got it when it first came out. Will I purchase W-7 maybe, and if I did it would be the Ultimate version. I believe that MS should give us a discount on Windows 7 if we had purchased Vista!!!!!!!!!

It's called the upgrade version.

I would agree with the idea of having major discounts for Vista owners. I myself purchased Vista for the single reason that I needed a 64bit version of Windows. As I was uable to aquire a copy of XPx64 I had no choise but to settle for Vista which in my opinion still is a far worse choise than XPx64 despite some of XP's drawbacks. Microsoft really did drop the ball with Vista and they should make it up to the users who had Vista more or less forced on them due to software requirements.

Microsoft is apparently going to have an upgrade version for people to go from XP to 7.

I've been using 7 on my brand new build from the start, so i can't compare it's performance directly to vista, except for that I don't use as much ram as my friends computer running vista, even though i have more available. My startup time is faster but that's due to all faster components, including a faster hard drive. However, my pentium 4 3ghz laptop with 1.5gb ddr 333 ram and a 5400rpm hard drive running xp, starts up faster than my new desktop... an Intel i7 OC to 3.2, ddr3 1600 cas 8, and a 7200 rpm hard drive. That being said, the slow startup is the only thing I notice being slower in any way. windows 7's UAC seems just as effective, but much, much less annoying than it was in vista. I haven't turned mine off where I surely would if I went with vista, I simply could not take 3-4 confirmations just to check what hardware was in my friends laptop for instance. Things will always continue to improve and change. I do think it would be better for microsoft to continue offering the 7 beta, but maybe that will just mean it will be out even sooner than august. I do not like the 6-7 versions of vista or windows 7, no matter how they explain it it took me a long time to understand the differences.
I personally will be buying whatever home premium type version they have, hopefully an oem version under $100.

I invested in vista and im not sorry one bit. Personaly its been a solid OS for me runs all my programs course since its a 64bit i did have to upgrade a couple programs of course. obviously i needed more power in my computer to run it at the speed im use to but hell what windows hasnt been like that? i cant think of one.

Anyways i would be for a major discount only really for the fact who doesnt like free money? and two the release time was way to short IMO to warrent what i paid for the OS.

I use windows media center for tv, and windows 7 is a big upgrade in this respect. Media center is still just ok for music, but i use it because i have the remote and its just more convenient. I duel boot xp and 7 boots much faster even though its on a slower drive. I installed it on my slower drive because my faith in Microsoft was lacking. Still think shutdown takes to long, but overall big boost from vista and good boost from xp.

Bit torrent can settle that loop hole of getting W7

Hi m8
I agree about my 1GB memory which is not enough for some huge applications like Photoshop and ... at W7. Also I forgot to mention why SS of Photoshop is like that! (tnx 4 mention it )

For instance, My friend system test results with AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6000+ processor and 4GB of memory:

Adobe Photoshop cs2 @ Vista 32bit : .....FS 3.40
Adobe Photoshop cs2 @ W7beta 32bit : .....FS 2.9

Compressing a 108MB text file (using WinRAR v3.80)
Windows XP SP3: ... 39.08
Windows 7: ........ 33.13

Anyway, It's seems Windows 7 have very good performance with great graphical environments and yes! It will be my next upgrade!

when will W7 come out?

Correction!

Compressing a 108MB text file (using WinRAR v3.80)
Windows Vista 32bit: ........ 39.08
Windows W7beta 32bi: ........ 33.13

Also one thing more:
We test Nvidia Driver which Microsoft provide it through its update center for playing some games. But It crashed too many time then We used latest Vista version of NVidia drivers on W7 and it's work perfectly!

I needed to reinstall my OS on our family computer. We had XP, and while it lasted a while (with 6 users accounts) it was time to reset or move on. The W7 Beta came out. I dled it just fine from MS, installed it, and the experience was great. I really disliked vista (it's the network configurations and wizards that put me off, among other things that are mostly just annoyances. It just makes me feel as if I don't have complete control of what's going on as I did in XP). W7 surprised me. It downloaded the drivers for my Geforce 7600 automatically (most up to date ones) and the other various drivers downloaded excellently. I love the new start menu, and the taskbar is so much more being able to customize it more specifically.
Sadly, I couldn't keep this for my family OS. I needed something that would last them when I went away. I had a copy of vista ultimate so I installed it. I do feel gypped. I downloaded the latest drivers from nvidia for my new 9800, and upon windows update I was informed that there was an newer driver for my 9800 then what I got straight from nvidia... :-\ Yeah right... but if it was my parents doing updates, they wouldn't know the difference. I wasn't able to test in W7, but in Vista, random programs (Windows features) kept asking for internet privileges (I use a firewall). I know there are more features in Vista than in XP, but all the while I've been working with Vista I'm like, "...so why do you need to access the internet random background program?" Guess it's time to go through the services and manually stop every frivolous feature.

You don't have to do that. You just need to change the User Account Control (UAC). I believe you change it from the User Accounts found in the Control Panel. Do so at your own risk though. It's a security feature, and security features are for your protection, not your convenience.

for those who think Vista was popular...most hospitals in the country are either in the process of Upgrading to XP or are still on Windows 2000 Pro.

MS makes most of their money from business, and obviously (just like Playstation) they are trying to get what they had with XP and it simply wont happen. They did a great job on XP....so good that there is no point in upgrading. Developers are taking advantage of XP and .NET...NOT VISTA the only the VISTA has is Direct X 10, but a developer would be stupid to cut off 75% of the PC market by making a game vista only.

First time I tryed downloading, it was crawling at about 30 KB a second. It eventually didn't work. The next time I tried it, I was almost done and it Fatal Errored. Oh, and Linux is still better.