Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Eager Fan Campaigns for Windows 7 Release Now

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 43 comments
Tags :

Earlier in the week we reported that general availability for the Windows 7 beta was set to end February 10. At the time you all seemed pretty cool with it. Plenty of time left to download, right? Turns out not everyone is so sensible.

Before general availability has even ended, one eager user has started an online campaign demanding Microsoft get on with things and release the new operating system right now.

Kelly Poe of Tennessee has a petition up online and is campaigning for Microsoft to “let the beautiful little birdy fly.”

“I'm a BIG Windows fan and have been loving what Microsoft has done with the recent Beta Release of Windows 7. There have been so many great reviews from people like Leo and Paul Thurrott, needless to say I'm jones'n for the release of Windows 7.

So here we are...let's join together and get Micorsoft to release Windows 7™...enough with this Beta stuff...release it already!!! Let the beautiful little birdy (with the odd name) fly!!!"


While we’re eager to see what the full release of Windows 7 has to offer, we’re all for Microsoft taking all the time it needs to make sure the new release is as bug-free as possible upon release.

Just as a little memo, if you’re still looking to download the beta, get right on it. General availability ends Feb. 10 and unfinished downloads will only continue through to Feb. 12. Click here to go straight to the download page. Oh and if you want to add your name to the sixty six other people who have signed up click here.

(Via TechFlash)

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 18 Hide
    The_Blood_Raven , January 29, 2009 4:35 PM
    Wow lets rush Microsoft with the release of a new Windows... that's a good idea...
  • 10 Hide
    JMcEntegart , January 29, 2009 4:39 PM
    The_Blood_RavenWow lets rush Microsoft with the release of a new Windows... that's a good idea...


    My thoughts exactly. Not a good idea, at all.
Other Comments
  • -5 Hide
    ispyamoose , January 29, 2009 4:33 PM
    I'm sure that she also wanted the early release of Windows Vista as well. Windows 7 isn't THAT good. Microsoft should focus on fixing Vista first.
  • Display all 43 comments.
  • 18 Hide
    The_Blood_Raven , January 29, 2009 4:35 PM
    Wow lets rush Microsoft with the release of a new Windows... that's a good idea...
  • 3 Hide
    A Stoner , January 29, 2009 4:38 PM
    Go for it, Microsoft needs another Vista debacle about as much as, well I hope you get the sarcasm intended there... If it gets released as it is, I will stick with windows XP for another generation of windows.

    What microsoft needs to do is work closer with anti virus companies and get the INTRUSIVE UAC to be more or less silent for just about every task. If I have to tell windows 3 or more times that I want to accomplish a task, that is 2 or more times more than needed. Unless Windows is informed there is a real threat it needs to just what I say. Are you sure you want to start a process from a file you downloaded from the internet? Yes. Are you sure you want to allow this signed by AVG process to continue? Yes. Process by AVG wants to change system files or folders, are you sure you want this to happen? Yes. Windows is currently blocking access to the internet for AVG, what do you want to do, allow access, keep blocking? Allow Access. I mean seriously?
  • 10 Hide
    JMcEntegart , January 29, 2009 4:39 PM
    The_Blood_RavenWow lets rush Microsoft with the release of a new Windows... that's a good idea...


    My thoughts exactly. Not a good idea, at all.
  • 0 Hide
    fonzy , January 29, 2009 4:46 PM
    I think it's pretty close to being finished(I haven't run into any problems on Win7-64) It's way beyond what Vista was when it was in Beta.I wouldn't release it now though, maybe when the Beta expires on August 1 would be a good time.
  • 2 Hide
    SamanuelMC , January 29, 2009 4:52 PM
    Do we really need want another Vista like launch disaster...ya no go on this one. Take the time and do it right!!!
  • 1 Hide
    SirCrono , January 29, 2009 4:56 PM
    I think the beta is stable enough for release, but I can comfortably wait till august or october, that way they can iron out most bugs and improve the kernel efficency by removing all that testing software betas usually carry.
  • -3 Hide
    Liuqyn , January 29, 2009 5:09 PM
    I say release it now before Microsoft has time to put all the bugs in.
  • 4 Hide
    GoodBytes , January 29, 2009 5:14 PM
    Windows 7 is not ready yet, there is A LOT of issues. Comparing Vista 64-bit and Windows 7, it seams that Microsoft recode some parts as bugs that were fixed in Vista 64-bit final release (from the Release Candidate or beta)are back in Windows 7. Moreover, drivers for the OS are not ready. If Microsoft release the OS, the same thing as Vista will occur... buggy and unoptimized drivers make eager review website benchmark the OS and go "new Windows os slower than the older one.", and due to the buggy driver issue destroy Windows image.
    I know that Windows 7 is probably the most constant Windows ever made form Microsoft wince Windows 95, but the UI is one thing, the rest it another.

    And even then the UI is far from being done. For example: UI related issues, is that the when you maximize a window the boarders are still transparent. This makes text on the transparent area hard to read, and if you have any bright (like orange, red, bright green) background or changing background (auto-switch or animated) it detracts you as you think that the OS ask you for your attention, and also it is ugly, and ultimately useless, as it serve no purpose.

    I can name more issues... the list is long.

    As much as I love Vista 64-bit, i must say that Microsoft needs more work for Windows 7, as I see no point for me to change. It is not a question of money for me, I still think that Vista was worth the money I spent. But Windows 7 gives no nothing much to jump.
  • -6 Hide
    cruiseoveride , January 29, 2009 5:36 PM
    How many years did Vista take? 5rs? 6yrs?

    Unless Win7 is not a glorified Vista Service Pack, it should take Microsoft at least another 4yrs before launching it to get the same performance as Vista. If history is any predictor
  • 2 Hide
    jrabbitb , January 29, 2009 5:47 PM
    @cruiseoveride
    Keep in mind that before XP new operating systems came out much more frequently. you could say that we've been spoiled with XP, and to it's credit, it is a phenomenal operating system to hold up this well for this long and do so much on so much hardware.

    @All
    Though win7 hasn't changed the kernel much from vista it has made some serious changes that make it a non service pack. it's memory management alone makes me happy. I agree with the majority here, let win 7 get polished off in the next few months. any coder knows it takes the most time to get the last 5% working just right on a project.

    Also, the longer they take to get 7 completed, the longer we have to convince them that this obnoxious versioning is just that, obnoxious. i can see 3 real versions (not including the 3rd world developing countries version), Home, Business, Ultimate. where home is essentially home premium, business is what it is and ultimate is all the features of home and business. that's it, don't make home users unhappy or confused like vista did with home basic. just stupid.
  • -2 Hide
    Anonymous , January 29, 2009 5:50 PM
    Nice viral campaign..
  • 7 Hide
    GoodBytes , January 29, 2009 6:04 PM
    Heuu cruiseoveride... no.
    XP (NT 5.1) was based on Windows 2000 (NT5), which was based on Windows NT4, and based on Windows NT. Back-then the Internet concept as we know today didn't exists and security was Microsoft least concerns.

    Windows XP was sooo bad security wise that Microsoft had to stop Longhorn development and put everyone together to make all the fixes for Windows XP so that it holds together and not have businesses and individual drop XP and switch to Linux. This was a critical moment from Microsoft. This made Longhorn first big delay, and made the release of XP SP2 instead. Remember that Longhorn is a new OS... a new kernel, a new system started from scratch, that had to be superior of Windows XP in many ways, and support all the millions of hardware configurations out there. And technology has no pause button... it goes on and faster each day. Making Microsoft do the big decision of dropping support for old technology... hence the reason why many people has problems with the OS.

    Another issue, is that Microsoft realized that Longhorn UI was too fancy for CPU's... as the UI was all done on the CPU back then. Also, the OS had many many issues with computers in the sense of lack of performance. This made Microsoft restart the Shell system of Windows, which added more delays. However, brought GPU rendered UI in Vista and even more under Windows 7.

    Another added delay was that Longhorn was available in 64-bit. Back then 64-bit CPU was not widely used. Many still had P4's... and AMD 64-bit was still expensive (Intel didn't have a desktop oriented 64-bit CPU (I mean a real 64-bit CPU)).This made Microsoft simply wait.. they did improvements but no development at full speed as it was before..
    Then Microsoft decided to make the bold decision of quickly patch up a 32-bit version of the OS due to pressure among shareholders and investors in the company to release something... FAST. And that is why we got Windows NT6.0 (which is miss leading as it's actually a new core... it should be New NT 1.0 (or New New Technology 1.0)) but that was that, and that made chip makers think it's an upgarde version of XP, and not focus on their drivers, until Vista was out and they got blasted with angry customers. And add Microsoft bad decisions after that moment like: lack of documentation for IT's to adapt XP setup to Vista and not the same registry hacks (if any) which could brake the OS, focus the selling of the 32-bit last minute ultra buggy Vista, instead of the well done 64-bit counterpart), bad/lack of marketing, lack of informing companies to about Vista new Core, and well the rest..

    You didn't buy Vista for the feature... the point of Vista was a new core and new ideas such as GPU rendered UI to make the CPU free for real tasks. Windows 7 takes that idea and and develop on it, with new features (their quiet a lot of new features... multi-touch, superbar, windows management, is just like looking at a delicious cake far far away. If you look much closer than it's packed with new features.
  • 3 Hide
    dariushro , January 29, 2009 6:09 PM
    LiuqynI say release it now before Microsoft has time to put all the bugs in.


    Gold :) ))
  • 5 Hide
    PrangeWay , January 29, 2009 6:14 PM
    Well I don't want a buggy product, but the sooner we move the 32bit-XP prehistoric cave-dwellers into the modern world of 64bit, the better.
  • -7 Hide
    caskachan , January 29, 2009 6:21 PM
    microsoft, make your os faster and esier to use, not slower and more intricate !
  • -9 Hide
    joebob2000 , January 29, 2009 6:24 PM
    You guys are looking at the development lifecycle ALL wrong. Look how much "good hard work" they put into Vista. As someone pointed out, it was ~6 years worth, and look what we got. Microsoft is encouraged (by the bottom line) to take as much time releasing an OS as they want. They don't have competition (except with their own older OSes) so they are going to sit around until the very last person has begrudgingly coughed up the cash for a Vista license. Then, they are going to drop Windows 7 with much fanfare, and let the wave of new licenses pad their bottom line for the next release cycle.

    Why not just let Windows 7 hit it big now? There aren't any big feature additions we are holding out for. There are no major bugs (that we have heard about, at least). A lot of people think this OS in beta looks better than Vista did in release. The bugs will get fixed in the next 6 months to 1 year whether it's a released product or not. So, why not let it go? Get it out the door before some make-work software engineers throw enough bugs in it to keep them employed the next 5 years fixing them.
  • 0 Hide
    pug_s , January 29, 2009 6:46 PM
    fonzyI think it's pretty close to being finished(I haven't run into any problems on Win7-64) It's way beyond what Vista was when it was in Beta.I wouldn't release it now though, maybe when the Beta expires on August 1 would be a good time.


    Microsoft is anything but finished. Most of their revenue is thru license renewals from corporations. An average company of 1,000 would pay microsoft hundreds of thousands for that every year. They do not earn alot of money from an average consumer but as long as we are using Windows XP and Outlook, your company is already paying their sum to Microsoft.
  • 0 Hide
    LightWeightX , January 29, 2009 6:56 PM
    Let the eager fan(s) use the beta until MS can get a product worth release. They rushed Vista and didn't get it to be a viable product until SP1.
  • 1 Hide
    captaincharisma , January 29, 2009 7:19 PM
    whoever started that campaign is an idiot. the last thing we need is a rushed peace of software to the market
Display more comments