Attendees at next month's Consumer Electronics Show (CES) could get the first public look at Windows 7, the next version of Microsoft's client OS.
Awesome i can't wait to BUY windows 7 and support Microsoft. Also it runs like windows xp but 100 times better so you can't go wrong.
i'll laugh if blue error screen appears again.
This will be one of the best days of my life when I get my hands on Windows 7, as soon as pricing is announced I am going to go out and pre-order the ultimate edition at a store which will offer a midnight sale. Until then I shall be using the Windows 7 beta when it is released, taking full advantage at all the revolutionary and award winning features it provides from the unrivalled genius of the Windows engineering team.
Lord Zhuk, you know Microsoft the best so I will look much more forward to my windows 7 copy. :)
"This will be one of the best days of my life when I get my hands on Windows 7" One could only imagine the sheer, relentless, drudgery of a day in your shoes if that's the case.
Vista is actually a flop - not because it has any serious flaws especially with SP. It's a flop because it too many people simply can not hae it work properly on their older computers. Still MS did a great job with XP so I hope they know what to do to make W7 a good system.
Windows 7 will be good.................. hopefully.
windows 7 is exactly the same as vista without the bad reputation pretty much
You're not far off. I'll be interesting to see the public's reaction to 7, I can already see people proclaiming it's the best OS since 2000 and such (So far early reports have been extremely positive, Vista was dogged with bad reports at this stage), but what most people don't realise is that 7 wouldn't be possible without Vista. Vista is the foundation to the whole OS, really what Microsoft did was make an awesome back end with Vista, but because people couldn't see it, they thought Vista consisted of Aero and not much else. Vista is actually a really good OS, it's just plagued by it's early reputation and the "vista capable" debacle. Whatever good things people say about 7, just keep in mind, Vista isn't far behind it.
I don't think that's true... Windows 7 have lots of features never seeing in vista let alone in any other OS... many of these feature seeing only on Microsoft Surface: • Multi-touch gestures in photo galleries like two-finger zoom, flicking, and panning. bahhh... never mind listing it... you can google them.. but one of the most important things is that Windows 7 will use a lot less resources than Vista. it can run with just 1GB of RAM. Vista failure can't be only attributed to the fact that it needs strong hardware to function properly... but to Apple strong bashing marketing... Think about it... When a new MAC OS comes out... you can't just install it to an old mac... you have to buy the new hardware... hense... duhhh it works.. not to mention that you can't just add any hardware you want to you mac... like a PC.. anyways... you should google and compare Vista vs 7 features before saying... that both are the same... lots of features in windows 7 that are currently not available in any OS. Specially in the Multi-touch gestures arena, boot, etc. I do agree that there are some similarities and lots of components are re-use... but isn't that the case with OSX, Linux, Unix and everything when a new version comes out? I do not think anyone expect all the code in the OS to be completely different. "I'll be interesting to see the public's reaction to 7" I think it will be great... because this time Microsoft understand what happens if they allow Apple to do their bash marketing without doing anything themselves. Also, I'm sure they will be very careful about those "Windows 7 capable" stickers... that did hurt them... when companies like HP and dell kept shipping their computers with those stickers... to prevent people from waiting for the release of vista before buying a new PC.
Vista can run with 1Gb of RAM... And all those "features" you're talking about, they all run on the same Core OS, that Core OS is the NT kernel and not a lot has changed between Vista and 7. Try to think of it this way, XP was based on 2000 and was, technically, a minor update to it. Now 2000 was a damn fine OS, but it had compatibility issues and didn't really work as a Desktop OS (Great for severs, though). Vista was a huge update, it's like the Windows 2000 of this generation - great OS underneath, but not really ready for "prime time", it's just a shame Microsoft had to release it so early. But Windows 7 is to Vista what XP was to 2000 - a minor update, but updated in all the right places to make it an amazing operating system. But it wouldn't exist without Vista, it pretty much IS vista with a few small changes and a few different apps here and there.
You guys sound like there have been an OS around at the level of a Windows brands popularity and use. MS had been monopolizing the industry for years. Keeping competition as well as originality and innovation stagnant. A product like Vista, which forced people to upgrade their systems, buy new system, with no guarantee of working, is sad proof of that.
Godmars, your comment is completely irrelevant to anything I've said. I never once said one way or the other about Microsoft's business practices, it's irrelevant to this discussion. We were talking about Windows 7 and everything it entails. Naturally, we're going to mention Vista in this - and why shouldn't we, 7 is based on that OS. The only reason we haven't mentioned other OS's is because there's no real need to, it's not really relevant to the development of Windows. But what the hell, I'll bite - where did Microsoft FORCE anyone to Upgrade their computer for Vista? That's absurd, you're not forced to upgrade to anything, if you WANT to Run Vista then you can't expect 8 year old hardware to run it, you can say the same about most any software. Do 8 year old Macs run the latest OSX? Do 8 year old PCs run the latest version of Ubuntu? (This part is debatable, but compare the average system specs from 8 years to todays and they'll struggle to run a modern Linux distribution). XP is still updated and supported and will be for quite some time to come, so you're not forced to update for security reasons, either. The only people "forced" to upgrade anything are the ones that simply wanted to use the latest operating system. The "It might not run" thing is also absurd. If you meet the minimum requirements for Vista, even the baseline "Vista capable" specifications that are causing so much controversy, it WILL run Vista, it just might not run Aero, which is what the fuss is about. That's it. Aero. Are you seriously going to compare Microsoft monopolising the entire OS industry to one graphical feature not working on their Operating System? Microsoft are certainly no angels, they've done a lot of questionable things over the years, so if you're going to attack them on something, do it for a good reason and not just the pathetic "Aero doesn't work on my old computer" debate that certain media have latched onto.
I agree with you Kushan... I agree that things do not go too well when Microsoft makes major updates to their OS... it usually gets the next version for them to tight the knots... I think that's understandable since most of the issues with windows as their release are mostly related to drivers, compatible software and hardware... usually by the time the next update (in this case Windows 7) 3rd party vendors and hardware makers got their heads around the OS and Microsoft already iron out any bugs... And well said to Godmars290... Kind of funny that Godmars290 complains about Microsoft "forcing people to upgrade" when for example Apple really... really forces people to upgrade their entire desktop (buy a new computer) when a new OS comes out. Take a look at OSX Leopard requirements: http://www.apple.com/macosx... APPLE tells you what MAC COMPUTER MODEL you can have before you can even try to install the OS... Why don't you try changing your modelboard on your MAC... or other components and you will see how the OS will not even install. That's what "forcing" someone to upgrade their hardware means... Microsoft does not force anyone to upgrade... as mater of fact you can try to intall Vista on any piece of crap hardware and it will.. it will simply not work properly... It's a PC... I have Vista and I have no problem.. because I hand pick every single hardware and ensure all hardware was made for vista... and more importantly have a ton of positive reviews from users. And it's not forcing... it's common sense... people want new features... and want to do more things in their computers... it's obvious that to support this.. the proper hardware must exist. This is why "Recommended requirements exist".
Windows 7 is a lot better optimized for multiple cores than Vista. And is also a lot less resource heavy, better optimized. It will also be coming with DirectX 11. Vista was good, just not good enough. Windows 7 will be the "good enough". I will be upgrading to it, and just applying a Windows XP skin, as I see no point for all the extra crap they have thrown into the OS to make it more Mac like. (p.s, You can get a Windows 7 beta off of torrent sites already, so technically it's already public ;).
Nice long read about DirectX 11. http://www.bit-tech.net/bit...
I have Windows 7 on my Laptop, I can't wait until the final release... Ms has this one down....
That its a reworked Vista w/o the heavy security implementation and the compatibility issues worked. Regardless, given that most MS software have launch issues, more so when its seemingly rushed, is no one worried about this?
me want windows 7.delicious
http://gizmodo.com/5119158/... Go grab it and test it out guys if you haven't already. :)
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.