Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Announces Windows 7 SP1

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the software-evolves dept.

Windows 355

CWmike writes "Microsoft has announced service packs for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2, but declined to set a release date or a schedule for getting a beta in users' hands. A company spokesman said Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1) will primarily contain 'minor updates,' including patches and hotfixes that will have been delivered earlier via the Windows Update service, rather than new features. One of the latter: an updated Remote Desktop client designed to work with RemoteFX, the new remote-access platform set to debut in SP1 for Windows Server 2008 R2. Windows Server 2008 R2 will also be upgraded to SP1, Microsoft said, presumably at the same time as Windows 7 since the two operating systems share a single code base. Besides RemoteFX — which Microsoft explained Wednesday in an entry on the Windows virtualization team's blog — Server 2008 R2 will also include a feature dubbed 'Dynamic Memory,' which lets IT staff adjust guest virtual machines' memory on the fly. Microsoft did not spell out a timetable for the service packs, saying only that it would provide more information as release milestones approach."

cancel ×

355 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

YOU FAIL IT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532162)

LAST POST. GO SUCK A BAG OF DICKS LINUX-FAGS.

Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Re:YOU FAIL IT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532208)

i love you

Re:YOU FAIL IT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532260)

Bill Gates...is that you?

Re:YOU FAIL IT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532620)

Will you touch my pee pee, captain wenis?

Signed,
Your Horny Buck nigger ;)

The wise user will wait (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532210)

It's a well-known fact that all first service-packs are buggy. Best to wait until the first service-pack-service-pack is released.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532250)

The problem is that with Microsoft's new biannual upgrade tax, Windows 8 will be released instead of Windows 7 SP2. So if you intend to always wait for SP2 you'll never be able to use Windows again.

Ah, OK, I guess that's not such a bad thing after all.

Re:The wise user will wait (3, Insightful)

Jazz-Masta (240659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532314)

Or we could be like Mac and get the annual upgrade tax for even more minor features.

Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard from 2001 - 2009

The same release window as Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. Each copy of OSX runs $129, with some upgrades only being $19. When upgrading from 10, 10.1 to 10.2 Jaguar, Apple required all users to pay $129. Safe to say, if you owned an Apple from 2001 - 2009 and purchased all the OS updates, vs a PC and purchased all the updates, you'd have paid less for Windows.

The upgrade paths for Apple have been far more expensive, for far less features. I don't think anyone can defend Apple's upgrades from 10.0 - 10.6 vs the changes between Windows XP and Windows 7, including their server line 2003 - 2008 for backend control.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Insightful)

theurge14 (820596) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532402)

Why is a defense needed? Windows has been playing catchup in features for that entire time period.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532630)

That depends on what you want, now doesn't it? I think that having one menu bar makes for an atrociously unusable GUI, and I like to play games... so for my money, Mac OS has never been ahead. For others', maybe it has. Either way, you can't really make an objective statement on it.

Re:The wise user will wait (4, Insightful)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532704)

Why is a defense needed? Windows has been playing catchup in features for that entire time period.

The only feature it's been playing "catchup" at is the display system. For pretty much everything else, OS X only hit parity with Windows *2000* at about 10.4/10.5.

Re:The wise user will wait (5, Funny)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532406)

The same release window as Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7.

On the other hand, Vista provided negative value to users, and many paid hundreds for the privilege. Maybe that evens it out.

Re:The wise user will wait (1, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532596)

Except Vista was fine. For every 10 users who claimed to "hate" Vista, you could find 1 or 2 who had a real reason to do so, rather than "my friend who knows computers told me it sucks". As much as people mocked the "Windows Mojave" commercial, I had to sympathize with what they were trying to say, because I saw the same phenomenon all over: people hating it out of sheer ignorance and word-of-mouth, rather than actual informed opinions.

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532708)

Uhm, sorry. Vista SUCKED, and still does. An inability to articulate exactly why, and to a degree that satisfies YOU, doesn't detract one bit from that.

Re:The wise user will wait (4, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532722)

Wow, you live in a different world than me then because all the friends and family I know that got Vista asked me to give them XP back :/

Maybe you only know people who never owned a computer before Vista?

People hated it because change for nothing more than the sake of change pisses people off, and thats what Vista was to 99.99999999999999999999999% of the world if you exclude Microsoft.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Insightful)

atmurray (983797) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532824)

Care to explain why Windows 7 is hated by far fewer people then? To me Windows 7 is Windows Vista with a few UI tweaks and the couple of less annoying default settings (like the UAP settings). There's few if any fundamental differences (neither user interface wise or code wise) between the two. Regardless of whether 7 is any good, if you hated Vista, you've got no reason to love 7 in my books.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Informative)

tagno25 (1518033) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532854)

Windows 7 will run on computers Vista could not run on. I have a ~5 year old desktop that is running Windows 7 Professional, but it couldn't run Vista very fast. It is only a single core 2.1GHz computer with 1GB of RAM and a 320GB HDD.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

mobets (101759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532878)

I liked Vista. The new start menu was great and the bread crumbs in explorer were nice. Also a stable 64 bit system, giving me access to all 4GiB of memory, was good. I will say they screwed up networking. I'm glad they fixed it in 7.

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532804)

Except Vista was fine.

No, no it wasn't. There is no excuse for an OS to be as bloated as Vista was.

Re:The wise user will wait (1, Insightful)

Miseph (979059) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532916)

Broken driver compatibility, unavoidable, but few people really understood that and Microsoft could have been much clearer. Broken print/file sharing with XP peers (broken in the "takes more than 2 minutes to set up and requires any research whatsoever to get working properly" sense, which given that between XP machines it really did work that way actually counts). An irritating, intrusive, meddlesome and often cloying UI that continually found ways to spit new and perplexing pointless dialogs and options. A disappointingly implemented and generally underwhelming security model (though they some credit for at least doing something in that regard). Hardware requirements which can only be charitably described as "uncalled for" matched with actual performance that is, again, charitably described as "not great".

Vista was just a revisit to the days of ME. Almost there, but not quite. The problem isn't that Vista has good stuff and people knock it unfairly, the problem is that Vista has good stuff and it still sucks, just not for the big glaring reasons people tend to look for. Again, see Windows ME.

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532428)

Fewer features.

You meant fewer.

Re:The wise user will wait (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532448)

Steve Ballmer still won't suck your dick. Sorry.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Informative)

WMD_88 (843388) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532504)

Safe to say, if you owned an Apple from 2001 - 2009 and purchased all the OS updates, vs a PC and purchased all the updates, you'd have paid less for Windows.

No Apple-sold computer that can run 10.0 can also run 10.6 - or 10.5, for that matter (at least officially). You wouldn't have bought all the updates, as you would have either gotten a new one on a new machine, or you stopped when your hardware was no longer supported.
In any case, Apple didn't force you to buy all the updates. I skipped 10.5 myself.

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532542)

In any case, Apple didn't force you to buy all the updates

No, they just stopped providing essential security upgrades for older versions. "I'm not forcing you to give me your money, but I will shoot you if you don't."

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532664)

Bullshit. Tiger just stopped getting security updates at the end of 2009. It was released in April 2005, so it had 4.75 years of support. And **News Flash**, still no viable malware in the wild for OS X (unless you count trojans, but then you can't patch users).

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532750)

Tiger just stopped getting security updates at the end of 2009. It was released in April 2005, so it had 4.75 years of support.

I know that. Of course, I'm not expecting them to maintain every OS forever, but as of late 2009, running Mac OS X 10.4 is no longer viable to users who wish to remain secure. Apple isn't "forcing" users running Tiger to upgrade, as I said.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

Jazz-Masta (240659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532574)

In any case, Apple didn't force you to buy all the updates. I skipped 10.5 myself.

I know, I just said if you bought all the updates it would cost more. Chances are people don't have the same PCs from 2001 either.

Microsoft didn't force their updates on anyone either.

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Interesting)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532766)

Not true.

10.0 - 10.3 Ran on PPC only, 10.6 will not.

Only 4 and 5 will run on both processor architectures but all versions have dropped support for older hardware as they came along.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

cigawoot (1242378) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532560)

On the other hand, I predominately use Linux (except my gaming machine, which unfortunately needs to run Windows). I pay nothing to upgrade those systems :)

Re:The wise user will wait (2, Informative)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532726)

Alright. I'll play your game. Let's calculate this:

Windows path: 300 [amazon.com] +107 [amazon.com] +196 [amazon.com] = $603, if I'm adding correctly.

OS X path: 129 [wikipedia.org] + 0 [wikipedia.org] +129 [apple.com] (at most - some users could upgrade for $20)+20 [apple.com] +129 [apple.com] +X+29 [apple.com] = 436+X, if I'm adding correctly.

I couldn't find a reliable price for Leopard, but as long as it was under $167, it looks like OS X is the cheaper route if you want to have all the features available. Yes, you could go with a cheaper version of Vista or 7, but you could also skip some OS X versions without much loss.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

Kral_Blbec (1201285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532900)

That is stupid. You're not counting hardware. As already mentioned, the path from 10.0 to 10.6 (or what ever it is, I hate macs) wont even run on the same architecture, so somewhere along that line you are plopping down a grand on a brand new machine, where as it is entirely possible to run 7 AND vista on a box that is 10 years old.

Re:The wise user will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532788)

If you purchased all the updates you had money to blow. Most normal people skipped revisions. As a general rule Mac users don't run out and upgrade just for the sake of upgrading, when a minor OSX revision didn't contain features important enough to matter it was skipped.

And yes, I can defend Apples upgrades between 10.0 to 10.6. 10.0 performance was pretty crappy over all when it first came out, updates helped, 10.1 did me a world of good. Each new update has resulted in a faster OS with MORE features from my perspective, on the same hardware. The OS actually gets better all around.

MS added more features, no doubt there, many very nice ones, but Win7 feels like a dog (even if it is better than Vista) on most hardware that came with XP unless it was pretty hefty for the time. First generation XP hardware running even Vista, yea, you have fun with that.

As an Apple owner I have plenty of GREAT reasons to bitch at Apple, but my reasons are never the same as people who whine about how bad Apple is.

I could bitch about the fact that I think my legs are blistering because the retarded system management controller won't keep this laptop cool because it has cooling vents with less airflow than a soda straw so until I get around to reinstalling a special driver and software package to undervolt the CPU its going to run hot, and there isn't a util for Win7 that will do it so I'm just roasting the nuts if I play a game. That just my current bitch, there are plenty more ... but none of my reasons, as an owner, ever seem to be the things that people who don't own the machines bitch about ... kind of funny don'tcha think? I wonder what it could possibly mean ... hrmmmm. you got any ideas?

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532826)

Ignoring that it is very possible to skip upgrades on Mac OS X, these price point debates are just made by people to support what they like working with. If people cared about price that much, no one would ever buy Windows Ultimate edition and Linux would be ruler of the earth. But rather, the atmosphere of things is more like this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-L-0s-7-Z0&feature=PlayList&p=8DF58E9C3BB72043&index=0 [youtube.com]

Re:The wise user will wait (5, Insightful)

Ralish (775196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532396)

Yes, a bit like how when Windows 7 was released, MS dropped support for Windows Vista, or how when 2008 R2 was released, they dropped support for 2008? Seriously, do you anti-MS zealots even bother to consider if the statements you make have any basis in reality? MS is only now even beginning to retire Windows 2000 support, XP is still supported for years to come, and Vista is currently placed as supported until 2017 and Server 2008 a little longer. If Windows 7 doesn't get at least two Service Packs in the decade or so of support it will get, I'll erase my system and install Gentoo.

The notion that you are somehow forced to upgrade because Microsoft continually releases new Windows versions is absurd to the extreme. You are forced to upgrade if you want to remain on the bleeding edge, and you are eventually forced to upgrade if you don't want to be obsolete. The same is true of all software as well as hardware. I've yet to find a Linux distribution that supports all releases for eternity; perhaps you are aware of one? Typically, MS supports their software for some of the longest timeframes of any IT company, which is part of the reason for their success. Red Hat also have excellent support lifecycles, as does Sun for Solaris, but they all do eventually end, and support lifecycles that exceed a decade are generally considered generous.

I don't buy into the notion that Slashdot is infested with full-time trolls, who intentionally spread FUD for kicks, or that they are paid to do so. Rather, I think people are just stupid, and posts like this just boggle my mind.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532484)

Yes, a bit like how when Windows 7 was released, MS dropped support for Windows Vista, or how when 2008 R2 was released, they dropped support for 2008?

Why would anyone buy Vista now that Windows 7 is out? And why would anyone buy Windows 7 after Windows 8 is out? Assuming it's actually an improvement and not Vista ME.

You don't have to be a troll to feel that being pushed into paying to upgrade Windows every two years is a seriously retrograde step after XP's long lifespan. Fortunately I only use Windows for games and video editing these days so all my other PCs run free operating systems without the biannual Microsoft tax.

Re:The wise user will wait (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532568)

That's his point. You aren't pushed into paying to upgrade, your old version will be supported for a while yet. Your "why buy x when you can buy x + 1" argument is a strawman, because that argument assumes that our theoretical user is looking to buy anyway. If he is, then he doesn't mind that there's a newer version, as he's going to buy anyway. If he's not, and he already has Windows, then he can continue to use it for a while longer yet, because support isn't disappearing overnight.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

Galactic Dominator (944134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532544)

WTF are you smoking? You're 5 years late in your claims.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx [microsoft.com]
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;%5Bln%5D;lifesupsps [microsoft.com]

Re:The wise user will wait (5, Informative)

Jazz-Masta (240659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532654)

You referenced lifecycle and service pack support availability. Mainstream support for XP ended last year, while extended support ends in 2014. Both support cycles offer security updates, but non-essential hotfixes are only available to companies who have support contracts.

The first link details when they stop selling various licences of the software (not support)
The second link details when support for services packs end AFTER the introduction on new service packs.

To reiterate, XP has extended support until 2014. Windows 2000 support just recently ended.

Apple stops releasing security updates shortly after new releases, while Ubuntu LTS is 3 years for Desktop and 5 years for server...

XP is 13 years.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

Graff (532189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532782)

Apple stops releasing security updates shortly after new releases

Actually Apple releases updates for the last version as well as the current version of Mac OS X and they've been known to release security updates for even earlier versions.

Re:The wise user will wait (0, Troll)

Galactic Dominator (944134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532840)

A Windows OS in an extended support phase is unsuitable is anything but a closed environment. Trying to frame it as a usable OS in normal small/medium office or home environment is simply ridiculous. Extended support life-cycles exist to help corporations plan, and for developers to base products on, not to judge if it's viable OS option.

To reiterate, any useful support short of egregious security holes for XP has already ended, and same happened to 2000 5 years ago.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532864)

W2K is still being supported until July of this year. Past that point, no more security fixes.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532764)

You do realize the information on those pages is clearly inaccurate and out of date ... right?

Re:The wise user will wait (4, Insightful)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532594)

I've yet to find a Linux distribution that supports all releases for eternity; perhaps you are aware of one?

Some linux distributions just continuously update their packages without any specific releases like Ubuntu does. For example gentoo and arch (?), etc.

It's true that Linux distributions don't have support for as long as windows does however I get the feeling the these huge distribution upgrades such as XP -> Windows 7 cost IT departments more time then just staying up to date with the latest version of whatever Linux distribution you're using.

Think about it. If you're continuously doing updates to your systems it's business as usual. If you have to roll out the latest windows to over 2000 desktops every 10 years that's going to cost you a lot of downtime and productivity loss.

Why? Well first it's a bigger change then continuous improvements. Maybe on Linux some menu that the user has gotten used to has changed but it's not a big deal because it's just a small change. Going from one version of windows to another is a massive change sometimes, for example xp to vista or win 7. Users don't like huge changes they balk at them and throw their hands in the air yelling that they can't work any more.

Another reason is that if you got to convert 2000 desktops to the latest OS, a lot of the business apps are probably going to have problems. Constant rolling updates have the some problem however you don't get 10+ apps not working all at the same time.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

atmurray (983797) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532892)

It's find for an IT administrator to continually stay up to date the continual way you suggest, however you can't expect end users to either do this or even allow IT people to do this for them. Could you imagine what it would be like to come in to work every week and find some programs that you rely on have been upgraded? Even businesses with unix/linux install bases don't do continual upgrades as you suggest. They wait for a few significant upgrades to be available, then test for compatibility, then release and train staff with the changes.

Re:The wise user will wait (4, Insightful)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532912)

Think about it. If you're continuously doing updates to your systems it's business as usual. If you have to roll out the latest windows to over 2000 desktops every 10 years that's going to cost you a lot of downtime and productivity loss.

I had to undo a bunch of moderation to chime in here. You're only experiencing down time and "productivity loss" if you don't know what you're doing. It doesn't matter if you're rolling out to 2 desktops or 2000 desktops. You create one image and then push it out. Most people do it over the weekend. Most people wait until they have a stable image before rolling it out.

Now if you have IT guys straight out of college with no real world experience you might run into some problems. But as long as you have a realistic time window for your OS rollout, it is a pretty painless process. If you wanted to get really aggressive and take chances, you could just image the base OS image with hardware drivers and rely on something like Systems Center or even Group Policy (if you're really masochistic and like rolling your own packages) to install all of your apps.

Another reason is that if you got to convert 2000 desktops to the latest OS, a lot of the business apps are probably going to have problems. Constant rolling updates have the some problem however you don't get 10+ apps not working all at the same time

Given your hypothetical "every 10 years" desktop OS refresh, if you can't plan 10 years ahead to get your business apps ready for the OS that you're going to be 'forced' to roll out then you have no business managing systems (Windows or otherwise).

To give you an idea of how I'm moving my users from XP to Win7, right now there are two workstations in the organization running Win7. Between those two workstations are 98% of the applications that the organization uses (the other apps are on Terminal Servers). Most of the apps work, a couple don't. As departments find room in their budgets for new workstations, we roll out Win7 if they aren't using apps with compatability problems. Over the course of the next two years, all of the workstations will be running Win7.

It isn't like I'm going to wake up one morning and decide, "I know... I'll go roll out Win7 today." Like any IT project, there is a process to follow.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532754)

The forced upgrade comes because users depend on so much other MS software. You upgrade one thing and instantly just about everything else needs an upgrade or it won't work. Since MS integrates so tightly with its own code and rarely ever takes any consideration to forward/backward compat for interop between applications within the system it seems like the force upgrades. You can't just upgrade Word, you upgrade office, and then CRM, and then SBM (or whatever its called this year).

Of course, the same is true of all software really.

Microsoft does it. Apple does it. Linux distros are the worst at this. More people us MS so it comes up more often for them, its not that anyone or anything is actually different, there are just more people talking about MS because its more popular.

Re:The wise user will wait (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532816)

I can't speak for the rest but I dislike Windows for the little annoyances which I don't seem to be able to get rid of. For example my wife's copy of WindowsXP pops up this window saying that her copy of windows is vulnerable because we don't have antivirus. I know this system is not vulnerable and I would like to inhibit the warning but I don't know how. As an experienced windows user you probably know a trick for this so I would be interested in any advice you can give me on this. To be frank the warning annoys the hell out of me. I wish it has a "don't tell me this again" checkbox.

Another one is the window which offers to help me clean up the desktop, usually every couple of minutes. It would be nice if I could make that one go away and not come back.

Disliking windows might be like disliking a couch because it has a spring which jabs you in the back. Its not about who made the couch or the overall quality. Its about that bloody spring.

Re:Gartner says it's unnecessary (1, Troll)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532694)

Gartner [softpedia.com] says Windows 7 breaks the rule - they're obviously getting better after 35 years of developing the SAME FUCKING OPERATING SYSTEM. I'll give them a break and say it's been since July 1993 for the NT codebase, so that's 17 years of practice to get a first release right.

Re:Gartner says it's unnecessary (-1, Troll)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532762)

Well by one standard Linux has been under development since 1969.

RmoteFX (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532230)

RmoteRegistryPwning, nodoubt.

Take out all the letters you want, still spells the same thing.

Who uses Windows 7? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532234)

I'm waiting for Windows 8 to come out.

Keep up man! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532418)

I'm waiting for Windows 8 to come out.

This is Windows 8.

Re:Keep up man! (1)

tagno25 (1518033) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532478)

via counting it is Windows 8
via MS naming it is Windows 7
via MS version numbering it is Windows 6.1

The first of many? (4, Funny)

zmaragdus (1686342) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532240)

Alright. So who wants to put down bets on how many service packs are eventually released for 7?

Re:The first of many? (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532262)

3 sounds about right.

Re:The first of many? (2, Interesting)

DIplomatic (1759914) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532422)

I think Win7 is right there with NT4 and XP as a long-lasting platform. It is stable, easy to use, and looks fantastic.

I hope it sees enough years to warrant 4 service packs.

They call that a service pack? (-1, Troll)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532270)

Clearly designed to get PHB's to sign-off on it, this collection of patches and hotfixes is not enough to qualify for a SP rating. That would be like me calling a .bat file 'high-level' coding!

Now we wait for SP2 before we will look at it.

Re:They call that a service pack? (2, Interesting)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532294)

Why? Have you actually played with Windows 7 (Beta, RC, RTM?)

The Beta was rock solid, the RC was, I don't know, it made the UI more uniform, and I hardly noticed many differences between the RC and release. And I haven't had any trouble at all with RTM.

Re:They call that a service pack? (3, Insightful)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532312)

The "Dynamic Memory" thing sounds cool, but it sounds like specific to servers, i.e. for Hyper-V. This is also really too early to know exactly what the SP will or won't contain; everybody knew there would be one and it's easy to make an approximate timeline for it, but SP1 rarely contains any major new features anyhow. They can still add additional minor improvements like parallelizing more of the core code or something - you probably wouldn't notice specifically, but the system would be faster on a multi-core machine than it was before. It takes a lot of testing to be sure something like that doesn't cause a problem, though.

Re:They call that a service pack? (4, Interesting)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532354)

What I'd love to see is BitLocker given the ability to encrypt system/boot drives the way BitLocker To Go drives can be encrypted with a passphrase.

This way, I could have decent WDE protection on machines without having to make sure that a TPM is specced on each of them, or use a third party utility. (This is nothing against PGP, TrueCrypt, or others, but corporate clients get real nervous when you spec a utility they never heard of [1] that handles a core security measure.)

[1]: IMHO, it takes living under a rock to not have heard of PGP or TrueCrypt and be in IT, but there are those PHBs out there, and they make the purse string decisions.

What's With the Windows icon??! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532284)

Seriously, what's the deal with slashdot using a "broken windows" image to represent windows?

You know there is an actual logo for it you can use. You do it for just about everything else, why can't you use an accurate, representative icon for this one?

I mean, I think just about everybody agrees that Windows 7 is actually a pretty good OS.

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532298)

Because fair and balanced reporting isn't part of Slashdot's policy. Isn't it keen how many people here bash Fox News bias but eat it up when it's Slashdot that does the same exact thing?

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (0, Offtopic)

Grapes4Buddha (32825) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532636)

When Fox News changes their slogan to "Propaganda for conservative wing-nuts, stuff to mess with Liberals' minds", maybe we'll stop bashing them so much.

Maybe.

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532546)

I mean, I think just about everybody agrees that Windows 7 is actually a pretty good OS.

I, for one, utterly hate a number of things about the interface. So there.

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532564)

I mean, I think just about everybody agrees that Windows 7 is actually a pretty good OS.

Not exactly. It's pretty good as far as Windows goes, but it still doesn't compare to the latest Mac OS or Ubuntu or whatever.

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (2, Informative)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532794)

It's just a joke. The same reason they have a gnu holding a blanket sucking his thumb every time there is a free software story.

Re:What's With the Windows icon??! (1, Troll)

KibibyteBrain (1455987) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532796)

People love biased reporting so long as the bias is the same as theirs. Better yet when the bias just happens to be in their best interest as well.

Barger (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532288)

SP1? So fast?
It means Win7 is full of bugs, dude
lol

Go for MAC!

Let the Games Begin... (3, Interesting)

tpstigers (1075021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532336)

Windows 7 is the best product MS has released in years. While this may be considered a pyrrhic victory (ME, anyone?), the fact remains that Windows 7 is a solid product. And, I daresay, a reasonably priced one. Do we have to continue this tired process of Microsoft bashing? It's gotten rather tiresome.

Re:Let the Games Begin... (0)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532440)

Agreed. First version of Windows that I can use in a desktop environment and can keep in running 24/7 for as long as I want. Months on end even. Eventually I will have to reboot to apply updates however. I really can't say the same for XP (though it was better than Win2K) and perhaps Vista as well.

Re:Let the Games Begin... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532872)

Sounds to me like it might be possible that a lot of cheering on the supposed "stability" of this new OS is from two reasons:
1) Most of you Windows guys skipped Vista, unless you got stuck with OEM hardware incompatible with XP. Few people here just go to a local store and pick up what's there... if you do, you install a pirate copy of your known OS. This results in little familiarity with daily use of the OS. You keep your eyes peeled for the known Vista flaws, in a positive reinforcement stance, without "control" use to compare it to.
2) Too little time has passed (about 6 months) for us to know of "submarine" problems on 7. Compare to 3 years [wikipedia.org] for Vista to get picked apart by critics. XP rules in IT shops. Vista is absent. 7 is liked, but still absent while paperwork and upgrade plans are thought out for their 10 year old XP installs
3) With all that said, think of how many people who got XP on their clunky PC's (256MB ram common with OEM's before pre-Vista skyrocketed hardware requirements to 2GB, and demanded dual core CPU's.) Now see them purchasing a NEW PC, rather than installing on their somewhat outdated hardware. The speed improvements will be obvious, but just wait until the same OS has been running for 5 years on the same machines. Which brings me to
4) Us tech guys normally reinstall the OS on personal hardware once in a while and know its normal speeds. However, think of the majority just saying "fuck that" and letting the old install get spyware-ridden AND slow. My laptop has a 2+ year old re-install now, for instance. 7 is likely to mean a new, clean install even on said hardware. The speed and stability on this 6 month old release is of course not going to be awefull until you have had time to migrate the rest of your apps to it, and then gone through app installs/uninstalls, bad drivers and customization addons that are really what slows down an OS. And then, there's spyware and rootkits. Many of you don't run an AV and may eventually get something that steals speed from your OS... once again, to blame it and the newly formed bluescreens and instability on the OS.

Only time will say how good this OS is. We just feel good now because it feels like MS "listened" and fixed well know Vista gripes; we haven't started to see the new gripes yet. Wait till the OS is seen on 50% of all rollouts, and let's talk again.

Re:Let the Games Begin... (4, Informative)

glwtta (532858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532572)

Windows 7 is the best product MS has released in years. While this may be considered a pyrrhic victory (ME, anyone?), the fact remains that Windows 7 is a solid product.

Just because I'm bored: a Pyrrhic victory is one that comes at too high a price. An example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but the development effort bankrupted Microsoft. Here you just mean that the praise may be disingenuous.

(I like being an asshole about language, alright?)

Re:Let the Games Begin... (1)

tpstigers (1075021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532644)

Another example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but was considered otherwise because previous Microsoft products were less than excellent. I chose my words carefully.

Re:Let the Games Begin... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532720)

I agree with everything except "reasonably priced".

Re:Let the Games Begin... (2, Interesting)

MrMista_B (891430) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532798)

Hmm? Are you trolling? Windows 7 /is/ regarded as the best MS product in years. At the time you posted this, there wasn't any Microsoft bashing whatsoever in any comment to this article.

So I don't know what you're preemptively responding to, but it makes me suspect you're astroturfing.

I'm old enough to remember... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532344)

...Promises waaaaaay back when that XP would never need a service pack.

Re:I'm old enough to remember... (1)

trapnest (1608791) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532378)

That's not very old bro. I remember that and I'm 20.

Re:I'm old enough to remember... (1)

tagno25 (1518033) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532496)

I remember buying Windows 3.1 and I am only 21. It never needed a upgrade at all.

Re:I'm old enough to remember... (2, Insightful)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532626)

I blame the internet. Software in those days could have lots of bugs but without an easy way to complain about (and exploit) them nothing got done immediately. Now with the internet spammers jump in with exploits and users hit the forums.

Re:I'm old enough to remember... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532768)

I had the internet, the spammers did not though.

Upgrade paths (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532348)

Its well known that most companies won't upgrade until SP1 is released, anyone else get the feeling they are releasing a service pack so companies will then upgrade to windows 7 due to slow adoption?

Re:Upgrade paths (1)

TheReal_sabret00the (1604049) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532454)

The adoption of 7 has been the best the company has recorded since XP, however there is no doubt that this is designed to bring in the admins sitting on the fence.

Re:Upgrade paths (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532678)

bring in the admins sitting on the fence

I read that as "admins sitting on the face".

That would be and upgrade.

Martin-boundary Announces Windows 7 SP2 (1, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532356)

In a bold move, martin-boundary has announced the new second service pack for Windows 7, but declined to set a release date or a schedule for getting a beta in users' hands. In a press conference from his mother's basement at 11am on 18 March 2010, martin-boundary stated:

"Like, there will totally be a Windows 7 SP2 sometime! I guarantee it, like, for sure you know? It'll contain some fixes for SP1."

Microsoft stock dipped on the news, and CEO Steve Ballmer was privately heard saying "Foiled again! Everytime we bring out an announcement, martin-boundary announces another announcement right after us! This announcement business is really tough."

Re:Martin-boundary Announces Windows 7 SP2 (3, Interesting)

pablomme (1270790) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532462)

I think you accidentally all your drugs.

Re:Martin-boundary Announces Windows 7 SP2 (0, Offtopic)

aurelianito (684162) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532614)

I think you accidentally all your drugs.

Compile error in line 1.

Re:Martin-boundary Announces Windows 7 SP2 (5, Funny)

pablomme (1270790) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532646)

I think you accidentally the joke.

Re:Martin-boundary Announces Windows 7 SP2 (5, Funny)

Kugrian (886993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532882)

The joke needs a service pack before anyone will find it funny.

Upgrading a PC is easy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532472)

Hello, I am a PC. :)

You see, for many years, I ran Windows XP home edition (32-bit) and paid $100 for it.
At the end of January, I bought Windows 7 home (It came with 32-bit AND 64-bit versions!) for $120. It was a snap in upgrading as Windows 7 made what seemed like a backup copy of what was on the drive, then installed Windows 7. Thus, a Windows.old folder existed on my C:\, where I went into it and copied some old folders over, like Steam for example, so I didn't have to redownload Left4Dead 2 or any other of my games.

I don't know about you, but, Windows 7 was a good idea because XP was just getting too darn slow.

Re:Upgrading a PC is easy. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532522)

Hello, I am a PC. :)

But, so are ALL Macintosh products.
PC = Personal Computer!

Marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532506)

Why would people bother to update to a service pack that "will primarily contain 'minor updates,' including patches and hotfixes that will have been delivered earlier via the Windows Update service"?

Seems like its just a push to get Win7 to SP1 so admins can tell their bosses "Look, it's at SP1, it's stable now! Can we upgrade?"

Careful about unwanted updates being included... (3, Informative)

AaronMK (1375465) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532600)

Hopefully this will not try to shove KB971033, the one that periodically phones home to verify that your copy is "genuine", onto unsuspecting users who thought they dodged it in the normal updates. However, if this is a lump collection of all previous "patches and hotfixes", I fear the worst.

Re:Careful about unwanted updates being included.. (1)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532672)

Hopefully this will not try to shove KB971033, the one that periodically phones home to verify that your copy is "genuine", onto unsuspecting users who thought they dodged it in the normal updates. However, if this is a lump collection of all previous "patches and hotfixes", I fear the worst.

Face it: If you use Windows, Microsoft is going to have their way with you. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not.

excellent :) (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532618)

In the past couple of months I've moved back to a home build PC from 2.5 years in the Mac world. I was probably right to be unhappy with where MS was going around Vista time, but now I'm with Windows 7, I can't remember why I left. There's really nothing that I miss from the Mac - Win7 is stable, fast, fairly intuitive, and seems to support anything I throw at it, via XP via VPC for really old stuff and Cygwin for a few Unix-built bits and pieces (though that is better run on the Linux server / a VM, and certainly not on OS X, where many things didn't quite work - it was like FreeBSD all over again). What's more, I actually have a fast reasonably-priced machine which I can upgrade as I want, rather than a single closed box with a million wires sticking out of the back for peripherals. Service Packs invite slipstreamed DVDs which make installation simpler - with MS Update and everything being online, they are not essential for most, but they're still welcome.

Thank you, MS. You are still an impossible choice on the server, and your licensing sucks, but you've actually got a fairly fucking fit-for-purpose product for the desktop. You're building for customers now, rather than to scratch an itch or needlessly upsell, and I hope this post-Vista turnaround doesn't wither.

Re:excellent :) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532896)

you forgot the <astroturf> tag

Forced WAT? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532648)

I hope this pack doesn't force the new activation technologies! I have a nice pirated windows 7 (reason to post anonymously) and wouldn't want any popup reminding me that. For the record, Windows 7 is too expensive to buy here. My main PC is for games, has a nice geforce and X-FI cards. My laptop may have ubuntu when 10.04 comes out, or even better a hackintosh if I can find a nice ISO (want to learn iphone programming), and my girlfriend's laptop is a tablet pc (four fingers and the same time with windows 7!). BTW, don't make finger jokes :)

Re:Forced WAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532820)

Please, do you really think MS would come after you over one license? Even if they had your name and address they probably wouldn't do a fucking thing.

Aside from that? No one really gives a damn what you're running at your house either.

Thankful for no new features.. cough bugs.. (1)

Ravi Shanghavi (1770808) | more than 4 years ago | (#31532772)

I'm frankly very happy to see that there are no new features being introduced in SP1. Gives me some comfort knowing I'm not opening a whole new can of worms on a userbase. -Ravi Shanghavi

I think I know what this is about (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31532780)

How much you want to bet they're conveniently releasing SP1 after recently pushing out the update that breaks many of the activation cracks for Windows 7 to simply force existing users to apply the update? In order to apply any future updates, users would probably be required to install SP1 which would no doubt include the update. I think the timing is far too coincidental to not be a business decision.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>