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!

Windows 7 To Be Released Next Year?

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the that's-mighty-fast dept.

561

KrispySausage writes "A recently-released roadmap for the next major Window release — Windows 7 — indicates that Microsoft is planning to release the new operating system in the second half of 2009, rather than the anticipated release date of some time in 2010. This quickly-approaching release date would seem to be at least partially verified by news of a milestone build available for review by an anonymous third party." We've previously discussed the upcoming new OS version, as well as its danger to Vista.

cancel ×

561 comments

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

windows7 (3, Insightful)

wwmedia (950346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136934)

itll probably end up being a minor change, Vista SP2 with new name?

they are taking a leadt out off Apples book again, "release often and charge alot for overglorified service packs"

Re:windows7 (2, Funny)

Jhon (241832) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136974)

Windows Vista is the new Windows ME.

Maybe it's like Star Trek movies -- only the even numbered ones are good (in this case, odd numbers).

Re:windows7 (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137030)

Windows Vista is the new Windows ME.
Oh god no. Does that mean bash.org is gonna be flooded with a whole slew of Vista quotes?!

Re:windows7 (1)

Hawkeye05 (1056362) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137122)

NT4 was alright.

Re:windows7 (5, Funny)

eat here_get gas (907110) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137170)

"Maybe it's like Star Trek movies -- only the even numbered ones are good (in this case, odd numbers)."

so it's not like Star Trek at all then?

Re:windows7 (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137208)

Um - maybe its like every other one is good?

Remember the parts of IQ tests where they say "how are these items alike"? Bet you scored low there.

Re:windows7 (-1, Troll)

eat here_get gas (907110) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137250)

if one is based on "even", and the other on "odd", how the fuck are they the same? since when does odd equal even?

and at least I had the balls to put my name on my test...

Re:windows7 (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137336)

You're a douchebag.

Re:windows7 (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137344)

For all Star Trek movie numbers and Windows release numbers n, n%2 = y. All good releases in their respective categories have the same y value.

Re:windows7 (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136976)

And then windows 7 will end up with something like a 20% market share as everyone with vista decides that they'd rather stick with it and everyone with xp decides that they still don't want to upgrade. So that means 2010 is FINALLY going to be the Year of Linux(tm), right?

Re:windows7 (2, Insightful)

BECoole (558920) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137154)

itll probably end up being a minor change, Vista SP2 with new name?
Hopefully more like Windows XP SP4.

Re:windows7 (4, Insightful)

colmore (56499) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137480)

Nah, if they were going to copy Apple, they'd also needlessly break backwards compatibility.

I like Macs, best UI stuck on a Unix out there, but there's a lot to hate about the cult and what it gets away with.

Re:windows7 (1, Redundant)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137564)

"itll probably end up being a minor change, Vista SP2 with new name?"

And, most important, with a price tag.

Marketing Slogan (4, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136938)

Windows 7 - because Vista sucked

Re:Marketing Slogan (5, Funny)

rvw (755107) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137038)

Windows 7 - because Vista sucked
7 of 2009 says: Hasta la Vista!

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137106)

I thought she said

"Not enough resources to complete this task, close some running applications and try again?

Accept | Deny

Re:Marketing Slogan (5, Insightful)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137148)

This is EXACTLY how they approach sales. They say the previous version sucked in certain aspects and swear that this version is going to be über.

And we all know how that ends out.

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137544)

This is EXACTLY how they approach sales. They say the previous version sucked in certain aspects and swear that this version is going to be über.

Isn't that true of most companies?

E.g., "PowerPC is much better than Intel" ... "Actually, Intel is great".

Or any company that brings out a new model, and tells you how much better it is over the previous version.

Re:Marketing Slogan (0)

suso (153703) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137194)

What versions of Windows actually count in this series? Because I count more than 7 already:

Windows 1 - 3
Windows 95 (4)
Windows 98 (5)
Windows ME (6)
Windows XP (7)
Windows Vista (8)
Windows 7 (9, because we got held back in 1st and 2nd grade)

Re:Marketing Slogan (5, Informative)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137260)

That's a terrible count.

Windows 1 - 3 (though the picture here was sort of confused in the first place, but never mind)

Windows 95 (4)
Windows 98 (4.1)
Windows ME (4.2)

The above three being sort of concurrent with:

Windows NT 3.5
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 2000 (NT 5)

Then the line was unified as:

Windows XP (5.1)

So Windows Vista is 6 and now we are talking about Windows 7. Got it now?

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

maniac/dev/null (170211) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137266)

Windows 98 and Windows ME were subversions of 4 (4.5 and 4.9, I think) which makes XP 5 and Vista 6.

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

Oscaro (153645) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137292)

windows 95, 98 and ME were all version 4.something

XP is 5, Vista is 6.

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

Ender_Stonebender (60900) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137298)

I think the "official" versions count from the first version of Windows NT (which was 3 point something because the marketroids pointed out that people would think "Windows NT 1.0" was less advanced than "Windows 3.1"). So the list should be:

Windows 1 - 2 (when NT didn't exist)
Windows NT 3.x (3)
Windows NT 4.0 (4)
Windows XP (5)
Windows Vista (6)
Windows 7

In which case, Windows 7 would be the correct designation. Of course, Microsoft will come up with a name for it instead of leaving it as a version number. Maybe "Windows Altavista"? "Alta" means "high", and "vista" means "view"; and just about any other operating system could be considered better than, or above, Windows Vista, right?

Re:Marketing Slogan (2, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137352)

Then after Windows Altavista they can bring out Windows Google just so people know that people don't think it's less advanced!

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137466)

Note that Windows 2000 was version 5 - XP was 5.1 I think.

Windows versioning (5, Funny)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137248)

I'm concerned about the return to numerical versioning.
They went from 3.11, to year-based (98), to cheesy acronyms (ME), to acronyms containing the Mighty Letter "X" (XP), to the vaguely multi-cultural (Vista). Now they're going back to whole numbers. All the joy of 3.11, half the perfomance.
They haven't really cribbed Apple's Roman Numeral approach, so let's work with that.
Vista...VII-STA...VII: Something To Avoid.

Re:Marketing Slogan (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137350)

Windows 7 - Quit bitching, it cames "free" with your PC.

Windows 7 - Your last chance before we start again in C#.

Windows 7 - Because we know where you live.

Help Destroy Scientology! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22136944)

click here [partyvan.info] . We've already taken down their website and phone numbers. Thank ebaumsworld!

Gimme just a sec... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22136950)

*yawn*

Vista a flop? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22136958)

Vista isn't getting the sales MS hoped, so perhaps they are planning to sweep it under the rug as soon as possible.

Re:Vista a flop? (1)

spamking (967666) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136986)

I really hope its a big rug.

Re:Vista a flop? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137274)

No, Vista is awesome.

Don't believe the Linux fanboy hype. Vista is doing just fine.

Re:Vista a flop? (5, Funny)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137538)

No, Vista is awesome.
How can it be awesome when it hasn't even got a Fun Pack ?
Every MS system had its Fun Pack with great games such as Tetris or Pong and fabulous screensavers like, uh, stuff in colours.

Vista needs a Fun Pack to be awesome.

If I were Microsoft (5, Funny)

vagabond_gr (762469) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136962)

given the delays of Vista I would schedule the next version for tomorrow, and hope to deliver some time in 2010.

Vista's missing features (3, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136972)

1 - Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes, and have been deconstructing Windows to remove bloat, and make the whole thing run faster. Windows Server can even run sans-GUI now, and they're building up from a minimalist stack. This is a really good thing.

2 - There were some neat concepts that were promised with Vista and never delivered, like the file abstraction stack, or WinFS. Now they might have time to do it right.

3 - Vista was a total bomb. There is no denying it at all. So why bother? Admit your mistake and move on quickly. All in all, this sounds like a surprisingly smart move on their part.

Re:Vista's missing features (2, Insightful)

rbochan (827946) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137072)


1 - Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes, and have been deconstructing Windows to remove bloat, and make the whole thing run faster. Windows Server can even run sans-GUI now, and they're building up from a minimalist stack. This is a really good thing.

Be realistic, remove bloat? This is Microsoft you're talking about.


2 - There were some neat concepts that were promised with Vista and never delivered, like the file abstraction stack, or WinFS. Now they might have time to do it right.

They've been promising stuff like this since the NT 3.5 days. I'd consider that plenty of time to deliver.


3 - Vista was a total bomb. There is no denying it at all. So why bother? Admit your mistake and move on quickly. All in all, this sounds like a surprisingly smart move on their part.

Has Microsoft ever admitted to making a mistake?

Call me skeptical, but experience does teach an individual.

Re:Vista's missing features (5, Informative)

Keeper Of Keys (928206) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137460)

3 - Vista was a total bomb. There is no denying it at all. So why bother? Admit your mistake and move on quickly. All in all, this sounds like a surprisingly smart move on their part.

Has Microsoft ever admitted to making a mistake?
Pretty much [gizmodo.com]

Re:Vista's missing features (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137514)

I think you mispelt 'Micro$oft', you ridiculous twat.

Re:Vista's missing features (4, Insightful)

draevil (598113) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137108)

I found it hard to continue reading your post after point 1 began with "Microsoft says". As you rightly point out in point 2, MS-says with respect to what we-got in Vista didn't quite match up. MS promised a lot and users got an OS that felt to many like a regression.

MS has a habit of "promising" features that it doesn't know how to deliver; its useful if you want to discourage investment in potential competitors. After all, why go and develop a new fs technology if the company with a 90%+ monopoly in the OS sector is going to integrate it into their product?

"Windows 7" will be an incremental change to Vista with some bug fixes and a desire to gain a better image in the market than the ironically sullied Vista has. How can MS develop features in less than 1 year that they couldn't manage to make in 4?

Re:Vista's missing features (1)

weicco (645927) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137300)

I found it hard to continue reading your post after this very speculative line:

"Windows 7" will be an incremental change to Vista with some bug fixes

You've got a crystal ball at your home or is this just another case of "The pot calls the kettle black"?

Re:Vista's missing features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137488)

Well, at that point, you'd basically read his post. Good call on skipping the last period, though.

Re:Vista's missing features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137178)

> Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes

They must have learned a hell of a lot.

Cairo [wikipedia.org] or bust eh?

Re:Vista's missing features (1)

lordofwhee (1187719) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137432)

1 - Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes, and have been deconstructing Windows to remove bloat, and make the whole thing run faster. Windows Server can even run sans-GUI now, and they're building up from a minimalist stack. This is a really good thing.

So, what you're saying is, Windows can now do things OSes like freeBSD have been doing for years, for free.

Re:Vista's missing features (1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137446)

Well, make up your mind. Are they going to remove bloat, or are they going to add new features. The only way they can do both is to break backwards compatability in a big way.

Has Microsoft changed internally that much that we can hope for something better than Vista?

Re:Vista's missing features (5, Funny)

eshefer (12336) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137532)

"Microsoft says they learned from their mistakes"

they always do. that's why they repeat them so well.

Makes sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137548)

All this makes sense...

I wouldn't count on it!

Howto: Confuse the User (1)

Djatha (848102) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136978)

Right, Windows 7 next year, as if there are not already enough different Windows versions out there. How in heavens name are Simple Joe and Jane able to get used to one of those versions and learn to use their computer? Not to mention the fact that they do not see why a new version is needed if their older one is fine enough (or so they think untill they call me because it doesn't work anymore). I mean, I can not explain why they should upgrade to Vista while they think that they need to because it is new and they have heard about it via commercials and other untrustworthy sources.

Re:Howto: Confuse the User (1)

BadHaggis (1179673) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137592)

I can hear it now. My brother-in-law calling and asking if he should upgrade from Vista Ultimate to this new Windows 7, while ranting and raving about how much Vista Ultimate cost him and how long it took him to finally get it to work. I know he'll get mad at me when I tell him he never should have upgraded to Vista to start with, and to stop calling me if he is going to ask Windows questions. HHHMMMM, Maybe I should tell him that he has no choice but to upgrade by buying a new machine and sending me the system that he bought with Vista, because you know that Windows 7 is going to require all new hardware to run.

I'm really of the mindset that you can take Linux away from me when you pry the Live-CD out of my cold dead fingers, hell I just might have my coffin setup with wi-fi and a sub-notebook so that I can read /. in peace.

Yeah But ... (1)

podilarius (868011) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136980)

They will schedule the release in 2009 but it won't be released until 2011. Yeah ... Microsoft ... did I mention that it will be missing key features they "said" would be in there. Blah Blah Blah ...

Such optimism? (4, Insightful)

Richard.g.k (1215362) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136984)

Hopefully it will end up being like windows ME -> windows XP, with vista being ME, and the new OS representing XP. Contrary to peoples constant whining, vista is a reasonable enough O/S, the only problem i've seen with it is the resource intensiveness. Rarely do i ever have crash problems. But this will turn into another 300 comment microsoft hate-o-thon just because of story that is an unverified RUMOR about an operating system that nobody responding has even SEEN yet.

Re:Such optimism? (1)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137064)

ME to XP happened solely because Microsoft had a solid platform (NT) ready to replace the 1993-era Win9x platform that ME was built on. Where is Microsoft's new platform now?

Re:Such optimism? (1)

ExE122 (954104) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137120)

ME to XP happened solely because Microsoft had a solid platform (NT) ready to replace the 1993-era Win9x platform that ME was built on. Where is Microsoft's new platform now?
Exactly! Windows XP has already extended their EOL, but even that will go away soon... and then what supported O/S will be left? Only Vista?

I think this sudden announcement is just a mad scramble for an alternative O/S, but without a solid platform to build off of, it's not looking too promising...

Re:Such optimism? (1)

PJ1216 (1063738) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137416)

I say they should just re-use XP.

Re:Such optimism? (5, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137096)

Problems with Vista include:

* UAC - annoying and not remotely secure. People will be trained to always click yes, or just disable it. Further more, it prevented me from installing legit software, and copying files in certain directories.
* Drivers - People say an OS is only as good as the software for it, and I'd argue an OS is only as good as the drivers. If you can't support your hardware, then software isn't even an issue. Now all drivers MUST be signed, yet many signed drivers don't work very well, if at all. I think it would be a good idea to have all drivers in one central repository (like the Linux kernel) so you won't have to worry about tracking down drivers for old hardware, but make sure the drivers work. And here is an idea, make the drivers modular. Drivers cause more BSODs and crashes than anything else. Don't let a single driver bring down a system. This is just basic common sense.
* Design for productivity, and not looks. Sexy is sexy, and we all like sexy things. In the long run however, I want my computer to enable me to work, not prevent me from doing so. Usability studies have shown that Vista's UI slows people down performing the same tasks. Scrolling in the Start Menu? Again, the writing was on the wall here. Look at the UI changes in Windows Media Player, and you'll see a program that has become less user friendly, while prettier. Why should we expect Vista to be different?
* Performance is piss-poor. Again, people like fast computers. Installing Vista is just a bad decision.
* Vista's worst enemy is not OS X or Linux (as much as I love me some Linux). Vista's worst enemy is XP, which post-SP1 has been a pretty decent OS. For the end user, Vista provides no real benefits or new features besides better looks, while slowing your PC down considerably. And with projects like the Vista Transformation Pack, you can make XP look like Vista. Why would someone want Vista?

Re:Such optimism? (2)

nwoolls (520606) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137586)

"Why would someone want Vista?" Because all of the crap you just copied and pasted from bandwaggoning bloggers above is only believed by those who haven't actually used the OS, and prefer to just regurgitate that same BS over and over.

People will be trained to always click yes with UAC, but not sudo right? MS is now in charge of writing drivers too? Why would anyone scroll the start menu when they can just start typing... You're worried about performance, but you'd still rather install a slew of third party applications on top of XP to get the same indexing, integrated search, visual extensions, and more?

Yawn...

Re:Such optimism? (5, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137470)

Too many people misread the whole Windows ME thing. Microsoft's goal since the days of Windows NT 3.1 was always to eventually migrate people from the old DOS/Windows codebase to the new NT codebase. In order to do that, they had to get the APIs synched.

Windows NT 3.1 had Win32 and Windows 3.1 had the older 'Win16' API. So they released Win32s for the older DOS/Windows platform, then Windows NT 4.0 with the new user interface. With the Chicago project -- Windows 95 (based on the new UI for NT4) -- was to be the first of the old codebase with the a full version of the new (NT) API, Win32. With that in hand, they had planned to do one more update to each version -- Nashville became Windows 98, and Daytona became Windows 2000. There was supposed to be a combined release of an operating system called 'Cairo' after that, where they finally dropped the whole DOS/Windows thing, but they got sidetracked because they were under pressure to produce a desktop OS for the low-end of the market. So the result was Windows ME, which was rushed out the door at the last minute and annointed as the last of the DOS/Windows line.

Cairo, which was promised to be totally 'object oriented' -- files would be stored as objects in a big database (sound familiar?), but it never happened. So instead, we get, as the first OS of the newly merged OS lines, Windows XP. And yes, XP looks like the greek letter "Chi" and "Ro", of course XP doesn't end up having anything promised in Cairo.

The Cairo promises were to be fullfilled with Vista, but that never happened because the schedule got pushed more and more and they were under pressure to do SOMETHING since competition from Apple and Linux stepped in to fill the void of 5+ years with no new Microsoft OS. So they pushed Vista out the door with none of the promised features and a bunch glitz stolen from Apple. (The last time they stole from Apple, it went exceedingly well, so what the heck, right?)

Windows 7 -- if it's true -- sounds like it could be what Vista was supposed to be. Of course, by now no one will care. It'll be too little, too late, IMHO.

Re:Such optimism? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137482)

s/Daytona/Memphis. Daytona was something else. Memphis was chosen as a place being 'very close to Cairo.'

two thoughts (3, Insightful)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136990)

ME was out HOW long before the next OS?

and WIN98 SE maybe this is Vista SE...As long as they cut some bloat and give me back admin controls in less than convoluted places, I'm cool.

an ME situation would be my guess (2, Interesting)

phorm (591458) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137020)

Perhaps MSW7 would be the equivalent to what win2k was over ME? It might actually be a decent product then (of all them, 2k was a shining star in many ways), but I'd imagine that if this is the case a *lot* of those who bought Vista (or machines with Vista) are going to be royally pissed.

Official (0, Flamebait)

Unixfreak31 (634088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136996)

So is it official now is vista the next Windows ME? Funny some of the Microsoft fan boys are so in love with it just like they were with ME.

Low memory requirements from ms... (5, Funny)

hengdi (1202709) | more than 6 years ago | (#22136998)

From TFA:

"The system is very responsive, using barely 480MB of memory after boot."

I've obviously been in *nix land for too long, I'm still of the impression that 256 Mb is pretty much all one needs for most tasks. Even EMACS!

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137084)

My A1200 was fine and responsive with 16MB of memory, I found that comment rather funny too. The operating system itself should simply manage resources rather than freaking consume them all.. how can you justify 480MB even with all of your necessary drivers/DLLs/whatever loaded into memory? And that was even without the Aero interface wasn't it?

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (3, Insightful)

martinmcc (214402) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137242)

Indeed, that is a ridiculous number to boast about. That is not much under 512 MB, which many machines out there are still using. If you have 2 Gigs, which should be more than plenty for an average desktop system, then 1/4 of the memory is used before you even do anything. It just emphasises that there is no such thing as a windows upgrade, it just expands to fill the resources available (much like a fart in a room). Personally, when I have a 2Ghz Dual core 64Bit system with 4GB of RAM on my desktop, I want it to be _slightly_ more responsive than the 8Mhz 8086 system with 640 KB I started my PC experience on.

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (3, Interesting)

mchawi (468120) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137302)

If you follow the links on the other article though, where they talk about redoing the kernel to what they are calling MinWin - it ran on 40 MB of memory and only had 100 files.

So it might be interesting where they draw the line between the kernel at 40 MB and 'the system' with 480 MB of memory. It sounds like mainly applications running that you could probably parse down.

A move in the right direction at least.

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (5, Interesting)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137390)


From TFA:

"The system is very responsive, using barely 480MB of memory after boot."

I've obviously been in *nix land for too long, I'm still of the impression that 256 Mb is pretty much all one needs for most tasks. Even EMACS!


Bloat is relative. Compared to Vista, 480MB is freaking Calista Flockhart-level of skinny.

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (5, Informative)

ledow (319597) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137408)

Holy cow. I can remember when my HARD DISK was 480Mb. And that was 10 times bigger than the first hard disk I bought. And even THAT was an upgrade that cost nearly 25% of the computer again.

And, as you point out, that's BEFORE you do anything but actually turn the computer on and wait ten minutes. God knows what happens when you actually WANT to work. XP can boot fairly comfortable for low-to-mid-end users in 256Mb - it ain't fast, it'll swap, but on network managed machines without the usual startup cruft you'll get work done without in-app pauses and for a basic Office suite you won't even notice (I tend to find silent-hard-disk computers are percieved as "faster" by users, even when they are swapping more). 512Mb makes for a nice XP system and anything more is a bonus - I've run networks with hundreds of machines on XP and none of them ever needed more than 512Mb for adequate performance, unless they were doing high-end stuff like CAD - more important is to keep your startup entries clear than put more than 512Mb into an "office" XP machine. But having to have 512Mb before you can even boot the thing up?

                          total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 254296 249912 4384 0 1288 75964
-/+ buffers/cache: 172660 81636
Swap: 473908 41000 432908

170Mb used out of 256. That's with a full KDE GUI (commonly referred to as bloated by a lot of people who obviously don't get out into retail stores and buy Windows much), an Opera process collecting mail from dozens of accounts and browsing hundreds of webpages each day with memory caching, and that's been running for about 26 days now.

                          total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 222712 218960 3752 0 126832 40760
-/+ buffers/cache: 51368 171344
Swap: 1140604 0 1140604

And THAT's a proxy/filter/cache for a school, with transparent bridging that hasn't rebooted in months. 50Mb in use, admittedly no X-Windows running at the moment. Even most of that is Samba, Squid memory cache, Apache and other miscellaneous programs running on it, not all of which are critical to its operation but provide nice web or GUI interfaces to the admins.

Seriously, I know that things move on and you can't stay on a 386 but what benefit does the actual end-user get for all that bloat? What can you do on a 512Mb "Windows 7" machine that you can't on a 512Mb Vista machine, 512Mb XP machine, 512Mb Linux machine? Can you even BOOT with just 512Mb on this new version? More worrying, how many Gigs of rubbish that load on startup does it come with to fill up 480 Mb before you get into the machine? And what does that do to your minimum installation size and baseline CPU use?

I switched, personally, to Linux at home, Linux in work where appropriate (i.e. everything but network-managed desktops, because of the amount of legacy Windows software required) at around the same time that a Linux machine with 256Mb could do the same things as an XP machine with 512Mb, all other things being equal.

I've got a salesman coming tomorrow to try to sell the school Vista, two months after we put in a brand new XP network replacing the previous XP network. They aren't even going to be able to sell us that because I've done my research, which they don't expect smaller schools to do. Too high requirements, too many unnecessary features, too much rubbish, no practical advantage. How are MS going to sell an OS that's going to need literally Gigs of RAM once it's combined with Office and all the usual bundled offering?

This same salesman will be selling Windows 7 in a few years, of course he will, but what do you get for your money? I've seen people selling Windows Vista "digital signage" (i.e. scrolly powerpoint presentations on a "low-spec" PC in a small form factor), something which is a complete waste of resources and licensing money - you're paying MS a huge license fee to run a presentation/download a webpage etc. on dual-core 3GHz machines with a gig of RAM - that same job can be done by a 600MHz laptop, or a small desktop machine with less than 512Mb. It's just getting too stupid now. Everyone owns their own Concorde but, because of the weight of bundled Microsoft hostess trolley you're forced to fly at a crawl just metres from the ground. It's ridiculous and Windows 7 just looks to continue that trned.

Re:Low memory requirements from ms... (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137510)

Heh. I just realized a month ago that my workhorse Ubuntu machine had 512MB ram. Serving a small website, streaming audio within the house, light photo editing, internet browsing all at the same time with pretty good performance.

From a hardware standpoint, we've hit the point of diminishing returns for the average user. So long as we use a reasonable OS, that is.

Microsoft roadmaps (1, Interesting)

olman (127310) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137012)

Two words:
Yeah. Right.

And same goes for the feature list. I haven't been arsed to check but do they have the new filesystem there once more? Someone has been working on the new Windows filesystem for about 14 years now (since chicago). Must be really rewarding to have it axed time after time.

Windows 7? (0, Redundant)

CF4L (1072112) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137022)

Wow, what a creative name they came up with. Knowing M$, they probably thought the problem with Vista was it's name and not the O/S and this is their solution.

Re:Windows 7? (1)

Klaus_1250 (987230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137164)

Windows Vista is Windows 6, Windows 2000 was Windows 5, and XP was 5.1 . Windows 7 is just the version and not the name. I'm sure the marketing-department will come up with a slick fancy name this year. My vote goes to Windows Vista XP (or Windows Vista NG) :-)

Good news for Linux (2, Interesting)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137026)

If the screenshots are anything to judge by then Microsoft are changing user interfaces AGAIN ( and as usual it is a partial clone of Apple ). Wonder what will happen when people find that switching to Linux is an easier learning curve than upgrading windows...

Re:Good news for Linux (1)

ericlondaits (32714) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137126)

Nah, when they developed the Vista GUI they also did a red-herring GUI to hide the real one until the official announcement. I doubt you can get an actual screenshot of whatever Windows 7 will look like right now.

Re:Good news for Linux (1)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137166)

Ripping off Apple seems to be business as usual for Microsoft. Why do you think MS bought a bunch of Apple stock back in the day? If this screenshot [apcmag.com] is any indication, though, Microsoft continues its other time-honored tradition of Doing It Wrong. Ye gods! Look at the size of the dock!

Re:Good news for Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137270)

i'll be one of the ones telling them to stay away after recent upgrades to ubuntu killed what was perfectly good working hardware. i thought that only happened in windoze? not to even mention the complete lack of support for the card reader in the machine.

but no that stuff only happens in windows. not the mighty linux.

School year ... whoops (-1, Offtopic)

cbart387 (1192883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137032)

I think I've been in school for too long. When I read 'next year' I thought 'next fall'. Ugh

Re:School year ... whoops (1)

Secrity (742221) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137380)

When you have been out of school long enough, you will start realizing that "next year" frequently means at least two to three years from now. This is especially true with Microsoft. Next quarter means next year sometime.

Time (1)

contraba55 (1217056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137040)

The sooner they push the release date, the less time they have to debug it.

Re:Time (1)

jomegat (706411) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137118)

No, no. The sooner they get behind, the more time they'll have to catch up.

Re:Time (1)

Spamalope (91802) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137234)

MS: We can force adoption of Vista at the OEM level. Why should we 'fix' Vista when we can instead rename the repairs 'Windows 7' or something else and charge for Windows all over again?

Development Structure (5, Informative)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137042)

It will be interesting to see if the new focus on a "clean, lean" Windows 7 can be sustained, given Microsoft's deeply bureaucratic [blogspot.com] development structure.

Each team was separated by 6 layers of management from the leads, so let's add them in too, giving us 24 + (6 * 3) + 1 (the shared manager) 43 total people with a voice in this feature. Twenty-four of them were connected sorta closely to the code, and of those twenty four there were exactly zero with final say in how the feature worked.
The quote is from one of the people in the Vista shutdown menu team. It will be hard to winnow the cruft in that sort of environment.

What new technologies can we except? (3, Interesting)

apathy maybe (922212) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137048)

I remember reading an article in 2001 in a computer magazine about the marvellous things that were going to be in Longhorn (now Vista). A wonderful new database-like file system, brilliant UI and other great things. I thought how wonderful this system was going to be compared to WinXP (which had just come out).

Then later I read about how the new file system (WinFS) was based on something called 'Cairo' and about how that too had been scrapped.

At that stage I was using Mandrake Linux (I switched to Ubuntu at the start of 2007), and wanted something better.

Anyway, so this chain of thought ends in, well now I am using Ubuntu, it does keep getting better all the time. I don't use MS Windows really at all now on my computers. Why do I care?

Meh, lets try and get back to where I stared. Can we expect a new file system? Can we expect radical 'new' technologies? Perhaps even voice commands? (Computer: open http colon slash slash slash dot dot org)

Me 2!!!oneone!!one! (1, Insightful)

EnsilZah (575600) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137052)

This strengthens the impression that Vista is the second iteration of Windows Me which was also replaced by a new OS rater quickly (about a year) after being found to suck donkey balls.

Re:Me 2!!!oneone!!one! (1)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137216)

I agree with this, it does seem awfully soon to start mentioning this stuff, it reminds me a lot of the ME days.

My opinion? Vista is shit, plain and simple, it's not fast enough on high end hardware (no I didn't say too slow, not fast enough) it's ugly in classic mode and intrusive and the list goes on and on.

A bit more of the review... (2, Informative)

Sirch (82595) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137062)

... can be found here [istartedsomething.com] .

I figured this would happen (5, Insightful)

darkvizier (703808) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137082)

Microsoft may have blundered, but they're not dumb. I'm pretty sure they wrote Vista in such a way that it's extensible. So people didn't like Vista, so what? Some people have paid for it, enough at least that they've gotten feedback on how to polish it up. Then they release their next OS, and life goes on. One product failure is not enough to kill MS.

Hmmm..... (1)

8127972 (73495) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137090)

"A recently-release roadmap for the next major Window release -- Windows 7 -- indicates that Microsoft is planning to release the new operating system in the second half of 2009, rather than the anticipated release date of some time in 2010."

Given Micro$oft's track record that means if they say it's going to be out in 2009, it's on track for release in late 2010 or 2011. Nice to know that it's on schedule.

I'll call it the "President Bush Corollary" (-1, Troll)

TheJerg (1052952) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137110)

I think I have figured out Microsoft's master strategy. They put out Vista as a giant advertisement to hype their new OS. You might ask "Well doesn't that seem like an awful waste of resources?" and I'd respond "No, actually it's brilliant." The same way we're at the point now that we'll take anybody as long as Bush is gone, after people's experiences with Vista they'll try anything(even Linux in some cases, shocking I know).

Re:I'll call it the "President Bush Corollary" (1)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137232)

Meh. I didn't need to use Vista in order to try out OS X. I just wanted a laptop that came with a Unix pre-installed, got more than 3 hours of battery life, and didn't cost more than $1,500. The MacBook fit the bill.

Schedules of the Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22137128)

Microsoft is not a good example of the standard by which to abide for defining the time it takes to make an OS. They releases OSes at a regular pace, and each os release is done to exploit more the new hardware. It's not a matter of "it took microsoft 20 years so it will take you 5000 years", NO! If you want to make a multitasking, multithreading OS with an interface similar to XP, I would say one year is a reasonable time frame. For vista it's more difficult since there's the 3d cards for them you need to write drivers. YOu also need to write network support for your os to be like microsoft's. But please remember, The microsoft operating system is plagued with politics, negociations, legacy support and all that, and if making an operating system just like what microsoft did is really what you want, Im sure you can do it in less time microsoft did it, if you work on it full time. But about this particular opensource operating system that just want to be exactly like windows, I don't know. Reactos is its name, http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html [reactos.org]

Insiders say ... (1)

boxlight (928484) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137168)

Insiders say, it's gonna suck!

This is fake, mod article down (*sigh*) (3, Insightful)

A Friendly Troll (1017492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137184)

If someone only bothered to spend two more minutes investigating...

Windows Seven with a build number of 6.1.6519.1? The Windows Seven that is currently in the kernel-only, text mode, MinWin phase?

This was probably some kind of a Vista SP2 build, something that will be released next year and is in heavy development. That, or the guy was given a modded/themed current version of Vista and was fooled.

Re:This is fake, mod article down (*sigh*) (2, Interesting)

tdanecker (1223662) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137492)

It really looks like the Article's Windows 7 is not the same as the "MinWin" Windows 7. MinWin is only 64-bit but the article states the OS will be shipped as 32- and 64-bit version - No chance with MinWin.

if only... (1)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137202)

If only there were an OS out there where you could just turn on the machine for the first time, and have your browser, office suite and media player installed and ready to go.
and if you need a new program, no endless googleing for a trial version of something that should be included, you just go to Applications > Add/remove programs, search for what you want, and click install.

Once MS makes an OS that can do all that, I might rejoin the dark side.

oh, wait, I already have an OS that does all that...

I have a good feeling about this 'Windows 7' it sounds simple, direct, and straight to the point. lets hope that MS has learned from their mistakes (ME, Vista, or anything they release before SP1) and can give us a lean, secure, and easy to use OS.

Of course, I don't expect to see MS make their deadline. It's more likely that we will see 2008 become the year of linux on the desktop than have MS release something on time

Re:if only... (4, Interesting)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137324)

Once MS makes an OS that can do all that, I might rejoin the dark side
I'm sure its safe to say MS -wish- they could do it :) They'd just get sued to oblivion by the europeans. MS Office bundled with Windows and forced on the user? Users seeing an MS controled repository of software with everything under the sun? Man, thats their wet dream.

Why is it.... (5, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137268)

That Microsoft cant do what others can?

I just got a copy of OSX 10.5 for my really old and outdated mac. Specifically to get a working copy of dashcode as I write OSX widgets for Crestron control. I was expecting the worst as installing the latest OS on a old PC never is a good thing.

10.5 makes my machine faster. I kind of looked at it skeptically but it actually boots faster and has a more responsive feel, even NeoOffice opens faster as well as Final Cut.

Why is Apple able to deliver an OS that is faster instead of slower? It's got as much eye candy as vista.

Maybe microsoft needs to have all their programmers re-trained?

FYI: Single processor G4 with only 784 meg of ram, and a crappy laptop video card.

Re:Why is it.... (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137296)

Microsoft had to add all the security stuff. There's a reason DOS was so fast...no checking whatsoever anywhere. So obviously now this would be slower. Unixes did it already, so you can improve on performance there. But Vista -is- indeed the result of extremely poor management decisions, the same kind of constraints that produced the RRODing Xbox360s... and i expect most products of Microsoft that were thought of during that period to have similar issues. Next batch should be better.

That being said, your computer is about the same than the one i run Vista, and its snappy. People saying you need 4 gigs of ram and a dual core for it are in their world.

Kill XP early (1)

MarcAuslander (517215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137332)

I've expected this ploy. They need a new release so they can sunset XP and force people to vista, or to vista renamed.

If Windows 7 comes out late 2009... (1)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137402)

...Microsoft MUST start its wide beta program within the next few months. That could indicate we may see the first wide beta release out probably around late March to early April of this year.

And Windows 7 is to be called... Longhorn (1)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137534)

Does this mean that we can expect Longhorn in less than 2 years?

Guys! Guys! Microsoft is finally releasing Longhorn in less than two years' time!

Windows 7? (1)

Iamthebubblelady (1221414) | more than 6 years ago | (#22137550)

Maybe we will get lucky and this will be a finished version of Windows instead of a half ass one. I would much rather wait 4 years for a good operating software than 2 years for a piece of junk wraped in too much fluff.
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>