Windows 7

[Borgsta]

LOL. I don't intend to make anyone else sound like a "fanboy" but as you probably realise I am not a fanboy, at least of the first several releases of any new Microsoft release.

Your right that I have not read up on Windows 7 but I have used the beta in conjunction with several colleagues who run significant IT business's. There are numerous bugs and glitches, which is par for the course in all previous new Windows OS releases.
The opinion was asked. I gave it.

Also the ability to run programs under prior OS conditions has been in the OS's since XP and operates with varying success but is better than nothing.

yet they are running a beta version of an operating system....why?

 

[Pie eyed]

yet they are running a beta version of an operating system....why?

As a matter of professional interest I suppose they run all potentially new OS's. They also have a few versions of Linux running as well.

 

[Pie eyed]

Are you trying to say that the 7 beta is no less buggy than Vista beta 1 or XP beta 1???

If so I am going to have a lot of trouble taking you seriously. They were both total train wrecks (Vista in particular).





Err...yes...however it is significantly improved from previous versions. 3.11 had icons and stuff too, but things have improved a little since then too.

It is impossible to make that "exact" comparison until enough time has elapsed and enough potential conflicts and undiscovered bugs have been identified. If you are asking if I think there is the potential for Windows 7 (the release version) to be as buggy as XP or Vista on initial release then yes.

 

[weevil]

It is impossible to make that "exact" comparison until enough time has elapsed and enough potential conflicts and undiscovered bugs have been identified. If you are asking if I think there is the potential for Windows 7 (the release version) to be as buggy as XP or Vista on initial release then yes.

Nah I’m sorry you don’t know what you are talking about here.

Both the Vista and XP betas were infamously total dogs.

The earlier betas were full of incomplete, bug ridden non-optimised code. MS would include incomplete code then chip away at the rough edges in later builds.

They have fundamentally changed their entire build processes since then. Now they only include features when they are completed and optimized.

Unlike XP and Vista there will be no further betas of 7. There will be a public release candidate in a few months and then the final product will be shipped. Totally different process and the betas are at totally different stages of their development.

 

[Pie eyed]

Nah I’m sorry you don’t know what you are talking about here.

Both the Vista and XP betas were infamously total dogs.

The earlier betas were full of incomplete, bug ridden non-optimised code. MS would include incomplete code then chip away at the rough edges in later builds.

They have fundamentally changed their entire build processes since then. Now they only include features when they are completed and optimized.

Unlike XP and Vista there will be no further betas of 7. There will be a public release candidate in a few months and then the final product will be shipped. Totally different process and the betas are at totally different stages of their development.

I find it very hard to find what you are disagreeing with me about here.
My entire point, initially was totally along the lines you have just posted.

The final product is due for release in late 2009, early 2010.

Then and only then will you be able to use it and then argue it's good or bad points.

There is every chance that large portions of the beta release will not even make into the final product and that several inclusions which will be in the final product were never released as part of the beta.

I would still, regardless of how glowing the prasie may be for Windows 7, not pay the purchase price until, at the very least, the first service pack has been released.

I don't mean to sound condescending or harsh but you would not be the first person on earth to extol the virtues of this or that MS product which was later found to be riddled with bugs.
You may well be totally correct and the new OS may be rock solid.

However past experience, a long and spectacular history of partially complete OS's from MS and the caution acquired from many, many unfulfilled claims from IT salesmen pushing a particular product has taught me to ere on the side of caution and adopt a wait and see attitude to these purchases.
If you can't accept that then that is your problem.

Without evidence I won't pay.

 

[Borgsta]

I would still, regardless of how glowing the prasie may be for Windows 7, not pay the purchase price until, at the very least, the first service pack has been released.
.

That is a totally different argument though and whilst I have loved what I have seen in the 2 or so weeks I have Windows 7 on my test machine there is no way in hell I will be one of the first to purchase it come 2010.

Being the 1st to buy something is almost always stupid but Microsoft have very bad history there and I think you would be extremely naive to hope it has all changed that quickly.

Hope I am wrong about them but I'm happy to wait for 5-6 months until it has been fully tested in the security sector.

 

[weevil]

I find it very hard to find what you are disagreeing with me about here.
My entire point, initially was totally along the lines you have just posted.

The final product is due for release in late 2009, early 2010.

Then and only then will you be able to use it and then argue it's good or bad points.

There is every chance that large portions of the beta release will not even make into the final product and that several inclusions which will be in the final product were never released as part of the beta.

I would still, regardless of how glowing the prasie may be for Windows 7, not pay the purchase price until, at the very least, the first service pack has been released.

I don't mean to sound condescending or harsh but you would not be the first person on earth to extol the virtues of this or that MS product which was later found to be riddled with bugs.
You may well be totally correct and the new OS may be rock solid.

However past experience, a long and spectacular history of partially complete OS's from MS and the caution acquired from many, many unfulfilled claims from IT salesmen pushing a particular product has taught me to ere on the side of caution and adopt a wait and see attitude to these purchases.
If you can't accept that then that is your problem.

Without evidence I won't pay.

As you know full well, the discussion was specifically about comparing the Betas. Completely understandable that you would try suddenly to change the subject.

I am not doubting your IT bona fides, but on the issue in question you are simply out of your depth.

 

[Pie eyed]

As you know full well, the discussion was specifically about comparing the Betas. Completely understandable that you would try suddenly to change the subject.

I am not doubting your IT bona fides, but on the issue in question you are simply out of your depth.

Now I have it........lol.
I went back and read from the start.....
Where I refer to "Windows 7 beta" in my first post I was sarcastically describing Windows 7 (the release version) as a beta in a derogatory fashion along the lines of it will not be without a lot of bugs.......like XP and Vista first retail release versions.

I was at no time comparing beta's. I have never even seen XP or Vista beta's. I am talking Retail Os's and if you read my posts you'll realise that. I am talking about how buggy and unfinished the first releases of XP and Vista were.
The only comment I make releveant to 7 Beta is that I have a copy on a desktop and a couple of my colleagues have it running and it has several bugs. These are stand alone machines running psuedo networks (fake networks if you like).

I still would not buy the first release version. They are already posting patches for the beta.
"Microsoft is warning users of the new Windows 7 Beta of a flaw that can permanently impair your MP3 files, including purchased MP3 tracks."

Don't accept my advice do a bloody Google seach on "Windows 7 Bugs"

See you in a week.

 

[weevil]

Right, I alone must have used the word beta more than a dozen times in the last 2 pages...But only now you claim to realise the discussion was about the beta.

I wasted my time, making multiple thoughtful replies to someone who could not even be arsed to read them.

You know so much about the topic you think a bug that was patched 3 weeks ago is news.

Tell us all about the OS that when you google it’s name and the word "bugs" that you get no hits.

If you cannot be bothered even reading the original posts then don’t bother replying.

What a total waste of time.

 

[Pie eyed]

Right, I alone must have used the word beta more than a dozen times in the last 2 pages...But only now you claim to realise the discussion was about the beta.

I wasted my time, making multiple thoughtful replies to someone who could not even be arsed to read them.

You know so much about the topic you think a bug that was patched 3 weeks ago is news.

Tell us all about the OS that when you google it’s name and the word "bugs" that you get no hits.

If you cannot be bothered even reading the original posts then don’t bother replying.

What a total waste of time.

Hey I posted my opinion...you are the one valiantly trying cut it down.
I have no vested interest in "looking" knowledgeable on a forum...no-one would even know who I am.

The fact still remains and will, until I find a good reason to change my opinion, that I will not recommend the first release of any MS product, including OS's.

The original question I gave my opinion on was whether a poster with an under resourced laptop struggling with Vista should buy Windows 7 when it is released and whether this would run better on his setup.

My response was save your money and buy more RAM and go back to XP. Then wait until Windows 7 (beta) (sarcasm) is a full and stable release and then try it.

I really don't give a rats arse what you contend on stability of the OS, my IT skills or my credentials....

It was an interesting chat at any rate in the light of very little footy going on at the moment.

Good luck to your Lions.

 

[Rod Stroker]

Great, another BF thread derailed

To get it back on track, I'm keen to hear about peoples experiences who have actually installed and are using the Win7 Beta. What they like and don't like about it, their user experience, etc.

I'm not interested in hearing why people DON'T want to install it, at least not in this thread. Start a new thread if that is what you want to discuss.

I've been running it for over a month now and still not a single issue. Humming along nicely. After the pain Windows caused me with Vista, they have won me back with Win7. I just hope they don't make too many changes to the Beta release.

 

[weevil]

Yeah, posts from people who actually know what they are talking about would be a bonus.

 

[spitlizard]

Yeah, posts from people who actually know what they are talking about would be a bonus.

LOL...
On that note, it would be good to gauge from all those others that are using the beta version their pro's and con's.

Pro's:
The SPEEEEEEEEEED, I love it. I am so impressed with it
The driver base, I don't think I have ever installed an O/S whereby I didn't have to install additional drivers.
Very easy, comfortable interface (yes so was Vista but W7 does it better )
Oh.....did I mention the SPEEEEEED

Con's:
Don't like the way they structure the Files/Folders tree

 

[Rod Stroker]

The driver base, I don't think I have ever installed an O/S whereby I didn't have to install additional drivers.

That impressed me as well. Whatever drivers weren't installed during the initial OS installation process were automatically fetched from the web when W7 booted up for the first time after the install had completed. No manual intervention required. It was great to finally open the Device Manager after a Windows install without a heap of yellow exclamation marks next to "Unknown Devices".

Con's:
Don't like the way they structure the Files/Folders tree

What in particular don't you like about it? I was concerned the very first time I opened Windows Explorer to see that none of my Optical drives were visible in the drive tree under the hard disks. It's only when you put a disc in the optical drive that the optical drive letter appears in the drive tree.

 

[TheGhostOfJohnBelushi]

Has anyone found a way to do the Quicklaunch bar? I found a way to add it as a toolbar but it disappeared after reboot.

 

[weevil]

Has anyone found a way to do the Quicklaunch bar? I found a way to add it as a toolbar but it disappeared after reboot.

I think you will find the answer here.

 

[weevil]

I don’t like the default taskbar with all the icons appearing as squares. Hard to tell what is running and what is not. Much happier after right clicking on the taskbar and setting the Taskbar Buttons property to “Combine when taskbar is full” option.

I am thinking about just enabling the Quick Launch bar myself and using it in the ‘traditional’ way.

 

[weevil]

Con's:
Don't like the way they structure the Files/Folders tree

I didn’t at first, but it has really grown on me.

The libraries in particular are really cool. Love the way you can combine a whole bunch of related but separate directories into the one customised virtual folder.

 

[Borgsta]

The fact still remains and will, until I find a good reason to change my opinion, that I will not recommend the first release of any MS product, including OS's.

1 simple and serious question for you.

What 1st release of hardware and software would you recommend?

 

[spitlizard]

One other thing that whilst dosen't bug me, is going to take time to get use to is where they have placed the "Show Desktop" button on the right side of the system tray. Mind you I do like the way all you need to do is hover the mouse over it and it shows the desktop briefly

 

[Rod Stroker]

One other thing that whilst dosen't bug me, is going to take time to get use to is where they have placed the "Show Desktop" button on the right side of the system tray. Mind you I do like the way all you need to do is hover the mouse over it and it shows the desktop briefly

This used to annoy me too, until I activated the Quick Launch toolbar which includes "Show Desktop" by default, so now the icon is back on the left hand side of the task bar next to the Start button where I've always been used to having it.

 

[spitlizard]

This used to annoy me too, until I activated the Quick Launch toolbar which includes "Show Desktop" by default, so now the icon is back on the left hand side of the task bar next to the Start button where I've always been used to having it.

I'm actually starting to get use to the "Aero Peek" button....yes folks thats what it's called or so I've read.

By separating it from the other icons, I don't have to think about which one it is anymore like I did with Vista (they all kinda looked the same in Vista!!)

 

[TheGhostOfJohnBelushi]

I think you will find the answer here.

Wow, who ever would of thought of doing that...

I did Google it, Einstein, but after creating the toolbar initially it disappeared. Have made it stick now, thanks for being a tool about it.

 

[weevil]

Wow, who ever would of thought of doing that...

I did Google it, Einstein, but after creating the toolbar initially it disappeared. Have made it stick now, thanks for being a tool about it.

Settle down sunshine. Check the winking smiley before you get your knickers in a twist. Also try looking further down the list of results.

 

[Rawhead]

I'm loving Windows7, Media center is way better.