Microsoft: No plans for second Windows 7 beta
Microsoft has confirmed that it won't issue a second beta of Windows 7, saying that the next test version of the operating system will be a near-final release candidate.
Windows engineering head Steven Sinofsky announced the move in a blog posting on Friday, confirming that Microsoft would stick to earlier plans for just a single beta.
"The next milestone for the development of Windows 7 is the Release Candidate or 'RC,'" Sinofsky wrote. "Historically the Release Candidate has signaled 'we're pretty close and we want people to start testing the release, especially because all the features are done.'"
Microsoft released the feature-complete beta version earlier this month and general computer users have until February 10 to download the software. (Click on the video at right to hear me talk Windows 7 on CNET Editors' Office Hours.)
Sinofsky didn't say when to expect a release candidate, or the final release, though the company is believed to still be aiming to have the operating system ready to go on PCs in time for this year's holiday shopping season.
Although that is believed to be the goal, Microsoft has told partners that it is still too soon to commit for a 2009 release and it could yet be pushed into early 2010. Officially, Microsoft has said that it will have Windows 7 out within three years of the general availability of Windows Vista, which hit its two-year anniversary on Thursday.
For his part, Sinofsky encouraged people not too read to much into his posting.
"This post is in no way an announcement of a ship date, change in plans, or change in our previously described process, but rather it provides additional detail and a forward looking view of the path to (release)."
Meanwhile, Microsoft is moving ahead with plans for a second service pack for Windows Vista, which is due out next quarter, ahead of Windows 7.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
I like Windows 7 but I have some concerns that I'd like addressed before final release
First thing - EVERYONE I spoke to even at the MS booth at CES said they want the UP FOLDER back in explorer - yes there are other ways to go back one folder but the up folder was convenient.
Classic start menu - not an option - classic start menu makes it easier to support clients if they have key components such as network properties and my computer on the desktop. I'm not saying it should be the default but why not make it an option as it was in Windows XP and Vista? I realize you can put some icons on the desktop (not IE) using personalize.
Media Center won't let you click on album art cover once a song is already playing to play the new song from the album art cover. Seems only logical.
Media Center - often has static in playback - using Audigy 2z sound card.
Search works well but it would be great if the search in the start menu had a drop down just like run has in the start menu so you can repeat a search from your search history.
Aero interface stops working without message so flip 3d stops with alt-tab - using the troubleshooting fix sometimes solves it by enabling desktop manager - sometimes it can't - how do you manually enable Windows desktop manager - personalize desktop works but nothing to control the aero interface
Since most current receivers and other media streaming capable devices will support .flac file playback, it seems a shame not to use the native media player in windows as a media streaming server - instead because windows does not natively support flac playback, we have to look at alternative hardware streaming solutions or mediaplayers similar to windows media player but with flac support such as tversity or Twonky or Nero
Winver does not tell you if you are running 64 or 32 bit - computer properties would be improved if 64 or 32 bit was listed in the top section. It never states if you are installing the 32 or 64 bit version during installation.
It would be nice if it was easy to see what version and build of windows you were running by going to computer properties or by running winver - currently it tells you Windows Version 6.1 - Build 70000 - it doesn't say 7000 x64 081212-1400
During Install if you attempt to install with a brand new drive it won't install until you format the drive and reboot.
There is no desktop icon for IE - this was very handy for clear items and change settings etc before going into IE.
Do something with the 200 MB partion in disk manager so it is clear that it is a restore point or whatever - change the color of it, just make it more clearly defined.
Of course, Ina Fried has shown a decent amount of objective journalism when compared to some others.
I don't know about serious issues with Windows 7, but I do agree that Explorer should have an up folder option. The removal of the IE icon on the desktop is because I think they want (or expect) you to pin it to the taskbar. I have removed most of my icons and pinned them to the taskbar and I have realized that is the idea.
I don't like that I can only add indexed locations to the libraries. I have an Apps library I created with a few locations I have applications saved in. I can't add one network share in because it forces me to add only indexed locations. This kind of defeats the purpose of these folders.
I am disappointed they haven't upgraded IE8 to RC1 for W7 yet. That is the only app I really am having major problems with.
I think some of your other concerns will be cleaned up before the final release. I am sure that others have run into these issues as well and reported them. Overall, I am happy with W7. It is a major improvement in performance over Vista.
Having used vista and windows 7, early adopter for both, i have to say that i consider windows vista the beta and windows 7 the final windows vista release. After i installed vista on my computer, the now famous (vista capable) i found that many if not most of my drivers where missing, did the same with windows 7 and they all worked. Also it feels as if windows seven has narrowed the components and makes a much decent and stable run in the computer.
I used them both on the same comptuer sony vaio fz 2.4ghz plus 2gigs or ram. I now run windows 7 on my mac after moving out of windows due to vista and i have to say, windows 7 might spark some fire, but it will not burn my passion for os x, ill hold my breath so see what snow kitty will bring, but as it is, i see os x still ahead of windows
Win 7 is good, now finish it and make it better!
If users are prompted for their choice of web browser, when the system is first booted, there would not be a crippled version. At least with a solution like this, the non-geeks would be aware that there actually is a choice.
I'm more interested in IE "not" being on all PCs by default, so web designers stick to open web standards that work on all browsers. Today, they design to IE, since they know it is always there.
1. Rely on some third-party browser that may or may not work in rendering what it wants. It'll have to test all browsers on the market because the user now can pick any of them as the HTML renderer for the OS.
2. Leave IE in the OS under the hood and not as a desktop browser so it can still use it as the HTML renderer for it's OS components. Then it still has to listen to people whine and the EU sue because IE is still bundled and integrated with the OS.
3. Leave IE in as the default broswer and let users freely download the browser of their choise. Hell, they can include download links on the desktop for all of the browsers known to mandkind. Or even better they can bundle every browser with the OS so you don't need to download them. That way they can take the blame for distributing older, exploitable browsers in copies of the OS they sit on store shelves for more than a week. They can also be blamed form including bloatware, having such a big install footprint, for issues with the third-party browser, etc. etc. etc.
4. Remove any reliance on HTML rendering in the OS or any of its bundled applications. That way they can be blamed for being propriatry, ridged, and unextensible.
Rinse and repeat for all of the other applications bundled with Windows...
I sure hope they bundle SonngSmith with Windows 7 so all of the whiners can make some music to go along with all of thier whining.
Heres the issue with that. If you are going to "bundle" another OS you're doing to run into the following issue... an OUT OF DATE version.
Firefox was as 1.5 when Vista came out. Imagine people who might be installing Vista today and Firefox 1.5 appearing. It's a seemingly big issue in Linux editions. I'm stuck using FF1.5 in RHEL 5 for my Red Hat classes.
Microsoft doesn't update packages when they release a new SP cd. So XP SP2 CD doesn't come with IE7 or WMP11. Neither does SP3. So a Vista SP1/SP2 DVD would still ship with Firefox 1.5.
More people would benefit from DOWNLOADING the latest version, and uninstalling/hiding IE rather than running a major out of date version that would need a similar download anyway.
I've been using Ubuntu for a while, but I seem to recall when I was using Windows that, at least for Firefox, I was informed, when any new updates/versions were available.
Another solution could be to have a software repository for Windows (similar to Linux) and when you select a browser during the initial boot, it downloads & installs the latest version from the repository.
None of the problems like uninstalling the default browser, installing a browser without a browser, etc. exist on Linux, so I assume it should be possible with Windows. It's just not something Microsoft is probably that interested in doing...for obvious reasons.
Unless Linux is unable to display HTML properly, your argument has no validity. Having IE as an integral part of the OS in such a way as to make it impossible to remove without crippling the system is poor design. No browser should ever be so tightly integrated into the system as that. It's part of why Windows is still such a magnet for viruses and malware.
Unless Linux is unable to display HTML properly, your argument has no validity. Having IE as an integral part of the OS in such a way as to make it impossible to remove without crippling the system is poor design. No browser should ever be so tightly integrated into the system as that. It's part of why Windows is still such a magnet for viruses and malware.
@timber 2005
I haven't used RHEL, but I'm assuming you can add third party repositories like in Ubuntu. Have you tried adding the one for Firefox and then updating your system? Should bring you up to speed right away.
However, I still cling tightly to my lovely 1997 NT4 machine. :P
This is a classic scheme that is always being done in the world of business... Give people a bad product, which became a joke in the IT community, then release a new and "improved" product, making everyone giggly about how good Win 7 is...
Truth of the matter is... if Vista wasn't even released at all, and Win 7 was released earlier, everyone would've treated Win 7 like Vista now... Still half-baked, aero problems, etc... although it feels like a good product, this is because we are always comparing it with the Vista Reject... Kinda like what happened in the movie (My Bestfriend's girl), where the guy works on your girlfriend, show how an ass he is, making the girl realize how good a catch the original boyfriend was...
What waste? MS sold the public on Vista before it went out, now they sell the license to both Vista AND XP to the OEMs in order for the public to be able to get either a Vista machine or an XP machine and they get to continue to develop the OS into something closer to what it should have been originally, meaning the people who bought Vista as is or who bought a machine running Vista will come running to purchase Windows 7 and be "upgraded" into a more stable release. MS also gets to say that, rather than having such a long time between releases, there has actually been 2 releases.
It's like selling a car with only the two front seats and an empty row in the back where there should be passenger seating, then selling the upgrade for comfort.
In essense, I liked Vista, but it was slow. 7 is faster, and looks just as good, if not better. If I compared it to XP, and only XP, I'd like it. Better. Strictly better.
So I vote that Win7 needs to drop backwards compatibility. OR make an option to install the necessary files to become backwards compatible. That way if you don't need backwards compatibility, you're not wasting space on your drive.
And switching from any version of windows wont require you to learn a new interface? I cant even begin to comprehend the stupidity of that comment.
I was a big supporter of XP and really loved it and never considered moving to Vista until about a year ago and only because so many friends had it and wanted to know how to do this or that and i didnt know. Since I installed Vista I have not had any BSOD's due to the OS. Only time I have had any problems is when OCing my system. No other hardware of software issues.
Try reading the OPs comment. By taking that quote out of context, you've proven yourself to be a troll.
Even works with 3D acceleration. I love Sun Microsystems.
1. No "up folder" button.
2. Status bar stops displaying information when more than 15 files are selected.
3. Windows do not save their positions. Try it. Open 2 windows, place them around the screen how you want, close them both and open them again, at least 1 window will not be in the right position.
4. UAC is still annoying as hell. Yes you can turn it off, but what's the point of even including then? They need to either fix UAC once and for all, or get rid of it. There's no reason I should have to suffer through no less than THREE popups every time I log in to my computer. Then almost every game or app I run creates another popup. People install popup blockers for a reason! This is their 2nd chance, most people probably won't give them a 3rd chance - I know I won't.
I turned off UAC but the stupid "unsecured" icon keeps annoying me about UAC being turned off!!!
Second, Windows do save their positions. I have done exactly what you are suggesting, and guess what? It remembers what positions I had my windows in.
Third, the up folder button was removed because, after getting much feedback, Microsoft realized that most people don't use it and didn't use it.
Fourth, UAC is not still annoying as hell. It is MUCH better in Windows 7, you can even tell it to let a file run every single time you click on it in UAC.
I opened "pictures" and alighted it to bottom left of screen, and "network" to top right.
Closed each, open each, they open in those places.
Other than that, I don't get any and it is set to it's highest level.
Turning UAC off is a bad idea. People whine about MS OS's being 'insecure' then turn the security features off. Stupid or what?
EU is all over MS for including a browser.
Boe_d is all over them for not supporting FLAC Files in Media Player, so he has to go find a player that does.
Anyone see a conflict here?
If 'we' like the feature we want them to include it for 'free' of course.
If 'we' don't like it, somehow apparently to the EU, MS including it makes it to hard for them to load an alternative.
What Boe_d wants isn't for them to include more software, he wants them to make the software they're already bundling worth his time. If there's going to be a media player already present, he wants it to actually play all media. It makes sense. If I bought a car with a radio, I'd expect the radio to be able to play all stations.
Windows 7 is Vista SP3. If it was a major overhoul, they can't away without
going through few betas. You moro*ns....
I am an experienced computer user, and Programmer.
Turned off UAC, shared everything, setup security Policy, created a take ownership right click menu, installed unlocker, activated hidden Administrator account and still have permission problems even when run as Administrator.
Adobe reader 8 and 9 was unable to create their own shortcuts, and this is a few of the programs with problems.
Unable to save a text file in notepad when logged in as Administrator.
Example: Create a dos .bat file with echo hello, and then a pause, run it, make changes and then try to save it.
You will not be unable to save back to the original file even when logged in as a true administrator.
Unable to delete temp folders created by installed program.
Many programs are unable to uninstall because they don't have permission to delete their own files and shortcuts. They even have problems with permission to use the temp folder. Many programs are unable to install because of permissions.
Programs using MsiExec have super problems, and MsiExec seems to stay locked in memory causing permission problems. I have already deleted the DisabledSessions registry key that caused many previous problems.
UAC was and is a bad idea, and the permission problem is a nightmare, and creating many other problems.
The Windows.old folder will sometimes delete after install and sometimes it's a nightmare to delete file by file.
Windows 7 doesn't assign a drive letter to a Windows XP Partition when installing under Dual boot .
You will need to go to Computer Management and assign a Drive letter.
Windows 7 is unsuitable for an average home user, and many experienced users.
It works better than Vista, but it's a pain, and time consuming to use because of permissions.
I am burned out on the use of takeown, and icacls, and these commands don't work half the time.
Another failed operating system, and I believe many people will be downgrading to Windows XP as they did with Vista.
I myself will be sticking with Windows XP until Microsoft comes out with a better System.
"Turned off UAC, shared everything, setup security Policy, created a take ownership right click menu, installed unlocker, activated hidden Administrator account and still have permission problems even when run as Administrator." - I only have to ask....why??
If you hack about with an OS it will end up in a mess and that is what you seem to have done. Install it again, use it without the unnecessary f**king about with it and you'll have no problems.
Here comes Snow Leopard! Its going kick a*&!
MS needs Windows 10 in 2015 to catchup with Snow Leopard that would
be release 2009!!
You Windows users are being ripped off! Wakeup folks!!
Linux is definitely high quality, Mac OS is high quality, Windows is trying. Out of those three, Linux is still the best value if for no other reason than it is completely free.
Keep smoking whatever it is you are. ;-)
Sinofsky makes this clear in his comments. "The next milestone for the development of Windows 7 is the Release Candidate or ?RC?. Historically the Release Candidate has signaled ?we?re pretty close and we want people to start testing the release, especially because all the features are done.? As we have said before, with Windows 7 we chose a slightly different approach which we were clear up front about and are all now experiencing together and out in the open. The Pre-Beta from the PDC was a release where we said it was substantially API complete **and even for the areas that were not in the release** we detailed the APIs and experience in the sessions at the PDC. At that time we announced that the Beta test in early 2009 would be both API and feature complete, widely available, and would be the only Beta test. We continued this dialog with our hardware partners at WinHEC. We also said that many ecosystem partners including PC makers, software vendors, hardware makers will, as has been the case, continue to receive interim builds on a regular basis. This is where we stand today."
Translation: If history is any guide, Intel's goals will be at odds with Microsoft's before the GA of a new Windows O/S, and Intel's demands and Microsoft's negotiations with Intel will slow down the release of Win7 just like it did with WinVista. Contrary to what their PR Dept may lead us to believe, Redmond isn't particularly interested in the feedback of the public during an O/S beta phase. And they're only marginally interested in their OEM customer's (e.g. HP, Dell, Acer) feedback. At the end of the day and after many months of serious negotiations, Intel will inform Microsoft of what they can and must do with the release of a new Windows O/S if the O/S is to receive Intel's blessings. Redmond listens when Intel speaks.
My forecast is the same today as it's been since first trials of Win7 - I seriously doubt we'll see Win7 achieve GA before October 2011.
- by boe_d February 1, 2009 7:21 AM PST
- I've seen no indication MS is listening to any of our comments
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (64 Comments)You can send feedback all day long about the things you want fixed in Windows 7 - but where do we see any of the things MS is actually going to work on?
When you send feedback to MS you don't get responses.
Where is a place that you can post that MS will actually listen? Or are they going to make another Vista and ignore everyone who said Vista was slow? How'd that work out for them last time?