Comments on: Windows 7 beta: First impressions

A new version of Microsoft's operating system, bringing back that nebulous "Windows XP feel," won't wow anyone but will satisfy them on a much deeper level, ZDNet Australia writes.

[RHartzell]

If Martin Luther had posted his 95 theses on CNET, the comments by Protestants and Catholics wouldn't have been much different from the snarky quips by the Microsoft and Apple faithful here. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ... except when CNET writes about Vista (or post-Vista) or OS X. Then you can be fairly certain that flaming dogma will rule the day.

Sheesh.

[Penguinisto]

Just one small problem with your theory:

When Luther nailed his questions to the church door in Wittenberg, there were no Lutherans.

Or rather, there was only one Lutheran on the planet - him. ;)

[D3vildog699]

I don't really see the problem there, he could still post it and people could make fun of him, But since i'm lutheran i don't think thats something i would do...

[computerdude10]

You mac people are so stupid. You try to make it sound like Vista is bad and Leopard is good. When you look at the facts, the opposite is true. Leopard is filled of security holes and can easily be hacked in 10 minutes, while vista can't be hacked in over 24 hours (nobody bothers to create viruses the mac because there's nobody using them, so hacking them is pointless)... this gives mac users a false sense of security. Because mac users are generally unintelligent to begin with, Apple doesnt have much work to do in convincing users that macs are secure.

[Perry_Clease]

Good joke kid, outrageous lies can be funny when the audience knows the truth and knows that the comedian knows that he is lying.

[Maclover1]

"Leopard is filled of security holes and can easily be hacked in 10 minutes"

So why is not getting hacked?

[The_happy_switcher]

You are truly a world-class bozo. I used to build my own pcs and used windows for 17 years and I switched to Mac. I'm betting I know more about your PC than you do, jackass.

You are just another idiot promoting the 'security through obscurity' bs that's expounded my know-nothing window's users.

There's nobody with an ego big enough in the entire world who would want bragging rights about infecting Macs en masse? Really? Or perhaps it's because it's too difficult. Which is the more likely explanation?

[PunkToad]

Unix based systems have always been far superior in regards to security than any DOS base system

[tm_anon]

Macs have the same type of security set up as Linux does, in other words, when you log on, you're a limited user. Vista actually put that in. The problem is the implementation of it was horrible. Macs are secure because in order to have a virus run, you have to give it permission to run, same with any other program. Vista was a failed attempt at copying the Unix based OS way of setting up user status.
As for the "hack" that was used on the Mac, if I remember correctly that was a security loophole in the Flash Player. The same loophole can be used to break into Vista or possibly Linux. It's not a flaw in an OS that allowed access, it's a flaw in a piece of software that has somehow been allowed to remain crappy due to its dominance in the online world of advertisements and other media forms.
In other words, if you can't hack your way into Vista using the same exact methods used to hack your way into a Mac OS, you really aren't that good at what you're doing. As for Mac users being unintelligent, I've had to help pretty close to every single person I know who runs a Windows based computer by walking them through the process of a defrag, cleaning out their hard drive, using antivirus programs, etc. I've had to help them troubleshoot problems running certain programs. I know a few people running Mac OS, never had to help them with anything. I know one or two people running Linux in various forms, never had to help them with anything either. With Linux based computers, the people running them tend to be able to troubleshoot or are at least smart enough to run a google search. Especially with the newest releases of Ubuntu, I haven't heard many problems not related to driver support problems. With Mac OS, their aren't really any driver support problems I've heard of due to the ability of Apple to check the devices that will be used with their computers before they are shipped out the door. Remind me again, did you even have a point?

[bradysama]

Great write up, but I wanted to mention one thing...
"Microsoft appears to have an antivirus package installed under the hood; when downloading new software with Firefox, we were told that our downloads were being scanned for viruses."
This is a feature built in to Firefox, and not something that the underlying Windows 7 environment was providing.

[racedriverof35]

Through my 3 hour of tinkering with it I thought the Load Speeds were much slower. Notepad crashed on me at least 3 times. I was also A little frustrated with their new window controlling. I could not find an option to turn it off. I am also Very disappointing with the video drivers. They don't support OpenGL. They also changed something in their networking code, as programs that worked fine before took minutes to work. I am also very disappointed that they still have not allow the user to scroll on an inactive window. Overall I still prefer Linux over Windows.

[Zaunto]

I've been using Windows Vista since November 2007. It was a nightmare on the new desktop I bought then. Only with a clean install of Vista Business, did it cooperate. It came on a new laptop I bought in 2008 and I haven't had any problems with it there. That being said, it does appear that Windows 7 is what Vista should have been and Microsoft is going to be pushing Windows 7 on us sooner than any of us want. I personally won't touch it at least for a year. Don't need it. Don't want it. My systems work as they are. I'll let everyone else beta test it and keep my eye on what Apple is doing. If I find that Apple has better music recording options for me, that is where I will go. We will see.

[jeremyblaze]

Fanboys on both side amaze me. I waited until Vista launched to purchase a new laptop, and immediately hated it. Now, almost 2 years in, with near constant updates, Vista does great for my home pc. But in the beginning, when printers didn't work and even my Blackberry couldn't snyc, I was hot. Now, all that works fine, but my Blackberry still doesn't *really* work with our mac. I dont think Windows 7 or Mac OS x version whatever will change the dynamics of the pc war, but I think the mobile phone market could. If Windows Mobile 7 and Blackberry can't overcome whatever the next iPhone will be, then you have all those new customers looking at macs because of the perceived ease of use with the phone. But the fanboys dont seem to realize we would be trading one evil empire for another. In fact, Apple is much more controlling than almost any other tech company. In the end, it probably wont matter who wins, because the consumer is still going to be stuck, one way or another.

[tm_anon]

It's called Linux, look it up.

[Seaspray0]

first, the iphone uses activesync to synchronize with corporate email. Activesynce is microsoft's software; it's what windows mobile has been using for years. Apple is licensing activesync from microsoft for the iphone. second, IT departments will continue to avoid the iphone for corporate use until several security issues are corrected (blackberry and windows mobile are welcome). It seems to me that the iphone still has a ways to go before it overcomes what blackberry and windows moble already are... business phones.

[Heebee Jeebies]

After turning UAC off with Vista I am mostly ok with it. However, my big complaint now is that Microsoft keeps moving things around and changing their names. For example the new Action security center in 7. I wish Microsoft would pare down all of these things and put them all in one application driven by tabs or something so that we don't have to look all over creation for stuff and deal with dozens of small, single or few items little do-hicky applets.

I am also more annoyed by all of the little programs that Adobe seems to hide (don't provide interface or icon access to.) When I have had to deal with tech support (from third parties, not microsoft) I have almost always had to go to the run command and come some small little applet to get to some configuration setting that needed to be adjusted but wasn't accessible or easily know about by the user.

Microsoft needs to stop treating people like their idiots. Most are, but not all of us. Some of us are smart enough to figure out things, but don't want to spend days or weeks hunting for such small items. Again all of this should be in one tab separated application.

As long as Microsoft keeps dumbing stuff down to protect the stupid I am going to have issues with Windows. Maybe instead of 3 or 4 or 5 different versions of Windows they need to have two. Windows 7 The Smart Edition for people with IQs and computer know how above that of a 3 year old and Windows 7 Dumb for those dumber than a 3 year old. They could include a diaper with that one and bring back the office paper clip to help them understand that an icon is for clicking.

Robert

[Maclover1]

"After turning UAC off with Vista" Wow you turned off the best feature in Vista. UAC is the only reason I suggest Vista to my PC friends when they want a new PC.

Is it totally annoying in Vista? Yes quite so. However its concept has been in OS X and Linux for a long time and done right its what saves you way more on Vista than XP from malware.

Turning off UAC is like not wearing your seat belt. Sure you seat belt wont always save you, nor will UAC, but it goes a long way in doing so.

[Seaspray0]

I agree with maclover1 on this one. My wife just got a new PC and in the last month has only seen UAC twice... first on installing software, and second on installing a flash pluggin. It certainly is not the annoyance that everyone has made it out to be. I wish XP had it.

[Vegaman_Dan]

FYI: The official beta of Windows 7 is build 7000. All earlier versions are not the official beta. The beta is expected to be out in a few days.

The 200Mb partition is created for Bitlocker. Previously it would create a 1.5Gb partition, but this has been reduced.

The photo realistic icons are supplied by the OEM's with the idea that it will be far easier to have people associate an HP All in one printer/copier/fax machine with a photo of the actual item rather than a rather cryptic name like HP LZ137-AZ or whatever. Each option on the device is treated separately as well. This makes driver updates a lot easier as well as you can address each feature of the device instead of the all or nothing approach.

Typical install times are 30 minutes or less, which is greatly reduced from previous OS versions.

[The_happy_switcher]

"Typical install times are 30 minutes or less, which is greatly reduced from previous OS versions."

And this only took eight years to speed up. Wow, welcome to the 'bleeding edge.' lol

[Vegaman_Dan]

AppleRocks1963 wrote:

"And this only took eight years to speed up. Wow, welcome to the 'bleeding edge.' lol "

Catch up to what, exactly? Some OS's take more or less time depending upon what is installed.

[tm_anon]

My install of Ubuntu took less than that, installed much more than Vista does and I'm betting more than Windows 7 will. It also takes up much less hard drive space and deliver a larger bang for the space it does take up.

[Dalkorian]

by tm_anon January 7, 2009 6:31 PM PST
My install of Ubuntu took less than that, installed much more than Vista does and I'm betting more than Windows 7 will. It also takes up much less hard drive space and deliver a larger bang for the space it does take up.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well yeah, but it's not crippling you with draconian DRM schemes designed to keep you under their control. That's why Ubuntu also runs faster than fista, even this new fista sp 3 code named w7.

Why do you resist the tentacle?

[tm_anon]

@Dalkorian

Even after they promised to use the velvet tentacle, they still used the leather one. I just won't trust someone who lies about tentacle usage.

[duelistskater]

I just want to let all of you who think that there is an "under the hood antivirus," Firefox has ALWAYS scanned your files before you finished downloading them. That is why everyone loves Firefox so much. All of the added and safer searching features that Firefox has.

As for Windows 7, I have it on my computer and have started using it as my main OS, it runs faster than my XP machine does as well as my Vista machine. Games even run better on it and get much better frame rates.

[sythara]

Firefox has an anti-virus built in?

[Seaspray0]

Same question as sythara.

[renec2006]

Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't make it prettier.
M$ tries to now compete with OS X and Linux with GUI changes and widgets.
M$ is no match with the OS X/Linux GUI and of course the stability.
OS X and Linux do not require you to install a third party anti virus app.
Win 7 is not out yet and they ask to buy an anti virus.
Yeah sure, it's more secure!

[Dalkorian]

Well, more secure than previous version of winblows anyway. I'll give them that. But keep in mind the perspective, it's more secure than the least secure OS known to man.

[ssicomputers]

M$? Really? Hey, 1998 is calling...

[rranger1]

I've been using Linux for years (specifically Mandrake/Mandriva and PCLinuxOS) and, though I love them and believe in the "cause", I feel the uncontrollable need to comment on this. When it comes to stability, Linux still has a SIGNIFICANT amount of work to do, even when compared to Windows (which, using XP, Vista and now 7, hasn't given me a BSOD in at least a half decade).

I can't tell you, for example, how many times I've had Firefox 3 die on me in Linux only to have KDE tell me that it's still running in the background. So, you can't launch a new instance without rebooting - not logging out and re logging in, mind you, but a complete, total, hard reboot to use a web browser. Ugh!

So, maybe Windows is lipsticked pig, but at least it's a pig that can run a web browser.

[MachTurtle]

all this speculation:

i am sure there was lots of discussions about vista, when it thought to be reaching escape velocity, that were way off mark as well

[Dalkorian]

Winblows apologists would love for us all to forget about all the promised features of fista that were dropped at the last minute to get it out the door, like that new file system that's been promised for over a decade now.

Here's an important question, does fista and it's newest variation still use the registry?

[Vegaman_Dan]

Dalkorian:

There is no such thing as Windows 'fista'. Please use the correct name if you wish to be taken seriously.

Thanks.

[topgunb2]

and what is Winblows? is it some custom OS you are using?

[Seaspray0]

He's most likely a pre-teen. I'm guessing 10 years old. Why else would he be using such childish name calling like that?

[fokkwp]

Regarding Mac pricing - unfortunately Dell and other Wintel folks offer at various times killer pricing on quite decent machines. Recent Vostro business computers at about $420 with Core 2 - 2.8 gig, including DVD writer and 20" flat-screen, small tower.

What happens in a company that already has flat screens but wants to upgrade just its boxes? are you going to spend $1200 for an iMac with a built-in flat screen you don't need, or $400 on a Vista box with equivalent performance but letting you re-use your existing flat screen? especially when 90% of user time is spent on cross-platform apps like Office, Thunderbird, iTunes, and Firefox - so that most of the other neat Mac apps are ignored?

Even if you make the argument that total cost of ownership over time is less on a Mac - which I find hard to support - what most businesses are dealing with is the immediate bottom-line of equiping their current users given current budget.

Mac would do well to offer a box-only computer better powered and more accessible for repair than a Mini, at a cost comparable to a Win box.

[tm_anon]

You could always just install a user friendly Linux distro such as Ubuntu on the same machines, use OOo which comes preinstalled along with Firefox and Rhythmbox (Linux answer to iTunes), install Thunderbird and be done with it and notice the huge difference in performance, even between brand new installs of Ubuntu and Windows. With the same hardware, you'd end up getting a comparable machine to the newer ones you were planning on buying without the overhead. Since Ubuntu already has forums and many users have successfully set up Ubuntu machines on Windows servers, the walkthrough for how to do this is already online meaning the current IT guys would just have to be able to follow instructions. In other words, brand new Windows machines may cost less than brand new Macintosh machines, but when Ubuntu is making your old hardware look top of the line and not costing a dime, why would you ever want to buy anything?

[SparXXXie]

unbiased? the one piece of software the author complains about is iTunes. notice how the author posts no real data on how/why the OS is faster than Vista. we're just supposed to believe this. so, if the author is telling me that windows 7 is faster than vista, does this mean it's finally catching up to XP? everyone knows XP is faster than Vista. show me the specifics. show me resource numbers. show me performance tests. if you believe everything you read or hear, we'd all be driving GM cars running Windows Vista as the navigation system, while our gas consumption increases 100%.

[Seaspray0]

It was just released today. What were you expecting? A novel?

[lfreel]

From the first review to the last comment mean nada' to folks who have scanners, printers or other periferals unsupported by Vista. How about Windoz 7? Most likely the same story.

[cracm]

i have vista64 installed on my lenovo x200tablet notebook and like it a lot... everything is extremely fast and responsive.. the wacom drivers are awesome with with photoshop.. looking forward to windows 7.. i just wish they would switch that command line to bash rather than that 70's style CP/M dos prompt.

[SteamChip]

No real reason to upgrade, where are the applications I gotta have that only run under THAT?!?

If my computer breaks and I need to get another, NO VISTINK. To much a backlog of old programs and peripherals to figure out if I have a ?new computer? problem or Vistink problem.

In any case, Windows 7 look to be the future and when the future arrives, I shall deal with it, looking forward to VISTINK not being there and a kinder, gentler Windows 7 replacing it.

[D3vildog699]

what's VISTINK?

[brian.lee]

"I found Vista to be a worthy upgrade from Windows XP SP2. Despite its obvious flaws (can you say "resource hog"?) and the acknowlegement that some of its features need to be disabled by default, Vista at heart is a much more stable and usable operating system than XP, which was first released in 2001."

Can you say full of c4ap... I've used vista for 2 months now on a laptop that has 4gb of ram and a dedicated video card it's GARBAGE it slows down to a crawl after a few hours of use. I want to swtich back to XP but they don't seel XP anymore.... I can't see any of the advantages to Vista the slowness alone kills your productivity and the annoying security alerts that do absoutly nothing "do you want to allow Windows Mail to Launch so you can write this email" YES NO... thank you Microsoft I feel safer already.

It's a prettier SLOWER version of XP to the common user... I have experienced more BSOD with Vista than XP.

[ppgreat]

"Windows 7 could be one of Microsoft's greatest operating systems..."

Faint praise, indeed. If all you're going to go is compare MS OS releases to one another, you might think that Windows 7 (Vista SP3) is a decent update.

But I have seen too many posts that contradict some of your main points to make me think that Windows 7 might need to be avoided as well in pursuit of other alternatives.

[Seaspray0]

Every review I've seen so far says it's great. Show me the contradictions.

[tm_anon]

Every review I've seen so far compares Windows 7 to Vista, but not to another OS. How about someone with the Windows 7 beta and a comparable OS compare the two? The only qualifications necessary are
1)User must not be biased towards a particular OS. One of you triple booting users with OSX, Windows and a Linux distro should do nicely.
2)User must use each OS for exactly the same tasks on the same PC. Play MP3s, write emails and upload photos to photobucket. View youtube vids and watch a movie. Even go so far as to customize the look of your desktop.

Once you've done that, write an article and give your comparison of the different OS's. Since most users aren't really into installing their own OS, that part's optional.

[bobby_brady]

Will the days of having to wait a minute just to eject a CD be gone?

[YankeePoodle]

Lack of Modularity is the Apple killer. That is the reason why IBM PC Clones beat Apple in the first place. Academia is *nixy and OS X provides a cute *nix environment, so I understand students have Apples in the Campuses, but Apple's rise is limited to US, it is not even prevalent in other parts of western hemisphere and the growing market for computing is no more Europe and US, so the trends can be deceiving.

As long as Windows franchise churns a successful OS for every 7 years they will retain lions share of the OS world as long as x86 is the computing realm. That said IPhone is the main competition to the most of the computers since more smarter phones will utimately replace the basic computing needs of people. But the processing power and client rich applications including games will keep Desktop relevant for atleast next 20 years.