Comments on: Microsoft exec: Windows 7 is no service pack

In a speech to investors, Windows business unit head Bill Veghte says there will be plenty to make Windows 7 a major release.

[npseattle]

Windows Server 2008 is solid and runs on Vista x64 drivers (which is very good for hardware compaitibility). By the time Windows 7 comes out, it will be much more stable than Vista was when it first came out. It should be trimmer as well, and let's not forget it will play the newest games using DirectX 10. The Windows team is more capable than you think, granted they don't drop the ball on this one.

Releasing Vista when it was released was a giant mistake and the team neglected to focus on getting basic things (file transfer/networking issues, bloat, etc.) ironed out before releasing it to the public.

Many Windows users here in the Puget Sound have used Linux for over 13 years. We understand it and know its purpose (cheap servers running MySQL clusters, beowulf clustering for performance in academia with custom programs, Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP, Perl, Python). We know that the best versions of Linux are custom versions, and that the next-best versions are Enterprise versions (which, coincidentally cost money). However, we also know how much quicker it is to get things up-and-running in terms of programming and server setup. The fact is that it would take an army of free workers to put together something that Microsoft can pay the best programmers to create.

Sorry, but there are many people who don't feel like opening up a shell and compiling an application (perhaps going into configuration files, perhaps modifying C code and then recompiling), only to find out something isn't working because a piece of hardware doesn't have drivers written for it. Then, to get drivers sometimes someone has to find the code (not always released by OEMs) and custom-create them. Anyone here write drivers? And if you do, have you seen crappy drivers versus good drivers? To get custom drivers, there are third-party companies that sell them (whereas they would be free for Windows users).

Does someone want to write code for a program for three OS's (because, granted any software that is going to be sold commercially is going to hit Windows/Mac shelves before it touches the non-existent Linux shelf). Writing code, then debugging and unit testing takes time and money. The only major thing that may happen is the increase of thin-client computing, which Microsoft is preparing for.

[koala121]

Personally, I generally enjoy Windows. When it breaks, it doesn't usually take much to fix. I would like to see smaller system requirements than what Vista sported to leave more overhead for games etc. and a *true* compatability mode. It would be nice if running installs and executables for older software and games in compatability mode truly emulated previous versions of windows so that "classic" software was not lost in a void without virtual machines and 3rd party emulators. Something like "previous windows" modules available, seperate regestry for compatability modes, etc. Something to put in my wish list for Santa. But otherwise, windows works. For anyone converned with hardware compatability, or critical structures, either wait until the OS is confirmed working in their environment, or learn how to dual boot! Dual boot works great if you're unsure of compatability, like moving in before you get married :)

[RAMWolff]

Seems that MS has taken on the mentality to make new releases more often. Only difference with MS and Linux and is that Linux is mostly free and MS is the most expensive of all OS's out there so..... makes little sense to me. I really have struggled with Vista. I'm getting used to it but it's a dog compared to XP Pro. I wish I had simply bought XP Pro 64 bit and stuck with that since according to many of my graphics friends (I do some work in the 3d industry off and on) that driver support for XP 64 bit is every bit as good as support for Vista 64bit (which I run to have access to all 8 gig of RAM).

One issue I have with Vista that really irritates the bleep out of me is that the selection of multiple icons on the desktop but more so in folders. It seems in MS limited wisdom of "ease of use" they decided to NOT make the alpha for the icons completely transparent and so when clicking in what looks like an empty area you are still selecting the icon to the right or left so grabbing multiple icons in the middle of a group is a royal PITA. If this is fixed in Windows 7 I'll upgrade. If not I'm keeping my money. My seem like a rather stupid complaint but if you work with as many files as I do it's a big deal!!

[dwinks]

To be fair Vista does make a big, blue box around each icon as soon as you move from empty space to hovering over an icon, even if you are hovering over part of the alpha. If they did it the way you suggest, you'd run into lots of problems such as users not being able to click on an icon with alpha in the middle of it, such as an "O" or similar, which would cause more confusion.

I recommend setting your folders to "details" mode when dealing with lots of files, it makes it much easier, to me at least.

[as2786]

"In Windows 7 there's a capability called Direct Access that allows users to more easily connect to their corporate network. You no longer have to VPN in,".

But people *want* to VPN in, that's how everybody does it. Why on earth do they need to monkey with this? It sounds like I am nit-picking but it illustrates a more general point. MS are floundering around, seems to me, with no real idea of what to do. And 5 editions of Windows Vista? Spare me! There will be 7 editions of WIndows 7, no doubt.

[blevdog]

People want to VPN in? Really? When I am sent a link to an internal file share or intranet site and have to VPN it is a time waster. Using Direct Access there is no need. I can be in Starbucks, receive the link and automatically launch the application without having to take another step. Huge time saver for me.

[AndyPagin]

As a business user my priorities for an O/S are that its:

Fast enough to do the job.

Reliable.

Secure.

Our current XP desktop setup meets the first two criteria as far as I'm concerned, and we meet the security criteria through other means. Cisco VPN handles the remote access issues quite nicely.

Unless Microsoft can offer significant improvements on my three criteria, then I'm not interested.

I think the problem is MS are trying to be all things to all men, obviously a home user is going to expect and require different things from their 'home entertainment system' computer than a number crunching business user. I can't understand why MS don't develop a no frills industrial grade O/S for businesses who basically don't give a rat if the odd game & gizmo doesn't work with it? I mean if the Linux community can develop a system like WINE that happily runs most Windows apps on a Linux desktop it can't be that difficult?

[Brian]

"Microsoft's biggest challenges with Windows 7 will be to convince users that it is an important upgrade"

An "Important Upgrade" is Snow Leopard, where Steve Jobs pointed out that Apple is focusing their attention to making the operating system much more stable.

What Microsoft does is not important anymore (at least not to this consumer).

[AndyPagin]

'In Windows 7 there's a capability called Direct Access'
Now let me guess.... this only works if you have a MS server at the other end? Unlike Cisco where you can access your Windows AND Linux servers seemlessly. Smart move by MS to try & push Linux out of the server market.

[bluvg]

"the server unit is saying its version of Windows 7 will be a minor release."

Depends on whom you ask... according to Arie van der Hoeven, his team considers this the biggest release since Windows 2000 Server:

http://channel9.msdn.com/pdc2008/ES20/

[tbworoby]

WINDOWS 7? Just a small upgrade from Vista? Shouldn't suffer as many incompatibilities? Don't make me laugh. I am constantly losing our networked printers, Windows Media Player, and sound. and don't get me started on networking stability. we have Vista and XP, and the XP is, or was, "set it and forget it". however, even XP is losing wireless communication with our hard-wired net (thanks to the "upgrades", which require resetting Zone Alarm, etc.. One of uSoft's little tricks to force me into Vista, and then into Win7, where older (probably non-usoft) programs are EMULATED?)? forget it!

[sharmajunior]

Windows 7 is just the sister cousin of Vista Code named -Vienna. The spokes M$ is putting in Win-7 are the spokes they originally wanted to put in Vista but couldn't due to lack of time after their first project was scrapped. So in other words. I am not upgrading to Win-7 just for the looks and some minor changes. I jumped from Win-98 to XP to Vista. I'll be looking forward to their next release sometime in 2012 or 13.

Also, I really do hope that they put out some nice changes in Vista SP-2.

[dunde8889]

I think the main problem with most of the complaints about Vista are that most ppl dont clean install vista thus leaving all the manufacturers junk on there, and have lower end systems that dont have the resources. By that I mean cheap laptops dont have a dedicated video card, and wihtout a video card the CPU is being used too much. Right now I'm using a 3 year old laptop (2GHz single core) running Vista ultimate and it's not slow at all - right now at idle using 2% cpu, but it has a dedicated video card. Another computer at home is a 5 year old P4 2.4ghz single core running vista as well and there are no problems with it.

[RainCaster]

I've been testing builds of Win7 for quite some time now. While I can't say much, I can tell you that it is goodness. Not earthshattering-new-relearn-everything, but so many really thoughtful incremental changes that it makes me smile every time I find a new one. I will be updating all my home machine as soon as I can.

[AppleManifesto]

Regardless, of what Microsoft supporters say, if Windows 7, is pretty much a big service pack to Windows Vista, why can they release it as a big service pack and not have all those companies and private consumers spend extra money for a service pack. I think that is ridiculous, regardless of how you put it. I mean come on, really? And I cannot believe, "dhavleak" actually asks, "What bloat?", that is pretty funny. It is obvious any rational person, knows Vista has some bloat. And I think, MS should really look at how they can make they software more efficient and optimized. I love that Apple is doing just that with Snow Leopard OS. They are making all the software much, much more efficient and optimized and at the same time, they are minimizing each application's file size footprint. For example, Mail which used to be 289MB, might run at 19MB, making it exponentially faster to launch, work on, and you will be able to reclaim a lot of lost storage space. Furthermore, now with OpenCL, it will fuse all the trapped processing power of multi-core CPU's and GPU's to fully utilize all the hardware that current software does not begin to scratch.

[blevdog]

Well if it is your contention that a 1K plus machine is tha answer to every computer users needs then I think you have a valid point. However, if you are willing to concede the point that not everyone needs Steve's marraige of hardware ad software and there should be some choice in the PC market then I would say your arguement is invalid. MS chooses to create software that can be run in multple configurations on many differnet types of machines and so has more overhead. Apple does not face this issue.

[Stormspace]

They just need to fix Vista instead of trying to bilk customers out of more money for the next greatest thing. If they want to call my fix Windows 7 fine, I just don't want to have to pay for it.

[magusat999]

Windows 7 is obviously a re-packaged, re-purposed, re-gurgitated version of Vista with a couple of "extras" slapped on it. Thus far nobody has written anything with enough depth to differentiate Vista and Windows 7 according to the major complaints that consumers have had. Only the new features seem to be talked about, and the only thing close to a respectable comparison is the UAC differences - which amount to "big whoop". The question is - underneath the hood, is Windows 7 100% unique code - or does it use Vista's underpinnings and just tweak them? And if it does utilize Vista coding - in any form or fashion - how can Microsoft get away with calling it a new OS???

I'm a Windows user, but what my expectation was from MS was an improved, beefed up, spiffied up XP - not Vista or a variant thereof. It's disappointing that MS would come out with another variant of the product that everybody hates when they already have a clear winner in XP - but on the other hand it's all about cash, and maybe they cannot see how to milk the XP cash cow anymore.

[philosfool]

Microsoft's whole model of OS development is wrong.

The changes in computer hardware are continuous and incremental. The changes in the programs we run are continuous and incremental.

Nevertheless, Microsoft's approach to the operating system is staggered and monolithic.

The life span of a computer is 2-3 years. You can use a computer longer than this, but it isn't reasonable to expect such a computer to run last month's software. Microsoft's insistence on building an OS that can somehow be modern and yet run on medieval hardware is out of touch with the reality of the industry.

Microsoft needs to stop selling the OS as something that you upgrade. You don't upgrade an OS. You buy a new computer, and new computers have new OSes on them. (That's a bit of an exaggeration, but I think the basic idea is clear.)

When MS rolls out it's new OS, this isn't something that you try to sell. You simply say "Windows X is now availalble. It is the new industry standard OS for desktops. New computers will ship with Windows X." If you do this every one and a half to two years, this transition is incremental, making life for developers and administrators easier. When you stop sales of Windows X -1, no one has to be upset because the new operating system is part of the incremental, continuous development of computing rather than a monolithic change.

[Spanwite]

I guess the Win7 space needed on your Drive will grow significant. Min. 6mb of ram to run with pulled brakes.

Let's say Win7 has a new feature when it comes out to the "main street" Jan2010, that most Computer lover will like.

During the installation you have 3install setup choices: 1= all you can eat, universal, makes most People happy with compatibility back to a commodore C64 Printer :-), still works with IE5, slowest, most Drive space needed. Like a Train that stops on every single station.
Choice 2 Just compatible with hardware/software build/sold after 2006 (or later you can choose), get rid of the old crap, 85% less Drive space needed as setup1, high performance right of the box. ..Train with only your destination in mind.
Choice 3 based on top of #2.
Similar to the Desktop cleanup, just much more advanced, it is monitoring your heavy Win7 use for a while, then it tells you, you did not use 90% (or more useless) of Win7 Program codes.
Then it asks you the user can it safely remove the unused Codes, streamlining your Windows7 for maximum performance. It work 2ways when you install something new it will add codes again.
And it makes a self test (overnight) once in a while for "self improvement", with your permission of course.

Prrrr. I have to wake up it's just a dream.

[jmcintire]

After all the bad press Vista got, I don't see a problem with convincing users Windows 7 will be a significant upgrade. Anyone with Vista will no doubt be clamoring to get the upgrade!

[iMiiTH]

If Windows 7 is a service pack, Snow Lepoard is a bug fix.

[jeremyhuber]

Yea after trying to install defender in win 7 home premium I was suprrised to see a dialog box open up and say Windows Defender already comes with VISTA no need to re-reinstall.

Photo of proof is at my web page on Google

http://sites.google.com/site/windows7isavistasevicepack/