# Windows 7 will pick up where Vista left off...



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

The next version of Microsoft’s OS, Windows 7 (and that is the final name) is well on the way and currently on target for release in early 2010.

But Windows 7 perhaps shouldn’t be considered a major release.

Windows 7 will be built on the Vista platform, carrying forward the changes made in networking, security hardening. memory management, program management and perhaps most importantly, drivers. Yes, there will not be a repeat of the difficulties with drivers when Vista arrived.

There will be changes in the kernel and they will be implemented simultaneously in Windows 2008 Server when Windows 7 is released. You can take parallel processing to the bank, Windows 7 will have it, and contrary to popular belief, Windows 7 will come in both 32 and 64 bit versions.

Windows 7 will lose some programs… Windows Mail, Windows Photo Gallery, and Windows Movie Maker will be gone from Windows 7. There will be versions available for download thru Windows Live.

User Account control will be improved (?) and presented as a “slider” control that will vary the use form Never to Always with 4 settings that you can customize. I have always believed that User Account Control was a good thing but many disagree.

There will be new versions of Internet Explorer (8), Windows Media Player (12), Windows Media Center and Microsoft Paint appears to have been revised in a big way.

There will be a new center for managing password logons and id’s of any sort and it will be called Windows Credential Manager. There will be a secure online vault for backing up this application.

Windows 7 will support natively biometric devices like finger print readers.

A new Windows 7 Center called Homegroup, which will make it easier to set up a home network and determine what gets shared.

Wordpad will get the Office ribbon bar treatment and will be returned to its former strength as a word processor.

Windows 7 will include a new Display center that will simplify the support of multiple monitors. 

Windows Mobile Device Center will be included with Windows 7.

Windows 7 will natively support the VHD virtual hard drive format utilized by Virtual PC and Hyper-V, Virtual desktops and “workspaces” managed thru a central point.

The calculator in Windows 7 will be virtually unrecognizable. Microsoft has placed it on steroids… time calculations, mortgages; lease calculations, scientific and unit conversions will all be supported. 

The dpi of your screen will also be more controllable, currently Vista provides support for 96 dpi and 120 dpi. In Windows 7 you will be able to adjust between 100 and 200 dpi. Today’s HD monitors will benefit greatly from this control. The “clear type” settings for fonts is also going to be “customizable”.

Windows 7 will be the first windows client to include PowerShell V2 and Integrated Scripting Environment.

Major work has been done and is continuing on Voice Recognition and so called “Touch Computing”. Windows 7 will natively support Windows Surface computing.

I am scheduled to begin participating in the Windows 7 beta starting in November of this year. I will update as I get hands on experience. The information in the post has been gathered from many sources on the internet who are already participating in the beta program.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

That's one thing that I don't understand...

By 2010, all of the processors in new machines will be 64-bit processors. Yet, Microsoft is still releasing a 32-bit version of Windows. I thought that a 64-bit OS would fully utilize the 64-bit processor. Why?

And, why the Ribbon interface? Don't know of too many fans of that.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

Mark Holtz said:


> That's one thing that I don't understand...
> 
> By 2010, all of the processors in new machines will be 64-bit processors. Yet, Microsoft is still releasing a 32-bit version of Windows. I thought that a 64-bit OS would fully utilize the 64-bit processor. Why?
> 
> And, why the Ribbon interface? Don't know of too many fans of that.


Still way too much software written for 32 bit processors and then there is the gaming issue. I expect that most people will run 64 bit though.

As to the ribbon interface, Microsoft has sold over 140 million copies of Office 2007 since its release and that is about 12% ahead of the adoption of Office 2003 over the same time frame. The product has proved extremely successful in the business arena and did not exhibit the oft expressed concern when it was released that the new Ribbon bars would raise the learning curve so much that it would slow adoption.

In fact the ribbon bars seem to have been embraced and that may be due to the heavily used help tools that Microsoft released at the same time as office. The tools are flash applications that when opened display, for example, the Word 2003 interface. You select the menu command sequence for what you want to do and it runs an animation showing you how to do it in Office 2007.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

I was hoping Windows 7 would reverse the trend of ever expanding code bloat. I envisioned them even going back a bit in time; perhaps improving the core software of Windows 2K and moving forward from there. Now it appears that Microsoft will just be adding a few million more lines of code to VISTA and pass the kludge off to us as their newest and greatest.

What Windows needs is snappy response on a 1.5 Ghz processor with a gigabyte of memory, a reasonably pretty user interface, a totally reorganized control panel that logically organizes its settings and one Version like OSX. Updating the included applets is nice .. Paint is abysmal.

More under the hood, it needs to segregate the kernel files so no one can dump those application files and malware into the Windows directory and needs to defeat rootkits. It needs to be self cleaning removing drivers and services and their associated files left over from uninstalled applications. It needs an installer that conducts an interview at install time and loads only those features and files pertinent to the user profile. 

And yes, it needs to be realistically priced if they want non-business users to upgrade.

--- CHAS


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

They dont work backwards, there is no reason to make it work good on a 1.5ghz processor with how cheap lots of power is these days.

People forget that this is progression, not just upgrading the old. Honestly, 95, 98, 98SE, ME, 2k, XP. Through that short time period the OS made huge leaps as did the hardware. Now people are complaining that Windows 7 is coming too fast, thus proof Vista is bad (not at all...look at the past, 2 yrs is actually the norm for new OSes) and that it needs to work with everything they already have (again look at the past, lots of 95 and 98 machines did not run 2k and XP well at all).

The deal is that new OSes will have greater performance demands not because of bloat, but because of progression of features and technology. How well does XP run on the old 100mhz Pentiums? I think XP is bloated because it does not run well on a 400mhz P3!


The biggest reason people do not like Vista is because it is CHANGE and they are unwilling to relearn how to do anything. XP was on the market too long and people got in bed with it and now dont want to leave, funny since XP was met with very disapproving critics for the first few years just like Vista...the media and critics need to be quiet and let people experience it for themselves, I met many every day that have NEVER used Vista and still bash it, total BS.


----------



## Hansen (Jan 1, 2006)

Thanks Larry for the update and good information on Windows 7. Some really interesting stuff in there. I really enjoy Vista and am looking forward to the improvements, advancements and natural progression that Windows 7 will bring to an already, IMO, very good OS.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

Sorry if I'm 'old school'. I just can't subscribe to sloppy design because the drives are bigger and the chips are cheaper. And, unless your into managing networks of corporate computers, most of us will never use those technological advances. Most of us don't have the vaguest idea what's already available in XP or VISTA.

Simple Quiz, Just for starters, who here other than the IT Pros:

1) Has ever checked the error log and fixed the errors
2) Customized the running and loading of background services 
3) Set up a plug-in with a management console
4) Used the Group Policy tool
5) Used the command line, written a simple batch file, or a more complex script

I'm amazed every time I discover what little I know about what's already there and even more amazed how many of my new discoveries aren't really useful to me. Too much op-system?

--- CHAS


----------



## puckwithahalo (Sep 3, 2007)

> The deal is that new OSes will have greater performance demands not because of bloat, but because of progression of features and technology. How well does XP run on the old 100mhz Pentiums? I think XP is bloated because it does not run well on a 400mhz P3!


I'm sorry, but XP and Vista both suffer from bloated code. I really think that while microsoft should go ahead with Windows 7, they should start a new development team and build a new OS from the bottom up. I imagine they could vastly streamline the code, and still have the same capability as the other OS. Yes, it would take more time, but I think in the long run, they could produce an even more powerfull operating system that would be able to run on current spec computers, or maybe even on older ones.

I know what I'm saying is just speculation, and maybe someone with more knowlege will say I'm completely off my rocker.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

puckwithahalo said:


> I'm sorry, but XP and Vista both suffer from bloated code. I really think that while microsoft should go ahead with Windows 7, they should start a new development team and build a new OS from the bottom up.


I agree. Microsoft really needs to decide if they want quantity or quality in their code. It's true that the hardware is getting cheap but does that mean it's OK to keep adding code to an already bloated system?

Microsoft needs to be careful where they go with Windows 7. If there are issues and adoption is slow, other OS's (like Apple's OSX) will continue to gain marketshare.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Daer Microsoft:

Call me when XP SP4 is released...or else....

don't call me at all. 

*(Vista? Phoooey...)*


----------



## puckwithahalo (Sep 3, 2007)

> agree. Microsoft really needs to decide if they want quantity or quality in their code. It's true that the hardware is getting cheap but does that mean it's OK to keep adding code to an already bloated system?
> 
> Microsoft needs to be careful where they go with Windows 7. If there are issues and adoption is slow, other OS's (like Apple's OSX) will continue to gain marketshare.


Makes you wonder what they could do with current hardware capabilities if the OS software was more efficient.


----------



## jerry downing (Mar 7, 2004)

The biggest problem with Vista is that Microsoft set the bar too low on which computers can run it. I have seen people trying to run Vista on underpowered computers and it was a dog. All of these computers were tested to be OK by the Vista website. On a properly powered computer, Vista is fine.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

The amazing thing to me is that OSX is a pig as well, but since Apple controls software and hardware, they make sure that people run OSX on machines that handle it properly.

Microsoft is hurt because of many companies selling Vista on vastly underpowered machines.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

As much as people make a big deal over the lines of code in Vista... Mac OS's are much larger and no one cares.


----------



## puckwithahalo (Sep 3, 2007)

> As much as people make a big deal over the lines of code in Vista... Mac OS's are much larger and no one cares.


I don't know about Mac's OS's, so I can't comment upon them. I just think that microsoft could make theirs so much more if they took the time to start from scratch and streamlined their code to be more efficient.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Daer Microsoft:
> 
> Call me when XP SP4 is released...or else....
> 
> ...


One thing you won't see... XP SP4...:lol:

By the time Windows 7 arrives you will have seen the end of XP support... going forward will be Vista, 7, Windows 2003 & Windows 2008 and by the time 7 is released there will probably be a timetable for the end of Windows 2003.

I know some IT people running Windows 2008 on test bed servers.. they are excited and they *hate* server changes..


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

There actually is a completely re-written windows code in existence... problem is, it isn't working very well. You may have read some articles about going all the way back to beginning of Vista development and you would have read in particular "Windows FS" a completely re-written OS and (F)ile (S)ystem code... rumor was that FS was in the first version of Vista the one that was completely scrapped.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

LarryFlowers said:


> There actually is a completely re-written windows code in existence... problem is, it isn't working very well. ...


I hate having any sympathy for Microsoft because they don't deserve any. But I guess I'll have to concede that, even if they could get it working on the bench, it would be nearly impossible to test it for a clean general release. :bad_nono:

BTW, I like Windows. I have an OSX Leopard MacBook but always find myself going back to my XP machines. I'm really wishing for something innovative with number seven rather than something the just picks up where VISTA left off.

--- CHAS


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

In an report here, Ballmer this morning said it was "OK" to stay with XP and wait for Windows 7.

I'm so relieved he gave me permission! :lol: /steve


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

LarryFlowers said:


> There actually is a completely re-written windows code in existence... problem is, it isn't working very well. You may have read some articles about going all the way back to beginning of Vista development and you would have read in particular "Windows FS" a completely re-written OS and (F)ile (S)ystem code... rumor was that FS was in the first version of Vista the one that was completely scrapped.


WinFS was just a new file system code. It was included in the first versions of Vista betas, but scrapped for whatever reason later on. The Vista code was still the same as you have today, only the file system was different. We still use as we have for a while, NTFS.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

HIPAR said:


> Simple Quiz, Just for starters, who here other than the IT Pros:
> 
> 1) Has ever checked the error log and fixed the errors
> 2) Customized the running and loading of background services
> ...


Yes to 1, 2, 3, and 5.

I've never been an "IT Pro" in any sense of the word as I've always been in administration and management. But in 1970 I received my first training certificate in programming and systems administration all related to the room-filling machine of that time, an IBM-360.

I have no delusions. I spent time every week tweaking the Registry in XP as I do in Vista. I probably wouldn't spend as much time tweaking things in the Mac environment. At times, I feel that being a compulsive Windows "tweaker" is as almost as debilitating as being an addicted meth "tweaker." If I live that long, I'll be doing the same thing with 7. But I must say that running compatible software on compatible hardware my experience is no "buggier" with Vista than it was with XP at the time I switched.

I'm fascinated with the ongoing complaint about bloat. When we started our service business in 1980 with Tandy Model II's, it was a miraculous desktop machine with 64K ram to service an 8-bit processor. With access to less than 50K of the RAM for program code and data, VisiCalc did 90% of the things I use Excel for at essentially the same real-time speed when taking into account keyboard input. To me "bloat" started in the 1970's when 64K of RAM became inadequate.

Don't get me wrong. I'm generally contented with all the advances, bloat and all. For instance, I was "online" with Compuserve using those Tandy Model II's, and that just didn't work well enough in real-time to be useful for anything.

Except for the moronic "levels" in Vista's system menus which I guess were designed to keep the employees out of the system, Vista works fine using compatible hardware and software. It just needs more computing hardware power, as did the transition from MS-DOS to a working useful version of Windows did.

The thing is, to do on a computer what has become necessary for me in my life I certainly didn't need to learn an operating system beyond XP nor did I need 64-bit processing power. But both are required for me to be able to effectively edit and process video in anything resembling an efficient use of time. And after all, is anything more important than editing and organizing all those videos of the grandkids?


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

phat78boy said:


> WinFS was just a new file system code. It was included in the first versions of Vista betas, but scrapped for whatever reason later on. The Vista code was still the same as you have today, only the file system was different. We still use as we have for a while, NTFS.


"The first incarnation of Windows Vista was scrapped because a senior executive warned chairman Bill Gates that it was just too hard to work with. Jim Allchin, group VP in charge of Windows, says he told Gates that summer that the Longhorn of the time was quite simply "not going to work" because it was so complex that Microsoft's developers would never be able to make it run properly." This was the first attempt to include FS.


----------

