Windows 7

[suryad]

On one hand i dont want to loose backwards compatability
but on the other if you take beos as an example the performance to be gained from starting totally from scatch is pretty amazing

beos is an outstanding OS. I agree with you there.

Well, considering all the crap MS has gotten for not implementing DX10 on XP it's not hard to understand that they usually opt for backward compatibility.

And yes I do agree with you there as well but I think the DX10 flak MS has received vs the flak they got for Vista...there is no comparison

 

[Blazkowicz]

hell I was pissed by the lousy DOS compatibility on NT 5.x so I kept running 98se till 2005.

 

[suryad]

I downloaded the ISO today and installed it on the x64 version of VirtualBox. It was just cake. The instllation took like 10 min or so and then it was up and running. Boot time is very quick and the OS is overall quite zippy. Currently it is taking up around 6.4 gb of the 20 gb allocated to it. Quite pleasantly surprised.

 

[Davros]

Anyone who like windows sidebar should try sysmetrix
http://www.xymantix.com/sysmetrix/

Themes
http://www.skinbase.org/Skins/SysMetrix/446

 

[suryad]

hell I was pissed by the lousy DOS compatibility on NT 5.x so I kept running 98se till 2005.

I remember having 2 PCs...one with 98SE and the other with XP on it

 

[Rodéric]

There are many people who would like a fresh start and an emulator (Virtual PC or Parallels) to run legacy apps.
Could lead to a fast and powerful system for those who don't care about legacy apps, and those who care could load all the 'bloat' to get it to work...

Anyway sofar Win7 is rather good, not sure they shouldn't embrace Mac OS dock a little more instead of that Taskbar imitation...

 

[Dominik D]

That argument can be used for a lot of other new options W7 introduces too. And the fact that there are 3rd party apps is a weak point as that never stopped MS from putting functionality similar to existing 3rd party apps in Windows before.

There is a difference between new feature and option (something you can toggle on/off). There are very few options introduced around the existing functionality and new stuff has very limited exposed tweaking.

(...) The novelty isn't that the gradient is gone. It's that you interact with gadgets directly in W7 whereas in Vista half of the time you're interacting with the sidebar. That's much more important than a gradient, even though it's lost on many commentators.

So we agree on this? I'm confused...

You can say that again. You're human therefore inherently biased. Using your argument, you're wrong too. Heck, according to you, every single advice given by every human for the duration of our stay on Earth is wrong.

Of course I'm human, of course I make mistakes. But I'm not imposing my opinion upon others (or at least I try not to).

Am I the only one who does NOT want any backwards compatibility? Isnt that the main thorn in the side of MS and their products and part of a reason why making progress is so hard for them? Look at the jump from Mac OS 9 to OS X...as an example.

As long as Diablo works, back compat is not important. But seriously: yes, this is why it's rather hard to make huge progress, even with stuff like performance. But back-compat is what is giving Windows an edge over alternatives.

Anyway, while I do believe there's some BC that could be moved to virtualisation (I love Virtual PC), the truth is that most Windows users either don't care or don't want to use a dedicated virtualisation app, install a new OS inside their OS, and _then_ run their critical apps. I think MS is striking a good balance between having BC and not letting it hold back inovation. It's a complex problem to solve.

It is. And virtualization is not perfect solution (sadly). Many features you take for granted (drag & drop, OLE) are hard to get right between native shell and virtualization environment (especially OLE).

How far back do I want that compatability to extend? To be honest, i want it to extend all the way back to DOS. If I get the urge to fire up Doom 2 I just wanna be able to do it without worrying about compatability.

For DOS, Windows should ship with DosBOX.

Still, if its seriously holding performance back on modern applications, I wouldn't mind dropping native backwards compatability for say the pre-XP era. Especially if they could run older apps via emulation.

Unfortunately back-compat is important even for things like drivers.

They could start with ditching x86 support.

There's no x86 Server 2008 R2 already.
http://concentratedtech.com/content...ye-x86-windows-server-2008-r2-to-be-x64-only/
But WOW64 is still there.

I can see and and agree with what you are saying but I would like MS to be a bit bolder and just dump backwards compatibility completely.

And sell 1% of what they could? Great idea!

 

[Davros]

they could include an allready set up preconfigured virtualised xp in with the new o/s

 

[Dominik D]

Wouldn't that discourage developers from adhering to stricter requirements/guidelines? "Works on virtualized XP, so we're fine. Who cares about UAC of user folder anyway?"

 

[chavvdarrr]

I can't search in mapped folders
anyone who can try or give idea how to solve that issue?!
the search field is right there in upper right corner, but when i write smth and press enter nothing happens

 

[Davros]

conray, hopefully all developement for xp would end, and they would dev for the new o/s because of greater features, more speed, more stability ect.
and hopefully users would rather work in the new o/s and want their programs to run in it and only use a virtualised xp for older apps/games
If not ms could bribe them, nothing new to ms
the virtualised o/s could also be vista as long as its compatability is good (havnt tested it,but it seems to be as long as you dont go back as far as dos)

 

[Dominik D]

If not ms could bribe them, nothing new to ms

Bribe users (100mln+) or devs (10k+)? Either way - I guess that's a perfect job for you! Could you do it in, say, a week? Ok, fine - two weeks.

 

[Davros]

Just give em free dev tools

 

[Dominik D]

Dev tools are already free. Guidelines are public. I don't think that's what is keeping people from releasing code that works well on, say, 64-bit Vista with UAC.

 

[Panajev2001a]

You can say that again. You're human therefore inherently biased. Using your argument, you're wrong too.

*looks around... I knew those deja-vu's and vuja-de's (I wonder how many will get the latter ) meant something...*

We are all in the Matrix!!!!

 

[hoom]

Is it ironic that since XP doesn't know how to burn DVDs I'm burning the beta using Ubuntu which will have grub shortly broken by the Windows 7 installer?

 

[chavvdarrr]

anyone who can search in mapped folders?
also a hint how to search in content? atm i only see it as option after the search has ended

 

[Panajev2001a]

Could anyone try (in Windows 7) to install Matlab 6.1 (with its weird MS Java VM) please? It does work work for me under Vista x64 so it would be a kind of showstopper for me as far as using the Windows 7 Beta is concerned if it could not be installed and run on it...

 

[Rodéric]

Could anyone try (in Windows 7) to install Matlab 6.1 (with its weird MS Java VM) please? It does work work for me under Vista x64 so it would be a kind of showstopper for me as far as using the Windows 7 Beta is concerned if it could not be installed and run on it...

I'm tempted to tell you to try it yourself, since it's not a good idea to use a beta OS as a primary OS.
(You would install it, try it and see how it's like, but not make it your main OS.)

 

[Richard]

There is a difference between new feature and option (something you can toggle on/off). There are very few options introduced around the existing functionality and new stuff has very limited exposed tweaking.

I'll give you one example, HomeGroups is a new feature that wraps the End-to-End UX for something you already can do in Vista. W7 itself can be used for homegroups usage model without using the HomeGroup feature. New options were put in place just to deal with homegroup (OS installation, network configuaration, etc.). Btw, just so there's no misunderstanding I'm really liking homegroup, it's just an example that there's plenty of added options for new features. Another would be the context-menu that appears when you right-click the aero-peek on the superbar. New feature with a tweak option.

So we agree on this? I'm confused...

To reiterate, I was just making a comment in jest on how people commenting on Vista/W7 are relieved the sidebar isn't there anymore, not because of how you interact with gadgets but because the gradient isn't there.

Of course I'm human, of course I make mistakes. But I'm not imposing my opinion upon others (or at least I try not to).

Same. Whoever reads my post is free to do what ever they want. For disclosure purposes, it's not even a value for euro proposition for me since I'll be getting W7 for free through my MSDN sub anyway.

As long as Diablo works, back compat is not important. But seriously: yes, this is why it's rather hard to make huge progress, even with stuff like performance. But back-compat is what is giving Windows an edge over alternatives.

Indeed. One needs only to look at the driver compat situation at Vista's launch and how everyone that got an unknown driver in DM called it a botched launch to realise that if Windows 8 dropped x86 and pre-Vista 64-bit BC, there'd be mobs with torches and pitchforks outside the MS campus.

For DOS, Windows should ship with DosBOX.

I know you're kidding but for the Home editions I think that'd be a great move. For business editions I believe MS should throw in a free Windows 3.11 Workgroups or even Windown 98 SE license for Virtual PC. Just for that extra hint.

There's no x86 Server 2008 R2 already.
http://concentratedtech.com/content...ye-x86-windows-server-2008-r2-to-be-x64-only/
But WOW64 is still there.

If you're feeling adventurous you can install Server 2008 R2 core without WOW64.