For a number of different hardware platforms, how does it performance compare with XP (both for 32 and 64 bit versions of the OS)

e.g.

1GB RAM Single core P4 2GHz
2GB RAM Dual core Core 2Duo
4GB RAM Quad Core system

For a number of different hardware platforms, how does it performance compare with XP (both for 32 and 64 bit versions of the OS)

e.g.

1GB RAM Single core P4 2GHz
2GB RAM Dual core Core 2Duo
4GB RAM Quad Core system

- What happened to "Previous version" aka restoring individual user files?
- The Preview panel on the reworked Explorer looks, finally, usable. Any word of adding basic MS Office files viewer functionality?

So PC_Tool is really Mike Nash?

Who knew! At least toolie's acting like he is. Way to ruin a good topic, foolie.

*laughing*

It's a public forum, jackass. Anyone can answer the questions.

Since you seem to be easily confused, let me inform you that Mike's answers will be in the form of an article, you ignorant twat.

Nice of you to drop by and publicly display your obsession with me. You really should get some help.

Are they going to do anything about the registry? It is the biggest single problem by far.

Are the system requirements heavier than Vista?

Will NET40 be included as pre-installed component?

I want the damned lock outs to be gone,not like now in vista, ie let me as a user enter and see ANY folder on my system. It bugs the hell out of me not to be able to get into some folders on vista like XP. I like to go into my Internet temp folder and pull stuff at times,
among other folders that are blocked now in vista.

Is fax and scan going to be put back in ALL versions? this should be "standard" as not just business types use fax or scanners.

let me as a user enter and see ANY folder on my system.

Yeah...*that's* secure... /sarcasm

It bugs the hell out of me not to be able to get into some folders on vista like XP.

XP is horrendously insecure.

I like to go into my Internet temp folder and pull stuff at times, among other folders that are blocked now in vista.

Control Panel - internet options - one of the tabs - Clear temp folders.

XP can very easily be secured. It's not secure out of the box but it's not too hard to get it that way. the problem is that many apps don't want to run in a secure posture - many of them want to be god on the box.

Persohally, I think the security debate is blown far out of proportion. You don't want a totally secure box because You Can't Use It. You want a happy medium, that medium driven by user requirements.

oh man, another pc wiz. hell does me as a user of MY machine have to do with security, or the security of XP? I'm talkin about MY system and me getting into ALL aspects of it not you or anyone else, man, and I said nuttin about "cleaning" the folder, read what I said I said pull stuff out. Any moron knows how to clear these folders.

...and UAC has forced many developers to code their apps so they *can* be run in a limited user environment.

Happy medium? Check. ;)

It just came with some growing pains. Those are largely vanishing. Just not fast enough for our tastes, but vanishing nonetheless. ;)

*laughing*

Oh man..another clueless user.

If you are running with the privileges required to access and modify all files and folders, than so can *any* malware on your system.

Sorry, pal. Stick with XP, if you want that BS. The rest of us would like apps that behave and an OS malware can't destroy without warning.

Hoody, ignore the idiotic troll. Toolie's the dumbest git on here and everyone knows it.

Toolie = zridling

Most of those folders are just symlinks to the real folders on your system, put there for old application compatibility.

You can access all the folders, you're just looking in the wrong places.

The only folder which is intentionally blocked from your view is System Volume Information. This is intentionally blocked to prevent malware from being able to access it (it contains System Restore Points).

It's also blocked on XP.

"I like to go into my Internet temp folder and pull stuff at times, among other folders that are blocked now in vista.

Control Panel - internet options - one of the tabs - Clear temp folders. "

He said he would like to pull some stuff up not just empty the thing. Surely you have noticed its a way to copy some internet media files?

Read what people write. The rest you had a point on.

As usual, you have nothing to add but personal insults.

Crawl back into your hole, loser. The grown-ups are talking.

I like the new taskbar, but some windows do not have a distinct icon (IE they use the system default window icon), and others force the Vista and earlier taskbar to hide the icon and only show text in the taskbar button.

How will these applications be handled in the new taskbar? Will they have captions in the new taskbar or just the system default icon, with the window name only shown on mouseover?

--

I hear many of the new features shown at PDC are not included in the build that will be/has been made available then.

What will be different in that build exactly?

--

Do you know if Microsoft plans to continue their strategy of pushing their newest OS to gamers with Windows 7 and DirectX 11? By this I mean games like Halo 2 which only run in Vista or newer, despite there are no technical limitations preventing their running on XP, as third-parties have proven*.

* - There are tools which allow single-player functionality of Halo 2 on XP, as well as a third-party packaged DirectX 10 for XP installer (as useless as DirectX 10 on XP might be... apps needing it might assume they'll be run under Vista and use Vista-only API functions).

--

The screenshots I've seen show the taskbar as glass... how does it look without glass? (IE: Aero Basic mode... does it look like the Vista taskbar as far as the background colors and gradients?)

--

With users being slow to adopt Vista, and with Linux distributions such as Ubuntu becoming more user-friendly and attractive to average users, and considering piracy of Windows is on one hand arguably good for Microsoft (users stick to using Microsoft products instead of Linux) but also bad for them at the same time (one less box copy sold, one could argue)... do you know if Microsoft will be doing anything price-wise with Windows 7 to help boost sales? IE: Will Windows 7 be offered at lower or comparable prices to Vista at its release? Will there be any promotional giveaways of 7? (Vista had one, I got a copy of Vista Business and Office Professional 2007, thanks!)

--

What type of API is used to allow third-party devs to make their own jump menus for apps? How customizable are these menus?

--

The screenshots of the start menu show the "Shut Down" text instead of an icon. Has this been customized by the user this way? Is this incomplete? I personally would prefer an icon, like in Vista.

--

http://www.betanews.com/...ws_7_Screenshots/200/10 Did you guys really draw this in Paint? ;)

OK a real question: Why is there no "Office button" like in Office? You seem to have separated it into the original system icon and another button (drop down for the Office 2007-style menu?) IMO the system icon looks like just another quick toolbar item like this... are you definitely making it like this or are you still tweaking, or even still considering the big round button approach? :)

--

What apps are planned to have ribbon interfaces in Windows 7?

http://www.betanews.com/...ws_7_Screenshots/200/10 Did you guys really draw this in Paint? ;)

I lol'd. ;)

Why is there no "Office button" like in Office?

That's the start-button.

http://www.betanews.com/...ows_7_Screenshots/200/3

It has the same look/feel as the office button.

No, that's different. I mean this:

http://x.mzzt.net/2008.10.28.19.57.43.jpg

It's a button with the Office logo on it.

...kinda like the start-button witht he windows logo on it.

The menus are strikingly similar.

Perhaps I am completely misunderstanding what you are looking for. One can only hope... ;)

Just got wind of how many versions of windows 7 will be available when it is released! I'm not excited about this at all, though.

http://www.makeuseof.com...ds/2008/10/windows7.png

Comments, anyone?

Bad troll, die now.

k? thxbye

lol - cute but in bad taste.

old... That's been around since Win7 was announced.

FWIW, it was funny then...

When I used Windows Explorer in XP, I could look at the status bar and see the total amount of space the files in that folder were using. For some stupid reason, that's missing in Vista and I really miss it. It would also be nice to also see the total space usage of the files and subfolders.

That is nice to have. :(

A work around is to use CTRL+A to select all files in the folder, and then it'll show the size of 'em.

Total folder size is much harder to do and I can see why they didn't. In XP (and prolly Vista) you can get to it by going to the folder Properties.

If a folder has a lot of files and subfolders it can take a while for the total size to be computed (just watch the number go up and see!). It's just not practical for it to be done automatically every time you open a folder on all its subfolders.

A new version of NTFS might be able to cache these values and make that work, though. But it would slow down file operations since every time you wrote to a file it would have to cascade back up the folder tree updating the cached size...

PLEASE fix Windows Explorer VIEW OPTIONS. It's been broken forever (but it actually works better in XP than in Vista). I always set my folders to view as details, and I would love a button that would spread that view across the entire system, not just a few folders (if you don't think it's a painful process getting Windows to remember this setting, just try it).

Also this is more of a pet peeve but why not have all Windows files in lower case. Why do some files have names like CaPitAl.DLL and EXAMPLE.exe just put everything as lower case please, and add _ for anything_with_spaces. I think nix is more elegant in this case.

I think the capital letters are hangups from having to be backwards compatible.

Could be wrong.

"and add _ for anything_with_spaces. I think nix is more elegant in this case. "

Save us from your concept of elegant. Its ugly and unneeded. Only a Unix geek could like it.

Use the SPACE key, its under your thumbs. Its been used for millenia for a reason. The UNDERSCORE is a refugee from cuneiform and its on the top row plus it needs the needs the s*** key. Its a pain on top being an ugly kludge.

Why is the taskbar and Start menu so damn ugly? Is it time to borrow the menu system from the Gnome desktop?

Will it be slimmer / faster / MUCH more robust? Will UAC be banished (as it should be)? Will the video subsystem finally actually work and not completely bork under load? Will network performance finally be on par with Windows XP / XP64? Will the UI finally make sense and not require so many extra steps to get done what took a minimum of clicks under XP/ Will this thing be actually properly tested and not rushed to market (Microsoft admits Vista was - just ask any of their engineers who worked on the project). Will compatibility with old application be improved and not be made cumbersome in the process? Why is there air?

One of the screenshots I saw shows a UAC control panel which seems to allow you to adjust, with a single slider, the aggressiveness of UAC.

Thank God. I'm a security specialist and one of the most important tenets of security is that it should be as non-intrusive as practically possible because if it is not, users will get fed up and find a way to either bypass it or avoid using the system altogether.

UAC fits that kind of annoyance in spades and is the FIRST thing I disable on any new install for anyone because as a rule, the average user doesn't know enough about what their system is doing to be able to answer the prompts in a meaningful manner. That makes the whole concept ineffective at best.

I'm a security specialist and one of the most important tenets of security is that it should be as non-intrusive as practically possible because if it is not, users will get fed up and find a way to either bypass it or avoid using the system altogether.


Are you suggesting we trade security to allow devs to continue to carelessly access protected folders and settings without the users knowledge?

UAC is the trade off allowing these programs to function (compatibility) while maintaining some semblance of security and giving those developers time to code their applications in a more secure fashion.

I suppose they could simply bloakc *all* access to protected folders and system settings, but that would completely break functionality of *many* programs still out there that haven't had a release since Vista. Not really an ideal solution, eh?

By the time Win7 hits, most apps should behave with regard to such things, and UAC would only pop up during initial config and in the event malware attempts to run.

If you read one of my posts up above, I state there that the app devs are the ones who are the real pain in the a** since they build apps that want to be god on thye machine.

As to apps being on board when 7 ships, do you dream in lurid technicolor? I've heard that ever since Windows 3.x. The registry was designed to get around devs doing whatever they wanted and creating .dll hell. It clearly didn't work. UAC ain't gonna be any different.

How about trading security for freedom? Don't libertopians say something like "Those who trade security for freedom deserve neither..."? [smiles]

UAC is garbage since it doesn't offer any real protection because it is so annoying that users will just automatically click on it no matter what just to get through it.

Been using Vista lately? Much of the software I currently use installs without a peep from UAC, much less when I run them.

I had a UAC pop-up once in the last month, installing some shareware BS to which I promptly told UAC to not allow it to run and deleted the installation file.

They can conform, or they can choose to not develop apps. They won't find an OS out there nowadays to code for that lets them muck about the OS willy-nilly. (All nimbly-pimbly, like)

Yeah, I think it was that terrible person Benjamin Franklin who said it originally...

Given that I turn of UAC **IMMEDIATELY** (and Strongly recommend that others do the same) after installing the OS, I no longer care what works with it and what doesn't.

Regarding conformity, MS is NOT the 800lb gorilla it once was and has to kowtow to OEMs and devs to stay in business. That means if a powerful enough OEM or group of devs wants to dictate a policy in direct conflict with MS, the company will simply have to "suck it up, princess" and that will be that.

Windows MiniMe was the result of just such an exchange so there is a precedent. It's also why they'll be jumping through hoops with parallel execution on startup to get existing drivers to start faster without redesigning them just so they don't have to change the driver model. Again.

Your ability to completely ignore the point is amazing.

The blinders are on full, I see.

It's already happening. Of course you don't see it, because you aren't using it. That in *no* way means it isn't working.

Another twat who can't see the forest for the trees.

UAC isn't meant to change user behavior or make them read.

UAC exists to make developers code their apps properly.

Users can click through whatever the hell they want. Who cares? The point is in getting the apps to stop mucking about with Windows, making it less stable and less secure.

will there be a new design for the Icons, or will 7 be stuck with the same boring yellow vista folders ???

by the looks of things you get the same ugly icons and you get ugly dividers around them on the task bar without the text. the dark and dreary theme and radioactive logo lend to the overall depressing look of the OS with the only upside being their new "libraries" icon sets which i think i've actually seen an apple patent for. Libraries looks cool, but then, I don't think that's a microsoft idea inherently, so maybe thats why.

Does Device Stage work over Bluetooth or is it USB only?

I've heard rumors they will be stripping features of upcoming versions to make it faster and more efficient, and make those features optional downloads. Will that be taking place in Windows 7 or further down the road if at all?

Not really to make it faster or more efficient. They're pulling all the "apps" they now have "live" versions for. i don't think they're pulling any actual "Vista" functionality so far as they've mentioned in their blogs.

Oxymoron. Vista and functionality. [smiles]

Moron. sjc001. [smiles]

what about system requirements improvement?

The PDC had a demo of a 1ghz 1gb memory laptop running Windows 7 quite well, so I hear.

Server 2k8 performance, basically.

Will Windows 7 run in the same machines that Windows Vista runs? or its more heavy than Vista?

According to the "Engineering Windows 7" blog, it will run better on the same hardware Vista currently runs on. They are working very hard at improving I/O and the use of Cache and such, as well as rewriting much of the functionality of Vista to improve performance.

Would love to know how W7 optimizes itself when running on a machine with SSD hard drives.

Is it going to be truly unique or just Vista Second Edition with a slightly different UI like the trick with Mojave?

Take a look at the screenshots gallery here at BetaNews and see for yourself.

Don't judge a book by its cover.... Remember. I did mention Mojave.

I have been reading that live blog of Windows 7 keynote (PDC 2008). I have some doubts...will that dock feature of Windows 7 be much better than that of Mac or will just come close to it?
What about security enhancements in Windows 7 besides UAC improvement? Vista is def. more secure than XP but despite that it's security is still lame.
I have read that blog of UAC improvements in Windows 7. Windows team should improve UAC of Vista too. What makes UAC really annoying is, it blocks the entire screen when showing it's dialog box. This should be fixed in Vista too.
What about common controls? Just look at the common controls of Mac OS X like buttons, tabs, check box etc...will we see better looking common controls?
And are you guys working on good looking 2D themes for Windows 7? Windows Vista basic theme is so ugly. Why not replace it with the UI that we see when installing Vista (kinda like Aero but are bitmaps) or better ones.
And finally will Windows 7 be Mac OS X killer? I would love to see that :P

What makes UAC really annoying is, it blocks the entire screen when showing it's dialog box. This should be fixed in Vista too.

That's intended so that malware can't access the dialog and hit "Yes" (or "Allow") for you.

What about common controls? Just look at the common controls of Mac OS X like buttons, tabs, check box etc...will we see better looking common controls?

Win7 will use the ribbon interface extensively (of Office 2007 fame/infamy), I would assume the other interface elements from O2k7 will also migrate. Good question, though. I'd love to see their answer to this one myself.

Why not replace it with the UI that we see when installing Vista (kinda like Aero but are bitmaps) or better ones.

Yes! Please...I hope they do this.

"And finally will Windows 7 be Mac OS X killer?"

Since when was Windows not killing Mac OS X?

"That's intended so that malware can't access the dialog and hit "Yes" (or "Allow") for you"

It can easily be done. Use 'SendInput' API or 'keybd_event' API to do that :P

I meant will Windows 7 be better than Mac OS X in every aspect?

Does the UAC slider involve a tradeoff between security and annoyingness?

http://www.betanews.com/...ows_7_Screenshots/200/8

First of all some more details about support/optimization for Netbooks (which only make sense running XP or Linux so far).

Also if there are any new features regarding WinMo integration please (should be released on version 7 as well around the same time as Win 7).

What are some of the biggest changes going from Windows Vista to Windows 7?

This is actually the real question.. One that will discern a lot between Win7 and Vista.

How many versions of Windows 7 will there be? (Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate)

Thanks

Here's your answer to that without even waiting.
http://www.istartedsomet...rebirth-longhorn-castle/

If HomeGroup is the same as the Castle as described in that article, it would be something special. Roaming profiles without the need for a domain controller is interesting.

How about some details on DLNA compatibility. Do we have to leave Windows Media Center open for it to work, or is this somehow bundled into HomeGroup?

How is HomeGroup different from traditional WorkGroups? Is the setup going to be another strange wizard, that I don't have much luck with using?