Keep in mind if you have a working Virtual PC 2007 installation, you will have to uninstall it to install Windows Virtual PC. Once done, you will not be able to install the older version, even if you uninstall the new one. I found this out the hard, and will now be installing another virtualization solution.

I've found repeatedly in other products this "valve system" which only allows you to go forward and never backwards, without any previous notice. IMO there should be a legal limit to this totalitarian way of forcing sales.Improvements are done at the cost of something, and for some purposes old methods are considerably better than the new ones.

I was talking only about XP.
Well, IMHO in fact this version is also true....

I've been wondering when ms would do this. Makes much more sense than dealing with the bane of backward compatibility, which plagued windows for a while. I hope this lets windows move forward without being dragged down by its past.

Maybe I overlooked it, but does it still use your native video drivers, or a virtualized version like VPC does now? IE: can you play games?

Virtualized. This is targeted at the enterprise, no games need apply.

Hummm, wonder if this means I would be able to run the one app I really like thats only compatible with XP or Vista 32 bit on a x64 Win7 system

@DotNet_Coder: "It's people that complain about wanting to use their aging systems that derail future advancements".

Nobody derails anything because of using what he/she considers to be the best for his/her own needs. Sometimes it is convenient to renew everything, and sometimes it is better to keep everything as it is. A computer is an instrument and the important decision is not between old or new but between good or bad for yourself, taking into account that you spare a lot of your time if your convenience is to keep using what you know by heart and don't have to learn new tricks. Time is money and life.

I disagree... IMHO, technologies like Win7 could have been produced years ago were it not for having to deal with a consumer base that is slow (or scared) to adopt new technologies. *Most* of the time (and I say that with a lot of reservation), the newer technologies will be able to allow people to do what they want faster and easier. It's people that are resistant to change that impedes progress. The general public (and enterprise users) that want to stick with XP are doing so *usually* because of the "If it works, why fix it" mentality...

Let's take the car anology for a moment. You are driving a 1980 Pinto which needs parts. Somewhere, there is a factory that still continues to make those parts, thereby taking away from the workforce that could be working on newer, more innovative parts for newer, more innovative vehicles. But, because people refuse to give up the outdated Pinto, newer cars take longer to produce and are introduced to the market much later than they need to be.

(sorry to use a Pinto as your car, no offense intended. It was the only old car I could think of off the top of my head... :-D )

Your reasoning is correct in mathematical and scientifical terms. In those terms all measures that Hitler or Stalin used to increase the medical science or reduce the improductive population were correct. IMHO the end never justifies the used means, and each of us has the right to decide what likes the most because we are the ones who work and pay.

Goodwin'd.

@DotNet_Coder: "It's people that complain about wanting to use their aging systems that derail future advancements".

Idiocy. Vista didn't work with way too much software that indeed created wealth for their owners and was an integral part of their business model. There isn't a business out there making use of personalized software systems willing to accept downtime just to say they run the latest in a crashware OS. As a business decision, that earns you the door.

The inclusion of XP virtualization would seem to be the opening Microsoft needed to get rid of the Registry. Compatibility with the old while allowing a new more robust secure future. I wonder why they did not do it. I guess there is still too much legacy hardware in use that will be Windows 7 compatible but with not enough capability to support both environments.

But it isn't like nobody has XP an license. Nearly every potential Windows 7 already has an XP license, moreover hardware virtualization is there on few processors at the moment, not even all Core 2 Duo models, limiting this "feature" to very few ppl (those who have hardware virtualization as well as as least Pro SKU).

Most Core2's now support Intel VT-x (http://www.intel.com/pro...mber/chart/core2duo.htm) and i think all AMD AM2 X2's and newer support it as well. Some of the mobile CPUs of both companies do not support the hardware virtualization but a very good portion of the CPUs made in the last 3 years do.

Who cares if these people already have an XP license? Dual-booting or running 2 different machines to accomplish 1 goal is not always desired. this is an announcement of epic proportions with only positive outcomes for all businesses, schools, and power users. it's not like Win7 REQUIRES CPU support to run XPM and we're not even sure it will run faster anyway...

When people discard their old computer, they either throw away the WinXP license or they might forget where they stored the original license. I fix some old computers for charity, people donated the old computer with the license sticker on the case. I don't know how what is the legal implication of this but may be they are no longer considered as an owner of an XP license.

Microsoft now says it will be the final Windows version to ship in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions.
There are also persistent rumors that Microsoft is planning to replace the Aero UI skin with a new version. I cannot confirm that, however.

source: http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/faq.asp

Just wondering why your every posts in this page have -ve scores :P

I've heard the UI reumors for sometime now and I don't think it will be dramatic. I think we'll see a refresh, but nothing in the way to make us change our routines.

If the new UI rumor is true then it will be in RTM :)

I just read all the comments below, and I really dont see why some people complain. What harm does it do that 7 has a XP mode that makes every application run problem free on windows 7?!

That's an old wound. Many people felt forced to upgrade against their will.

You mean other than the fact its superior to Vista in every way? As for the dead part, tell that to the 75-80% of Windows users still running it. Maybe its your brain that's dead.

Dead only for you. Most of us keep using it.

http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

What are you smoking?
Perhaps you need a valid reason to use a computer.

Why should something be NOT usable just because it might not be winning benchmarks? Many people might consider "benchmarks" to be useful but, most of the typical user base doesn't even understand what that means...much less care enough to make that a deciding factor. People that buy $300 desktops from Walmart (and there are quite a few) DO NOT walk out empty handed because of some benchmark somewhere. These people MUST be considered as they become the largest market of computer buyers (the average person). Maybe IT dept. heads might look at this but most people don't.

Not so: Many App,s I have tried to install on Win 7,latest build,have the - incombatible with no solution available!

The only apps I had issues with were anything that installed virtual mode drivers (ISO hosts, etc and also cygwin). Everything else installed fine and if it gave me a compatability warning, I ran the installer in compatability mode and it was fine..

I keep using XP and I'm happy with it. I wonder why I must buy anything but XP if I only want XP. What if you want to buy a motorcycle and the salesman tells you: "You must buy a new car and then you may ride the motorcycle included in the sale"?. Many people thinks the same way and Microsoft knows it, but respect for their customers has been lost, I'm afraid.

An old proverb says: "The ignorance of the hare is the treasure of the hound".

I already had to pay for the downgrade option. I only wanted XP.

Nobody is forcing to use anything but XP if that's what you want...just don't expect MS to support it forever. You used a car analogy which I always say never make sense...but to keep your analogy going, ford won't keep fixing your 20 year old Escort for free.

A car is a material thing, a program is an intellectual work from Microsoft and a way of working for all of us. What if U2 rewrites every song they write?

LOL exactly that's why car analogies don't work. And that U2 example makes NO sense...LOL.

And yet nothing has changed...you can continue to use XP as long as you like, just don't expect support forever.

It's people that complain about wanting to use their aging systems that derail future advancements. People are afraid of change, they are afraid of the learning curve no matter how steep it may or may not be. This is a major detriment to future innovation IMHO.

Some changes are good....others, not so good. Change for the sake of change is not logical. I do understand the need to keep learning. This however, is turning into more of a game of follow the leader. MS leads and people follow. This in itself does not indicate advancement or innovation. (the pied piper) A user must grow beyond all that and be intelligent enough to understand that there is a very big difference between making good changes and staying away from bad changes.

You don't honestly think the changes MSFT makes to the UI are "because they felt like it", do you?

VirtualBox had "seamless mode" since last year.
It also is very cool to have a Linux program running on a Windows Desktop.

I have been running 7 since the earliest leaked alphas and haven't found any programs I use that I had to switch to Vista or XP to run. Granted, some stuff needed to be "finagled" until the developer releases a Windows 7 version, but ...

So far OS/2 Warp is the only operating system that has had truly seamless virtualization, in this case for Windows 3.1 apps. Hopefully Windows 7 with XP Mode can do just as good of a job.

actually, i've been harping for a long time at microsoft's marketing travesties.

microsoft has lost billions in sales because they do not include themes of their older o.s.'s in the new releases.

MS MARKETING MONKEYS DONT KNOW NOTHIN ANYWAYS...?

so called computer specialis,t like yourself make a living ripping off unknowledgiable computer users.

so your arguments are not with standing.

anyone conceeded enough to include "computers" in the handle is justifiably accused.

perhaps, you should replace it with "anus".

Maybe it's the name of the company that they work at and they're in a non-tech position.

This is simply the next version of Virtual PC which adds native host OS integration (removes the desktop and start menu/taskbar from the guest OS). This should in an ideal scenario work with any OS, esp Vista, but Microsoft is trying to sell if off as an exclusive Windows 7 feature for business reasons. VMWare Workstation 6.5 released in September 2008 aleady does this (called Unity mode instead of XP Mode) and isn't locked for Windows 7 hosts and Windows XP guests. Sadly, THIS WON'T GIVE ME BACK THE FEATURES REMOVED FROM WINDOWS VISTA OR WINDOWS 7 WITH NATIVE INTEGRATION. Users will still have to manage and patch this "Virtual XP". This won't take management of the XP VM (patching, defragmenting) out of the equation.

I just saw this comment @zdnet: http://talkback.zdnet.co...0&messageID=1183439

LOL

I'm guessing the amount he paid for a less pretty, marginally lower quality PC was just enough lower than he'd have paid for a Mac to cover the cost of VMWW.

:p

Yes this is an exclusive feature of Windows 7. It will not work with any other desktop version of Windows. This is exactly what Apple did with the PowerPC version of Mac OS X so people could still run Mac OS 9 apps. In Apple's case it may not have been a separate download but it's the same exact concept.

@Tool.

LOL! Oh, like the guy on the PC commercial who is "more concerned with aesthetics than computing power"? LMAO!

Sure he can run Linux and more instances of Windows, but he still lacks the functionality and ability the addition of OSX and its extensive application library affords.

You certainly don't get what you pay for!

;-)

"the functionality and ability the addition of OSX and its extensive application library affords."

*laughing*

From what I've seen, it costs more than money...have you *seen* the Mactards on this site? I believe it not only cost them more money, but their soul and the majority of their intelligence as well. *evil grin*

"...have you *seen* the Mactards on this site?"

I sure have, and those idiots seem to be more than evenly matched by an even greater number of Windows @ssholes who are convinced that system inadequacies are indeed distinguishing features.

(Not to even mention the absolutely incredible "I value aesthetics over processing power" dimwit trying to find a less than $1500 laptop in the most recent "I'm a PC" commercial! LMAO!!! Seldom have I seen such mediocrity lauded so highly and treated as a GOAL! - except for the obvious ongoing routine by so many here on this site!)

But what really surprises me is that you seem to have no clue as to the advantages offered by the most POSIX compliant UNIX on the market - regardless of what you think of Apple, MS or the @ssholes on this site who parade their ignorance like it is fashionware in their continuing emotional tantrum between the platforms.

Personally, I think anyone who is content to use only one of them is severely limited in either their expectations or in what they need a computer to do, as both have tools that are limited only to their respective platform that you cannot get on both. And while the subjective differences are real, the notion so common among so many hear that one is the cat's meow while the other is a dog, simply demonstrates how F****** ignorant they really are.

But what I really get a kick out of is how truly ignorant so many are regarding UNIX. And how proudly so many are of this as they routinely demonstrate and parade their ignorance as they think they are demonstrating their astuteness.

But then I have long since tossed any notions of this forum being populated by more than a few who actually have truly dealt with the major systems or who have a disciplined education in the theory, design and operation of said systems.

Instead, we get to continue to watch as a bunch of desktop jockeys rave about their rad standalone machines, totally ignorant of enterprise systems, as they persist in attempting to evaluate platforms, environments and applications in between, and in terms of their experiences playing a computer game.

And that certainly restricts the potential for actual shared conversations where we can actively discuss the pros and cons of real issues in a worthwhile manner.

So, like it or not, (and I definitely have my 'differences' with Apple hardware and their business practices!), the Mac still is the only platform that effectively allows you the greatest choice and the most bang for the buck simply by virtue of the possibility of employing the ALL of the available best of breed desktop environments for the x86 platform. Regardless of what your emotional favorite may be. Now,if they would only get their head out of their @ss and address the lower end as well as the high end of the spectrum in their laptops (or simply license OSX to a co-branded quad core extended RAM capable, graphics accelerated Lenovo W700 if they aren't willing or able to do it themselves! ;-)

*laughing*

It was a joke, man. Sometimes it's almost too easy to get you worked up. ;)

Worked up?

Just because I write more than a 7 word retort consisting of as many special characters as letters?

LOL!

Yeah. When my comment was completely tongue-in-cheek, I'd call a 9 paragraph treatise on the virtues of a Mac a little overboard. ;-)

...but that's what we love about you.

Not worked up at all. But its simply an issue that has been utterly missed in the comparison of VMWare on a PC, where you simply get more of the same, and VMWare on a Mac, where you increase the net choices available that you can whine and moan about.

And despite your inability to find value in anything other than Windows or Linux, the OS with limited applicability on a desktop (got apps?), at least on a Mac, there are more environmental and application options to complain about.

And more choice is good.

Sorry I confused you there.

But if you're happy, that's all that matters... ;-))

Huh...Leak article disappeared. Interesting.

Running the RC here, no issues so far, boots in 20 seconds...gotta love that.

Hope they get a download page up and running for the XP mode... I would *love* to test this out.

Looks like they finally fixed Win-E to open to your drives now instead of the library. Still wish they'd make the "home" location easily configurable...this is something that nearly every other filemanager on the planet allows you to do...

What's the SHA1 has of that ISO file? is it x86 or x64? I am also downloading Windows 7 RC from torrents and damn it's too slow.
Seeds: 2433 Peers: 7275
That's awesome :)

Hop on the usenet. Much faster (23 minutes for me). Binverse has a 14 day trial, but you *have* to remember to cancel it prior to the 14th day or you're screwed.

I use EasyNews, but do not believe they have a free trial any longer.

This kind of thing, Angela, is the definition of fun....at least for me.

Love messing around with New OSes, new apps, and the like. It's like a kid in a playground.

Looking forward to messing around with XP mode. Here, and in the labs at work.

This is why I have 2 netbooks and 2 "junk" systems... my poor HP mini has seen 7 OSs in as many weeks. lol

Like the big bosses in my previous work: They use MAC's and then a virtualized XP...
But it is a MAC...

If you want to try something like this try VMWare with Unity

More new features in Windows 7 RC:
1: Stream Your Library Over the Internet With Windows Media Player
2: XP mode
3: New cool wallpapers
Source: http://i.gizmodo.com/522...t-surprise-new-features

Windows 7 will rule!!

It will just do what Vista SHOULD have done, and hopefully reduce some of the SIGNIFICANT user base fragmentation.

As far as the hyperbole, it is just that...

Windows 7 will do much more than what Vista should have done :)

Flash drives encryption (BitLocker To Go), AppLocker, booting from VHD, multi-touch, cool UI (don't care much, though) and so on :)

Yup, complete with the security exposure that comes with the requirement that the BIOS on the protected machine supports the reading of USB devices in the pre-OS environment.

Allowing, among many other exploits (aside from the key being kept with the computer as is far too often done!!! - by far the easiest and most common method of compromising a machine during audits!), or that either pre-boot or post-boot malware can read the startup key off of the USB Key, store it, and then be accesses to decrypt and access the BitLocker-secured hard disk.

Thanks, but USB device and bus config are normally disabled in a secure environment.

"Yup, complete with the security exposure that comes with the requirement that the BIOS on the protected machine supports the reading of USB devices in the pre-OS environment."

Uh... Disable USB and lock the BIOS? That's what we've done.

Seems to work just peachy.

Which we do as well (as you would have noted if you had actually read the enitre post! Duh!).

The result? USB mode Bitlocker fails. As well as the majority of the connected functionality of a PC.

Of course, you could increase your effectiveness by just removing any battery and/or power cords...you security wizard you... LOL!

Good work! ;-))

An user wants XP, is sold Windows 7, which then executes WinXP inside a VM. It's a hell of a price to run a VM. There were plenty of solutions to run XP in a VM. It costs $0 and will even run better than the expensive Windows 7 alternative: using Linux + VirtualBox or KVM.

Although everyone tends to think in 'users' as home users, Microsoft has a LOT of business users that this is probably more directed towards.

There are very few applications that don't work under Vista or Win7 for personal or 'home' users.

However, when it comes to the corporate world, there is a lot of custom software that was written by in house staff or just poorly written that still doesn't get the concept of 'security' in the OS and therefore does fail without IT mangling to get it to work.

What this solution does is creates a secure XP virtualization, and IT around the world can move to Windows7 faster than any other Windows upgrade/migration ever.

(This is Microsoft listening to corporate customers, that also benefits home users on a smaller scale.)

There is alo how MS implements this technology as 'virutalization' is not exactly what you seem to think it is.

Addtionally, term virtualization gets conflated a lot. MS could be doing anything from a hardware virtualization solution all the way to just a sofware virtualization where XP applicaitons run natively, but read and write to a virtualized FS and registry, which also would be virtualization.

Lastly, if you can run XP applicaitons without 'noticing' they are different or have to open up VMWare or VirtualBox, this is a big advantage.

Business is going to buy the business version, and if they can save on VMWare costs (Which is NOT free to business) they have more options for smaller companies.

Add this with Terminal Services desktop integration (where applications runnong on the server just appear in the start menu and run like local applications) and IT has tons of choices to move to Win7 and finally the complete set of tools that has been preventing them with Vista.

Microsoft usually bends over more than others to please and people still throw s*** at them...MS probably need to learn a trick or 2 from Apple...see how they fleece customers and the customers getting fleeced don't even know they are getting it....Awesome....

Well, it's all in the numbers. You can bend 5% of the world but 90%?
Why do you think 95% of the world won't use MAC?

i just got an macbook with mac os x leopard in it and omg let me tell you downloading vlc i couldnt cause it has to be the same exact version as the mac os wants, in windows i can download the latest vlc in xp with no problems, why i was downloading vlc well the most aawesomest program called quicktime does not support the biggest movie format out there mainly avi

ive tried now mac os x, linux all the windows back from 95 to windows 7, and they only screwed up twice windows me and vista, and if you count xp before sp1. Now i think thats a pretty good track record right there. Windows 7 will blow peoples minds away i say its that super duper awesome

Because only 5% are either asinine enough to truly believe Apple computers are "better" (better in a sense that they provide more functionality and value vs. non macs) than brand name PCs, absolutely have to use it for work, are genuinely swayed by the beautiful aesthetic that Apple products provide and so suffer the constraints and extra expense of owning one (same thing if you're into BMW/Mercedes brand vehicles), or just downright prefer them (find them easier to use, etc.).

The other 95% are either tech savvy and value conscious or too chap or poor to afford Apple computers. So, it's not that they won't buy it, it's that they can't.

That last line doesn't really make sense.

Lol yea that last line really doesn't make much sense...yes I'm tech savvy and value conscious so I just CAN'T get a mac. LOL...

I'd say that most luxury German (+Lexus, Acura, Infiniti, Cadillac, Ferrari) cars are actually technically superior to non-luxury cars. They use better materials and are usually have a better combination of power and handling.

It is actually a pretty good analogy, because if you look at pricing before desperate discounting efforts, you will find that to get a Chevy or Toyota with all the options that make them equivalent to a Merc, Acura, etc., you will find that your paying about the same. To get the same level of hardware in most Macs, you will actually end up paying a similar amount for a PC. It is just that cheaper options are available. For many people, a Hyundai or a HP will be just fine.

With a move to use virtualization for backwards compatibility, MS may finally be able to build an OS that can be as good as OS X or Unix/Linux.