Windows 7

Message

Shadowlinx · #1 Post by **Shadowlinx** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 4:25 pm

Hi all.

I have installed Windows 7 Pre-Beta Build 6801 on my Thinkpad X60 tablet. Has anyone else installed it on their Thinkpad? My impressions so far are very positive: I prefer it over XP tablet.

This thread contains some helpful advice on activating Windows 7 and installing Thinkvantage software:
http://www.gottabemobile.com/forum/foru ... p?TID=6861

-S

Marin85 · #2 Post by **Marin85** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 5:01 pm

I had a close look at some earlier versions of Windows 7 and they seem to have fixed the folder issue from Vista. However, I don´t like the fact that it takes up even more HD space than Vista does

Also, my impression is that they have polished the visual outfit of Vista and Windows 7 looks just slightly better (but that´s a matter of taste

).
BTW, build 6801 is the one available from torrent sites, so I guess you have an illegal copy of Windows 7 (and you are talking about activation)! Keep in mind that having an illegal copy of M$ alpha/beta software can with higher probability lead to legal consequences than if you had simply a cracked copy of Vista or XP (AFAIK policy of M$ about beta software).

Marin

Marin85 · #3 Post by **Marin85** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 9:22 pm

I forgot to ask: Do Windows 7 tablet features already work as advertised in those videos on youtube? Thanks.

Marin

Shadowlinx · #4 Post by **Shadowlinx** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 9:44 pm

I agree, Windows 7 looks a lot better than Vista. When I refer to activation I mean using the Vista Beta serial to activate Windows 7, as shown in the link.

The tablet functionality of Windows 7 is excellent in build 6801; the on-screen keyboard is larger and more responsive than the on-screen keyboard in XP tablet edition. The Windows 7 multi-touch drivers seem much more functional than their XP counterparts. Performance in general seems faster and smoother.

-S

jjesusfreak01 · #5 Post by **jjesusfreak01** » Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:28 am

Posting this from Firefox 3 on Windows 7 on a T60.

Shadowlinx · #6 Post by **Shadowlinx** » Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:57 pm

How're you finding it? I've recently started to experience a number of random system freezes. I cannot isolate the cause, but they seem to happen exclusively when using the laptop on battery power.

jjesusfreak01 · #7 Post by **jjesusfreak01** » Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:56 pm

Ive bluescreened twice. Once when trying to download about 20 things at the same time in Firefox, and the second when I tried to use Move media player on Fox's video service. It worked fine after restarting the computer however.

Aside from that, it has generally run fine.

Shadowlinx · #8 Post by **Shadowlinx** » Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:52 pm

Ah, I haven't had a BSOD yet, just these random lock-ups.

Radioguy · #9 Post by **Radioguy** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:33 pm

Why not use IE8?

mattbiernat · #10 Post by **mattbiernat** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:22 pm

because IE6>IE7>IE8 regarding speed and freeze ups.

beGi · #11 Post by **beGi** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:43 pm

Few benchmarks leaked.....

Vista vs. W7 pre-beta

XP SP3 vs W7 pre-beta

Nice...

mattbiernat · #12 Post by **mattbiernat** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:53 pm

indeed very interesting, lets see if ms is going to fully redeem itself and also bring back some of the lost functionality from windows xp.

Radioguy · #13 Post by **Radioguy** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 am

mattbiernat wrote:because IE6>IE7>IE8 regarding speed and freeze ups.

Yes, but isn't IE6 more exploitable than IE7 or 8? That's the main reason I upgrade.

mattbiernat · #14 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:46 am

it depends what you use IE6 for. I use it to go to only known websites and i have no problems with it.

mattbiernat · #15 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:32 pm

looking at the screen shots, I guess I can forget the good old plain look of windows 95, 98, 2000, Me and XP. I guess I will stay with XP.

Marin85 · #16 Post by **Marin85** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:05 pm

mattbiernat wrote:looking at the screen shots, I guess I can forget the good old plain look of windows 95, 98, 2000, Me and XP. I guess I will stay with XP.

Actually, Vista has quite nice windows classic look (and without aero) and I believe Windows 7 won´t be much different - a bit for every taste

mattbiernat · #17 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:02 pm

actually it is the vista's so called "windows classic" theme is what i really don't like.

Marin85 · #18 Post by **Marin85** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:02 pm

I admit Vista´s windows classic theme is not that classic at all compared to XP or 2000. It seems more polished to me, still somehow classic and I definitely like it more than the XP one. Another reason for my preference for the Vista´s windows classic theme over the XP one is that the Vista´s one uses different gray and blue colors which combination is easier on eyes than the previous ones. In general, I´m not a Vista fan, but I like it for the way it handles colors and fonts - much more comfortable for me than XP...

Just my 2 cents

Marin

Cunha · #19 Post by **Cunha** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 6:13 pm

Well..it is nice that those tests show windows 7 to be faster than Vista, though it really is hard to imagine them making a slower O.S. though I guess they are capable of that.

However, those tests show XP scoring lower than at least some version Vista in all but the boot time. Those numbers may mean something to someone, but the fact is that XP has been faster than vista since the beginning, so those test results seem to have very little bearing on reality.

Also looks like they somehow nerfed open GL on windows 7 beta. That is strange.

However I dont see myself able to do things on XP forever and being two generations behind (If I was not to upgrade to win7) seems a bit backwards to me. But I may have to.

So I hope they fix everything. I want it to be faster than XP, and really, it should. It is newer..newer software should be more refined, and better than ever. I hope we see that happen. If not, I dont see myself running windows at all any longer.

Marin85 · #20 Post by **Marin85** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:49 pm

Cunha wrote:though it really is hard to imagine them making a slower O.S.

Cunha wrote:the fact is that XP has been faster than vista since the beginning

Is that really so? What do you base your statement on? But even supposed this is true, if you want do draw a fair comparison between XP and Vista, just remember what XP was like in its beginning... I think Vista was a sort of progress for M$ in that particular concern.

Cunha wrote:It is newer..newer software should be more refined, and better than ever.

I couldn´t agree more (except for the "ever"-part

), but producing (relatively) slower software is part of the "game" - it just makes people buy newer, faster (and in many cases relatively more expensive) hardware. If you have once bought a piece of hardware in the top range, you are not going to replace it by something in the lower or mid range even if it outperforms it, you will still want the best. In any case, when buying newer hardware, people generally tend to move up one or more categories of hardware over time (well, that´s a bit oversimplified because many are willing to sacrifice performance for mobility, but in total that´s again something hi(gher)-tech than before).

mattbiernat · #21 Post by **mattbiernat** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:02 pm

the entire argument that slower software makes you buy faster hardware is a little bit flawed. people simply want buy new software and stay with the current hardware. especially with the economy down the drain.

Marin85 · #22 Post by **Marin85** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:39 am

mattbiernat wrote:the entire argument that slower software makes you buy faster hardware is a little bit flawed.

...and indeed oversimplified (but very observative of you

). Nevertheless it works: a good example is Vista, not quite e few folks were willing to buy newer hardware to be able to run the fancy new Vista aero...

mattbiernat wrote:people simply want buy new software and stay with the current hardware.

Certainly, but for how long can they do that?

mattbiernat wrote:especially with the economy down the drain.

True, but the economy is not going to stay down forever

Besides, ups and downs have been always in the nature of economy, but this didn´t stop people from buying new hardware (let´s not forget how everything started in the paradise - with an apple

).

mattbiernat · #23 Post by **mattbiernat** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:40 pm

i can see your point.
now my question is when is Windows 7 going to come out?
anybody got any realistic dates or is it all guess work?

#24 Post by **bill bolton** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:28 pm

mattbiernat wrote:people simply want buy new software and stay with the current hardware.

There are always some people who want to do that, but as a generalisation its certainly invalid at a whole host of levels.

Cheers,

Bill B.

beGi · #25 Post by **beGi** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:38 pm

mattbiernat wrote:anybody got any realistic dates or is it all guess work?

Few more rumors:

Microsoft aims Windows 7 for 2009 holiday season

Vista upgrade possibilities (limited time & versions) a.k.a: Tech Guarantee Program

And some official info: Letter to windows customers

#26 Post by **bill bolton** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:35 pm

beGi wrote:Microsoft aims Windows 7 for 2009 holiday season

Based on past Microsoft delivery performance (both deep and recent), if it makes that time frame its going to be in a very brittle condition in terms of actually working on a wide range of hardware configurations, or if it not released until its basically stable/useful on a wide range of hardware configurations, it wont make the time frame.

Cheers,

Bill B.

beGi · #27 Post by **beGi** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:45 am

Well, don't kill the messenger Mr.Bolton...

bill bolton wrote:...if it makes that time frame its going to be in a very brittle condition in terms of actually working on a wide range of hardware configurations...

I don't know what are your sources, but I've seen one rather new PC with W7 installed, and it works pretty well considering it is pre-beta OS (which wasn't the case with XP & Vista in same stage). But i do agree with one thing, it wouldn't be first time that MS delay something... But 64K$ question is: Do you know something what we mortals do not

Closest I could find is taken from third link of my previous post:

Some of you may have heard about "Windows 7", which is the working name for the next release of Microsoft Windows. We have learned a great deal through the feedback you have shared with us about Windows Vista and that feedback is playing an important role in our work on Windows 7. You have told us you want a more regular, predictable Windows release schedule. To this end, our plan is to deliver Windows 7 approximately 3 years after the January 2007 general availability launch date of Windows Vista.

Bill Veghte
Senior Vice President
Microsoft Corporation

hellosailor · #28 Post by **hellosailor** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:41 pm

Bear in mind that Windows7 will be mainly the same core code as Vista, which means it should release at "NT6.x" instead of NT7.

And for comparison, look at the differences in Windows2000 (NT5.0) and XP (NT5.1) which was the result of only 18 more onths of "polishing and completing" the same core code.

So, if you think XP was an improvement on Win2000, expect that MS has taken the same amount of time, and the same opportunity, to polish up the Vista code and again declare a new product name for it, instead of just calling it "Vista-dot-one".

Also remember that during Vista development MS stopped all development work early in the project for a 2-month long programmer retraining period, switching to "team programming" instead of solo assignments, and retraining everyone to look harder at security and reliability. The original Vista code was started before that retraining. New code should benefit from it, especially from the team ("pair") programming, and all the feedback time.

#29 Post by **bill bolton** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:03 pm

beGi wrote:but I've seen one rather new PC with W7 installed, and it works pretty well considering it is pre-beta OS

What was it you didn't understand about "a wide range of hardware configurations"?

Cheers,

Bill B.

beGi · #30 Post by **beGi** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:04 pm

I've seen one (and worked on it for a while) and read plenty other positive reviews on W7...

I know OS developing demands hard work, and I'm not trying to convince you to anything...

I just provided few links (rumors) available to all regarding W7, and if I'm wrong then you should correct me, rather than providing vague arguments...

I'm not arguing with you. PC is my hobby, not my job.

Windows 7

Windows 7

Re: Marin85

Who is online