Vista successor, Windows 7 to be released next year?

Renegades:

I can only hope that the upgrade from vista does not cost an arm and a leg. I also hope that this operating system will be one that performs really well.

Charlie:

i hope they learn from there lessons with the start of vista, but now what im thinking about is Win 7 going to be upgradeable from xp ? or will alot of the remaining XP folks have to get vista then get Win 7 ?

tin:

Hmmm.
Features got cut from 2000, XP and Vista to meet deadlines. How well is the next thing going to work if it's deadline just got brought forward by 6-12 months?

The Doctor:

Like a shovel... Since a shovel doesn't do much in the computing world (Much like the dusty fibre-optic-hole digging shovel Telstra have sitting in the cupboard) it will be the same with Windows.

Mark:

What makes me laugh is people going through the pain of upgrading to a new version of Windows instead of using free software. All I can say is thank god I lead a Microsoft free life. I've long since given up trying to help idiots, and fixing problems with machines that shouldn't have even been problems. People pay for this stuff!!!!

JeffP:

What makes me laugh are people that think free software is bug free and never has any problems.

Zarneth:

What makes me laugh is realising that you haven't even read the comment you replied to.

There was no mention of linux not having bugs. I use it myself and I know it has bugs. The point is the fact that people _pay_ for Windows, yet they still recieve a bug ridden product. At least with free software you get fantastic value for money.

Not to mention linux's far more frequent but smaller, major updates than windows that allow for an easy transition unlike moving from XP to vista.

Linux - no no:

Yeah, but at least MS OS'es don't damage your hardware, while linux - does.
When I checked recently, the "Linux-is-killing-your-HDD" problem (which is marked as critical) is still not fixed in ubuntu and etc... (changing values manualy in config files and overheating HDD's are not solutions)

asfasdatav:

One might say that Windows cripples your hardware due to it being bloated, and deliberately disables your hardware with schemes such as HDCP and WGA.

Bevan:

I totally agree, I too have been free of Microsoft for years I do not use a single byte of windows code and I just watch the machinations of the poor windows users with some amusement.

It is very interesting to note that vistas failure is not microsofts fault but rather the fault of the hardware vendors, well, at least according to the author of the article ;)

I am waiting for a law suit to be brought against microsoft for supplying faulty software.

Scott:

And Windows and Mac users watch the poor Linux trolls struggle to play DVDs and listen to MP3s and lots of other things that 98% of computer users take for granted.

Open source trolls don't convince anyone. Just go away. Each and every OS has its faults OK.

Bevan:

I see from your comment that you have not had a look at linux. I would respectfully suggest you have a look and you just might be surprised. btw dvds mp3s avis wifi etc work just fine in linux (in the Mint distro) straight out of the box, so to speak.

Scott:

In the Mint distro, one of thousands. What about Ubuntu? Or Kubunto? Solaris? Red Hat? Or any of the others? How the hell is a non-geek, no scratch that, just someone who isn't obsessed with Linux, supposed to keep up. I haven't tried it because Vista and OSX do everything I want them to do with a minimum of fuss and no command line. Much easier.

richfish:

umm Windows doesn't allow the play back of DVD's either because Microsoft do not pay the licensing fee. It's only third party software on Windows that allows DVD playback (pre installed if you happen to buy a Dell or HP etc. but sill not a part of the Windows operating system).

To my knowledge OSX is the only OS that will legally play back DVD's "out of the box" because Apple are the only one's to pay the fee and build it into the OS.

I could be wrong and open to being corrected by someone who knows more about this than me but 90% sure I'm right. Just saying.

Anonymous--:

Windows Media Player supports dvd playback. The description field states "Play digital media including music, videos, CDs, and DVDs."

cursed:

looks like a photo shopped mac osx

John the Dentist:

Well, the company I work with did not upgrade because of the learning curve. The auditors and what not are not completely computer literate. We are not willing to upgrade and offer training, when what we use now works (aka win XP).

As for developers and computer-literate people in the company, Vista is simply too slow. We started to roll it out on members that wanted it and thought it was great. Their attitudes turned and we re-nigged the roll-out. People became fed up with the resource hog. It is more annoying than pleasant.

Vim:

Actually it looks more like Linux. Very much like an install of Ubuntu I have running at the moment!

Would be nice if they dropped the legacy support (natively) and instead followed Apple's route of a totally new OS from the ground up, offering legacy through a virtual environment in the same vein as Classic (OS 9) running transparently under OS X. It offers just enough for people to transition smoothly whilst retaining their older apps until developers release new versions and I think MS can learn a lot from Apple in this department - it's a very successful model (see also the Rosetta transition from PPC to Intel for more of the same).

I think Vista's biggest bugbear has been the lack of third party development in the first year - they rushed the OS to marketplace before they had the dev support in place and have suffered from problems (some perceived, some real) for upgraders, thus word of mouth negativity has hampered take-up.

Perhaps Win 7 will be all the things Longhorn originally promised to be, not this cut-down compromise of an OS that Vista has become.

Also, if they had a ground-up rewrite and took their time they'd clear many of the security issues they've spent so much time trying to patch over to date and have a more optimised system, which would use the hardware to full effect.

Don't forget, also, that it took Apple over 10 years to get their 'next gen' OS (OS X) to market!!! They started writing it before OS 8 came out and eventually scrapped all their work when Steve Jobs returned, opting instead to annex his NexTStep and build upon that instead. Anyone remember OpenDoc? That was part of the original plan for the next-gen, but proved so difficult to get right that it got shelved (I think there were still System Extensions in OS 9 for OpenDoc support before OS X was released). So it'd be prudent for MS to take this Vista breathing space to get their OS perfect whilst the spotlight's not fully on them.

Bob:

@Vim:

10 years to get OS X to market?

OS X is already on its sixth major release, and it's only been about 12 years since Jobs returned to Apple as part of the merger with NeXT. The first of those OS X releases shipped to customers in 2001, almost seven years ago. So your math doesn't quite add up.

You'd be right to point out that Apple had other modernized OS efforts such as Copland which were canceled prior to the NeXT merger.

Gene:

I have always wondered if MS employees actually read the comments made by its customers.

Windows 7 ,prolly more Redmond bloatware.
Minimum system requirements
dual 0ct-core Intel core3@3.00Ghz,
16 gigs of ddr8
400 gig SSD HD, OS only(minimum space needed 399gb)

Dual quad sli setup (to watch all the pretty crap on the desktop)

Why can't they pull their heads outta their behinds and decent OS ?
Xp is good after a couple hours of turning useless crap off.
Make a gamer OS for true enthusiasts (No bloat),then a pretty version for the morons surfing myspace (all the bells and whistles.)

I wanna pc that performs and games well and all this extra crap they keep cramming in their OS SUCKS!

Shrike:

Sounds like a great idea. I think the biggest problem with Vista adaptation was peoples perception of it, and not wanting to give up something they had become comfortable with. A shorter release cycle is exactly what Microsoft needs, and I think people will flock to Windows 7 in droves, just to escape the perceived Vista menace.

'Anonymous' should not be allowed to be a registered user!:

It's mostly FUD about Vista: many of the people ranting about how bad it is have never used it.

There were superficial instabilities with the RTM which have been fixed with subsequent Windows Updates.

I have just upgraded on a 3.5 year old computer and it is *faster* and *more stable* than XP. Some problems are still apparent, such as hibernation needs more work (as it did with XP, so it is no worse on this point).

Applications that did not work properly under XP, due to bad design, work better and do not require extensive study and workarounds to make them work under Vista.

Some losses: Advanced sound effects features on Creative soundcards were built on assumptions that no longer hold true and this problem is unfixable, so gamers will prefer to stick with XP.

But this does not affect business users who can benefit greatly from the vastly improved security, fewer setup hassles and better performance. Sound works fine with common tasks, such as CD, DVD, etc, in fact it is significantly higher fidelity and does not stutter anymore. WMP outperforms iTunes by a mile because it can upscale to a 24-bit DAC if your soundcard has one.

The main problem with Vista was: 3rd party developers came to the party late, and it is only now that XP is discontinued that they are forced to pull their socks up.

One could put on a tinfoil hat on and say, who benefits from this FUD? Antivirus vendors, virus writers and hackers would for a start, as Vista eliminates all the problems that kept them in business.

tin:

"It's mostly FUD about Vista: many of the people ranting about how bad it is have never used it."

I don't know how wrong that is in your case, but it certainly doesn't fit what I've noticed.

Most people I know who complain about it are actually still using it, or recently moved to something else (back to XP, over to the dark side with Apple, or onto Linux of some sort).

Miranda:

Most of the "FUD" about vista is true.

You say vista is faster? I have a 2yr old computer and with xp on it I can play the latest games on lowish settings without a problem - tried vista on it and it lagged just running the OS!!

Vastly improved security? That's true to the point where the user is not actually able to use the computer the ways its meant to be used. Out of the box you have to fight with UAC to use your computer, fight with security setting so that you can install programs in your start menu!! Yes it is secure because you can do anything!! (at least without heavily modifying all the security settings... grr)

Put anti-virus vendors out of business? Not likely - I only had vista on my computer for a week before it got a virus.

Needless to say I got rid of vista and went back to xp for my games (everything else is linux).

Devon Smashh:

Why would you put yourself through the pain? I'm off to Apple in the near future and nearly all my friends have said the same! Microsoft better pull something pretty increbile out of the hat as people are becoming increasingly fed up...

McBanjo:

Read that last paragraph. About 3 mistakes if I count correctly.

Integr8d:

And I count one mistake, in your two sentences. He wins.

David Flynn:

While I initially hoped that Windows 7 would really be a BIG step forward for the Windows platform, much like OS X was for the Mac, I doubt we'd see this in the projected timeframe.

But, you know, that's not such a bad thing, and I don't even care if 7 doesn't have loads of extra features shoehorned it -- if it was to arrive late 2009 (and I mean ship in late 2009, not RTM on December 3st) I would dearly love to see Windows 7 emerge as "Vista done right" - Microsoft's "mea culpa", where Sinofsky and co attack all the stuff that everyone has complained about, clean it up and get it right, while finessing and updating the 'okay' stuff to make it even better.

In that case, I could imagine many XP users (who are admittedly clinging to XP, and already having to tolerate running a six-year old OS on the latest PC hardware) would happily sidestep Vista and upgrade straight to 7.

(In fact, simultaneous to the development of 7's "Vista done right", I'd love to see a separate advance team hammering away on Windows 8, the 64-bit OS that breaks with ye olde Windowes and starts totally afresh a la Mac OS X, so that 7's success could give Microsoft some breathing space to prep for tackling the transition to 8). 

Anonymouss:

People don't need to "tolerate running a six-year old OS on the latest PC hardware", from their perspective it does what they expect and mostly does it reasonably speedily and with reasonable stability. Running the latest OS on old hardware would be a problem. Running an established OS on the latest hardware is mostly fine for the user.

Portnoy:

Heck, my toaster is nearly 20 years old and I don't find much fault with something that works the way I want to...

Jinzo.pk3:

A really good toaster probably would easily last 20 years. A cr*ppy one wouldn't last 3 before you need a new one. kinda like OSes eh Microsoft?

Chris Jenkins:

Because a toaster doubles in power every 18 months? I know what he was saying, that was just a jab.

XP is still strong and thats because most users dont see any advantage. if your an idiot and never used a computer before it makes it idiot proof really.

I love linux to bits, but its still not practical for gaming nor serios office work, I love Macs but for one thing.. Video editing, apart from that there no good to me. Everyone bash's MS but if there was something which was that much better why arent we ALL using it. FOR there sake they better not screw up the next release. lol

Kelvin Lee:

Unfortunately with gamers, Microsoft has got us tied in.

cursed:

well sorta you can use linux with wine almost all games play except EA games(there known for there shoddy games anyway) though vista is a very bad memory hog takes 800MB of ram on startup where as linux uses 300MB but it does awesome things all you need to see is beryl and compiz-fusion on youtube to see it rocks

Schlub:

People aren't 'afraid to move out of the XP comfort zone' - they just don't see the point.

To upgrade from XP (which has worked nearly flawlessly for years BTW) I either need to double all my RAM and HD space and hope Vista will recognise all of my old hardware, or scrap everything and buy a new system. Why would I bother when my current OS does everything I want it to do currently?

Once i'm finished upgrading what am I faced with?

* An OS with more flaws and incompatibility than the one I left behind.
* An OS with an annoying "User Account Control" system that many users just switch off, which defeats the purpose of its existence.
* An OS that only seems to offer a shiny interface (XP themes can achieve the same), DX10 support (a big lie as this is also possible in XP), and translucent / glass effects (also possible in XP).

At the end of the day all I'm left with is this thought:

"Vista? What's the point?"

mike:

this news is pure FUD. There is no win7

wes:

I don't think there is a release next year. Seems too early to me.

Christopher Cox:

Whats amazing is Microsofts lack of innovation. Just about everything they have done has been copies of designs done by some other group of people. Vistas copy of docks that have been used in Linux based systems for years. And now this thing looks like an Apple OSX ripoff. Internet Explorer 7 has taken features from other freely available browsers, and botched them up. I can't see why people are content with paying for their shoddy software, other than "they have to."

JM:

Microsoft shifting away from the lengthy development cycle that has cursed Vista will be a warm welcome to windows users. While I disagree with why users are hesitating on Vista, as I do believe that the OS is still unstable for a variety of applications, a move in this direction will help improve customer satisfaction.

It is my opinion that if Microsoft doesn't reverse the negative atmosphere associated with their latest OS release, they will loose more ground to OS X on the consumer end and ultimately with developers.

Duke Nukem:

MS has shifted away from lenghty development because the goal is to move to Winders FS. Winders FS is a SQL front end. Just like MS Exchange 7 is a SQL DB as will be all your Winderz Servers.

Bashar:

Seems they wanna rush in copying all those Leopard features :P

Jeppe Jepari:

"The transition to Windows Vista seems to have caused a lot of angst amongst users, but I think has far more to do with moving out of the Windows XP comfort zone, rather than any indication of Vista’s quality or stability."

Dear writer.. have you taken your medication? Compared to Windows XP, you can't even mention quality in the same sentence as Vista.
Also installing Vista means, that the computer you bought few years ago is now useless.. Why would anyone throw hundreds of euros to trash just to get better looking desktop clock (which infact can be installed to XP also)?

James Bannan:

Yep I take my medication with rigid and unwavering regularity. And as a desktop admin and SOE designer, I am happy to restate (and restate as many time as required) that Windows Vista is vastly more stable, secure and of a higher quality than Windows XP.  :-) 

As XP was over 2000, and 2000 over NT and so on and so on...

Anonymous1111111111111111111111111111:

ITS LOOKS LIKE A MAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But anyway Vista SUCKS!!!!!!!!!

sjaeger172004:

Looks like Microsoft has given up on Vista and moved to Windows 7 hopefully it will have all the features Microsoft promised with Vista (e.g New File system) thank goodness I stayed with Win XP Pro even thou I could have gotten Vista cheaper Legally as a student.

concolor:

That last paragraph must be a joke. Sure, I can stomaich a need for more ram for a newer OS. I can't stomaich an OS that idles at around 1.2gb.
Vista's quality and stability are documented issues. A simple google search can verify this, past even Slashdot.
As for blaming the hardware vendors for Vista's rocky start, try checking Microsoft's requirements from said hardware vendors. They're abysmal. It's a wonder the hardware vendors did as good a job as they did.

James Bannan:

No, no joking here. Not today anyway...

Do you remember the release of Vista? Vendors like ATI and Intel did a sterling job in having fully-supported, final release Vista drivers ready and raring to go, whereas others like NVIDIA and Creative did an abysmal job and let their customers down badly.

You can't really claim that it's Microsoft's fault, when Vista was in beta for so long, and some vendors proved themselves more than up to the task.

Assign blame where it rightly belongs, not where it's popular to dump it. 

NoName:

"Do you remember the release of Vista? Vendors like ATI and Intel did a sterling job in having fully-supported, final release Vista drivers ready and raring to go, whereas others like NVIDIA and Creative did an abysmal job and let their customers down badly."

Maybe if Microsoft hadn't gone and created a whole new audio stack then Creative wouldn't have to have completely rewritten their drivers for Vista.

Mind you, ANYTHING which uses DirectSound (which is practically every computer game and audio related program) cannot use hardware acceleration in Vista now. This move also made EVERY Creative soundcard damn near useless as all audio processing had to be done by the CPU. What does this mean? Byebye EAX, A3D and hardware surround sound.

Anybody who has anything to do with Audio (sound engineers etc), gaming and home theater are steering well clear of Vista for this very reason. Not to mention it's a resource hog.

Please get your facts straight.

Asmodeus:

--The transition to Windows Vista seems to have caused a lot of angst amongst users, but I think has far more to do with moving out of the Windows XP comfort zone, rather than any indication of Vista’s quality or stability.--

Are they serious? Vista practically required a new computer to run, had massive hardware and software compatibility issues and was just a giant pain in the butt overall. The explanation for the 'comfort zone' could me more like the 'thing that works with what I've got' zone. Let's hear it for fans of whatever Microsoft comes out with that's new!

pish.

Asmodeus

Kafkaesque:

Tbh the biggest issue I found with Vista was how resource-intense it was. I sorted my parents out with a new PC (they were on ME ^^ still) and got them as decent spec machine for a fair price. Given that they will literally be using it for email, internet, storing photos and the odd document I plumped for 1Gb ram.

As such I wasn't particulary pleased with the rather sluggish performance. As inexperienced users, all my parents noticed was it slowed down as soon as you had a few things open. They were also intimidated by Vista asking them questions about "are you sure you want to open this document / webpage" every few seconds and kept thinking they were doing to break something whichever option they chose. I thought the aim was to let the OS do the hard work, it hasn't seemed to help them.

Nice pic of Phi Phi on that screenie though :)