Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 To Be Released Next Year?
KrispySausage writes "A recently-released roadmap for the next major Window release — Windows 7 — indicates that Microsoft is planning to release the new operating system in the second half of 2009, rather than the anticipated release date of some time in 2010. This quickly-approaching release date would seem to be at least partially verified by news of a milestone build available for review by an anonymous third party." We've previously discussed the upcoming new OS version, as well as its danger to Vista.
That Microsoft cant do what others can?
I just got a copy of OSX 10.5 for my really old and outdated mac. Specifically to get a working copy of dashcode as I write OSX widgets for Crestron control. I was expecting the worst as installing the latest OS on a old PC never is a good thing.
10.5 makes my machine faster. I kind of looked at it skeptically but it actually boots faster and has a more responsive feel, even NeoOffice opens faster as well as Final Cut.
Why is Apple able to deliver an OS that is faster instead of slower? It's got as much eye candy as vista.
Maybe microsoft needs to have all their programmers re-trained?
FYI: Single processor G4 with only 784 meg of ram, and a crappy laptop video card.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
From TFA:
"The system is very responsive, using barely 480MB of memory after boot."
I've obviously been in *nix land for too long, I'm still of the impression that 256 Mb is pretty much all one needs for most tasks. Even EMACS!
Bloat is relative. Compared to Vista, 480MB is freaking Calista Flockhart-level of skinny.
As a primarily Linux user, who uses Gentoo for frequent rolling minor updates rather than infrequent major updates, I keep a constant backup of the working kernel and configuration files by use of a cronjob shell script such that if a similar thing happened to me, if I couldn't fix it myself quickly, I would just do a rollback.
What I'm trying to say is that no-one denies that an update to *ANY* operating system can, potentially, screw the system up - but the fact is that preparing for such an eventuality is of primary importance.
I don't use Ubuntu but I would suspect if a Ubuntu update caused lots of people to have baulked machines, then, like Microsoft, Ubuntu would publish a fix on their web site to help get you out of it and it would be up to the user to go find and follow those instructions to get their machines back. But I suspect most Windows users would never bother even checking the MS web site, rather they'd just reinstall their machines or give it to an expert to fix.
In your particular case, it might be a wierd combination of hardware that has caused you, and maybe a handful of other people, to have a problem with an update that most other people didn't suffer. But the chances are that someone else more knowledgeable than you would have seen the problem, fixed it and put it up on the web somewhere - all it would take from you is a little clever Googling to find that out.
Ultimately, this issue has nothing to do with problems caused by whoever created the update, but about you making some effort to analyse what the problem is, look for a fix, and if there isn't one, post some polite messages in appropriate places asking for someone's help - whether it's Windows or Linux, someone will always jump to your assistance if you demonstrate that you can provide as much information as possible as to what the problem is.
Unlike Windows, where you have an expert on "every street corner", Linux requires that you take some responsibility for your own machines and learn as much as you can about how it works - if you're not prepared to do that, then you should find or pay for someone to do that for you or, even better, stay away from Linux.
Unfortunately, there are far too many people out there lost in the "cool factor" of using Linux because it's different to what most other people run who don't think about the ramifications of doing so. Linux is *ONLY* a replacement for Windows if you spend as much time becoming accustomed to it as you did with Windows (albeit you learnt to use computers and Windows pretty transparently) and switching to Linux is not a decision to be taken lightly if you are pretty new to it.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I'd say Windows releases are more like Batman movies, each ones sucks more than the one before until it gets "re-imagined" into a new series (Win2k), which starts the process over (XP, Vista).
Or maybe like Bond movies, where they're all pretty much the same, only the plots get less believable and you're left longing for the "classic" Bond who didn't need insane gizmos to get the job done. Yes, I like that analogy better.
http://www.mhall119.com
personaly i thought w2k was perfect.. truely built on NT with jsut a few usability things added.. the fact that w2k had device management and better error reporting for hardware was a perfect improvement over NT4 - also the support for things like directX and OGL was nice too - made it more usable - while w2k still had a the small (if you wnated it to be) foot print and prety decent preformance.
i am also glad that they updated the documentation from nt4 to w2k under defragment.. i will never forget reading that in the nt4 manual.. the recomended procedure for disk defragmentation was to back up the drive to tape.. format the drive and restore from tape.. just sadly funny for a server OS..
personaly i like w2k and still use it on my laptop.. i don't need the bells and wisles that xp and vista have - and with the lesser over head it makes my old p3 laptop run perfect
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'