Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Leaks Windows 7 RC Date — Before May 5
CWmike writes "Microsoft will deliver a release candidate of Windows 7 in about two weeks, the company's Web site revealed Saturday. According to a page posted on Microsoft's partner program site, Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC) may be available to paying subscribers to Microsoft's developer and IT services before May 5. Partners will be allowed to download the release candidate on that date, the first Tuesday of the month. 'Partners: If you have a subscription to MSDN or TechNet, you can download Windows 7 RC now,' the page read Saturday afternoon. 'Otherwise, you can download Windows 7 RC starting May 5, 2009.' The link to the download, however, shunted users to the TechNet download page, which did not list Windows 7 RC as one of the available files. This is the second time in just over three weeks that Microsoft's Web site has leaked information about Windows 7 RC. Accidental, or buzz-builder?"
Dunno what that is, but I'm not sure there's much point in frustrating potential downloaders. Microsoft hasn't had much success with any OSes released since 2002 so it's probably not wise to dick people around too much. I'm posting this from Ubuntu because Microsoft made it impossible for me to copy files around between USB keys, dvds and hard disks with anything like the speed of XP for reasons they've never explained.
Microsoft? Refuse money? In an attempt to win a little "good will"?
HAH!
They're Microsoft. They have a tiny group of diehard fanboys, and that's it. Nobody else really likes them, and they really don't need to be liked. As long as their OS and Office suite continue to dominate, they couldn't care less what their users think of them.
SP1 did NOT fix the copy performance issues. Dumbass.
The wallpapers of an extra feminine Michael Jackson on your homepage really creep me out.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Microsoft sucks, FYI.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
But I don't want it to add features, I want it to run programs, fast and efficiently, and stay the fuck out of my way, and not worry about whether I've got licenses to the music on my computer, especially since most of that music I composed and recorded myself.
Why is it so hard to get an operating system to use for my digital audio workstation that I can use the way I want, on the hardware I want?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Take a look here everyone (especially those computershack called names) - http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1198841&cid=27622135 (and see how stupid Computershack really is (Especially after his name calling at that url I had posted's parent post)).
Take a look here http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1198841&cid=27622135 and see who the dumbass is here, Computershack. Especially after your name calling as that url's parent posting. Your name tossing reply (and errors there) truly made you look like the complete rookie/noob that you are, Computershack. One that only looks at the surface of things (but doesn't really know what's going on beneath the hood of these operating systems).
Ah, from what I heard, it wasn't leaked anyway. It was squirted.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
> It is also completely inactive and irrelevant until
> somebody's code calls the necessary APIs.
That is so not true!
The reason why MS Windows Vista is so very slow at copying documents is because it is checking multiple times a second to see if a user is attempting to copying, or an application is otherwise attempting to access, any high definition media, and if it is it will either act to prevent it, or will only permit that access by means of specifically encrypted data paths.
MS windows Vista is essentially paranoid re preventing users from copying HD material. This is one of the reasons why the OS still uses a considerable amount of CPU time even when it is ostensibly idle.
DRM is fundamentally built into MS Windows Vista in such a way that the performance of the OS has suffered as a result.