Slashdot Mirror
Wait For Windows 7 SP1, Support Firm Warns Users
CWmike writes "Users should wait for Microsoft to work out the bugs in Windows 7 before jumping on the new OS, computer support company Rescuecom said on Friday. 'From the calls we're getting, as well as our own experience in the past with all Microsoft's operating systems, we're recommending that people stick with their time-tested OS and wait for the dust to settle,' said Josh Kaplan, president of Rescuecom. Citing a litany of reasons, ranging from the risk of losing data during an upgrade to tough economic times, Kaplan urged Windows users to put off upgrading to Windows 7 or buying a new PC with the operating system pre-installed. 'There are some compelling reasons for both businesses and home users to move to Windows 7,' Kaplan said, 'so we're saying "just wait for a bit."' Upgrading an existing machine — whether it's running the eight-year-old Windows XP or the much newer Vista — is particularly risky, he added, especially if users haven't taken time to make a full backup before they migrate their machines. Some users have found that out first hand. Among the top subjects on Microsoft's support forum is one that has put some PCs into an endless reboot loop when their owners tried to upgrade from Vista to Windows 7. Microsoft has not yet come up with a solution that works for all the users who have reported the problem, sparking frustration."
I say get Windows 7 now, if you have a reason. If you have a new computer get it with 7 for sure. Get it for an old computer if there's a reason you want it (like DirectX 10/11 support or something) and your computer is reasonable (at least a dual core with 2GB RAM).
We have been deploying it here at work and it works great. It is a solid and fast OS. App compatibility is extremely good, even with our squirelly engineering apps.
But then seriously, how is this guy's story "news for nerds" any more than my anecdote? I would think nerds would be capable enough of doing testing to determine if 7 is right for their environment and then deploying it if appropriate.
What's new? This is always the recommendation. It has never not been the recommendation to jump on a Windows product as soon as it's been released by a support firm. Is it just posted here to give Slashdot readers a space to vent their Windows 7 thoughts on?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Having played with Windows 7 Build 7000 (public beta), Build 7100 (RC1) and the final version, Windows 7 is stable enough as is to not need to wait for a Service Pack 1. The only thing we need are proper Windows 7 drivers, which will be coming over the next 4-5 months from hardware manufacturers that haven't gotten them available yet at the time of Windows 7's retail release.
When SP1 comes out (which I expect will arrive probably Summer 2010), I expect to be a "roll up" of the monthly security fixes plus additional driver support. This isn't like SP1 of Windows Vista, which had a LOT of bug fixes to correct a number of memory handling issues.
While no initial release is perfect (and nor is any currently deployed system), this seems like FUD to me. Win7 is small enough of a difference from Vista (and that's a good thing) that there's relatively few surprises switching to it. There's no major driver model change and real world app compatibility testing has been in progress for almost a year now.
I hear this every time a new version of Windows comes out. While it may be good policy for businesses to buy time to test the OS, develop training materials, and fix any application problems, it isn't as big of a deal for consumers, and articles like this come off as anti-Microsoft FUD.
There is always risk in upgrading to a new operating system, especially if you don't have much experience with it. That shouldn't stop you from waiting for the service pack.
My Sysadmin Blog
Purchasing version 1.0 of anything is always an act of vanity rather than practicality.
Examples include:
Cars (Tesla?)
Phones, including Droid
Operating Systems
Girl friends
etc, etc.
But then you should have that anyhow. If you data matters, it needs to be backed up. How much it matters depends on how well you back it up. Reinstalls aren't the time to make backups, every single day is the time to make backups.
I wonder how much they get paid to release that? Everyone knows to wait for SP1 in businesses.
If it isn't broke, tinker with it till it is!
All OSes have bugs (read the Ubuntu forums for verification), that's what the forums is for, although I would still maintain that Apple (or Ubuntu, once set-up) needs less baby sitting - especially for the computer illiterate who are apt to fuck things up royally.
I've been running Windows 7 since July, and while I like it a lot compared to previous Windows, I just been running a registry cleaner with a ton of results. I don't get malware/spyware as much but the babysitting to get it back up to speed is quite annoying - I don't really have to do this on a *nix system. (I wish they just got rid of the registry, period).
"has put some PCs into an endless reboot loop when their owners tried to upgrade from Vista to Windows 7. Microsoft has not yet come up with a solution that works for all the users who have reported the problem,"
Download and boot a linux live cd, mount your NTFS partitions, copy all your data, install linux or reinstall windows
These Mac ads remind me of a politician who has nothing good to say about his own policies and platform, so he spends his time badmouthing the other candidates. I make it a point never to vote for those kinds of politicians.
Actually, Vista is on SP2 currently... so you should be calling Windows 7 "Vista SP3".
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Windows 7 is just a servicepack and some graphical changes to Windows Vista. Its still horribly incompatible with older applications, has very bad support for older hardware like printers and scanners and are a real resource pig. Frankly, Vista/Windows 7 still sucks just as bad despite the name change.
If you have a working computer at home with XP there arent any reason whatsoever to install Windows 7. The benefits just doesnt exist.
Buying a new computer and getting Windows 7 is something else but to get rid of a functioning XP install in return for a world of pain? Im not even sure Vista users will get that much out of installing Windows 7 unless the install is 100% flawless (wich it looks like it never is).
HTTP/1.1 400
I have that problem on Slashdot 2.0
Something to think about:
Registry cleaners have a huge incentive to be ridiculously oversensitive. They have almost exactly zero incentive to be competent and intelligent about what gets labeled as 'registry cruft'. Who's gonna pay for or download a reg cleaner that says 'nah, this is mostly clean, just a bit of stuff from an old trialware software to remove'?
Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
that would be Slackware. and i am sticking to it.
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
CCleaner does a pretty good job. Spyboy S&D... eh, seems like a resource hog to me... but maybe I just don't like shit running in the background. But the point is valid - know what you delete! (on the other hand, unless you do a reg clear on a regular basis, you'll have dozens of entries to check in google.)
a decent antivirus (and paying attention to what you do) should protect you from crap
-- All this knowledge is giving me a raging brainer.
I just been running a registry cleaner with a ton of results
Keep doing that and you'll have some problems soon enough... I've seen a tremendous amount of harm done by these things and I don't care how 'good' it is, it is going to mess up eventually. When it does, you're going to be wondering where your start bar went or why you're getting some nagging error after opening Windows Explorer.
;)
The worst part is reg scanners don't make your system unbootable where you can just system restore your old registry; rather, it just gradually creeps problems into your install that you never notice until you can't go back far enough to fix them.
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
I've never met one of these mythical windows fanboys. Can someone point out to me where they are? I mean the unpaid rabid fanboys like the ones apple (or linux) has. I use windows almost exclusively, not because i like it but because:
1. I am lazy
2. I make a living because i can make it work pretty well
3. I am lazy
I would make a longer list but.. eh, why bother? I just don't hear people ever saying how awesome windows is for anything (except games maybe). Windows jockeys just like using something that is standardized, supported by a large company and is easy to google answers for, and make a living at managing. Plus you can do almost everything without learning any messy command line stuff (although the stuff you do have to do with command line is just as cryptic if not moreso that any *nix flavor)
Windows fanboys are as rare as screwdriver fanboys, sure screwdrivers are useful but they are just a tool that works okay, why get excited about them? I've never understood the whole religious operating system wars.
Oh, bullshit. I have NEVER ONCE done a format/install on a Mac OS that hadn't experienced a hardware issue requiring an HD replacement. And I have NEVER ONCE had a problem doing it. That goes back to Mac System 6->7, up to and including OS 10.5.8. I have found bugs in the new system, but NEVER ONCE an issue with the upgrade itself. Format/install is probably the only way I would do Windows "upgrades" but it's simply a non-issue with Macs going back ~20 years.
Brett
AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry Cleaner?
[excerpt]
Mark Russinovich wrote:
No, even if the registry was massively bloated there would be little
impact on the performance of anything other than exhaustive
searches (ed. of the registry itself).
On Win2K Terminal Server systems, however, there is a limit on the
total amount of Registry data that can be loaded and so large
profile hives can limit the number of users that can be logged on
simultaneously.
I haven't and never will implement a Registry cleaner since
it's of little practical use on anything other than Win2K
terminal servers and developing one that's both safe and
effective requires a huge amount of application-specific
knowledge.
[/excerpt]
It's a very interesting read, that's just one of the many security
and computer experts that chimed in on the issue.Overall, the
consensus is No, you should not use a registry cleaner. Period.
A few end-users howl contrary.
I'll go with the expert's advice that aren't trying to sell or promote crapware.