Vista successor rumored to be on track for 2009 release
By Donald Melanson 
posted January 18th 2008 4:48PM
posted January 18th 2008 4:48PM
Rumors of Microsoft's successor to Vista have been cropping up virtually since day one, and if this latest one is to be believed, it looks like one of the earliest may have been right on target after all. According to TG Daily, "several industry sources" are now saying that the a very early version of the so-called "Windows 7" OS has already shipped to "key partners," and that Microsoft is now eying the second half of 2009 for a release of the real deal. That's a slight revision from the most recent rumors, which had pegged the debut as late as 2010 or, more vaguely, sometime within the next three years. As if that wasn't enough, Microsoft's apparently also lined up the next two early versions to be released, with the so-called M2 build slated for April or May of this year, and the M3 release slated to drop sometime in the third quarter. Given recent history, however, it's probably not the best idea to start marking your calendars just yet.
I'm tired of M$ in general. Vista is to Windows 7 what Millenium was to Windows 2000. An embarrassment best forgotten.
I grew up with Windows starting with Dos and Windows 3.11. I have been moving on to various flavors of Linux. Windows just does not do it for me. So I have every right to be Anti-M$. I have experienced it for years as a user, a consultant, and a programmer. I'm just really tired.
If M$ seriously throws backwards compatibility out the window, and concentrates on OS with a security/performance mindset from the start... then maybe I will come back to them.
Until then the horror continues.
torrent or it didn't happen
Microsoft needs to drop compatibility; just say f*** it to compatibility start fresh so that they don't have to worry about old problems, old viruses and such popping up again.
Its time for a drastic change in the os
* if you choose to stay on an old version fine dont expect no more updates. Use a new code for every 3-4 operating systems no more than that
* do something with paint that crap hasnt changed in decades just drop that crap
* its time to drop registry dll's .net and activex come up with something new
* Stop the beta testing somewhat meaning only allow verified software designers, programmers to use it, because out of everybody that downloaded it some were probably hackers.
* stop putting advertisements on software that comes with the operating system. stuff thats downloaded free from their site go ahead and put ad's on it
* Drop everything that does not play a critical part to the os, such as the windows classic theme in xp & vista.
* allow more customization of the task bar and windows, the ability to change the color was a good start but should have been in their since xp
* make internet explorer and windows media player programs not tied to the os in anyway, make it easy to uninstall both if the user chooses
* stream line all of the os and all microsoft products to have the same interface gui as the os they are using. Make all microsoft products that have been released within the past year, year and a half compatible with the new os.
* Make all products come out within months of a new os not years unless absolutely necessary if Windows comes out March 09 Office should come out before August and less used programs afterwards if need be hire more people in some divisions and layoff or transfer some in other.
* For God sakes one mail program Microsoft Office Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows Mail , Windows Live Mail how about just one or 2 at the most one for business and another free one with no ad's that is downloaded from microsoft's website or it bundled with home versions of the os. How many versions of the damn mail program are there
* Drop all Windows Vista Starter, Windows Vista Home Basic,Premium, Windows Vista Business, Windows Vista Enterprise, Windows Vista Ultimate crap and only 4 versions of the OS
Basic, Premium, Business and a Server version thats it
As far as Vista goes, while it's not as bad as some people would want you to believe, it's certainly not the OS that was promised - even if you don't take into account all the features that were cut. More importantly Vista doesn't offer any reasons to upgrade. I mean seriously, name one significant feature that Vista offers over XP. DirectX 10 doesn't count btw because it is limited to gamers and still isn't commonly utilized. Everything else can be had in XP with additional software, often free, and probably doing it's thing better than Vista anyway.
As for Win7 - I actually read a few months back an article that mentioned MS's desire to create an OS that breaks backward compatibility in order to get rid of all the bloat. It is entirely possible that this is the OS that will do it and the reason they want to release it so soon after Vista is because it won't be replacing it, at least not unless you want to, but rather complementing it.
In other words, those people that need the backward compatibility will still be using Vista and between patches and service packs it will be as modern OS as anything else out there. On the other hand those that want, and aren't afraid, will have a new OS to play around with, that will hopefully be slimmer, faster and more powerful.
Ubuntu is crap. openSUSE is the distro. It's fast, it's pretty, it's stable, needs to tweaking what so ever and most of all it's user friendly (as in you don't even have to know what konsole is).
Umm Vista is a failure if I STILL haven't gotten the new laptop I want for fear that Vista is going to make my life pure hell.
Sorry but I want a laptop that is easy to use and doesn't frustrate me and from what I'm hearing Vista is horrible.
Don't get me wrong I don't hate MS. I have an xbox 370 and I love it to death. Plus I have Windows XP on my current comp (of course). However when they announced Vista I thought that it was going to be this GREAT EXCELLENT OS that would truly change things and make your computer very good.
So far I don't see most people liking it. And now THIS announcement has made me even more torn!
SO I ask all the EXPERTS who know alot about this type of stuff. Should I just get over, cough up the money, and "upgrade" to Vista when I get a laptop (my 1st one ever) OR should I just stick it out with my PC and get a laptop in 2009 when the new OS comes out? Assuming its met with mostly positive reviews....
I say go for it.
1) Thus far, all we have to go on is conjecture
2) We can be sure that a new Windows will not be released sooner than late 2009
3) But we can't be sure that it will arrive on time (most likely the contrary)
4) The resulting product isn't guaranteed to be better than Vista or even XP
5) You might like Vista after giving it a chance (that includes turning off UAC, etc)
6) Keep in mind Vista SP1 is very near (a release candidate is already out)
7) If it doesn't work out, just install another OS on it after the decrapification format you'll be doing anyway
Vista is a load of crap, always has been and always will be.
Microsoft killed Vista by removing the features that would have made a big difference and bulked up on garbage. Superfetch is a terrible idea for power users who use a lot of applications, but not all at once. I never want a program loaded in memory unless I intend to use it.
The OS Microsoft should have concetrated on was XP 64. That OS is beyond stable, works fantastic, and doesn't crash. Because of releasing Vista with a 32 bit version we will be stuck with 32 bit applications for at least another 5 years. I was looking forward to taking advantage of 64 bit applications and the fancy 64 bit processors that have been out for 5 years, instead the power will continue to be wasted.
We've been promised the power of 64 bit for how long now. Hopefully the next OS will be full 64bit and a lean operator. Microsoft is too concerned with being an entertainment company to be any good at making an OS anymore. That is why Microsoft needs to be broken up from the monopoly it is. There would be a MS entertainment company, a mobile company, and a software company. Then we might get some advancement again.
Try Vista, and you will take everything you said back.
Super fetch is flexible space, if you need the RAM MS will give it to you instantly.
WinXP 64-bit is worst then Me. Me is better then Win 64-bit. That WAS the main reason Vista was created. I followed Vista development since the begging and it was developed for 64-bit CPU's with 32-bit compatibility. Then towards the end they decided to make a 32-bit.
My computer had WinXP from 2006 to June 2007, (I was running Win2K, but it caused issues with my new computer I got in Jan 2006, with PCI-E port and my SATA controller for some reason). When you look in the event log, it says I had 83 blue screens. With Vista I had none. Even when I tested Vista public Beta 2, RC1, and RC2 with forced Windows XP drivers down its throat it never give me a BSOD, now excuse me that is stable. Make sure your computer has proper cooling and its not overheating because dust is blocking your fans to properly work, and make sure that you got a descent computer with proper compatible hardware, and latest BIOS version and drivers.
New OS will be 64-bit like Vista 64-bit. Vista is TRUE 64-bit, its core and applications (maybe expect for 1 or 2 applications like "charmap" is in 32-bit). And runs 64-bit applications. If you purchased a retail copy of Windows Vista Home Premium, or Business, you can contact Microsoft and get the 64-bit version for free.
Windows 7 will still support 32-bit application and CPU that supports both 32 and 64-bit. Else MANY MANY MANY programs won't run under that new Windows, and you will complain some more.
I disagree with you. Win xp 64 was/is a very solid operating system. I have been running it for almost 2 years now with 4gb of ram. Runs awesome, if anything ms needs more 64bit support.
LOLZZ at all you microsoft fan-boys..
This is ridiculous Microsoft is making OS faster than they can make a decent service pack...
Windows is a perfectly fine OS, as long as you either stay off the internets or make sure it is extremely well locked down. Now my Dad has switched to a Mac Mini, I'm going to take the PC back just so I can use Neo Paint (why on earth there isn't a simple paint program for Mac, I don't know!)
However, Windows is a soulless operating system, at least in XP. I haven't really used Vista, but I don't really like the look. OS X is something I really enjoy using and I'm not sure about Leopard yet. I'm gonna see how it pans out on the Mini before I upgrade my iMac G5.
Before this is seen as fanboyish, I've experienced both sides of the OS 'war' and just prefer Mac, but concede for a simple paint program, it's got OS X beat, hands down ;)
Microsoft is stuck in a tight spot. The lack of reliability of the software is directly related to having to support 15 billion different hardware configurations and maintain backward compatibility. However if they limited the OS to specific hardware, they would be sued by hundreds of companies, who in turn would be put out of business.
Microsoft can only do three things. Either write Windows from scratch and come up with a modern way of handling tens of thousands of drivers, or write a new operating system in addition to Windows that only supports a handful of hardware like Apple does, or.... only support hardware for a limited number of years. If the hardware reaches a certain age, then it's not supported by the OS.
Frankly, I'm sick of hearing about "new" Microsoft Windows. First get Vista working really well...it's been a whole YEAR! in the corporate world it is junk, the breakage of programs was just too much and no ISVs are updating in a timely manner.
Next, don't talk about "7" until it's done.. take a page from Apple.
Also, realize that this "new" OS will be built for machines of 2009.. and Microsoft has inside info.. expect the same under powered hardware at release in 2009 with a "basic" version stripped out being the big seller.. Vista will be cheap and the new stuff will be twice as much to get the "full" experience.
The big problem with Vista isn't technical (features or bugs) at all. The trouble is that there is no VALUE in Vista upgrades. From a corporate POV it breaks too much stuff.. and the tools to tap the new features that make the business case for the OS are unreleased, or beta at this point... after a year! After 1 year, ISVs are still behind, you can't actually use all the new, time saving features on the box properly due to lack of Microsoft server tools (they want to sell a new server later this year).... in short they didn't get the product out in a timely manner, and they didn't do a good job of building the proper ecosystem of even their OWN products for this release. There is no VALUE of buying Vista over XP to the average customer, that's a business case and Microsoft didn't deliver USEFUL packages.
Leopard on the other hand is quite useful... it FEELS useful as soon as you install it. Not as good as some other updates, but I only have tiger to compare to and Leopard was nearly painless and the new features worked on the first try, and they are useful, like Time Machine... so it FEELS like there is value there.
Very well said.....
There is no business case for an upgrade to Vista.
Companies are reallocating their formerly budgeted Vista upgrade money to new hardware or to other projects.
MS have lost out on money that will not be redirected their way until the next cyclical upgrade in 3 years.
Vista's successor?
Oh you mean Leopard......
You have got to be focking with me!
Vistas successor.......you are implying that Vista was a useable product with that statement
Windows ME could be safely suggested as a potential successor to Vista.
An abacus could be a successor to Vista.
OS/2 could be a viable successor.
MS has disenfranchised itself so much with Vista among the business community.
You guys in Redmond had better put out a product worthy of adoption next time.
Enough BS from MS already.
Well... if this turns out to be true - then Vista really is the WinME of the NT class OSes... a bridge OS between the old system (XP) and the new one (Win7) primarily to get the drivers ready for the real release...
I'm anxious to see what they'll come up with next. I have no huge issues with Vista but I have dealt with sub-par machines running it, so I can understand where the doomsayers are coming from. Alas, this happened with XP when it was released as well. Many hated it, some refused to install it, some upgraded and claimed it was horrible, some upgraded and loved it. Been there - done that. Same script, different OS. My advice to anyone who has horrible issues with Vista is to upgrade...if it's slow, get more RAM and a better CPU. Look into a better video card. If you're unsure, disable Aero (this is THE most demanding part of Vista, otherwise it's just as fast as XP)
If it's blue screening etc. stop forcing old software and drivers into it. Install it fresh, and look for Vista certified/works with vista hardware and software and you'll be fine.
And most of all, don't believe the hype. Don't swear off the OS because 'others' naysay. Try it before you knock it.
That's not it at all. I've had Vista work very well (just slow) on what is now a 4 year old laptop - no driver issues no BS. Then I tried to install it on a computer I built with my own hands and new parts 6 months after release and I got LOADS of driver BS - half that hardware was "Vista Certified". All that that means is that drivers were created for it for some version of Vista, and its a pile of bollocks.
Microsoft is like the McDonalds of Operating Systems and the planet is becoming sick on it's unhealthy, fat laden bloated unwholesome junk.
I'm frankly amazed that more people are not sick of the MS diet yet and I wonder why you seriously don't insist on something 'better' rather than endlessly defending the 93% market share of the 'sickly establishment'?
Personally, I say thank god for Apple because without them EVEN I would have no choice but to join you all in eating this crap - FOREVER!.
Don't forget the "vegetarian" Ubuntu. ;)
Hearing news like this won't really encourage people to upgrade/switch to Vista. I think it's already been decided in certain companies to wait for Vista's successor & sleep out Vista, it could get worse for MS very fast if general consumers decide to do the same.
Am I the only person who actually didn't hate Windows ME? :(
Srsly
yes, probably.
Its probabbly going to need 2GB of RAM 512MB of VRAM (for Aero 1.5) 15GB of hard drive space and a 2.5Ghz Dual-Core Processor (minimum specs of course)
Backwards compatibility should no longer an issue. Microsoft can and should scrap slavish observance to the BC G*d, and require that any incompatible programs be run inside a Virtual Machine.
Makes me feel good that I switched to Ubuntu. They have a new release every 6 months or so. And guess what? Free.
At least once this successor is out and we've all upgraded, we can give some kudos to the Microsoft marketing team..."Windows Vista" sounds much better than "Windows ME 2".
me three
I guess Microsoft is trying to be agile on windows development.
It takes five years to release Vista.
Now they wants to be quicker
--
Kevin
Plenty of Software: Free downloads center
http://www.plentyofsoft.com
First nVidia screws every one who bought a GeForce 8 series in the ass, now microsoft is screwing everyone who bought Vista.
Since MS have gone from numbering versions of Windows, to using years, and then letters, and now a name, they should keep things interesting by putting the name at the beginning of the next version.
Therefore, they should call it Beyond Windows.
but why?
Well it's about time Windows caught up to System 7...I wonder when they'll get to OS X :duck:
Wow, a lot of ignorance on this board, but in any case defending Vista is a double edged sword. It's a great OS once you tweak it, too bad for MS that no one want to tweak an OS to make it work.
Is Vista bloated? Hell yes, but you can cut out the fat, check out Add/Remove Programs or vlite.com, Vista CAN be snappy on just 512 MB's of memory.
Is Vista too little too late? Yup, but its still much better than XP (and I really liked XP SP2)
Is Vista as crappy as ME? if you think so you need to have your head examined
Did Windows 7 catch you off guard? really?!? 7 comes after 6 happens all the time get over it.
Is OSX better than Vista? Who cares, Mac's make my wrists hurt.
- Sam
How about they fricking fix Vista first. Vista has so many issues. And I dont say that as a hater. XP Pro was awesome, but man they really screwed things up in Vista.