If your pants / panties were in a "bunch" upon hearing news that
Windows 7 would be headed into your ever-loving arms "next year," you might just want to hold off on those party invites for a little bit. Sure, Bill Gates just happened to mention that we'd
see a new version of the OS "Sometime in the next year or so," but it's looking like that "or so" makes a world of difference. Microsoft wants to chill everyone out with the somber news that its got no plans to introduce Windows 7 any earlier than
January 2010 (three years from the launch of Vista), and reassure us that crazy old Gates may have just been talkin' developer speak. "As is standard with the release of a new product, we will be releasing early builds of Windows 7 prior to its general availability as a means to gain tester feedback," a spokesman for Microsoft said, downplaying Gates' statement. Of course, this means that XP's cutoff will suddenly move even further down the line, which makes us wonder what the point of
setting that June 2010 date was in the first place. Why are you toying with us like this, Microsoft?
[Thanks, Tony]
posted Apr 7th 2008 6:58PM
That sucks. My shorts were in a bunch, but in a good way.
I love six month release schedules.
Gosh? A new Microsoft OS in two years? What'cha talkin about Willis?
MAN!!! so close.
Well.. Hot Damn..
Had us fooled again Bill Gates..
Oh you sly fox you..
good
While the date isn't a surprise, I was hoping they were further along in the development of the new OS. I really have high hopes for the next version of Windows as now MS is going to have to really make something impressive and fast to distract us from the turd that they left on the living room carpet(vista).
It is like ME all over again, maybe 7 will pull a W2K.
I actually really enjoy Vista. I can't work on my old XP desktop now that I've been using Vista on my new laptop. Maybe you were burned by early upgrading experiences but these days, Vista is second to none.
That said, I'm still excited for them to streamline and perfect the great experience they've created in Vista so I'll definitely be ready for Windows 7 when it comes out.
blah blah blah.
Doesn't anyone think anymore?? of course we'll see beta's next year! Remember tho, Windows 7 will be a natural progression on from Vista... Surely no one honestly thinks Microsoft will redo ALL of their code from scratch??!
@Mark: I'm glad for you that you're having a great experience with Vista. I think you're in the minority though.
For myself, I can feel my blood pressure rising every time I'm forced to switch from my 4 yr old XP work laptop to our brand new, much higher-spec'd home Vista laptop. I've about had it with this PoS. I was waiting to give SP1 a chance, but by now I'm seriously considering selling my brand new laptop on eBay and getting a Mac...
Conaill - before you give up on MS - try that same laptop with XP on it. Most systems sold with Vista come with a free upgrade disc to Vista since so many people complained about how slow vista is. The laptop isn't a POS - vista just makes you feel like it is.
You don't see professional speed boat racers dragging their anchor behind them - and you don't see Intel or AMD and nVidia showing off their products with Vista nope they demo them with XP - funny how they almost always try to impress people with how fast their CPUs are with XP. Do you really think the people at those companies just haven't gotten around to testing Vista? Or they are confused by it - haven't figured out how to set it to act like Windows "classic".
Do you think it is a coincidence that at CES didn't have ANY booths witht he word Vista on them - nope - Windows and Live were the words of the day.
I doubt bill would get something like this wrong. What is more likely is that he wasn't ment to say it pubically so as not to hurt sales of Vista
I'm pretty sure no one wants anything said "pubically".
Who cares! Vista was such a kick in the stomach I'm now Mac and will never look back - No McAfee organ grinder in the background neither.
Uh...you know McAfee is not required? You can use some other, less memory/CPU intensive application to scan your viruses you get from those porn sites. I hope you think that your Mac is "safe" from the viruses.
1. Remove McAffee like a smart user would.
2. ???
3. Profit!
Chris, go get yourself some AV software...because you don't have a registry does not mean you are safe! Get some spyware protection while your at it.
1. Remove PC
2. Buy Mac
3. Retire IT department
4. Buy a house in Malibu
As long as OEMs keep getting a fat check to bundle virus scans windows will always be plague. it's not always microsoft that is the problems it's more the scumbags they deal with. I mean where will Mcafee & norton be if windows had no virus????? that's why they tell you mac is not safer then windows, so you can buy a windows machine and they can sell you that garbage they call virus (scam)
Wow, you guys are really in the dark. Is that why you need a "genous" to fix your computer?
I don't care who is telling you what, viruses are not normal.
An OS can be truly and completely secure. ..and just because Vista isn't there yet doesn't mean they didn't do a lot of catching up- aero for compiz, IE8 for FF2, whatever they call their memory address space randomization thing (some acronym i think) for AppArmor, UAC for gksu...
Remember, they don't have to be as good as anyone else, they just have to be good /enough/. Knowing this allows them to concentrate their efforts for the best for their company-- like marketing and lobbying the ISO, for instance.
chris: you have it wrong:
1.Buy Ubuntu Dell
2.Get on with your life.
Just remember it only takes two minutes with a visit to one website to take control of a mac. A Vista machine is much safer than a mac, it's only the fact that people want to hack windows machines more.
Good Choice Chris,
Been using a Mac since the LC days. 18 Years, NO VIRUS PROTECTION, NO FIREWALL, NO SPYWARE PROTECTION. NO VIRUSES EVER, NEVER HACKED. Plus, I have my old 300MHz G3 running OSX server, hosting some personal/business sites. And, that hasn't been hacked. They attempted, without success. I'm not afraid to use my computers either. I watch what I download. I do keep up on my maintenance and keep an eye on my logs. I'm waiting for the day disaster strikes. My ONLY Mac to stop working was an iBook I had. So, one out of 12. Not bad. Other than that i had a few external drives go.
As far as the M$ story, Let see if they can do it right "this" time. So far, so...ya
good trolling
Boostjunkie:
way to reinforce your pre-existing beliefs by reading titles of engadget articles and extrapolating them globally as gospel
@scott: grats. whats your website again? :)
@Scott
did you ever stop to think that maybe your Mac has not had any virus's, spyware, and has never been hacked has to do with you being so careful with your IT related tasks? You do the same thing with windows and it would not be a problem either. As far as spyware/virus's go, if a programmer has the intent on infected computers and wreaking havoc which OS would you choose to write it for, windows and its ~90% market share, and hundreds upon hundreds of millions of computers, or a Mac, which has ~7% market share? If your precious Mac ever manages to garner a significantly larger portion of the market, prepare for your Mac to become very vulnerable to virus's and the like.
@ sjdurfey
I am by no way anything IT. My maintenance only consists of: installing updates and occasionally fix the permissions and verify the drive. Sometimes I will run DiskWarrior to optimize the drive. But, like I said, I have no firewall, virus or spyware protection. Just the OS. I have not had to purchase any additional software to keep my computer secure.
You need to find a better argument than M$ has 90% market share. Virus writers are smart for the most part, just look at what they can do as and example. Not the best way to prove your intelligence, but effective. Lazy people are smart also. An old saying, "If you want to find the easiest and fastest way to get something done, have a lazy person do it." There are MANY ways hacker can make something cross-platform (JAVA is one example), but it will take more work. M$ Software "could" have all the same holes, even less, as any other software, but it's easily exploitable. So it comes down to hackers are lazy people. Don't believe me. A hackers method couldn't be any lazier, make something once and let it do the work.
And, I do agree that when the Mac market share gains there will be more out there. That's a given with any technology. Although the hackers will now see the benefits of taking the extra time to make something cross-platform.
Hacked today, Here tomorrow.
I need to rephrase, Hackers was probably the wrong term, Virus writers is who I'm referring too. Hackers I don't think care what system they are going to get in, they just want in.
@boostjunkie. The hacker who can write a virus for the Mac - his name would be ingrained in viral folk law. I don't think anyone has been able to significantly penetrate the OS system. This makes it the holy grail of targets for top hackers wishing to take on the challenge.
As yet no one has claimed success and I don't think that there is universal love for Steve Jobs
I'm curious as to what Windows 7 will offer that is different from Vista.
phwoah
wikipedia it..
new kernel no taskbar ( replaced with a pie thing.. )
yeah pretty much everything
I realize that these are often famous last words, but it can't *possibly* be any worse than Vista (and likely an improvement).
Hopefully reinstating Legacy support. My soundcards beg for it! Other than that, Vista has a lot of it's kinks worked out... So I'm guessing just improvements in hardware/software support and stability. Maybe forced 64-bit with a damned good 32-bit emulator as well.
We all have our wishes. Let's just pray they're heard.
who knows! but definitely vista isn't "wow" as M$ saids
They're basically going to try and fix all the problems that Vista has - which is basically everything - plus the bad PR. Windows ME all over again.
All virus software slows the PC down - I found AVG pretty slow too. Unix based systems (like Mac OS) don't need it because of the different architecture. No registry see - worst thing MS ever invented.
No taskbar? I don't see that on the wiki.
@ Autotom
Get a fucking clue, you, and all like you. Somewhere, some retard claimed that it would have a brand-spanking new kernel and break backwards compatibility and all sorts of other utter bullshit. An alpha build of Windows 7 is available to certain people, if you're that anxious to see that the new kernel isn't forthcoming, go download it off bittorent and install it.
It will not break compatibility with older apps. It will not have a brand new kernel - it will have updates to the existing kernel and continued work on componentization. That is all. It will not bring back support for legacy drivers. It will be a comparatively minor upgrade (compared to Vista anyhow). There may or may not be pie-menus, although this is doubtful.
Good, bullshit-free reads - first one debunking common myths and the second one providing an interesting view into what IS coming up with Windows 7 (although to be fair, details are scarce).
http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/archive/2008/04/04/feel-free-to-ignore-this-drivel.aspx
http://www.aeroxp.org/index.php?categoryid=23&p2_articleid=164
Hooch is crazy!
high five for the random scrubs line
So is Vista the next offical ME?
No.
LOL at Microsoft making Bill Gates seem like a crazy old man.
You know it's hilarious because Torvalds (with his wonderful sense of propriety) has to have called Gates exactly that at least once.
No big deal. I'm in no hurry. Completely content with Vista Ultimate 32 bit. I haven't had one problem that wasn't caused by third party software, and only a few problems all together.
As an Ubuntu user, I haven't had one problem that /was/.
...but maybe that's not what you mean.
I'm thinking Bill Gates might be going pre-Britney on us...
Spears, that is.
Pity.
Can I be the leave Billy alone person?
@ AutoTom
I'm pretty sure that "pie thing" is called a clock..
@ Andrew
Hey everyone! This guy's on to something! He wrote @ AutoTom in his comment so that even if the reply didn't work.. he still doesn't look like a complete idiot!
Hey everyone! This guy's on to something! He wrote @ Andrew in his comment so that even if the reply didn't work.. he still doesn't look like a complete idiot!
2010 is still correct when Bill said "next year or so".
It's obviously still 'a world of difference'.
I don't recall currently living in 2009..
*crawls back under rock*
I just got a new core duo laptop and despite all the hate I figured before wiping the hard drive and installing XP I would give Vista a try. After uninstalling Mcaffee and installing SP1 and all my favorite apps, Vista pretty much rocks. I'm definitely not going back to XP. If you have the hardware to run it and are not a benchmark scrooge, Vista is a great OS.
But I've found in life people are so quick to hate, whether it comes to race, politics, high-density disc format or operating system.
I have a friend who uses Vista. He says he got a virus.
I'm never going to mess with an OS that gets viruses again; I thought they were finally past that. Turns out they aren't.
Microsoft won't fix this mess; google and codeweavers will.
@ethana2:
First off, no OS is immune. Simple fact. Secondly, some really high arbitrary percentage of viruses on computers exist simply because of user error. I'd call that 95%. The remaining 5% would be avoidable to some degree but largely easier to catch even for a power user. Sounds like you AND your friend need some remedial classes on computer security.
Ata -- I hate you and I hate your comment :) JK
Tom: that is incorrect. Viruses exist only because of several dumb factors:
--the OS can't do enough by itself so it needs all kinds of 3rd party software to gain basic functionality
--complete lack of proper package management (.msi might be close, I don't know)
---allowing apps to modify the OS
--basing assumptions about file contents on their name extensions
--running binaries that haven't been set executable
--Pathetic code quality throughout
It is possible to be immune. Don't do any of those, and your only problem will be the teething power user.
A virus called Vista!
@ethana2:
You remain incorrect. Viruses exist because of people. People create and other people destroy what has been created (although some sickos prefer to destroy their own creations). An OS can be created by anyone with an ounce of motivation, thus an OS can be destroyed by anyone with an ounce of motivation.
I'm going to assume you run either Mac or Linux, as those are the users who generally feel that they are invincible. That word... reminds me of something.... Oh yes, remember the Titanic? Invincible, they said it was.
"Viruses exist only because of several dumb factors:"
That's nonsense. A virus doesn't have to affect system files. An infected EXE could simply seek out other EXEs and infect them as well. The most secure OS in the world can still be infected by the USER--that is, in fact, how the vast majority of Viruses, Trojans and Spyware get installed in the real world.
Also, I feel the need to add the following paradox:
Viruses and malware force computers to be safer, more secure, and more private. People like this idea of security, but feel less secure because of viruses and malware.
Without viruses and malware, there would be little need for security software. People would like the idea of not *having* to lock the doors, but would feel less secure because of the inability to perform a solid lock down.
So, before you state that an OS is at fault for being vulnerable to viruses and the such, you must recognize that while all OS's have vulnerabilities, these vulnerabilities allow room to grow forward in security measures, allowing people to feel great about being more secure than they were yesterday. You must also realize though, that the coders who create malicious code will simply be more motivated and present a higher challenge to security companies, who can employ more people in the business of making others feel safe. Families eat, hackers get street-cred, and you have a smirk on your face knowing that you just installed the latest and greatest virus definitions - feeling like you can take on the world again.
Perhaps in 150 years or so (if computers as we know them are still around) there will be no need for new security measures because the bare minimum has not a single vulnerability. Then maybe those curious hackers can devote their time to curing Cancer 2.0 or finding a way to rid our planet of 30 Foot Roaches.
I'd estimate at least 400 years before Spam is a problem of the past, though...
And to juxtapose my sleep-deprived art major post of yesterminute, I will add one final quip.
We all have nice short names. Yay for us - Ethana2, GTFO with your two syllables and abstract numerical indicator.
I can't believe we missed this one!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8
Mac OSX 10.6 Slated for 2010 says Apple, Steve Jobs talking initial feature set and previews
..or something like that I'm sure
Yeah - W2K was a very nice step forward from Windows 98 and a huge step forward from Windows ME. I was using it in the beta stage and even then short of drivers it performed nicely.
3. Retire IT department
Ha, yeah right. We have a very small percentage of Macs in the company, but call the helpdesk more per computer than our Windows users.
Plus if you need a working corporate environment compatible with the rest of the world, you will need an IT staff to run your servers and enterprise solutions.
Let's just forget about all the future MS Windows OSs and just keep upgrading Windows XP. Windows XP forever and ever, amen.
Add the present ones, Steffen.
...and an XP install can't even last a year, let alone forever.
If you're going to make something eternal, it needs uptime to match.
In conclusion, Ubuntu and Fedora will have made four releases during the time that Microsoft makes one, and with the head start they have now, it's fun to think what market share numbers will do in the mean time.
When Hardy is released in two weeks, it will have a working PlayStation 3 port. We will see what that does to the equation.
~~~~~~
Announced was an Ultimate Windows™
With “’09 Release”, so the spin goes
But poor Gates looked depressed
Mumbling “Kernel’s—*refreshed*…”
And that tech help’s still outsourced to—Hindos!
~~~~~~~~
I can't believe anyone seriously thought the next Windows would come out next year.
I like Vista. It has its quirks but it's a perfectly good OS. Perhaps not a huge leap from XP but I consider it better and I believe it is paving the way for more advances in the OS.
Remember when XP came out? People hated it. They said it's no different from 2000 with a facelift.
Remember when OSX came out? People hated it. It wouldn't work with anything and there were huge bugs and issues.
Guess what? Most normal consumers would have hated Linux (non Ubuntu) if you forced it on them when it first came out.
But, they are all good OSes and they all have very different development and release cycles. Given MS's history I can't believe any took Gate's statement seriously.
What microsoft needs to focus on is fixing security. They need to fix their operating system so it don't contain viruses nor have code that can be made into a virus. Microsoft is all about this and that, but they are certainly lacking in this department. Apple & Linux seem to have that covered, why the big dog (supposebly) failing in this area?
you're at a shooting range with 3 targets in front of you named, Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux. The Windows target is much closer and much bigger (the target size and distance will represent its market size), while each target gets smaller and further away from you. You are joined by say 500 other people (virus programmers) at this range. The group is told to get as many points as possible by shooting targets, each target is worth the same amount of points. Obviously you want to get as many points as you can, so you're going to shoot at the Windows target because its bigger, closer and as a result much easier to hit. Such as it is in the OS world, the more prominent target with the most market share is going to be hit with the most viruses and spyware, so security becomes much more difficult with everyone gunning for you. This is not to say all 3 OS's are the same in terms of security, but its certainly more difficult to maintain a secure appearance when everyone wants to exploit your code.
Ubuntu?
Please keep XP alive till then and give us the ability to hop right over vista.
Well as we all know Vista is so wonderful that not one of us hankers for a return to XP nowdo we?? I gave it 2 months and gave in. It is worse than Win ME by a Micrsoft mile!! I do not see a lot of business users clammering to upgrade to Vista.
It will take them 3 years to figure out how to rip off the cool stuff from linux and OSX.
AIGLX for example?
I've been using Vista Ultimate 64 for a month and it is easily the best user experience I've *ever* had. My installation went smoothly and I never had any problems with hardware (yet!) or the performance, and unlike most people, I'm actually utilizing my quadcore and 8 gigs of RAM when I do my work (DAW stuff).
And on the same machine I have Leopard, Windows XP 32, and Ubuntu. Strangely enough, I'm never on any of the three other operating systems.
So Windows goes from being yearly named (95, 98, 2000)to Mac themed (XP), to a general name (Vista) to a version number 7? haha