Video: Windows 7 promises faster boots and up to 15% better battery life
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Nov 6th 2008 5:05AM
posted Nov 6th 2008 5:05AM
Now that Windows 7 has launched into pre-Beta, Microsoft has joined the world in Vista-bashing as they look to differentiate their newest OS from the incumbent. Speaking to its hardware partners at WinHEC, Microsoft is promising faster shutdown and startup times and less power consumption than its beleaguered predecessor despite the two sharing the same code base. In addition to an overall reduction in the number of services launched at startup, faster booting is achieved by loading device drivers in parallel instead of sequentially. Windows 7 also manages wireless radios better allowing them to drop below 100% power draw while managing the connection. And by tweaking the OS kernel, the CPU can sometimes run at a lower frequency and stay idle longer. This results are a minimum of 11% better battery life for Windows 7 compared to Vista -- and we're still only talking about pre-Beta Windows 7 software, mind you. Nice. Windows 7 also promises better memory management. So instead of managing all the background windows, Win7 offloads this to the GPU, for example -- system memory is then free for your applications and data. Check the trio of videos demonstrating these improvements after the break. Vista vs. Windows 7 Boot Race
Vista vs Windows 7 Management
Vista vs Windows 7 Battery Life
Does it cut taxes and fix health care as well?
also where are the hot Asian chicks..they have so much to learn about presentation.
To developers' thick eyeglasses, the speakers are THE hot asian chicks!
So you're saying Vista = George W Bush, and Windows 7 = John McCain? This doesn't sound good.
Now that's delicious.
I know right? Windows 7 looks to be shaping up very well. And yet people will STILL find something to complain about.
I can't wait... but we have to wait... which is good because it is keeping me from dropping money on a laptop that I don't need until 7 comes out!
I hear ya paul. I keep on whining about my 4 year old dell, and yet waiting for windows 7 is the only thing stopping me from dropping money on a new one.
It's delicious if Microsoft can deliver.
One thing that has always been true in the laptop world is that battery life promises have never shaped up the way companies say they will.
The question how will it compare to XP and not to Vista which sucks in my humble openion...
I don't get all the Vista bashing. I have Vista and it's certainly an improvement on XP. Is it a huge improvement? Maybe not, but it's certainly very noticeable in some areas.
Been using vista since day 1
Problems: 64 bit sux, cause no programs support it. SO having a 64bit processor seems kind of pointless, if the operating system supports it, but no existing programs support it or even intend to support it, because they see no added benefits.
Also in order to get the 64bit. You had to go online and buy it for 10 bux. Did i get my 10 bux back when i installed 32bit on top of it? Nope.
/sob story over.
So far no problems in vista. I had some trouble running Half-Life 2 games CS, etc but you have to tell them to run the *.exe in XP Mode w/e that is. So another stupid part of Vista.
====Aside:===
Play world of warcraft regularly in Vista. No problemo. Play Crysis in vista. No problemo, but game kinda stupid cause, it's not an mmo, so what's the point? If it ain't an mmo, i just don't see what the point of it is anymore? If i want to sit alone and read a book. I'll do that, but why would i want to sit alone and play a game, when i could play with real (figuratively) people.
Since installing 32 bit vista i can edit video again finally.
Wireless adapter that worked fine in XP, had to be removed because the system constantly crashed for no F-ing reason. WGT311 Atheros 4G, resolution disable Wireless adapter, only use wired connection, have since purchased a linksys wireless adapter with no problems to report except too good of signal :)
Audio Adapter: Audigy 128bit MP3 PCI card, constantly crashing pc, only supported by XP, not vista. Had to install BETA drivers for vista which aren't available from Soundblaster.com website anymore douchios at Creative.
What it really comes down to is. Product Support. It used to be you could go out and buy windows 95 and install it over your window 3.0 software and everything worked fine, it might ahve been slower, but it worked. And then you could put windows 98, me, etc on it, and it all worked fine. Now it's like BUY VISTA, BUY VISTA, BUY VISTA. Everyone goes out and tries it and then it's like hey it's broke WTF Mate. And only a poweruser can make it work. You need to buy a computer that comes with vista. And then once you get it. All the game developers and software work better on the XP....so....what's the point? MS? any ideas? You make XP so good nearly blue-screen-of-death proof, and instead of just giving XP a facelift (which it needs, still) you come out with something totally new. And everyones just fUstrated. minus the R, cause they're too pissed off to care about spelling.
No but I'm using Vista right now and it works fine, never crashes (anymore), and everything works fine on it, but then again, i'm a computer geek so I'm probably alone there.
So if my Acer with XP does 10 minutes on battery.. Windows 7 will do 11.5?
I'll take that!
I think you just might need a new battery :)
I'm already on my third one with that Acer.. and I got it at the end of last summer.. :\
Luckily it's not my only laptop :p
Actually, it will do much better than that as Vista is already tuned better than XP for laptops. As much as Engadget and its flock want to bash Vista, you're only going to end up hating on Windows 7 for the exact same reasons. After all, you expect an OS upgrade 5 years later to run faster on machines 5 years older. Get a clue.
hmm... does this mean I can go straight from WinXP to Windows 7? Good. :)
Admiral Ackbar "It's a trap!"
May be windows 7 will be a nice operating system, fast, not bloated and secure.
or
May be Window 7 will be a "Malibu" Vista with new hat
Why would you even upgrade your OS? If you're still running XP, you may as well face it, you need new hardware.
@Godfail
"Why would you even upgrade your OS? If you're still running XP, you may as well face it, you need new hardware."
Well, theres nothing wrong with my hardware. Got me an AMD Phenom(tm) 9850 Quad-Core Processor, 4GB RAM, 1TB HD and an ATI Radeon HD 3450. Had XP installed on it over Vista, mainly to ensure software compatibility and performance (Video Editing Rig). I'd probably consider upgrading to 7 - can't keep holding on to XP forever. Now don't get me wrong, Vista is a perfectly acceptable OS, but I prefer the simplicity of XP (Can't stand UAC on Vista).
... or the extra overhead...
You know, you can turn UAC off. Its like 4 clicks away.
@Andy:
Same here :) I have a good spec system and have had bought 2 new c2d's systems that came with vista licenses, fortunately it was business so I got XP licenses for free and the both the machines run happily now.
Only problem is my media centre, It's vista and won't take XP, the install crashes :( runs like a dog and before Mr. Smarty pants chips in: UAC is turned off and aero too. It still is dog slow.
Ya dude, UAC takes five seconds to turn off. Just click on your user picture at the top of the Start menu and you're right there at the option.
@rock99rock & THizzle7XU:
Thanks for the heads up guys. But I wouldn't want rid of UAC completely - just for it to be user scalable or less chatty. Its still there for a good reason, despite the annoying prompts like every five seconds. :)
@Kevin:
Seems theres a lot of people out there still desperately clinging to XP. Obviously can't blame them, especially if they're businesses. Hopefully the introduction of Windows 7 will change that - unless Microsoft makes a balls of it.
@Andy TGD
Spybot does a better job of what UAC tries to do. Turn off UAC, then install Spybot. You can configure spybot to be "less chatty" ;)
"faster booting is achieved by loading device drivers in parallel instead of sequentially"
Shouldn't they do it with Vista/XP before even releasing it?
I ques even W98 had same problems?!
whats happened with MS? looks like they get new good ideas only after they get kick in a ass after releasing a product.
or they have no new features to promote and started to fix OS in general.
whats next? in new version of OS, lets say Windows 8, they will get the idea that they can change something in OS so it won't freeze in case there is big HDD/CD/floppy i/o request.
hahaha Your having a go at them for FIXING PROBLEMS.
Crazy (=
Ya, I mean, why hasn't MS created world peace yet either? Let get on their back for that as well.
Idiot.
Yeah, give that to me on Vista please, treat your loyal customers... I'm not going to buy 7.
People said the same thing about upgrading from ME to XP.
Yeah but the short space of time and total lack of good updates/support.
Nothing really wrong with the OS, just needs a few updates, but instead of offering it to customers they want to go ahead and change a few lines of code and sell it as a totally new version? Previous ones have been more than just a few changes, at least that's the way I feel...
Sure, and while we're at it would you like me to put a 2008 engine in your 2005 car for free too?
Please. I guess the difference is with the pistons in the engine, a few grams off and let's sell it as a brand new version!! Profit!?!
The difference between this car engine/OS analogy is that even if the entire OS was reworked down to the kernel (like Vista), you'd take one look at the GUI and say it's the same.
Just like most consumers buy an Accord, and not a V6 Honda. I don't know where you were looking to go with that Kernel upgrade post, but when you realize (most) people buy cars based on the color, lines, and what it looks like then you realize that it's not all that different of an analogy. Nobody cares about the Kernel in an OS except for a geek, a programmer, or an obsessive fanboy. They buy computers based on look and function. (Will this car look cool, and haul all my kids to soccer? Yes? I'll take it!)
Here is the text from Vista's concession speech.
"My friends, we have come to the end of a long journey. The OS bloggers have spoken, and they have spoken clearly."
"Windows 7 and I have had and argued our differences, and he has prevailed. No doubt, many of those differences remain."
"I urge all Windows users who adopted me to join not only in congratulating Windows 7, but offering our next OS our good will and honest effort to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences."
Oh, so Vista actually does take a long time to start? I thought that was supposed to be my imagination...
If you consider a long time a few seconds at most extra than Windows 7, sure.
boots faster than xp for me...
Not impressed by the boot video. They count time from power on to desktop display; the rest of us in the real world count time from power on to "the OS starts responding to my clicks with something resembling speed."
True. I get desktop real soon but I get to use it in 2 minutes after that...
Shinigami, you talking about XP? from my experience, thats how XP was. Vista however lets you get clickin' while other stuff loads in the background.
Maybe you missed when they said they load services on demand now (end of second video), making the desktop more accessible faster after boot. I think it's a great step forward. And remember it's an alpha version, there's much to improve upon.
Sorry, end of first video. Going a bit too fast here. ;)
on a clean install of vista, the destop is responsive as soon as it appears. all the other slowdown is from the extra crap you have installed. there is no reason that microsoft should be responsible for that.
however, with the new on-demand service startup, you should see even greater improvements over vista after a system has become clogged with crap.
Excellent...It's going to be a great operating system, don't cock it up MS.
true that... ive tried the 6801 build.... boot speed is fast.. but later on..it condemned my vista...had to reinstall it...but other than that its great!
Before Vista came out I thought to myself, it's going to be a good product and will do everything I need it to do, but I kind of knew on release day that there were going to be some niggles. And I was right.
Right now, I actually have a very good feeling about Windows 7, much more so than with Vista at the same time before it's release. The more I read about Windows 7, the more I get the impression that MS have taken on board all the bad things that were levelled at them about Vista.
It's almost like they are looking at Windows 7 with a fresh perspective through a new pair of eyes, as if they gave Vista to someone and said "right then, here is your base. you need to shake this thing up, make it work faster, leaner, quicker, check our competitors (ssshhh... osx) and give us some new 'wow', read up on the problems with it and make it better. Just remember, it's still the base, but do what you like to build on it and make it better."
And it appears that the someone or someones that are now in charge of Windows 7 are listening, creating and doing something right.
I have a very very good gut feeling that Windows 7 will be what Vista should have been, and more.
So MS finally fixed Vista but rather than releasing it as a service pack they will want you pay another $200+? ARE YOU NUTS! And then they wonder why more and more people chose OS X despite the higher hardware cost ...
I agree, other than the OSX part, pretty much everything beats that.
If they do go ahead and release this, and start downplaying Vista than I'm switching to ubuntu, perhaps keeping my old Vista's for gaming.
Are you sayng that for each osx version they write down a completely new base code?
Yes we should all get free Windows upgrades for life. Bill should change his charity from curing Malaria for 3rd world kids to supplying everyone in the world with windows forever. We should also have free ice cream fridays.
No, we should get a proper update, like I said, not just a few lines of code changed, and a couple of bits of useless software for 90% of people.
Service pack, you ever heard of them?
ICECREAM!
YAY
windows flavoured ice cream? or malaria flavoured ice cream... if its the latter... I think I'll pass...
on topic... I'll get it because my laptops touchscreen and the new touchy things in 7 look GREAT.
also tablet pc with amd sucks for battery life... so this will be welcome :)
though maybe not worth 200... 100max for upgrade please! and maybe 40-60 preferred :P
cheers Bill.
"So MS finally fixed Vista but rather than releasing it as a service pack they will want you pay another $200+? ARE YOU NUTS! And then they wonder why more and more people chose OS X despite the higher hardware cost ..."
So go and pay 120+ dollars for a new "service pack" every two years, and feel better.
The last one gave you 300 new features.
Go ahead and list them. You wont, and you know why.
@Technex
If you actually used the pre-beta you would know that it is alot more than just a few different lines of code.
It's quite different from Vista and much better.
Service packs are roll ups of security and performance updates, the only time they added new features with one was XP SP2, and that was because SP1 was full of holes.
But feel free to pontificate like everyother sad hating geek on this page, TRY USING IT FIRST !
Here's the new features I've found on my copy of windows 7. Sounds like a little more than a hotfix/update:
* New UI Interface
* New Taskbar
* UAC simplification slider: You can define how and when you are prompted by the UAC, even shutting it off.
* UAC definition by program: You can also exempt specific programs from UAC prompts.
* Device Stage
* Homegroups
* Libraries in Explorer
* Math Input panel
* Calculator improvements
* MS Paint: Welcome the ribbon.
* Magnifier
* Gadgets across the desktop
* Simplified network connection stack
* Sticky windows (my definition)
* Preview Desktop
* Media Player Codec Expansion: Native support for AAC, H264, divx, xvid, AVCHD, flip video
* StreamOn: Ability to send audio and video output to networked A/V devices (think radios, receivers, and TV’s).
* Display Color Calibration Wizard
* Simplified Sideshow support
* Faster Boots will parallel device loading
* Simple Shutdown
For IT
* Action Center: There’s a good deal built into this function, but one of the most interesting features is a built in application that allows users record a walk through an action that generates an error and will email a system state and screenshots of each step to your IT support.
* Encryption of USB keys
* Workspaces Center
* Lite Touch Installation
* Improved Disk Defragment status
* Windows Solutions Center
* Better Multi monitor support for Remote Desktops and projectors
Under the hood
* Lighter footprint: Demonstrated using a 1ghz, 1 gig of ram.
* Longer Battery Life
* Increased Support for multicore CPUs: 250+ cores
* Multitouch
* Locations and Other Sensors: Added GPS integration and provisions for OS interactions with other sensors, such as accelerometers.
* Credential Manager
* Troubleshooting improvements w/ real world info
* Less Versions/SKU’s: *Rumor*
Sounds great!
At the end of the day all I really care about is performance. I don't give a shit about all those extra fancy features.
You'll lose weight! Increase your manhood! Gain stamina! Faster start-up time!
Although to be honest I started getting excited about Windows 7 as soon as I heard about improved SSD performance (don't have one,but may want to upgrade soon).
Looks like this will be an OS to look forward to!
sounds great MS... let's get this one real good and then Vista can quietly fade away. :P
Why do I only read "Highly Ranked" posts...?
Indeed... why skip the low/lowest ranked posts and risk missing out on crap like this?
I'm sure you've never heard someone say "Oh look, a train wreck", 'cause it's not like people really need to be told to look at one.
I had to use Vista today... god dam. This is my experience:
Do you want to access your own files on your own USB drive?
CONTINUE, CONTINUE, ALLOW, CONTINUE, OK, YES, REALLY YES, CONTINUE
The first thing you want to do on Vista is disabling parental control (the admin user control to be exact, its easy and makes life...faster).
Can be disabled, first thing I do.
I'm sure the 60 year old bookkeeper who owned the computer must have forgotten about that in their haste to start hammering away in visual studio.
been promised faster boot times before. Don't see anything here that'll really deliver it. Other poster is right. Seeing the desktop means nothing if it's not responsive. Smoke and mirrors.
Is the idea of having a gaming boot mode that only loads into a stripped down version still on the table?
Okay, its nice for laptops. But how about the desktop variants? Will Win7 run Dx10 games faster and make gamers finally able to move on from XP? Or is it going to be even worse?
I'm not talking about Crysis or Crysis WarHEAD here. I'm talking about Call of Juarez, Lost Planet and other Dx10 titles. As you know everything runs slower in Dx10.
Dude, you obviously know nothing about video hardware.
The reason DX10 runs slower is because IT HAS BETTER GRAPHICS. Try running a PS3 game on a Wii. There is no "fix" for making the Wii to be able to play the game as fast as the PS3. Thats why there are better graphics cards nowadays that support DX10 and are REALLY fast.
Oh well, promises from Microsoft ...
I couldn't care less about boot times (computer is almost never rebooted but rather put to sleep) but increased battery life is always welcome. If you can put a Windows 7 laptop to sleep such that it will wake up and not bitch about running out of Virtual Memory then that would be great (note: comment based on XP SP2 laptops).
like those up to 99% off sales, only a few useless item that price, I never like 'up to' claims, it could very well be using more battery for most people.
what's with faster boot up time? they claim xp boots up faster than 98, vista boots up faster than xp, but I see just the opposite.
So you got those '300 new features' for free from Apple then, right?
Uh huh.
And 'more people choose OSX than Vista'. What the hell?
Exactly what features were taken from Apple and what makes you think Apple originated them to begin with?
Back in the day, I had a Toshiba Sat Pro 400CDT, it had a Pentium 75 MHz processor and 40MB of RAM; it booted Win95 in less than 40 seconds from when I pressed the power button. Give me
...
Give me
Give me
What the hell do you want?
You know what boots faster... Windows 98.
On modern hardware, older versions of Windows are lightening fast. I'd gladly give up some of the modern glass to regain some of that speed.
It also crashes every 20 minutes, has poor security, and no support for modern hardware. And people bitch about how crappy they perceive Vista to be.
I'll take a the modern NT based OS anyday.
Clearly, you want MS-DOS 6.22. Maybe with Windows 3.1, but that might slow down your rig that you built for Crysis.
I'd sooner slit my wrists than go back to the horrors known as Win98 or WinMe.
that looks pretty cool, it's good to see microsoft back on track
and with the new Ge Force Nvidia just released with higher memory capabilities i think windows 7 will even make more use of that..
After the Vista launch with the 8800's and the nvdlmkkm.sys errors, I'll never buy another geforce again. I've never seen a company drop the ball so hard or take so long to pick it back up again...they were part of the design of the new driver interface yet they couldn't get it right for over a year? Not saying ATI is any better, don't get me wrong.
I wish they would show boot times between XP and Win7. Vista is slower than XP on my boxes.
Work It Harder, Make It Better, Do It Faster, Makes Us stronger
Our work is never over :(
Now do it with your fingers ^_^
Maybe if they work really hard they will deliver the boot time and power consumption of Windows XP! It would be a major improvement over Vista...
I've been running Win7 [6801] with the new taskbar enabled for about 4 days, I'm having a better experience with this pre-beta than with Vista RTM.
It's very fast, the new taskbar is excellent (and nothing like a dock) everything works and I'm running it on a 3Ghz P4 with 1GB Ram, REALEASE IT QUICK I NEED IT !
uhhh I can't wait! Windows 7!! another marketing theft from MS...yeah they like the $300.00 or $400.00 for a OS that will always be BETA version!
How ugly do they need to make the presentation??
Honestly all this comparison with Vista make it seem like all of these things in Windows 7 should have been in Vista in the first place. This is my first time paying attention to a Windows launch, so do they always compare the short comings of the previous Windows with the new one? Or do they usually present the new features (not improvements) of the new Windows vs the previous Windows? I also don't really like how they're naming this, it's really Windows 6.1, but they're calling it 7? Don't see the significance in it, since it technically ain't the 7th Windows in any way? Minor thing anyways... I hope to see new features in upcoming coverage of Windows 7, and not Vista fixes. This version of Windows should at least be a cheaper upgrade than from XP to Vista since this one is essentially Vista with it's fixes. I mean, didn't they state that it's built on Vista?
Also, all this junk about 7 being the XP, I really can't see that. Sure it performs a bit better, but if you're expecting crap from XP to work on 7 better than Vista, didn't they say "Whatever worked on Vista will work on 7"? Doesn't that mean whatever problems you still had with compatibility on Vista still will be problems on 7?
I'm sure this time 7 will be a great OS, but for Vista users, I'm sure many of them will be peeved, and would like to see a discount on 7, or a lower price tag on the upgrade on 7. So far I haven't seen much regarding security of 7, it's all been "mildly-minor" performance tweaks, and a ton of focus on the new task bar which to me looks really cluttered, and not too usefull, thought Aero Peek looks useful, the bar itself doesn't, it's thicker and the icons are bigger >.> I like my screen space thank you very much. Hopefully more features that help the user interface with the user-interface surface that are actually helpful like Aero Peek. That battery life got my attention, Aero Peek, and UAC slider all great things, here's hope for more good things to come to make it more different from Vista.
"do they always compare the short comings of the previous Windows with the new one? Or do they usually present the new features (not improvements) of the new Windows vs the previous Windows?"
These are videos from with WinHEC, the Windows Hardware Engineers Conference. Obviously things boot performance and battery life are going to be of prime interest to this audience. New features such as the taskbar and multitouch were demoed already at the Professional Developers Conferenceo on the 27th. Performance improvements are usually contrasted with the previous version of windows because, being a Windows developer conference, hardware or otherwise, that's what the audience is currently using.
"I also don't really like how they're naming this, it's really Windows 6.1, but they're calling it 7? Don't see the significance in it, since it technically ain't the 7th Windows in any way?"
This issue is completely irrelevant for end users, but the MS corprate VP Mike Nash has been has something on this topic:
"There's been some fodder about whether using 6.1 in the code is an indicator of the relevance of Windows 7. It is not.
Windows 7 is a significant and evolutionary advancement of the client operating system. It is in every way a major effort in design, engineering and innovation. The only thing to read into the code versioning is that we are absolutely committed to making sure application compatibility is optimized for our customers."
"Doesn't that mean whatever problems you still had with compatibility on Vista still will be problems on 7?"
Yes and no. There are going to be some applications which will never work, (those that expect and require administrative privledges. But MS has been releasing compatibility packs all the time, helping programs work with Vista. In 7, there is a compatibility analyzer which will help determine what an EXE needs to work on the OS.
"I'm sure many of them will be peeved, and would like to see a discount on 7, or a lower price tag on the upgrade on 7."
An upgrade from XP to Vista Home Premium is $74 on amazon. I don't think that's too much of a burden, and I'd expect similar prices for Windows 7.
"the bar itself doesn't, it's thicker and the icons are bigger >.> I like my screen space thank you very much."
The new bar is 10px taller than the old one. On a 1280x800 screen that's a 1% decrease in screen space. If you want, you can enable small icons and disable grouping to make it look just like the Vista taskbar. Of course, there's always auto-hide as well. As for being cluttered I don't see where you're coming from with that, since in every aspect, from removing quicklaunch to consolidating icons in the notification area, the new taskbar is less cluttered.
Simply the best..... Mac luvers u need 2 shut up & learn how to listen hahahaa
So the big question is what's the increase of battery life over XP?
I wish they had included the boot speed of XP in the video too.
If Windows 7 runs well on my MSI Wind I am sold.
i love it how Microsoft make the boot time such a significant benefit. i guess because Windows users are constantly having to restart their machine, quicker booting seems like a great thing.