Yes, Virginia, there's a leaked copy of
Windows 7 beta floating around, and if you aren't the type to "break the law" and check it out yourself, the folks at
Tech Cast News have made for you a picture-laden walkthrough of the installation process and some of the OS's new features, including Alt+Tab doppelganger Aero Peek, the icon-only Taskbar interface, and the Smart Folder-esque Libraries. Overall, they found the beta a major improvement over Vista and predict the final release will put Microsoft in consumers' good graces again. Here's hoping that apparent
January beta release comes to fruition so we can sweep that
other OS under the rug a little bit faster.
Update: Looks like
Tech Cast News is down, standby for innovative Ballmer-based conspiracy theories.
Update 2: ... and it's back!
posted Dec 30th 2008 at 12:01PM
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 7)
aaron @ Dec 30th 2008 12:04PM
Does that fish swim on the desktop?
crawdad689 @ Dec 30th 2008 12:06PM
I sure hope so
fjunejo @ Dec 30th 2008 12:11PM
No it doesn't. Not until a dreamscene background appears.
Cody @ Dec 30th 2008 12:18PM
It would be nice...but no. :-(
Saad Rabia @ Dec 30th 2008 12:21PM
In Vista, the default wallpaper had a moving dreamscene version of it, so I expect that this default fish picture will have a moving one hidden for the final release I guess.
I am sure that a huge amount of people will buy Windows 7 only by seeing that fish moving on a display screen at some shop; people love this stuff, hick, I love it!
tigs @ Dec 30th 2008 12:25PM
That's a Betta fish.
Maybe for the final release there will be a Gold fish.
Mobius_1 @ Dec 30th 2008 12:48PM
Only in the more expensive "Fish" edition. Otherwise you get a frozen static picture of a tin can of sardines.
giuliop @ Dec 30th 2008 1:05PM
Not if you have only 4GB of RAM. You'll need at least 8GB to see it moving.
RioRyan @ Dec 30th 2008 1:08PM
I don't think any of the backgrounds will be permanent. From Beta 1 of Vista through to RC1, maybe RC2, it had the same backgrounds. Upon release, they were all switched. This version of Windows 7 includes the "Light Aura" backgrounds that were included in the betas of Vista.
High ranks made me sterile :( @ Dec 30th 2008 1:11PM
When Windows Update crashes does it turn upside-down and float at the top of the screen?
ethana2 @ Dec 30th 2008 1:51PM
Blast, 'free the fish' isn't working.
Did they kill the fish? Where's my fish?
Brian King @ Dec 30th 2008 2:43PM
no, but the sushi chef that comes on later makes for a tasty treat
joueboy @ Dec 30th 2008 2:51PM
I believe you can get the moving one if you buy the Ultimate/Profesional Edition. Home/Premium Edition we are just second class.
霽月瀛台 @ Dec 30th 2008 8:41PM
This topical fish is not friendlt at all.
It fights!
Has anyone fed this?
feraligatr8 @ Jan 1st 2009 1:28AM
@ tigs- lolz a beta fish, u can make moving backgrounds I can do it, u just make an animated GIF and set it as ur wallpaper, I've done it before and it works
David @ Dec 30th 2008 12:05PM
but will it blend?
alej469 @ Dec 30th 2008 12:07PM
That is the question.
joe23521 @ Dec 30th 2008 12:25PM
Seriously, this needs to stop.
BlurMagic @ Dec 30th 2008 12:47PM
@Falcom
Apparently the new bench test is whether or not it will run GTA4
Felix Fdot @ Dec 30th 2008 12:49PM
@Falcom: Yes, with 1 FPS (fish per screen)
Shadyman @ Dec 30th 2008 1:18PM
@Felix:
I thought the new measure was SPC? Sardines per Can?
Lars @ Dec 30th 2008 1:34PM
That's a good point though.
I don't give a shit about flashy interface features. All I want to know is will it run older programs designed for XP? For all I care it could be a blank screen with no bells and whistles, only commands to launch the programs and games I care about.
Matthew C @ Dec 30th 2008 5:16PM
I believe he was asking if it would run blender efficiently, which it probably will. So far my only compatability issue has been with desktop gadgets, of all things.
XIYL @ Dec 30th 2008 5:34PM
@Lars
I even got XBCD running, with a touch of difficulty of course, (all I had to do was run the installer in compatibility mode and it works flawlessly). If you want to use this install like a regular copy of windows I recommend using Plus Patch by Orbit30, It removes the watermarks and patches it so that you can keep using it after 30 days with windows update. Its worked with all my old games flawlessly after I installed the Vista version of my graphics driver. Plus XBMC and TVersity both still work as expected, and It uses less RAM then Vista. Even If your against Piracy I recommend this, it works so much better than Vista.
Patrick @ Dec 30th 2008 12:05PM
I don't understand what's so bad with Vista. Works great for me and everyone I know who has it.
jonchwong @ Dec 30th 2008 12:08PM
It's fine for anyone with a more powerful processor and more ram. With Windows 7, keep the visuals, use a lot less resources, and add more features. A pretty good combination for success, I'd say.
thak @ Dec 30th 2008 12:12PM
apple said vista is bad...didnt you see all the commercials! therefore vista is bad.....
Magallanes @ Dec 30th 2008 12:12PM
so much bling bling and so poor performance. I known that "almost every people" is able to buy a quad-32gb-ssd-32lcd computer but there are still people that runs a computer using a rusty&trusty pentium-4.
The Joker @ Dec 30th 2008 12:16PM
There's nothing like exaggeration to make your point moot.
Stephen Lang @ Dec 30th 2008 12:19PM
I haven't used Vista, but the general consensus seems to be it runs fine on recent hardware. If Windows 7 improves performance significantly then that will be a nice win for the platform. It is nice to be able to install Leopard 10.5 on pretty old hardware and get good performance. With stuff like Spotlight and Time Machine (and their Windows equivalents) you can't work miracles, but the next OS's on both sides should be pretty good. Improving performance seems to be a major goal for both.
w00fy @ Dec 30th 2008 12:21PM
Vista x64 now runs great for me as well but the launch was completely bungled. I personally did not switch over to Vista until 2 months after SP1 was released.
The long development cycle with several resets nuked alot of the features that was supposed to make Vista a knockout product. Instead, it felt like a warmed over evolution of XP. Combine the hype with inital problems with bad/absent drivers, very heavy hardware requirements, and stability hiccups. Toss in Apple's skewing of Vista with the scathing "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" campaign and the damage has been done.
Many developers in my office have had "Mojave" moments where they grudgingly admit Vista is "not as bad as I thought." I still do have many criticisms of Vista. Power on to usable desktop is too long, any system with less than 2GB is slow, and the UI requires too many clicks.
CraigJ @ Dec 30th 2008 12:21PM
Well, as a developer, XP 64 is about 30% faster overall than Vista 64 on the same hardware, and Vista does nothing for me that XP doesn't do, and I turn off all the visual stuff anyway.
Performance is what I need, not pretty visuals and not useless "security" measures and certainly not pervasive, embedded DRM.
After 18 months using Vista I finally "downgraded" to XP, and to quote Apple, "it just works"... better. VMs load faster and I can can have 4 performant VPCs active at one time. On Vista I could load 3, and they were noticeably slower than on XP.
A core 2 2.4 processor and 4 GB RAM go a lot further with XP.
I'm hopeful that WIndows 7 will fix all the mistakes that MS made with Vista. Maybe they'll let it finish baking before they ship it this time...
neodorian @ Dec 30th 2008 12:23PM
I've never had issues either. I run Vista on two machines, one is a laptop with 2.4 dual core and 2gb of ram with integrated graphics, the other is a desktop with 3.0 dual core and 3gb of ram with a 9800gtx+. They both run perfectly fine with all bells and whistles and each of these machines cost under $1000. Maybe in early 2007 when people were trying to run it on their aging Dells with 512-1024 mb of ram and integrated graphics those specs might have seemed crazily exceptional but nowadays 3gb of ram is like $40 and a competent video card can be had for $50-80. Vista is a hog the same way XP seemed like one when run on old Win98 machines. On computers of proper spec it runs just fine.
I am glad to see Win7 can run with lower requirements because of the growing popularity of netbooks and lower powered machines. It got Microsoft to concentrate on tweaking their kernel and getting things running as well on lower specs as they do on mainstream specs.
John Doe @ Dec 30th 2008 12:24PM
@thak:
i agree with you...vista isn't bad after all. look at those stupid "i'm a pc, i'm a mac" ads and on top of that apple spreading "bad vista" word on blogs as well...which has caused havoc
i agree vista has not been taken up in the corporate world due to incompatibility with all those corporate softwares but for normal home usage or gaming...it rocks!!!
chris @ Dec 30th 2008 12:49PM
Vista works great for me to....but I will be getting Windows 7
Fred @ Dec 30th 2008 12:49PM
@CraigJ: it's too bad that you apparently don't know what you're talking about then. If XP gives you everything you need, fine. But when you dismiss vista based on "useless security measures" and "pervasive DRM", then you're kind of painfully demonstrating your ignorance. Please don't tell me you still believe the Gutman claims about Vista's DRM, or run XP as an administrator?
chefgon_ign @ Dec 30th 2008 12:54PM
"It's fine for anyone with a more powerful processor and more ram."
That's been my impression, too, but that still doesn't explain the seemingly large numbers of people buying powerful new super machines and going out of their way to downgrade to XP. That just seems silly to me. I don't know if I'd install it on a five year old machine, but if I was buying a new PC with decent specs I don't see any reason to demand XP instead of Vista.
UnixSystemsEngineer @ Dec 30th 2008 12:57PM
Vista had a bad reputation among everyone in the tech world long before Apple started making fun of it in the TV ads.
Now, perhaps most of those early Vista problems were solved with subsequent updates. But I'm just sayin'.
Mike10010100 @ Dec 30th 2008 1:00PM
I just got a core i7 gateway with ATI HD 4850, and I absolutely love Vista! I have had no problems whatsoever. You guys do know that you can disable the pop-ups that have the security verification. It takes like 2 seconds.
If Windows 7 is like Vista except that it uses less resources, then I'm assuming that my current rig would be fine upgrading to it, unlike the people who used rigs from 4 years ago and upgraded to Vista. Am I correct in assuming this?
giuliop @ Dec 30th 2008 1:12PM
@chefgon_ign
I'd like to know what you find silly in making a machine faster by simply changing the OS. Are people that buy faster processors - or even overclockers - all silly?
the real Brad @ Dec 30th 2008 1:16PM
@thak: I'm sure that's what everyone will rely on now: the unbiased, truth of Apple... how can they be wrong?
Nogami @ Dec 30th 2008 1:26PM
"but that still doesn't explain the seemingly large numbers of people buying powerful new super machines and going out of their way to downgrade to XP"
If it runs fast under Vista, it's going to run EXTREMELY fast under XP...
Jarrod @ Dec 30th 2008 2:04PM
@ Magallanes
Right...because my new 32 LCD makes vista run so much better...
Major4Play @ Dec 30th 2008 2:15PM
@Magallanes
Vista has always run fine on my Pentium 4 3Ghz, you sir are an idiot.
--------- @ Dec 30th 2008 2:57PM
I've had an OEM copy of Vista Ultimate tied to a single core Athlon 2800+/2GB since Vista's launch day. Works freaking great on that old machine, and it works even better on my 4GB/Q6600.
I will install an MS preview release of 7 as soon as it's available, and I will buy it on launch day.
joueboy @ Dec 30th 2008 3:07PM
So the consensus is we are not going to upgrade to Windows 7. You know what? It's not Apple made the Vista sucks. MS wants you to start thinking now that it sucks so we have to upgrade. Vista works perfectly for me, Windows 7 is just looks like Vista they didn't spend millions to make this new version. It is a package of Vista that has the upgrade in which we already got through updates. Vista is fine Microsoft and XP is much better please DONOT discontinue the XP.
Mike10010100 @ Dec 30th 2008 3:34PM
@joeboy
I, for one, am going to upgrade. Vista may be working fine, but that doesn't stop it from using resources, even though my rig can handle it. I can completely understand if people are having problems on older rigs. And since I always want my rig to run faster (as should everyone), I will upgrade to Windows 7 if the performance benefits and user-friendliness are better.
Mark Anderson @ Dec 30th 2008 3:39PM
Can people quit with the "XP is faster than Vista" on decent hardware bollocks please? Because, you know, it actually isn't.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302499,00.asp
Now Vista can be slower on network transfer but that's a separate issue.
Cadychan @ Dec 30th 2008 4:29PM
I use Vista at work and it makes me cry on a daily basis. I'm pretty tech savvy, but all the useless security crap and constant crashing, clasing and breakdowns make me want to tear my hair out. I've begged my boss for XP, but he won't give it. =(
Matthew C @ Dec 30th 2008 5:21PM
True , it works great, but having recently installed windows 7, I can confidently say that it is truly unrefined. I was satisfied with vista until I experiences the efficiency of 7 on the same machine, and despite some bugs, I wont go back now.