Microsoft rolls out Windows 7 packaging
By Ross Miller 
posted June 24th 2009 9:08PM
posted June 24th 2009 9:08PM
posted June 24th 2009 9:08PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Wheres the "Warning: May cause your computer to run slow and send information to hackers once connected to the internet"
JK
Where's the warning on OSX boxes "WILL cause you to become a pretentious snob?"
Where's the warning on OSX boxes, Warning: Will only work with cheap lame programs like iLife and iWork and thousand dollar "pro" applications. Other than that, you don't need it.
seems like what keeps Windows beautiful is it's outside plastic cover not the OS itself. I'm pretty sure that people who bought Windows 7 will soon shift back to Windows XP just like what happened to Windows Vista. THere is no significant change from Windows Xp to Windows 7, only it's minimum system requirement.
What Paul? That made no sense, like all your posts.
For that matter, why is there a box at all? Most will either buy it with a new computer or will take to the high seas and "aquire" it.
This is a pretty useless story Paul is right. but then again this keeps the trolls from leaving their windows bridge
Wow.. couldn't have found a less flattering photo for the Window 7 box if you tried.. and I'm sure you did. (just kidding)
Where's the warning on Linux that says "You will never get laid again"?
Here we can all see how Microsoft is cutting back on costs.... this is like a redesigned Vista logo and box.... and why use such a large plastic packaging for such a small disc? The instructions and all could still be printed in a smaller booklet, and everything could have been packed in a box made from recycled material.... Here's M$ to you.
The disclaimer on an OSX should read "Warning: The price on this OS does not reflect real world prices on the hardware required to run this OS."
Where's the note that commenting on engadget always turns into a hate-fest.
Bravo on the smaller box. It can get a bit out of control though (looking at you Apple).
There was a day... when it seemed all boxes might end up the same sorta size so they stacked nicely... alas there was a day.
Wow, you have got to be kidding hk_fng. Dear god I hope you are. Cuz if you're not...just wow. Wow, I don't even know what to say. Go back to your hole?
The op and several other comments should be low ranked, the comments system was changed recently.. right ? :(.
Why do we need that gigantic plastic box for a tiny dvd? How about something small, flat and recycled?
@ Russler
'Again'?
The constant trolling by people like Paul Chapel, murmermer, iphonerulz, etc. is really destroying this website. It used to be amuzing in small doses but has turned into a boring, tedious tide lately. It seems like every other post is guaranteed to be filled with the same dreary attacks and sarcastic bile that doesn't add anything and stifles discussion.
I'm an Apple disliker myself, and I have to agree with Paul on this one, this isn't news. Engadget should have a post at the end of the day of all the little worthless stories like this.
"Bravo on the smaller box. It can get a bit out of control though (looking at you Apple)."
Best example of the BS slung by the Apple haters. Congratulating MS for packaging that is still lots of waste and made of photodegrading material and then saying biodegradable packaging that is just big enough for the material is out of control is so mindblowing that someone could even come up with such BS.
@darkmax: Microsoft has taken green options in account, this is straight from Neowin:
"It also features less packaging materials to reduce environmental footprint."
"good news is that it is recyclable and actually weighs 37% less than the Vista
box"
It could be more greener of course, but at least they haven taken some eco concerns in hand. What's wrong with it being redesigned? It look pretty find and much easier to open this time.
All you haters have obviously never tried the Windows 7 beta or RC. Windows 7 is going to be an amazing product. The beta was really really good, and the RC is even better. I can't wait for the release. Please don't compare 7 to Vista. Vista is a POS. 7 is fast and stable and they made some really good design decisions, such as the new task bar. XP is on it's last legs. While XP has been a really good OS for years, 7 will be a worthy replacement.
Looks great! Simple and elegant. Just what it needed.
You needed a round plastic box and therefore you've been waiting for Win7 to come out? o_O
Just what IT needed. Not just what I needed.
I still can't believe they're really going to just call it Windows . . . 7.
Windows 3.1, Windows 95, 98 . . . . XP, Vista . . . Windows 7?
Not very creative, really.
I'm pretty sure Microsoft lost track of how many editions of Windows they've released
1.0
2.x
3.x
NT 3.x
95
NT 4.x
98
98SE
2000
ME
XP
Vista
7
Life without walls, baby.
Yeah they have that many versions, but it's not based off the same kernel. Some of those aren't based off the NT kernel. Windows 7 is because XP identifies itself as v5, Vista is v6. Windows 7 is v7, or rather it's supposed to be. Haven't used 7 since the first beta available on MSDN, but in the beta it called itself 6.1. Not sure if that's still true or if they just had it labeled as 6.1 in order to get Vista programs to install on Windows 7 beta while support was still minimal.
Yeah... especially since 7 is actually 6.1.
No... it's the 7'th version of Windows aimed at "home" computers.
7- Windows 7 (Based on Vista kernel)
6- Windows Vista (New Kernel)
5- Windows XP
4- Windows 2000 (Based on the 1993, NT3 kernel)
3- Windows ME
2- Windows 98
1- Windows 95 (based on MSDOS kernel)
Older Window's versions where DOS menu, not true OS. Like what Gnome and KDE is for Linux.
NT3, NT4.x, Servers editions where and are not aimed at home computers, but rather servers or large networks.
is because windows 7 name is based on the NT versions.
so there was like:
Nt 3
Nt 4
Windows 2000 and XP are NT 5
Windows Vista is NT 6
Windows 7 is technically still NT 6.xx but i think its trying to distance itself from Vista
For all you guys arguing about what the "real" version number for Win7 is... please see russlar's comment about "Where's the warning on Linux that says "You will never get laid again"?" and apply it to your situation.
@Alex,
Right, you have no walls. Instead, you're trapped inside your glorified--and very fragile--glass box playing Halo 2 because that's how cool you are.
That's what Microsoft gets for doing a little play on words; they're bound to imply something else.
Windows 2000 was not aimed at home PCs, and also came out before ME.
ME was just a crappy holdover os until XP came out for consumers, since 2000 couldn't stay in development much longer after all of its delays and enterprises demanding it.
to Dan. S
Mac OS versions since 2001.
10.0 Cheetah
10.1 Puma
10.2 Jaguar
10.3 Panther
10.4 Tiger
10.5 Leopard
10.6 Snow Leopard
Apple knocked Windows in their keynote a few weeks ago, saying that Windows 7 was basically a warmed over Vista. Which is fair to say. They claimed they love Leopard, but then said Snow Leopard is an improvement on Leopard.
Using your logic, Apple lost count of the amount of OSs they have made and Snow Leopard is OS 16. If you argue that, then Snow Leopard is just warmed over Leopard, which was warmed over Tiger and so on. Also, you could argue that Apple basically charges consumers for Service Packs that in most cases M$...sorry MS doesn't. I can respect if you don't Windows, but I hate how people try to turn things around for their benefit when the product they are supporting basically does the same thing or follows the same scheme.
I don't hate Apple, actually like the products, I have an IPhone, but run MS. I like XP better than Vista, but Vista runs fine on all of my machines at home. If Windows 7 is like Vista but cleaned up faster and limits UAC, which most people know how to turn off anyway, then I think that's great. Use what ya want.
"Elegant" is what you would call Vista or Office 2007 box. This is simple piece of plastic sh*t. Why didn't they use paper packaging? Would make it possible to send in an envelope, and would help reduce amount of plastic waste, too.
@bryanwint
"Apple knocked Windows in their keynote a few weeks ago, saying that Windows 7 was basically a warmed over Vista."
"I can respect if you don't Windows, but I hate how people try to turn things around for their benefit when the product they are supporting basically does the same thing or follows the same scheme."
I'm sorry but you got it wrong: the problem with that is not the "warming"; it's that Vista is a crappy operating system, so even if you really improve it you're talking about improved crap, which is still basically crap. That's the message they wanted to convey.
"Using your logic, Apple lost count of the amount of OSs they have made and Snow Leopard is OS 16. If you argue that, then Snow Leopard is just warmed over Leopard, which was warmed over Tiger and so on."
I only wish Microsoft would do the same. At this point OSs have all we need, and that's why a lot of people stick to XP. There is no need for a new operating system every 3 years; I wish Microsoft would understand that. Letting 7 years pass between the release of XP and Vista is an implicit admission that this is true, and only did them bad, because people realised that if they could live with the same OS for 7 years, they could live with it forever.
"Also, you could argue that Apple basically charges consumers for Service Packs that in most cases M$...sorry MS doesn't."
You could argue that, but you could also argue that Apple's "Service Packs" are much more; they always include new functionality while Microsoft's are mostly a bunch of fixes. Apple's new releases are overpriced improvements, as it's Apple's custom, but if is evident that this model works for them. The new functionality is not fundamental - but I said before, OSs have been fundamentally sound for many years now, and again the problem is that Microsoft wants to sell non-fundamental upgrades as completely new OSs.
BTW, I am not an Apple lover; I am simply saying that they are doing this thing right.
I think we should move to all-cardboard (or something else easily recycled) packages... let people buy disc binders to store the discs, but the software should come in something that will break down.
Games, movies, and music should still come in a plastic case, in my opinion, because they're often loaned to friends and carried around, but who really goes to someone's house and brings their copy of Windows 7?
I think you should go shoot yourself so nature can recycle your useless body into someone that will actually be a productive member of society and not try to ruin everyone's way of life
Plus with CDs I like the paper sleeves they come in more so than those easily breakable plastic cases that more often than not end up cutting your finger.
i totally agree.. at the very least just keep the cd case the same but kill the box!
and dude its never cool to rip on recycling.
youre internet dick must be huge
The blog says the package is recyclable.
The reason it's all plastic and not digital is in good part due to the greed of the record and movie business. Digital would be cheaper and easier to distribute and therein lies the problem... the easier to distribute part eats into their profits and number of houses your favorite artists and executives can have.
Sides... that new plastic smell is worth ruining the only planet we have IMHO. ;)
I hate to get into something like this on the Internet, but how would cardboard packaging "ruin everyone's way of life?" That said, this will be my only response to the criticism of my opinion.
I'm hardly someone anyone would consider an "environmentalist," but when something is obvious, why not try it? I'm not chaining myself to trees or picking up trash on the street, but I'm definitely not the person who leaves the faucet running just in case I need to come back to it later.
Digital Copies would probably not be cheaper for them, and even if it was, they could still charge the same amount. The real reason is probably 1) a hard copy is easier for most end users to deal with without being overly confused.
Also, plastic is probably used more because its hard to break in to and get the serial keys. It takes more work to break through plastic.
Well, you get all the shoplifters to behave so they can put stuff in packaging that can't be easily ripped open. Then maybe they could put it in cardboard.
@Alistair loveless
I'm all about keeping things clean but don't force me to recycle... I'll start burning Styrofoam in my backyard right next to the fountain of motor oil I'll be dumping in the creek at the back edge of my property!
Oh just stop whining now. If you don't want to buy the OS with the package then don't buy it on the shelves, buy it online. Sheesh, are you just playing stupid or what?
@Randy
..." The real reason is probably 1) a hard copy is easier for most end users to deal with without being overly confused."
You're not (completely) wrong, but what about all those Netbook users with no Optical drive?
I disagree, I only buy games that still have their box art and manual, because a nice case matters to me that much, on the very few rare occasions I buy a cd, I want it in a plastic case with nice album artwork, not in a little cardboard sleeve.
oooo did it smell like new software when you guys opened it? New software and electronics should be turned into a cologne/perfume for nerds.