WinInfo Daily News   |   Windows IT Pro
in

SuperSite Blog

Microsoft launches Windows 7 blog

Looks like the Windows 7 information blackout is finally over. I received an email from "Steven Sinofsky" (though I honestly wonder about that) this morning, which reads as follows:

a quick heads up

Howdy,

We haven’t been in touch directly in a while, but I wanted to give you a heads up about a new blog that we are starting this week.  As we lead up to a series of events this fall that will feature Windows 7, we thought it would be fun for us to start a blog about how we make Windows 7.  The blog will be hosted (and written) by myself and Jon DeVaan and will focus on the overall engineering aspects of building Windows 7.  Think of it as a companion to the overall external communications about Windows 7.

I ask that you not discuss or write about this till the blog posts since we aren’t really letting folks know in advance and we would not want to offend anyone. :-)

The blog will be hosted on http://blogs.msdn.com.

--Steven Sinofsky

Apparently, they decided not to wait too long. The blog is now available and the initial post has some interesting info:

Welcome to our first post on a new blog from Microsoft—the Engineering Windows 7 blog, or E7 for short. E7 is hosted by the two senior engineering managers for the Windows 7 product, Jon DeVaan and Steven Sinofsky. Jon and Steven, along with members of the engineering team will post, comment, and participate in this blog.

Beginning with this post together we are going to start looking forward towards the “Windows 7” project. We know there are tons of questions about the specifics of the project and strong desire to know what’s in store for the next major release of Windows. Believe us, we are just as excited to start talking about the release. Over the past 18 months since Windows Vista’s broad availability, the team has been hard at work creating the next Windows product.

The audience of enthusiasts, bloggers, and those that are the most passionate about Windows represent the folks we are dedicating this blog to. With this blog we’re opening up a two-way discussion about how we are making Windows 7. Windows has all the challenges of every large scale software project—picking features, designing them, developing them, and delivering them with high quality. Windows has an added challenge of doing so for an extraordinarily diverse set of customers. As a team and as individuals on the team we continue to be humbled by this responsibility.

We strongly believe that success for Windows 7 includes an open and honest, and two-way, discussion about how we balance all of these interests and deliver software on the scale of Windows. We promise and will deliver such a dialog with this blog.

Planning a product like Windows involves systematic learning from customers of all types. In terms of planning the release we’ve been working with a wide variety of customers and partners (PC makers, hardware developers, enterprise customers, developers, and more) since the start of the project. We also continue our broad consumer learning through telemetry (Customer Experience Improvement Program), usability studies, and more. One area this blog will soon explore is all the different ways we learn from customers and the marketplace that inform the release.

We have two significant events for developers and the overall ecosystem around Windows this fall. The Professional Developers Conference (PDC) on October 27 and the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) the following week both represent the first venues where we will provide in-depth technical information about Windows 7. This blog will provide context over the next 2+ months with regular posts about the behind the scenes development of the release and continue through the release of the product.

In leading up to this blog we have seen a lot of discussion in blogs about what Microsoft might be trying to accomplish by maintaining a little bit more control over the communication around Windows 7 (some might say that this is a significant understatement). We, as a team, definitely learned some lessons about “disclosure” and how we can all too easily get ahead of ourselves in talking about features before our understanding of them is solid. Our intent with Windows 7 and the pre-release communication is to make sure that we have a reasonable degree of confidence in what we talk about when we do talk. Again, top of mind for us is the responsibility we feel to make sure we are not stressing priorities, churning resource allocations, or causing strategic confusion among the tens of thousands of partners and customers who care deeply and have much invested in the evolution of Windows.

Related to disclosure is the idea of how we make sure not to set expectations around the release that end up disappointing you—features that don’t make it, claims that don’t stick, or support we don’t provide. Starting from the first days of developing Windows 7, we have committed as a team to “promise and deliver”. That’s our goal—share with you what we’re going to get done, why we’re doing it, and deliver it with high quality and on time.

We’re excited about this blog. As active bloggers on Microsoft’s intranet we are both looking forward to turning our attention and blogging energies towards the community outside Microsoft. We know the ins and outs of blogging and expect to have fun, provide great information, and also make a few mistakes. We know we’ll misspeak or what we say will be heard differently than we intended. We’re not worried. All we ask is that we have a dialog based on mutual respect and the shared goal of making a great release of Windows 7.

Our intent is to post “regularly”. We’ll watch the comments and we will definitely participate both in comments and potentially in follow-up posts as required. We will make sure that members of the Windows 7 development team represent themselves as such as well. While we want to keep the dialog out in the open, please feel free to use email to steven.sinofsky@microsoft.com should you wish to. In particular, email is a good way to suggest topics we might have a chance to discuss on the blog.

With that, we conclude our welcome post and ask you to stay tuned and join us in this dialog about the engineering of Windows 7.

Steven and Jon

Please note the availability of this blog in several other languages via the links on the nav pane. These posts are also created by members of our development team and we welcome dialog on these sites as well. We will continue to expand the list in other languages based on feedback.

Published Aug 14 2008, 04:24 PM by pthurrott
Filed under:

Comments

 

Josh_Miller said:

What no RSS?  That's lame.  No one actually GOES to blogs.

August 14, 2008 3:27 PM
 

Waethorn said:

Ok developers can run the course over new whitepapers on API featuresets and such, but the populous at large would rather see some nice screenshots (or videos).  Microsoft has always been fairly open about demo'ing stuff ahead of time.  Hopefully we'll see some of that around PDC and WinHEC.

I do hope they have a public beta that's much better than what was released during Vista Beta 2 though.  The performance of that was terrible, but RC-1 fixed that.  Unfortunately, many people didn't see RC-1, so they considered Beta 2 to be indicative of the quality (and performance) of the shipping product.  Luckily it wasn't.

August 14, 2008 3:31 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

There's a note there (on the right) about that: Syndication coming soon. Sorry for the delay.

August 14, 2008 3:31 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Waethorn

Betas are always slower. They have a LOT more test code in them to help figure out the bugs that the beta flushes.

Release Candidates, on the other hand, are generally VERY close to release code - often the final RC is bit-for-bit identical except for the numbering.

August 14, 2008 3:34 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

The delay in getting the RSS feed hooked up in time may have been due to some bloggers not respecting the embargo and posting before the site was active. That meant Microsoft either had to take it live early or get people connecting to a dead link.

August 14, 2008 3:45 PM
 

Blog do Windows 7 no ar! - Guia do PC said:

Pingback from  Blog do Windows 7 no ar! - Guia do PC

August 14, 2008 4:10 PM
 

Waethorn said:

@mike:

The big issue is that if they make a beta available to the public, it shouldn't have major performance issues.  This is where the population of tech enthusiasts will give their initial response to the software.  Poor performance to the point of near-unusability shouldn't be their primary retort.

Maybe they should make sure that "Community Technology Previews" should consist of RC-quality code only.

August 14, 2008 4:33 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Waethorn

The problem is that betas actually do serve a real purpose, they test the code in hardware and software combinations that would be way too diverse to test in the lab.

What they've become is a chance for people to play with new stuff or, in the case of FOSS code (or most Google apps), their permanent state since admitting you shipped might mean taking responsibility for it actually being ready.

What Microsoft used to do was issue Technical Betas to an invited group and Marketing Betas to the tire kickers. Now, it seems that's been renamed to Community Technology Preview for the limited tech beta and Beta for the marketing beta.

August 14, 2008 4:43 PM
 

drylight said:

This is great news. A record of all the things they will be copying from Apple. Microsoft, just another copier company.

August 14, 2008 6:49 PM
 

Waethorn said:

"Now, it seems that's been renamed to Community Technology Preview for the limited tech beta and Beta for the marketing beta."

All I'm saying is that a "Public Beta" should be called a "Technology Preview", and should contain near-complete code without performance issues - basically an RC.  Tech previews should highlight the functionality of the software, WITHOUT degradated performance.  "Beta" quality code should require registration to access, because the general public shouldn't experience pre-release software with performance issues or bugs, otherwise their UX with the poor performance will sway their opinion towards the negative.  Speed is one of the first things the general public will notice about a program.  Keeping the general public in the dark until the code is relatively polished might improve the company's image.  People should be able to test the bits before they're 100% complete, but it should still *appear* to be complete, even if some people make suggestions to add features in a subsequent update.  The RC's are the perfect time to do that.  Currently, a CTP is in the pre-beta to beta stage, which doesn't seem to make as much sense.  Code should be tested and bug-fixed before being released to the "Community".

It's mostly just a nomenclature thing more than anything else.

I'm not sure exactly how Microsoft's internal processes work, but I would imagine that it would better to think about performance WHILE coding, not afterwards - kind of like how they think about security now.  Lock down performance on complete features, then move on to new features in subsequent releases or job tasks.  With the scale of a company like Microsoft, I have no idea how their teams can work with a process like this:

a)  develop a feature

b)  fix xxx bugs/security after bug reporting

c)  recode it to improve performance

It would seem that it would involve a lot of backtracking.  Attempting to simplify the code at the beginning should help with b and c.  Obviously this is oversimplified, so I have no idea how their initial planning stages start, just that the feature set in the development process of Vista seemed to take precedence over optimized code.  What I'd be looking forward to is to have more separated, simpler processes for some of this stuff.  Kind of like how 3dfx had a unique API and graphics processor that was extremely simple, and yet very powerful and fast at the same time.  Maybe this will change in future versions of Windows, since there has been talk (by Microsoft?) that they'll segregate the GUI into something that is more akin to X-Windows.  Features are very important, and Vista is better than XP because of some spectacular feature additions, but from an observation standpoint, the later development process of Vista seemed kind of shaky with the first beta releases.  Ultimately, it worked in the end.  Performance should be one of those key code-outline decisions though.

I think that with the coming modularization work on future versions of Windows, it'll be easier to correct bugs, while simultaneously making it easier to add features.

August 14, 2008 6:53 PM
 

Waethorn said:

"Microsoft, just another copier company."

....oh, you mean like Xerox - where Apple got their UI design from?

August 14, 2008 6:54 PM
 

Ocean said:

Even if that were true, it's not where the idea came from...it's what you do with it.

August 14, 2008 7:30 PM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

I cannot wait to be apart of the Windows Seven beta program. I was not prepared to participate in the Vista beta, but now I have a second HDD to place an OS on. It will be sweet to see what Microsoft has in mind.  The beta program does serve a valuable purpose, to give Microsoft actual user performance data to get the OS up to snuff.

However, I do have to agree with Waethorn that the strength of the OS code for Seven has to be much stronger than Vista's CTP code was.  A lot of the issues that plagued Vista RTM must be resolved walking into Seven. What I believe we should be looking for in Seven is a faster OS speed, memory efficient, smoother app transition, prepared for cloud computing, and greater security in place.

I'd like to see security wise a major improvement on the Windows Firewall, greater layers of defense against rootkits, and programs that stop malicious code from executing. Hopefully the work on IE 8 will be a significant enough of an overhaul to equal up to or surpass Firefox 3. I'm sure Seven will have an improved version of Windows Defender, however some of the original tools from the first XP beta of Defender should be restored.

I would like to see a better gaming system in place. I would love to see dedicated app for installation, setup, and execution of games on the PC platform. Most importantly, the OS handling of PC games starts to mirror what the consoles do. I know that's asking for a lot, My feeling is this. If you are going to set the bar, make it a high one.

I'd like to see WMP with iPod sync capabilities and support for Apple media file formats. Also the grahpic equalizer in WMP is terrible. This is one area where WMP needs an overhaul. Instead of the cover view, how about the entire cover leaflet per album? All of the data you'd find in a CD booklet as a downloadable option in WMP? I think Microsoft should work with Dolby and THX, to have high quality audio API's that get certified by both audio organizations.

An improvement to various Windows apps like Photo Gallery, DVD Maker, and other apps to answer the iLife suite. A improved plug and play system with a database of approved drivers via the web at RTM launch would be nice. I know MS does this to some degree, but an even greater one should be done.

Bottom line, Seven should be much stronger, seamless, and smoother than what we've seen in Vista. Built on Vista's strength and eliminate any weaknesses.

Peace.

August 14, 2008 7:37 PM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

P.S. - The actual Engineering Windows 7 blog does have an RSS feed. I just did it in I.E. 7.

Later.

August 14, 2008 7:47 PM
 

Lindy said:

@subzero "I was not prepared to participate in the Vista beta"

Sure you were.  Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 are the same kernel

apcmag.com/microsoft_replaces_vista_kernel_in_sp1.htm.

MS wisely chose to finish Server 2008 and release it when it was stable to the public and not p!ss off the cash cow, "big business".  Vista's SP1 upgrade is HUGE (434.5meg) and it basically brought Vista up to the stable level of Windows 2008...the same kernel version.

So basically anyone that bought Vista before SP1 paid money to be part of a Beta, and by doing so helped MS flush out the bugs/fund the effort to finish Server 2008.  How nice of them.

Side Note: I think I remember Paul spouting off some cr@ptastic flame bait about Leopard finally coming out of beta when they released Leopard 10.5.2 or .3 because of the file size, yet is was smaller than Vista SP1.  Hypocrisy is such a bad character flaw.

August 14, 2008 10:21 PM
 

gorath said:

@ subzerohitman721

You do realise that THX certification would require you to pay big money for engineers and analysts to come to your vieweing room, and test and measure the frequency response and decay times of your room, amplifiers and speakers, right? It's an incredibly complex procedure.

As for dolby. MS don't have to do anything to support it. It already is. If you have an audio interface (soundcard) that can handle dolby, then you're all set.

@Lindy:

wow, you like to make some insane conclusions, right?

The reason for updating the kenrel version in SP1 to the same as Server2008 was so that the update cycle would be synchronised between the two.

It wasn't a secret, and the intention to do this was stated long before Vista hit RC2 stage.

Also, I was told (possibbly incorrectly) that the reason Server required a new kernel was to facillitate functions that were only necessary in a server system.

There's no point holding back Vista, whilst testing out these additional functions that will never get used.

August 15, 2008 4:52 AM
 

drylight said:

Vista is so plagued with problems, hated, security flaws, no style, taste, horrific UI that they'd want to move on to the next car crash that is Windows, as soon as possible. It is so overshadowed by a much superior OS in OS X that it's amusing to watch them wade through the mire. OS X has non-existent malware and viruses, much less security problems, an awesome UI, style and grace in comparison.

August 15, 2008 5:02 AM
 

Master3 said:

@drylight

That's nice.

Do you have anything intelligent to say now?

August 15, 2008 6:37 AM
 

Lindy said:

@gorath "Also, I was told (possibbly incorrectly) that the reason Server required a new kernel was to facillitate functions that were only necessary in a server system."

?????  Windows 2008 did not get a new kernel, it got a finished kernel in Feb of 2008.  Vista pre-SP1 and 2008 had the same kernel.  Vista got anew kernel.  MS says it was to match the feature set of 2008 for the corporate features if you believe that load of dung.

I beta tested 2008, and when installed on hardware it did not have a driver for (VMware AMD NIC) it would pop up that trouble shooting app and try to autofix its self.  When it could not fix its self, it would pop up a dialog box and say "VISTA" could not fix the problem.  A clear indication that it was the Vista kernel but a beta kernel revision higher.

This is nothing new for MS.  XP and Server 2003 (Pre-R2) did the same thing.  XP 64bit is Windows 2003 64bit.  The server versions strip out the consumer stuff, and the desktop versions strip out options you can install on server, like DHCP, DNS, and many other add-ons to the server version.  Nor is this different than from OS X Leopard and Leopard server, or say Ubuntu and Ubuntu server.  Except in the non-ms cases the server and desktop OS usually release on the same day.

There difference here is Vista was clearly not ready.  Had it been MS would have been happy to release 2008 at the same time.  However Vista was so dam late they put it out and the consumers paid the price first and MS has paid the price now because of its poor acceptance and negative view it gets.  Windows 7 is nothing more than Vista SP2 or Vista SE or Vista R2, all tricks MS has played in the past.  Weahorn wants screen shots, well turn on your Vista PC and look at Windows 7.

Sure Windows 7 will have some new features but they will be vastly out numbered by the bug fixes and performance enhancements and now probably massive security tweaks after Black Hat.

Again MS thanks you for funding the Windows 2008 beta project.

August 15, 2008 6:45 AM
 

johnpapola said:

I bet Window 7 will be their best release ever. Steven Sinofsky clearly knows how to run a tight ship.  I only question whether talking Windows 7 now will reinforce the sense that MS is anxious to turn the page on Vista.

August 15, 2008 7:53 AM
 

Lost Drive Blog » re: Microsoft launches Windows 7 blog said:

Pingback from  Lost Drive Blog » re: Microsoft launches Windows 7 blog

August 15, 2008 10:02 AM
 

gorath said:

Wow, Lindy, you really are quite, quite mad.

Show me an OS, where a new version's new features AREN't outnumbered by bug fixes, performance enhancments, and security tweaks?

As for Vista et all having big security improvements after black hat, well, isn't that kinda the point of black hat?

Why so much anger? If windows makes you so mental, then why don't you just ignore it?

4x4s (SUVs) drive me mad when I see them clogging up rural roads and causing massive congestion in city centres, but I don't go on 4x4 forums and let off both barrels. In fact, I just largely ignore them.

August 15, 2008 10:24 AM
 

Waethorn said:

"Waethorn wants screen shots, well turn on your Vista PC and look at Windows 7."

Obviously I'm talking about screenshots of the new features.  You don't honestly expect it to be the equivalent of a Mac OS X release do you?  Every release of Windows had noticeable differences.  Windows 98 was much better than 95.  ME got rid of the commandline boot environment, and XP was a huge step forward, as was Vista.  The differences between OS X releases were miniscule by comparison, and even the beta processes on OS X releases are a joke.

August 15, 2008 11:34 AM
 

Lindy said:

@gorath, mad???  Is my text all caps or bold in IE?  Maybe you have a malware problem, if so I suggest a format and a re-install to address the problem.  Or do you have a mood detecter widget on your sidebar?  Was it an "Ultimate" extra download?  One of three that MS has released:)

I did not pay to be part of the Vista beta, why would I be mad?

August 15, 2008 11:59 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Waethorn

A minor clarification for something that many people misunderstand...

None of the Windows 9x operating systems required a command line boot environment (or a real mode boot environment). Any real mode boot was done only if needed for backward compatibility.

Windows 95 would, as part of its boot process, check for the existance of real mode drivers in a CONFIG.SYS file and if they were present would load them. A similar thing was done with any files or commands present in an AUTOEXEC.BAT file so any settings could be inherited by later MS-DOS sessions.

If there was no CONFIG.SYS or AUTOEXEC.BAT file present on the system, the boot process would switch the processor up to protected mode without pause.

August 15, 2008 12:06 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Lindy

Apple's current OS, OS X 10.5 is currently at 10.5.4 (if I've kept up)

By your definition, anyone who paid for 10.5 prior to the final bug fixes that ship right before 10.6 will have paid for a beta.

Can we safely assume you are equally mad about being in the Leopard beta?

August 15, 2008 12:09 PM
 

Lindy said:

Micorsoft Mikey I was wondering what took you so long to pipe in, I mean almost every other post on this site is stamped with your good looks:)  Were you in some rah, rah meeting at MS HQ, pumping up the troops by showing them Mohave videos?:)

I will be the first to admit that all software has bugs, including Leopard.  I will also admit that I think its NOW safe to use Vista if you have to use Windows and I would recommend it to any potential Windows user that could not be convinced to not ditch Windows totally.

That said, the launch, adoption rate (per user base), teething problems real and hyped, employees admitting problems with emails on the internet, user satisfaction, press coverage, and amount of overall negativity expressed both real and hype is night and day when comparing Leopard to Vista.

In fact I would go so far as to say it Leopard was stupendous success compared to Vista.  There is no Mohave effort under way to convince the masses that its "ok" to use Leopard now, because its not needed.

So no I am not "mad" Leopard/iLive 08 came with my new Mac, not one bit.  I may even pay for Snow Leopard if stripping out the PPC code shows a significant improvement in performance, or Mail/address book/iCal gains full Exchange 2007 support, because Entourage is a horrible product.

August 15, 2008 1:46 PM
 

gorath said:

You can't have negative press at apple though. The hordes of maniacs will be lighting their torches, and blazing a pitchfork ridden path toyour door.

It's also very, very, very easy to convince some apple users that nothing is wrong with any apple product.

Hell, even the guy that paid top dolar for his system to be configured for audio recording at purchase, Which wasn't, so I had to do it when he arrived in our studio, he thought all you ever got was great service. And he still does, even though he's about a grand out of pocket.

August 15, 2008 2:05 PM
 

Lindy said:

Apple must have earned that somehow gorath.  Sure its hype, but you just cant buy that kind of attention.  At one time it was not like that for them.  

Also at one time MS was loved, but people love to hate them now.  Again MS must have earned that somehow.

August 15, 2008 2:28 PM
 

Waethorn said:

@mike:

I know that already.  It's just the Windows ME pulled it entirely.  The only way you could get it in Windows ME was by creating a boot floppy, or by booting off the CD.  There wasn't a boot option available on a normal install, unlike 98 or 95.

August 15, 2008 2:44 PM
 

Waethorn said:

"It's also very, very, very easy to convince some apple users that nothing is wrong with any apple product."

True for the "geniuses" or Mossberg's herd (at least when Apple flips the bill anyway).  It's pretty easy to "switch back" some that don't get satisfaction from their technical support though.  When the "geniuses" flat out refuse to acknowledge a problem, customers do get ornery.  At least, around these parts they do.  Maybe we're just too smart for an american company to pull the wool over our eyes.

August 15, 2008 2:53 PM
 

shark47 said:

Another thread successfully hijacked by the iCabal! Ignore the trolls, people.

August 15, 2008 3:07 PM
 

gorath said:

@ Lindy:

"Apple must have earned that somehow gorath. "

See, I don't think they ever did. All I see is hype, hype, and more hype. Oh, and sheep.

Hating MS seems to be the "in thing" among those that want to "stick it to the man", and currently, apple fully endorses these folk.

August 15, 2008 3:07 PM
 

shark47 said:

I can think of 2 reasons why Mac fanatics would visit Windows sites to comment about how much better OS X is compared to Vista:

1. They are probably Mac geniuses trying to get new customers.

2. They're jealous of Windows' marketshare and look for bad news about Windows all over the web to convince themselves that they did the right thing by switching.

3. The more bad news they spread about Windows in general and Vista in particular means more users switching to their favorite platform. I guess the day time job for many of these people is to manufacture stories and spread them all over the web.

It's clear that they've never used Vista - even thought they will claim to have used it extensively - and the only thing they "know" about it is that it sucks.

August 15, 2008 3:22 PM
 

Lindy said:

Yeah hype and sheep that is how Apple has become so popular and had tremendous sales growth over the last few years.  That sounds logical to me.  Maybe MS should go buy a flock or 2, it may bring them some good press.

And all those millions upon millions that Microsoft has paid out in legal penalties  is just people/governments trying to "stick it to the man" because none of it was justified.  That also sounds logical to me.

August 15, 2008 3:22 PM
 

gorath said:

Fair enough, trolls ignored.

Holy crap, have you read some of the comments on the Window 7 blog? Completely, certifiably insane. I particularly love the one that suggest, honsetly, that they should just use the Linux codebase, and make a windowing system for it, as this would eliminate all their problems, including compatability?!? WTF?

Are these people on PCP, or Shrooms?

August 15, 2008 3:25 PM
 

Lindy said:

4. Its very easy to push the "shark47" button and get a reaction.

August 15, 2008 3:25 PM
 

shark47 said:

"I can think of 2 reasons why Mac fanatics would visit Windows sites to comment about how much better OS X is compared to Vista:"

Guess I came up with 3 after all. Woohoo!

August 15, 2008 3:25 PM
 

shark47 said:

"4. Its very easy to push the "shark47" button and get a reaction."

Hey, you have a sense of humor too when you're not rabidly discussing OS X and Windows.

August 15, 2008 3:29 PM
 

Lindy said:

click....click....click:)  Peace out brother...the weekend here!!!

August 15, 2008 3:33 PM
 

Waethorn said:

"click....click....click"

If you had a mouse with more than one button, it wouldn't take as many clicks.  ;)

August 15, 2008 4:21 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

gorath

The person commenting on the Win7 blog you're talking about was actually parrotting an actual paid pundit from a major industry outlet.

Believe it or not, the original article said that killing Windows, switching to Linux and writing some custom window manager updates was the best way for Microsoft to "innovate".

And some idiot makes a living being that clueless.

August 15, 2008 4:28 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Waethorn

Yep, the compatibility boot was pulled when instrumented builds in a beta showed that real mode drivers were down to virtually non-existant.

Still, enough people actually think Windows 9x booted up MS-DOS and then loaded on top of this "hidden MS-DOS" to make sure it's clear. You'd be amazed how many times I've seen Mac and Linux (and before them OS/2) fanatics insist that Win95 ran on MS-DOS and had to explain - s l o w l y - that they were wrong.

These kind of misinformed idiots just love to repeat things that aren't true and don't seem to have either the skills to read or the honesty to care.

August 15, 2008 4:33 PM
 

Master3 said:

"In fact I would go so far as to say it Leopard was stupendous success compared to Vista.  There is no Mohave effort under way to convince the masses that its "ok" to use Leopard now, because its not needed."

Of course not, Lindy. Apple hasn't had a horde of bias tech writers, clueless fanatics, and otherwise dishonest people that have made a sport out of bashing that OS in Print, on the net and on Podcasts 24/7!

Those guys have done that with Vista, all the while deliberately covering up the multitude of problems with Leopard.

And to sit there like a totally arrogant dumbarse after all of that and say post what you said is just classic Apple user behavior.

And a OS that is being used by 10s of millions of more people than all of the OSX kitty versions combined is a failure while Leopard on it's own is a "stupendous success"?

Seriously that iFan BS is only making you believe you have common sense.

August 15, 2008 5:18 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Master3

The lack of ability of doing math by the Mac Trolls must have some reason.

I'm thinking:

A bug in the OS X calculator and they know too little basic arithmetic to notice

or

Spending too much time doing "Mac stuff" like editing their vlog rather than "PC stuff" like spreadsheets.

August 15, 2008 5:44 PM
 

gorath said:

@ Master3

"And to sit there like a totally arrogant dumbarse after all of that and say post what you said is just classic Apple user behavior."

Well, to be fair, it' not classic Apple user behaviour, it's classic Apple fanatic behaviour.

@mikegalos, mac stuff V pc stuff, LMAO!!

August 15, 2008 6:35 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

gorath

To be fair, it's both classic Apple fanatic behavior and classic Apple corporate behavior.

August 15, 2008 6:37 PM
 

Master3 said:

Thanks for the correction.

It does have to be noted that level-headed Apple users do not engage in this immature stuff, and are perfectly reasonable people.

August 15, 2008 7:58 PM
 

runner7775 said:

Johnpapola,

I hope Windows 7 is the bet release yet, they've got a good manager.  I hope 8, 9, and can be said the same about.  

Lindy, the size of the service pack downloaded could be anywhere from about 70 megs to hundreds.  Same with OS X I believe.  Silly to compare. Besides Leopard has had more patches since then and so has vista.

Mike can you explain how Windows 95, 98, and ME booted?  How did DOS play a role?  I might be misunderstanding what you are saying about them.  On my old Win 3.1 computer I have to boot it manually from DOS.(  Its still running strong 16 years later.  Sorta retired it a few weeks ago.)  Obviously on 95 you don't have to do that.

August 15, 2008 8:37 PM
 

Ocean said:

>>Were you in some rah, rah meeting at MS HQ, pumping up the troops by showing them Mohave videos?<<

Ok, I'll admit it:  I laughed.

>>Are these people on PCP, or Shrooms?<<

Yes.

August 15, 2008 10:43 PM
 

Ocean said:

Scrolling through the comments I see very little that requires a new OS.  Lots of people complaining about the UI...boot time...the installation...hibernation and sleep...

Thats Service Pack stuff, or am I missing something?

Everyone seems to hate the registry though.  Mike, got a comment on that?

August 15, 2008 10:54 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Ocean

Hating the registry is a popular meme but the only specific complaints I've seen are that some apps don't write clean uninstalls and leave stuff in the registry.

The benefits of a registry over the myriad text config files that used to be used in Windows 1-3.x and are still used in Unix style operating systems are (among others):

Security granularity at any level down to the individual entry.

Ease of remote management.

Ease of writing generic management apps vs a standard API that works for all files

August 16, 2008 12:39 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

runner7775

OK, here's the quick version of the boot in Win 95 as I remember it (It's been a decade or so since I worked on it so it's almost certain I'm missing something):

Power comes on

The processor starts in Real Mode (all x86 chips start in real mode since the 80286)

Check for CONFIG.SYS

If present

 - load MS-DOS minimal system

 - load real mode device drivers identified with DEVICE=*.SYS entry

Check for AUTOEXEC.BAT

If present

 - load MS-DOS minimal system if not already loaded

 - execute statements in AUTOEXEC.BAT

Switch processor to 386Protect Mode

If MS-DOS minimal system exists

 - use MS-DOS minimal system if present as template of System VM

Begin Windows OS init in System VM

Load SYSTEM.INI if present and process entries (generally a stub)

Load WIN.INI if present and process entries (generally a stub)

Load registry Local Machine hive and process entries

Init GDI graphics engine

Init Window manager

Process logon

Load registry Local User hive and process entries

Create Desktop

Again, that's from memory and simplifies some details. Let me know if that isn't clear or I missed some detail you care about.

If you really want the details, I'd suggest a copy of "Microsoft Windows 95 Training: Hands-On, Shelf-Paced Training for Supporting Windows 95 (Training Kit) (Paperback)" available at Amazon for under a dollar. Note that it IS 1200 pages of training material and shipping might be a bit high.

The URL for the book is www.amazon.com/.../ref=sr_1_3

August 16, 2008 12:56 AM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

@gorath

I'm aware of the dolby digital certified audio cards. However, something doesn't sound right even with good speakers. (I'm a former music major with the hearing ability known as perfect pitch. I'm usually not wrong but something doesn't sound right with those cards.) I am also aware of the THX certification. Most Bose computer speakers are THX certified and the THX group does do assist people with the certification process. I know THX is a costly business but there are some audiophiles like me who are willing to pay for it.

I just think there needs to be more native API's in Windows to better render sound. Also a good music recording app native in Windows would be appreciated. What I mean is something as good if not better than GarageBand. Also I know for certain that the WMP equalizer and presets are garbage and needs an overhaul.

Peace.

August 16, 2008 1:35 AM
 

Waethorn said:

"a good music recording app native in Windows would be appreciated"

I usually recommend either these:

www.sonycreativesoftware.com/.../acidfamily.asp

or for more advanced home users (on a budget), looking to get into the industry, I recommend this:

www.cakewalk.com/.../default.asp

Both are extremely good, although the Cakewalk software has a higher learning curve.  As a note:  I've used Steinberg's Cubase before, and I absolutely hate it with a passion.  Reason is also a pretty decent platform, but I wouldn't rely on it as a primary music application.

"Also I know for certain that the WMP equalizer and presets are garbage and needs an overhaul."

Most sound chips/cards have their own EQ settings that are better.  Each codec chip has a slightly different way of presenting baseline audio, so the WMP options aren't the best option to choose.  For example, on notebooks with Realtek HD audio codecs, usually the "Powerful" option in the Windows Vista EQ settings is the best balance of bass and treble for underpowered notebook speakers.  Of course, it's all up to the individual's preference too.

August 16, 2008 11:34 AM
 

shark47 said:

While MS had the right idea with the Vista versions, it clearly backfired. First of all, as Paul has mentioned on numerous occasions, some of the differences between versions were arbitrary. (That said, I don't agree with Paul that business users don't need WMP and other media components.) Secondly, Vista Home Basic is terrible. That said, I really don't know what they can do about it. They definitely cannot come up with a "one size fits all" solution like OS X.

August 16, 2008 12:46 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Shark

There really aren't many versions. Essentially, we've got the Full Product (Ultimate) and several versions that have features removed that are likely to not be used by their target group and are discounted to reflect that.

First, let's strip out the specialty ones (The "N" versions for EU compliance that nobody buys) and Enterprise since that's not sold at retail.

What we end up with are: Business, Home Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate

Home Basic really should be called "Vista trimmed back to run on that old computer you really should have replaced" but that's awfully hard to put on a label.

So really there are two versions that are optimized and discounted: Home (Premium) and Business along with one version that has everything and goes for full price.

Home Premium pretty much is the best choice for anyone not on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most home users would never want.

Business pretty much is the best choice for anyone on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most business users would never want.

If the discounted packages don't fit your needs (and no package will be perfect for everyone) then you can always buy Ultimate at full price.

What I've found is that people complaining about the versions really mean this:

I'm a computer hobbiest and I want Vista Ultimate (not that I really need the corporate stuff but I like having everything) but I still want the "Home" discount.

August 16, 2008 1:42 PM
 

gorath said:

@ mike, whilst I agree that in practice, there aren;t that many versions of Vista I still think having them all around can cause confusion to people.

I do honestly believe it would have been better to scrap the home basic version, and have at most only 3 avaialbe, namely, home premium, business, and ultimate.

What I'd like to see however, is simply ultimate, or business.

August 16, 2008 2:04 PM
 

gorath said:

@ subzerohitman721

The sound output from your computer will depend very heavily on the eventual digital-analogue converter that is used, whether that be on a crappy SoundBlaster card, or on an Apogee or Prism D/A.

I can verify that if you play stereo audio through a high-end audio mastering workstation, ad then play it in media player, the sound is identical.

And, no disrespect, but I have to have a little giggle at an "audiophile" who claims that the EQ in media player is flawed.

Why do you need an EQ if you want to hear the music as intended?

August 16, 2008 2:08 PM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

@gorath,

Because if you're a music teacher, preparing for a contest, you might want to turn up or down different sections of your band recordings. Many of my high school and college teachers did so, to find chords that might not sound correct. I'm sure there are other reasons, thats one of the few that I can practially state.

Especially since high schools and colleges play some stuff thats very unusual for performances. For the Texas region, the UIL contest usually demand strong performances.

August 17, 2008 7:36 AM
 

gorath said:

Sorry, subzero, but that's an uneducated use of EQ, at best. If you really want to be precise enough to be able to pick out individual notes or chords, then you're really looking at something along the lines of a parametric, or paragraphic EQ. They're pretty specialised, and aren;t likely of making into the default load-out of any consumer oriented playback device soon, or ever, ideally.

August 17, 2008 4:13 PM
 

Waethorn said:

"Home Premium pretty much is the best choice for anyone not on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most home users would never want."

I disagree.  I find the Ultimate is the best choice for an unmanaged corporate network, since it offers Bitlocker, as well as the usual Vista Business features such as remote desktop support.

Many users on an unmanaged network will use the same PC for home, so having the multimedia features is a bonus.

In a managed network, obviously those options need to be locked down, but Ultimate would be a smarter investment in the event that the network in question is upgraded later with a server.  Otherwise the company would have to upgrade user systems to Business/Enterprise, and if the network isn't server-based yet, a startup company would find a volume license agreement with Software Assurance (in order to get Vista Enterprise) a fairly hefty investment.  With Ultimate already loaded on a machine here or there, there is no additional investment required.  Ultimate OEM is also cheaper than Business OEM + SA.  If Bitlocker were one of the primary purchase reasons, I'd have to recommend Ultimate.  SA offers other benefits, I know, but for smaller companies that don't have central management, I'd say Ultimate is the smarter choice overall.

August 17, 2008 6:18 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Waethorn

And for users like you, Ultimate is the obvious choice.

The real question is how many businesses want their average employee desktop to have:

DVD Playback

Media Center

HD support for Movie Maker

Parental Controls

Bitlocker

Multilanguage UI

Subsystem for Unix-based Applications

Out of these, I could see Bitlocker for laptops and Unix app support in some specialty cases. I could see getting Ultimate for laptops now that there are good ways of managing keys but stil don't see it for the majority of business desktops.

August 17, 2008 6:34 PM
 

tayme said:

@jp - "I only question whether talking Windows 7 now will reinforce the sense that MS is anxious to turn the page on Vista."

And if they do want to turn the page on Vista, is that really a problem? Apple was very ready to turn the page on the first AppleTV and the iPhone, right?

--tayme

August 17, 2008 7:08 PM
 

Waethorn said:

" I could see getting Ultimate for laptops now that there are good ways of managing keys but stil don't see it for the majority of business desktops."

See, that's my point.  The majority of business desktops will be connected to a managed server-based environment.  Once connected, Ultimate can be locked down.  

For non-server based unmanaged environments, having Bitlocker installed on an OEM version of Windows in a workplace is a necessity.  Unmanaged networks still need to have those options, and I would say that the majority of unmanaged networks would do better with Ultimate than with Home Premium, since it offers features only available via a volume license agreement to get Enterprise.  Remember that Windows licenses in volume license agreements are only UPGRADES, not full versions, although you pay MUCH more for them than OEM versions cost (albeit ON TOP OF the price of the bundled OEM version you get with a PC), so if a company still doesn't manage their network, they're likely small enough that they don't have a volume license agreement.  Getting an OEM copy of Ultimate makes perfect business sense to them because the investment is much more economical, and they'll still get access to features only available in Enterprise.

Also, if you have mobile workers that don't VPN into the workplace (remember - this is UNmanaged environments we're talking about here), they'll often have all of their business data on the local hard drive.  This is the argument for having Bitlocker.

The best option for small businesses that already have a server/AD-DC is to use Vista Business+SA-on-OEM.  If they don't have a server, it's Ultimate w/ optional SA-on-OEM.

As a note:  Even when using SBS, Microsoft still recommends using OneCare on client workstations.  I haven't tried OneCare for Server on SBS 08 yet, so I don't know what happens to the "OneCare Circle" micro-management that you normally have on PC's when installing it at home.  SBS has always had simplified user folder redirection to the server, so I also don't know how client backups are done, but supposedly it is still done on the server end.  The normal SBS backup would back up the entire server anyway, so I don't know what else OneCare for Server does about backup, besides monitoring it.

August 18, 2008 11:00 AM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

gorath said:

Sorry, subzero, but that's an uneducated use of EQ, at best. If you really want to be precise enough to be able to pick out individual notes or chords, then you're really looking at something along the lines of a parametric, or paragraphic EQ. They're pretty specialised, and aren;t likely of making into the default load-out of any consumer oriented playback device soon, or ever, ideally.

My Comments:

You know, I think you might be right. Its just that a lot of public school bands don't get state funding and are limited to what they can fund raise. They are also stuck with what they get from the school district. I just have seen that frustration from those teachers and anything that can help them out I am all for.

Peace.

August 18, 2008 10:36 PM

About pthurrott

Paul Thurrott is the guy behind the SuperSite for Windows. Way behind. :)