Whereas Windows Vista has a confusing two-tiered logo program (with separate "Certified for Windows Vista" and "Works with Windows Vista" logos), Windows 7 will have a single logo program, so you either get the logo or you don’t. More info here.
Ok, this is for software.
What about hardware? Systems?
Waethorn
I'd suspect the Windows 7 hardware logo programs will be announced at WinHEC next week since that's the conference for people who make hardware for Windows.
Ahhh smart move for a change. Less confusion for the consumer.
This is pathetically sad.
www.engadget.com/.../microsoft-placing-im-a-pc-recording-booths-outside-apple-stor
Like a $2 hooker working out in the street. "Windows Vista, guaranteed to give you more viruses than a $2 hooker" (tm)
This sounds good, however will Microsoft have stringent standards? I would like to see a much stronger qualifications for Windows 7 certified computers. For guys like me who build of the recommended specs or better, it really isn't so much of an issue. However, for the consumer who walks into a PC retailer, I would like to see Microsoft make it clear what constitutes a Seven machine.
Oh as to the hooker comment, being the fact that OS-X in 2008 had 791 Vulnerabilities to Vista's 76 according to Secunia.com, I think Engadget's Apple bias is showing here.
I think it take big balls to put the booth right infront of the Apple stores. Taking the fight to Apple's backyard is priceless. So far its been all Apple talking and now Microsoft is speaking and stepping up. If Apple's products are so bad, then they've got nothing to worry about. On the otherhand, if 794 vulnerabilities bother you, you might be just a bit worried.
"I think it take big balls to put the booth right infront of the Apple stores."
Microsoft is weak. They have no quality to base any fight against Apple.
Microsoft is showing desperation. Their new brand (Vista) is tarnish and will never recover.
subzero
Actually, Microsoft has pretty stringent standards and have traditionally been a great way to see what was coming in PCs in a couple of years down the road since the certification requirements generally listed what hardware was being phased out with several years warning so hardware vendors had notice. By the way, the specs are not done by Microsoft, they'd done by a group of hardware vendors working with Microsoft to get agreement on where the industry should go.
The problem with the two Vista certification programs was that Microsoft got bullied into there being two rather than the one they'd had earlier. A lot of the reason for that anomaly (and that of having Windowe Vista Basic) had been the six year gap between new operating systems.
If you want to see what the programs are like the program specs are at http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev which is the hardware developers' programs site at Microsoft.
Yeah pretty stringent......
arstechnica.com/.../20080330-the-vista-capable-fiasco-to-hell-with-system-recs.html
Lindy,
Before you make sarcastic comments about a 3 paragraph message, maybe you should actually at least scan all 3 paragraphs.
Seeing how the 2nd of only 3 paragraphs talked about the Vista 2 tier problems and the 1st of only 3 paragraphs talked about the traditional role that the 2nd of only 3 paragraphs complained wasn't followed.
D o I n e e d t o t y p e m o r e s l o w l y ?
Does your copy of Safari take out every other paragraph?
bettieblu
Perhaps the difference between the Mac users who keep advocating against being given choices and Windows users is that for the most part we don't think two choices is mind bogglingly complex.
I guess having a two button mouse was some kind of a test for coping with complexity that only some people passed.
"Taking the fight to Apple's backyard is priceless."
Yes, from the company that (as "mikegalos" proclaims) spends hardly any time at all thinking about Apple.
Can you say "inferiority complex"?
Lame. Desperate. Sad.
"Can you say "inferiority complex"?"
Can't help it, man. When the news media starts publishing every press release from Cupertino as facts, unfortunately, MS has to spend time thinking about it and about how to retaliate.
Like I said, MS does not have the luxury of a fawning media.
By the way, for a so-called peddler of luxury goods (as opposed to the more "pedestrian" Microsoft), Apple seems to spend a lot of time thinking about Microsoft.
"Can you say 'inferiority complex?'"
"Lame. Desperate. Sad."
"By the way, for a so-called peddler of luxury goods (as opposed to the more "pedestrian" Microsoft), Apple seems to spend a lot of time thinking about Microsoft."
The only difference is that Apple IS inferior.
en.wikipedia.org/.../Factoid
"en.wikipedia.org/.../Factoid"
Looking up "factoid" on Wikipedia is cyclic.
(Use a real dictionary next time)
Let's see who is desperate and who care's about technology...
If you look at money available for both corporations to spend on R&D, Advertising and profit, you get the following:
Apple spends 9.1% on Advertising (over 50% more than Microsoft's 5.9%)
Microsoft spends 31.7% on R&D (over twice the 15.2% that Apple spends)
So, Apple's R&D budget is 67% more than their Ad budget
Microsoft's R&D budget is 433% more than their Ad budget
Microsoft is investing in the future, Apple's peddling what they've already got lying around.
Numbers from www.windows-now.com/.../apple-should-count-its-own-beans-first.aspx
Or, put simply:
For every dollar Apple spends on advertising they spend $1.67 on new product development
For every dollar Microsoft spends on advertising they spend $5.33 on new product development
Which is why Microsoft announced a geodistributed cloud operating system and Apple announced that Aluminum was the new White.
Or, putting it in consumer terms:
Of every $10 Apple took in selling things to you, they invested 33 cents on future products
Of that $10 Microsoft took in selling things to you, they invested $1.39 on future products
1/4 the investment of the future from the "innovative underdog" compared to the "entrenched monopoly" seems a little backwards from how it's supposed to work, doesn't it.
Looks like either those terms are backwards or Apple's desparate enough to eat their seed corn.
"Which is why Microsoft announced a geodistributed cloud operating system and Apple announced that Aluminum was the new White."
So why did they move away from aluminum to shiny plastic in the first place?
More like "Aluminum is the old, old white".
Hemlines go up, hemlines go down.
When you're selling fashion you don't sell innovation, you just sell, "New for 2009!!!" even if the "new" is actually retro and the same thing you said was horribly gauche two years earlier. (as long as people don't have their two year old gauche ones still sitting around)
BTW, mike:
I didn't get a chance to post something in an earlier article:
WinAntirus has no EULA. It gets installed without user intervention or permission. A trojan downloader is typically the source of it, and trojan downloaders are often installed when someone clicks one of those "Your computer is infected with x0000 viruses" ad banners after clicking on a Google ad link.
Also: I just wanted to say that UEFI is now usable. The slow boot bug was caused by a poorly-written Intel EFI firmware. Now AHCI works fine, and it boots at normal speed. No more Legacy IDE mode is required for UEFI support. They just released a new BIOS as of 10/28/08 which fixed the issue.
That means that systems now ship with fully UEFI-compliant BIOS's that support full functionality of the board. No more is the "Apple supports EFI, when PC's don't" argument is valid.
Now, PC's have a better EFI implementation: The open standard UEFI (EFI 2.0) specification, rather than Apple's proprietary version of EFI 1.1.
Pingback from WinAjuda » Windows 7 build 6801: download e quest??es incidentais