SuperSite Blog

So since this is not produced by Microsoft, wouldn't this violate some kind of reverse-engineering, NDA, or beta-software agreement?

Of course, this also leaves you with a system that, at best, is running components that Microsoft didn't think were ready for even pre-beta use.

Deep, Unbiased, Technical Comparison of Snow Leopard vs. Windows 7

http://tinyurl.com/6hakc2

Well, you don't even know if any of these secret features will make it into the final version.

Ocean

It's nice to see you've finally found a less biased source than the ones you usually post here.

WARNING TO ALL:

may be a total coincidence, but I installed this, restarted as recommended, and now have no sound... when trying to play files fail in WMP and itunes just doesn't play them. i did back up all the files, but i see no way to re-apply them, as it says "files in use" (obviously)...

Justin Long's prized acting career at its pinnacle:

www.youtube.com/watch

Both those links were pretty hilarious, thanks guys!

Oh and I agree with Mike G on this one - there is a reason they were hidden in the pre-beta...MS only wanted to have features that were complete in the pre-beta...it will be interesting to see if any of those are still locked for the public beta...

deepfry

I think it'll be interesting to see how many people (including "industry analysts", "reviewers" and "tech pundits") will run this patch and then talk about how they thought Windows 7 wasn't stable.

A negative Windows 7 review.  Oh yes, if it can be given accolades despite it being a pre-beta, rocks can be tossed at despite the same.  Keep in mind, this review is IT-shop based, not consumer based.

I'm expecting a stream of techno-poo to come streaming from Mike Galos keyboard in 3-2-1...

>>Bottom line: So far, Windows 7 looks and behaves almost exactly like Windows Vista. It performs almost exactly like Vista. And it breaks all sorts of things that used to work just fine under Vista. In other words, Microsoft's follow-up to its most unpopular OS release since Windows Me threatens to deliver zero measurable performance benefits while introducing new and potentially crippling compatibility issues.

IT organizations rejected Windows Vista en masse, and Windows 7 is Microsoft's response. Simply put, it's not enough. Slapping an upgraded UI onto an already discredited OS platform fools nobody and serves only to further alienate the very enterprise customers whom Microsoft claims to be wooing. What the company needs to do is listen to its corporate customers and implement the features that IT shops have been requesting: lower resource requirements, better backward compatibility, and a clear migration strategy from Windows XP. The window for lowering resource requirements in Windows 7 has undoubtedly closed. But it's not too late to fix Vista's spotty support for legacy Windows applications. Application virtualization technology is an ideal way to isolate troublesome applications. If Microsoft were to include its App-V bits in Windows 7 -- as part of a legacy-compatibility subsystem that could take over when a problem application is detected -- I'd take its claims of targeting the enterprise more seriously. As it stands, there's little in Windows 7 that IT shops will find compelling. Most of the new features are targeted squarely at consumers, which is the same formula that got Microsoft into trouble with Vista. <<

www.infoworld.com/.../emailPrint.jsp

Another:

>>Running away as fast as it can from Vista, Microsoft rolled out an  alpha version of Windows 7 at its recent Professional Developers Conference. But is Windows 7 going to be 7Up, the Un-Vista, or is it going to be (gag) New Vista?

Microsoft would like you to believe that Windows 7 is going to be the next great desktop operating system. It's not. The company would also like you to please forget that it said the same things about Vista. Remember how Windows 98 was followed by Windows 98 Second Edition? That's what we have here: Windows 7 is Vista SE.

--

...the fact is, like New Coke back in its day, my first taste of Vista SE is leaving a bad taste in my mouth.<<

www.computerworld.com/.../article.do

Ocean

As I said earlier (and you've demonstrated by quoting Randall Kennedy and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols) you'd finally found a less biased source than the ones you usually post here when you cited The Onion.

Theres no bias there, and even if it were Jon Gruber who wrote the review the important thing would be whether the *facts* stand.  Not *who* wrote the article.

Reproducible facts:

>>All the test tools I used for this article are freely available from the exo.performance.network Web site.

--

Using a combination of the Clarity Studio's ADO (ActiveX Data Objects), MAPI (Messaging Application Programming Interface), and WMP (Windows Media Player) Stress workload objects, I was able to simulate a complex, multiprocess workload under Windows 7 consisting of client/server database, workflow, and streaming media playback tasks. I used the DMS Clarity Tracker agent to record system and process metrics during the test scenarios. All tests were conducted against a 2GB Core 2 Duo (T7200) laptop PC (the Dell XPS M1710) configured to dual-boot between Windows 7 Ultimate M3 and Windows Vista Ultimate SP1.

A nine-way test scenario, involving three concurrent instances of each workload object, turned in nearly identical average transaction times under Windows 7 M3 and Windows Vista. In fact, the scores were so close -- less than a 5 percent delta (in favor of Vista) on the database tasks, and a roughly 2 percent delta (in favor of Windows 7) on the workflow tasks -- that they fell within what I'd typically consider the margin of error for this sort of test.

<<

Ocean

If I start a review website and review a movies before they are done would you be my number one fan.

Back from vacation....did I miss anything?

--tayme

>>Ocean

If I start a review website and review a movies before they are done<<

Two links:

1.  It's done for movies...sometimes even before the shooting starts -->  www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi

2.  Paul does it -->

>>The makers of Windows 7 have reevaluated virtually everything about Vista and made changes small and large across the board. The result is a better Windows, no matter how you slice it.<<

www.winsupersite.com/.../win7_preview.asp

So yes, theres some value there.

>>Back from vacation....did I miss anything?<<

The release of  Vista 1.6

And a pretty hot new videogame:

technologizer.com/.../best-game-about-a-president-elect-ever

"As I said earlier (and you've demonstrated by quoting Randall Kennedy and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols) you'd finally found a less biased source than the ones you usually post here "

Mike your disagreement != biased source.

Or, like we used to say in the old days:

Mike your disagreement .ne. biased source. (Wow, that's pretty awful, isn't it? Aside from Mike, I'm not sure anyone here is old enough to get it...)

Ocean

I said review not preview...

Mike, Ocean's trolling is all your fault this time . :-)

Semantics DarkSage.  Both require a subjective judgment...and at least the Infoworld review includes reproducible statistics.

Paul just says its Windows done right,  

Pingback from  &raquo; re: Rivera unlocks all hidden features in Windows 7 M3

I'm on-topic.  I'm talking windows 7.

Though I think if it were a *positive* review, you might see things differently.

So you call me a troll, and I'll call you a partisan windows fanboi.  There...we're even.  :)

Infoworld is garbage.  They only want to push their ad-ridden CRN magazines to anyone that publicly lists themselves as being in the computer business (without permission too - I call EVERY time they send another one that I don't want it and not to waste the extra printing effort).  Their magazines go straight from the mailman's hand right into my shredder.

I'm assuming Randall Kennedy was the one guy that Paul and Ed Bott were talking about on the TWIT show. :-)

For Nichols, he knows that the only way to ensure 7 fails is to start early. He is not the most objective of people.

"So you call me a troll, and I'll call you a partisan windows fanboi.  There...we're even.  :)"

Doesn't change a thing. I might be a "partisan windows fanboi". At least I don't go to Linux or OS X blogs and troll there. :-)

You're on topic simply because you changed the topic and everybody's talking about it.

Ocean,

This (Win 7) is very, very early code. What this means? It means that every positive review is looking at what it has already done and tries to guess what could be the final thing (obviously, assuming that the final article will be better); however, every bad review is... just plain stupid, because, again, is based in incomplete code.

Having said this, a comparison between two incomplete products is even more stupid...

Attack the argument, not the messenger.

aemarques

Thank you I was trying to hint it but Ocean would not get it.

More facts.  Posted two hours ago, it says no performance differences:

>>If you’ve been following the PC Pro blogs, you’ll know that we recently received a preview build of Windows 7. Useful work has pretty much ground to a halt as we’ve all set about nuking our Vista installations and upgrading our work PCs to this unsupported pre-alpha OS.

And the net effect? Surprisingly little. <<

Though they do note:

>>Windows 7 does already offer one compelling advantage over Vista: it’s fast. Both our senior pontificators were struck by how nimble Windows 7 feels after you’re used to its predecessor. As Tim Danton writes, “Vista was never this nippy. You press on an icon and it leaps into action. . . . I can’t remember using any new OS that was this quick.”

Now if that’s not cause for celebration, I don’t know what is. Vista has had us driving with the handbrake on for the past two years, but at long last Windows 7 is coming to set us free. Admittedly it’s not actually going to get here for another year, but at least salvation is in sight.

But it’s a funny thing, you know. Because I’ve been running a few benchmarks, just to find out exactly what sort of speed boost we’re talking about. And I can exclusively reveal that the actual performance gap between Vista and Windows 7 is… nada. Absolutely nothing. Our Office benchmarks and video encoding tests complete in precisely the same time regardless of which OS in installed.<<

www.pcpro.co.uk/.../windows-7-faster-or-just-smarter

"Attack the argument, not the messenger."

Dude, just shut up!

You've derailed YET ANOTHER TOPIC with links that have NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT PAUL POSTED!

Then after doing that, you spam even more off-topic stuff, and then cry foul that people actually accuse you of trolling!

How F'ing arrogant can you get!

You have to be that same "ocean" on Engadget whos comments are constantly "low ranked" because of how annoying you've become there.

Jesus, Paul, cant you try to moderate this place a bit more?

I get it Aemarques argument:

"If it's this good now, it'll be even better when we finish it" and "If it's a dog now, it doesn't matter because it will be better when we finish it."

That it will improve is an assumption.

I don't post on Engadget.

"That it will improve is an assumption. "

That it won't is not? You're talking about pre-Beta software here, dude. Sinofsky even said this wasn't a benchmarking build. The only reason I can see for people doing all this benchmarking is that they want to start criticizing the product early, hoping to influence more people.

>>That it won't is not?<<

You're right.  The point is, that its silly to say that it should be reviewed *only* under the premise that it will improve, when there are other outcomes that could take place.  The performance in the end may be the same as it is now, or it may degrade a little bit.

Overall, the point is this:  Reviews of all stripes --> Positive, neutral, or negative should be considered equally...especially when they include reproducible experiments.

Yeah sure you dont.

Not only are you arrogant, you are a liar to boot!

Heck, even your fellow Apple fanatics that post here find you to be obnoxious because you make them look even worse.

>>The only reason I can see for people doing all this benchmarking is that they want to start criticizing the product early<<

You really, *really* think that *every* person who runs benchmarking software on a new OS is anti-MS?

Do you believe the Earth is flat, and that the Sun revolves around it too?

I don't post on Engadget.  Sorry it doesn't fit your conspiracy theory, but no, its not me.

I'm not an Apple fan either.  Never owned an Apple computer.

"I don't post on Engadget.  Sorry it doesn't fit your conspiracy theory, but no, its not me.

I'm not an Apple fan either.  Never owned an Apple computer.

"

Yeah suuuuuuuure, Ocean. If you say so.

"Justin Long's prized acting career at its pinnacle:"

I love that movie. Reminds me of visiting Canada.

Wow so much talk about a build that will be forgotten very soon.  Reviewing and speculating on Windows 7 in pre-beta form is useless.  

There will probably be at least 5 more builds before it goes gold.

True, Bettieblu.  I hope there are no eruptions over benchmarkings, positive or negative, for those.

One year give or take a few months till the final version:

>>whisper dates for Windows 7

   * Feature-complete, public Beta 1: The week before Christmas 2008 (Microsoft is saying Q1 2009)

   * No public Beta 2 (Microsoft isn’t saying whether there will be a Beta 2)

   * Release Candidate: Q1/Q2 2009 (Microsoft is saying there will be “a release candidate” but offering no due date)

   * RTM: Mid-2009 (Microsoft is saying “early 2010″)

(There are a few wild cards to factor in here, like possible law suits, OEMs not being able to preload in time to make a certain launch goal, etc. But these are the dates I’ve been hearing through the grapevine for the month-plus.)

When anyone asks me whether they should buy a new PC now or wait, I tell them I’m banking on getting a new Windows 7 PC next fall.<<

blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft

blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/.../windows_7_for_christmas_in_200.html

Great article article of PCPro mag. I especially like this paragraph:

"Of course, it’s a disappointment to realise just how similar Microsoft’s new OS is, under the bonnet, to its current one – similar enough to explain why Windows 7 actually has an internal version number of 6.1. We all had high hopes of a lightweight “MinWin”, akin to what Apple is reportedly working on for OS X 10.6 (“Snow Leopard”).

But while this faster front-end seems like a superficial change, it makes a world of difference. As I’ve said before, there are plenty of things in Vista to like, but I find it impossible to enjoy them while the whole experience is weighed down by a sluggish interface. No longer. I can only echo Tim Danton’s conclusion: “Windows 7 is exactly what Vista should have been.”

Of course, it’s shameful that it’s taken so long to get here. It’s generally suspected that Vista was a rush release, but there’s no reason the improved window manager couldn’t have been dropped in via Windows Update once it was ready. Holding it back for Windows 7 is a real two fingers to users who paid for Vista, and I’m not sure it makes sense for Microsoft. The company surely realises what Vista is doing to its reputation, yet here it is giving Apple another year, on top of the two it’s already had, to thumb its nose and woo away potential customers."

"If you’ve been following the PC Pro blogs, you’ll know that we recently received a preview build of Windows 7. Useful work has pretty much ground to a halt as we’ve all set about nuking our Vista installations and upgrading our work PCs to this unsupported pre-alpha OS."

-2 points for installing it on production PC's.

If this is the kind of credibility you're looking for, you just lost your argument.

"I love that movie. Reminds me of visiting Canada."

The Costco part reminds me of the US economy.

Take a look at your banks vs. ours, losta.  Ours are being demonstrated as the model for the world to use, contrary to yours, which caused the disaster in the first place.

There is a Slashdot thread on this now:

tech.slashdot.org/.../1522246.shtml

Yeah, the Slashdot crowd is always pretty unbiased when it comes to operating systems...

>>the Slashdot crowd is always pretty unbiased<<

Whatever happened to judging an argument on its merit, on not on its author?

Are you scared you'll read something you can't refute?

>>If this is the kind of credibility you're looking for, you just lost your argument.<<

How does that disprove the benchmarking statistics?  If its the same exact hardware as Vista was tested on, it makes it even more compelling.

"You really, *really* think that *every* person who runs benchmarking software on a new OS is anti-MS?

Do you believe the Earth is flat, and that the Sun revolves around it too?"

Either that was an attempt at twisting my words or you didn't understand a word of what I was trying to say.

OK. I don't know which one is more idiotic - comparing a pre-beta software to a released software or drawing conclusions from the results. BTW, I do believe the world is flat.

>>BTW, I do believe the world is flat.<<

This too?

en.wikipedia.org/.../Modern_geocentrism

"This too?

en.wikipedia.org/.../Modern_geocentrism"

No. This

This too?

en.wikipedia.org/.../The_World_Is_Flat

"How does that disprove the benchmarking statistics?"

It's not finished.  They're testing a product that is a) not designed to be benchmarked yet, b) not complete, and c) the authors test on production computers, discrediting their actual skill in IT.

Until it reaches Release Candidate stage, you can't judge it against currently-released production software.  Release Candidate stages are designed to be code-complete, but not necessarily feature complete.  The last changes will be minor UI polish.  If you want an accurate comparison, compare it to Vista in the first pre-public-beta stage in its development, keeping in mind that Beta 2 and 3 were released to the general public (well, those that signed up to the Connect site anyway - Windows 7 isn't available through that channel yet either).

The development process for Windows 7 has changed a lot anyway.  A valid comparison might never be accomplished, unless you compare final products.  Then again, since Windows 7 is just "Vista 2" in Mackies eyes, all the improvements they've made over the last couple of years to Windows Vista, both prior and post SP1, would've made an impact in Windows 7.

>>They're testing a product that is a) not designed to be benchmarked yet,<<

Oh stop it.  You're buying into the marketing spin.

If the device can encode MP3's and run Photoshop, there's nothing special about timing how long it takes to do it.

We accept Paul saying "It feels snappy", but we can't run a stopwatch to see what the numbers say?

Get real.

>>the authors test on production computers, discrediting their actual skill in IT.<<

I don't even know what this means.

Look, if the Win7 gets progressively faster through each release until RTM'd while adding features, then that's actually a positive and says a great deal about MS's programming skill.

No one is saying that these numbers are going to be static.  All they are saying is that "TO THIS POINT...it seems that MS has done little work on the underlying structure."

And the idiocy continues...

This is from the Windows Team blog.  To the critics of posting about the speed of a 'unfinished' OS:  kindly shut up.  At least the guys I linked to had the chops to give their readers some hard numbers.  All the quotes on the Windows Blog are little more than subjective impressions.  They don't even tell us what "decent battery life" is.

>>I thought it might be nice to do a little round-up of what folks are saying about Windows 7 after today’s keynote here at the PDC in Los Angeles. I’d like to share some of the best ones we’ve found so far.

<<“This loaner machine certainly doesn’t feel like it’s running pre-beta code. It’s wicked fast and eerily quiet thanks to a solid state drive. In a very long day’s worth of use it has yet to crash or display any of the flaky behavior you might expect from a beta.”>>

<<the early build of Windows 7 feels like a fast, stable environment. There's a lot going on behind the scenes to make the OS more usable, one monumental improvement being how video memory is allocated for unseen windows. (Hint: It's not.) The result is a highly responsive machine that gets decent battery life.”>>

windowsteamblog.com/.../post-pdc-keynote-what-are-people-saying-about-windows-7.aspx

"Oh stop it.  You're buying into the marketing spin."

"Look, if the Win7 gets progressively faster through each release until RTM'd while adding features, then that's actually a positive and says a great deal about MS's programming skill.

No one is saying that these numbers are going to be static.  All they are saying is that "TO THIS POINT...it seems that MS has done little work on the underlying structure.""

Thanks for backing up my point.  Benchmarking this pre-beta will have no bearing on the actual outcome of the product as shipped.

"I don't even know what this means."

If an IT company is going to go out of their way to blow away production IT computers just to test a pre-beta OS (which has little purpose), then they're in the wrong business.  Posting that kind of information without some sort of disclaimer (they should've said it was in a test environment, which they didn't - it was on *production* computers) is just plain stupid, and is worse when you consider some moron might think this is going to give you a better experience than Vista as-is.  YOU JUST DON'T DO THAT, and I question their abilities as far as any computer skills go.

They must suck at IT.

"Oh stop it.  You're buying into the marketing spin."

No, s/he's just demonstrating, once again, that you can praise a Microsoft product all you want, but any criticism will be met with instant denunciation from the WinJihadists.

IOW, you can say "it feels snappier" or "it runs better" or "it looks prettier, and my helper cat loves it", but if you say anything even remotely negative (or, gawd forbid, includes actual "facts"), you're obviously a MS-hater and should have your opinion squashed as quickly as possible.

Wow. Ocean, congrats. You not only jumped the shark, you leaped over the ocean and every shark contained within. Your credibility is now on par with President Bush.

We're talking Milestone 3 code for Windows Seven and you're already to condemn the product? Wow, thanks for the great reviewing and commentary there. There is still a lot of work to be done before we can honestly give this thing a grade. Seriously, take a step back and chill out. Wait for the betas or at least a Release Candidate, when its close to something resembling a finished product.

Everytime you speak, it lends credence to the whole "iCabal" theory. A lot of the guys and gals in here barking the extremes do. Even I'm taking all of the Windows Seven M3 reviews with a whopping grain of salt. I'm even being completely openminded about SnowLeopard.

Paul, I have to agree Master 3 wholeheartedly that a lot of moderation is needed. Some of these guys just need to be blocked from blogging. Especially the instigators just looking to piss people off and not add to the discussion.

@Ocean:

Let's see cross-platform application benchmarks between Windows 7 and Snow Leopard, both as-is.

Apple:  *crickets*

I think that you're all confused. What does this have to do with my $400 Vista SP1 laptop?

>>you're already to condemn the product?<<

Did I say that?

Because its not true.  Read some of my posts from the day Windows 7 was given to the convention attendees up till now and you'll see I've been looking forward to this release.

Of course I'm sure you skipped those posts.  They don't fit in with your conspiracy theory about people who criticize Vista...

>>Let's see cross-platform application benchmarks between Windows 7 and Snow Leopard, both as-is.<<

That would make for some interesting discussion.

>>instigators just looking to piss people off <<

It seems like a couple of people are *talking* about test results and the value or lack of value of said results.  A perfectly legitimate discussion.

Others (subzerointelligence) are complaining that a technical discussion is going on because it doesn't cast MS in the best light.  I'd say that it's these people who

A,  Need their own blogs

B.  Are trending toward acting like enemies of free speech.

Paul sent me an email and said "Keep it civil, keep it about relevant technology".

Master and Subzero are breaking that by trying to make the conversation about *ME* instead of contributing the discussion or just ignoring it.

>>What does this have to do with my $400 Vista SP1 laptop?<<

See if it will run Win7 here:

www.itworld.com/.../find-out-if-your-pc-can-run-windows-7

Thanks Ocean. I'm going to wait for the MS product since I don't want to sign my life away for the Infoworld app which is based on the current knowledge of very little. But thanks for the link. Besides, I almost never upgrade my OSes. The expense is usually not worth it, even though I can write it off! IMO of course.

Doc

DRWAM, I'm about to get a PC with Vista 64 pre-installed.  I found a really nice price, but I'm wondering I should wait for black Friday or not.   If we were six months closer to the release of Win7, I'd wait, but not a year.  I think I'll be getting a netbook for portability in the coming year...I may wait and get 7 on that one...

Maybe I'm a little dense here, but I'm seeing two totally different things being reviewed here.

1) The operating system and generally usability is snappier and more responsive than Vista. This was a fairly well-accepted problem with Vista, I think, and if this is an indication of things to come, then great.

2) Benchmarks of tasks that don't have anything to do with the operating system - just tasks that a computer can do - showed that Windows 7 M3 (a pre-release build about a year off from release) has nearly identical scores to Windows Vista. I don't recall there being a lot of complaints about those benchmarks in Vista (once the graphics, etc. vendors finally caught up and gave us stable drivers, at least). So the fact that they're roughly equal in a pre-release build sounds like a good thing to me.

What's the problem, again?

Great post NoWim...

Ocean, Definitely wait for Black Friday, but also check at dealnews.com

That's where I found a $500 off coupon for my nephew's HP laptop, a 17 in model that I beefed up with the works, including Vista 64 bit and RAID 0 7200 RPM HD's as well as the better video card. He loves it. It's not very lightweight, but he's almost my size, so he can carry a little more than most.

"What's the problem, again?"

No problem, except that those benchmarks were used by one of the two articles that Ocean posted that Windows 7 sucks. In the end, this is pre-beta software and I've indicated earlier too that some of the features that Paul seems to be getting excited about may or may not make it into the final release. Nevertheless, getting excited about possible features is different from using benchmarking studies on a pre-Beta software to draw conclusions about the performance of the final release.

What does all this have to do with the geocentric model? Only Ocean knows.

>>this is pre-beta software<<

Question:  Since it and Vista have the same performance does that mean that Vista was released way too early?

I'm kidding.  :)

>>dealnews.com<<

Thanks.  I've got the Fetch Text Url add on for Firefox, so I just highlighted the name, right clicked and it popped up in another tab.  Neat site, thanks!

Heres a public service announcement for the users of this site from DRWAM's site:

>> Dell PowerEdge SC440 Intel Dual Core 2GHz Server for $199 + $20 s&h

The Dell PowerEdge SC440 Pentium Dual-Core 2GHz Server costs $199 plus $19.99 for shipping at Dell Small Business.<<

No preinstalled OS, but not a problem for users of this site.  

"The Dell PowerEdge SC440 Pentium Dual-Core 2GHz Server"

If it's not server hardware, it's not a real server.  Xeon's only, please.

Pingback from  links for 2008-11-10 | hxf148

"Since it and Vista have the same performance does that mean that Vista was released way too early?"

Ask the people that upgraded from Tiger to Leopard when Leopard shipped how relevent that is.

I have to say for a pre-beta this OS is amazingly stable. It feels a lot snappier on the machine I'm trying it on than Vista. (Thinkpad R60 core duo) The battery life is much improved and it handles most programs I've put on it. BTY Avira AV works great on it as does Malwarebytes antispywre.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this released by June of next year.

Xeon for $100 more...

Ocean, check the site a few times each day. You may be surprised at what prices the find, as well as mistakes. Newegg had a 32GB USB flash drive for $29 for a few minutes, until they sold out. I had it in my basket but took too long looking for more stuff and it was out of stock, or they figured out the error and hacked my deal. Bummer. Now it's $99 or $79.

Waethorn

"If it's not server hardware, it's not a real server.  Xeon's only, please."

Or Itaniums. (I'd be quite happy with a nice HP Integrity Superdome with 64 dual core Itaniums if somebody felt like loaning me one...)

"you can say "it feels snappier" or "it runs better" or "it looks prettier, and my helper cat loves it", but if you say anything even remotely negative (or, gawd forbid, includes actual "facts"), you're obviously a MS-hater and should have your opinion squashed as quickly as possible."

Oh please.  You make the same argument against anyone on here who says anything negative against Apple.

"Xeon for $100 more..."

Just so you know, Xeon 3000-series processors sell for the same price as equivalent spec Core 2 Duo's/Quad's (a Xeon 3320 = Core 2 Quad Q9300, for instance).  The difference is that Xeon's are validated for server use, while the desktop version Core 2 processors aren't.  They both use LGA 775 sockets, and are interchangeable between motherboards (usually desktop boards will mistake Xeon's as their equivalent Core processor and vice versa, depending on BIOS version).  Xeon 3000-series are single-processor only - a part of the LGA 775 platform design.

Xeon 5000-series are similar, but are designed for multi-processor use.

That said, it would be kind of a joke nowadays to get a server without VT support, or less than 4GB of RAM and a decent-sized hard drive (no less than 2 identical drives is the only realistic option for a server).  I like the Intel S3210SH motherboards.  That's why I sell them in small business servers that I build.

BTW:  If you run Windows Server 2008 w/ Hyper-V, or Hyper-V Server 2008, what is the minimum realistic amount of RAM to designate to the parent partition (forget the child partitions altogether)?  You can run Windows Server 2008 on 512MB, just like Vista.  1GB more reasonable?  Keep in mind, the parent partition is only designed only to run the Hypervisor and nothing else.

@mike:

Itaniums are overrated.

I'd rather set up a performance cluster with HPC Server on Xeon's.  Better performance for less money, plus x86-compatibility.

The NVIDIA Tesla's look kind of interesting too.