Windows

Does Windows 7 make Vista the new ME?

Microsoft has taken another step towards the impending release of the desktop OS that will take the place of Windows Vista. A very early version of the new OS, currently code named Windows 7, was given to federal antitrust regulators who will test and make sure that it meets the standards laid out in Microsoft's 2002 antitrust settlement.

Microsoft has taken another step towards the impending release of the desktop OS that will take the place of Windows Vista. A very early version of the new OS, currently code named Windows 7, was given to federal antitrust regulators who will test and make sure that it meets the standards laid out in Microsoft's 2002 antitrust settlement. Basically, the regulators want to make sure that third-party applications have the ability to run just as smoothly as the ones Microsoft writes.

Microsoft submits Windows 7 for U.S. antitrust review (InfoWorld)

Windows 7 may include features that allow users to control the PC without using the familiar keyboard and mouse, instead using "gestures" like an iPhone or pen-based input like the Tablet PCs that Bill Gates is still a big fan of. Screenshots of some of the new OS features have recently surfaced, despite Microsoft's usual tight lips, with no confirmation of authenticity. Analysts are speculating that many features that were supposed to be included in Vista, features like a new file system called WinFS, will be part of the new release, but privacy advocates are looking hard at a feature called "location awareness," which can deliver applications and content based on the physical location of a PC.

Keyboard, mouse to get company in Windows 7 (News.com)

A preview peek at Windows 7 screenshots (Computerworld)

Will Windows 7 track your every move? (Computerworld blog)

Estimates for a release date vary, with some people saying 2010 and others predicting a release next year. Microsoft's decision to turn over early copies to federal regulators seems to suggest that the release is coming sooner rather than later, which begs the question, has the much maligned Windows Vista just become like Windows ME, a desktop OS that had problems from the start and was never widely adopted?

26 comments
hilbertdbp
hilbertdbp

i think that we need to wait and see if windows 7 is any better.Microsoft is trying to shove vista onto us because they spend so much time and money saleing it.Itdoes not work all that well.

Kym Yeoward
Kym Yeoward

Moving from XP-Pro to Vista Business = a big step backward for functionality - its s-l-o-w, buggy, Explorer & Outlook look confusingly similar, I suddenly can't find my favourite quick menu commands and locating files via the strange access tree takes ages - why can't I map my favourite folders to a drive letter as in XP ? Are early customers the beta testers ? DOS3.3 was great but DOS 4 was a disaster - now reborn as Vista !

john3347
john3347

"I suddenly can't find my favourite quick menu commands and locating files via the strange access tree takes ages - why can't I map my favourite folders to a drive letter as in XP" Kym, ignoring the frequent freeze-screen, the incompatibility with my favorite programs, UAC, and several other problems, Locating files is the BIGGEST problem with Vista. How can we scream to Microsoft to correct this abomination of a file system to make someone want to move to a new Operating System?

briant11
briant11

I don't know, I haven't used Windows 7 yet but I get the drift ... it could make Vista look like ME. Although I think Vista is a lot better then Windows Millennium but I don't have any problems with Vista on my PC, I don't know why so many people don't like Vista. In fact I think it's better than XP. I hope the new OS won't come out soon because Vista should have some time to develope and shine, it would be a shame to release something new and not give Vista a chance to prove itself.

funkyman
funkyman

I fought tooth and nail not to move to XP and this time I am one of the first to switch to Vista. It was reluctantly since I got a new system but I am actually finding it better than XP as well.

teradude
teradude

Yup, I agree with my friend here down under. It seems fashionable to bash Vista. See my comments under "I Hope Not" thread up above.

Frogman_07006
Frogman_07006

After reading the article it is understandable why people won't change to Vista. I am a big Vista fan. I have it running on 3 Desktops along with four virtual instals on my lab machine. Its a snap to install, it is fast, and offers outstanding security. Microspft should take the blame for keeping XP as an alternative. Don't be left behind get the hardware get the memory then load Vista. You will have no regrets. Change is GOOD !!!!

Another Canadian
Another Canadian

If you computer came VISTA preloaded when you bought it with Vista Home Premium loaded it will run great or at least will give you the minimum of what Home Premium supposed to be. I mean if you bought the "Capable" or just ready it mean it will probably not run the Aero effect and forget about the latest game as their requirement are way above the minimum of Vista Home Premium anyway. I have Vista and did own ME and 98 and 95 and XP and if I have to choose what I prefer it will be Vista follow very close by XP because of the integration of the Media Center in Vista, and for my kids they don?t care as long as I am willing to buy them the latest hardware it could be Sega for them or MAC or Sony as all kids are more fashion then they are techno aware for many (Clue why the IPod) and "Podcast" became a success story,it is clairly not because the kids have money most are at school and like to shine with your hard earn money. Like most kids are today anyway so mine are not worst or better than your kids. I have see and opportunity to recycled some of my old XP PC in "super boosted" Windows Home Server" and already installed in my family and related and some of my friends are starting to recycle their old XP PC in a Windows Home Server and are for now very as they don't have the need to buy in the "Ultimate Vista version" to get barebones metal restore PC effect :) it done from the Windows Home Server recovery disk. Vista have now the integrated Windows Media Center and it work very well with their Home Server and to me it is less of the stupid OS war in our home and it could be finally the maximisation of the whole advantage of having a "home" network like I am getting at work prensently. To be honest both OS, XP and Vista are very stable and when you get an update that are Vista friendly ?Commercial software? or free software the UAC user account disappear like it was never there, yes you will get a warning when you go in the setting but hey you get the same kind of warning in Linux as it was built to be secure at first and now Microsoft with ?Vista? have finally understood the principle. I won?t start to blame now Microsoft to give me a way more secure ?OS? but if that still give me the chance to play game work and record my TV programs and make some buck with it on the side, not bad for a package that want to pretend to the same of level of security of Linux, I won?t talk about Mac as they don?t sell their OS without the ?Machine? I won?t say PC I heard it is ?taboos? with them. As you have probably already deciphered, I am no were at your level of expertise in regard of the PC but I am a ?Power User? and recognized as such in my organization and I am not a dummy when it come to install Linux or build my own PC or Server and make it work in a integrated manner with my PC Vista and PC XP in fact on certain subject like using Office product or encoding or recording and mixing I am probably in advance of many so I already know my place and I am not certainly saying that you are wrong but giving you the home perspective user point of vue regarding Vista and it does not compare at all with ME. As a home user and Power User at work I see a big advantage of XP over 2000 and same thing with Vista now. The advantage is not as marked for Vista toward the corporation as XP or 2000 was vice 98 but it is certainly marked for the home user with a desktop the advantage seem to disappear when it come to the laptop for now as the requirement is above the standard laptop were I see a disadvantage of Vista vice XP when it come to the laptop as it is way more resource intensive then XP, but on the desktop as all my family are computer "Geek" we were not overwhelm by Vista requirement as we already used to ridiculous standard requirement created by the new PC game on the market that my kids want to play with all the bells and whistles turned ON in fact at one point I was telling my wife it is not Microsoft that make the exigencies of the PC going forward it is the bloody PC games they are real vampire when it come to any ?PC?.

deMidgard
deMidgard

Afaic, Vista is already a big shame for MS, because the amount of money they got is unexpected (i mean ms received less money as they thought before). And a large sum of money came from selling laptops with Vista preinstalled. Although Vista has some really helpful features (Mac's Time Machine analogue) people don't know anything about it, because MS is promoting the whole product, not features. And next thing MS is going to present is Win7, and key is that they are rewriting core in order to improve [almost] everything (as i written above, 2 months ago core filesize was 25 Mb with text browser). So i think they will integrate kinda NET OS (and will call it OS.NET :-D) that is future (there are some start-ups now allowing you to create internet-based desktop that is run under unix system). That is what I think.

Jaqui
Jaqui

Microsoft did that all by themselves.

armstrongb
armstrongb

ME and Vista are alike in that there seems to be no compelling technical reason for their existence. They do not solve problems, and in some cases, created more problems for end users. I have Vista and XP in my world. XP is the better performer at this time. Will those of us who bought Vista be whacked again for Windows 7? I am not terribly interested in paying another Microsoft tax. Vista works OK for me but the whole epsiode is leaving a very bitter taste in my mouth.

deMidgard
deMidgard

You know that developers are writing code (core etc) from the very beginnning. Two or three months ago core filesize was about 25 Mb, and I hope, MS will try to create a brand new OS, that will really help CUSTOMERS to solve THEIR (not MS's) problems.

DadsPad
DadsPad

I had a SB Live! soundcard that would only work with ME. Using the same MB, it crashes with XP loaded. ME was just too unstable to use, could not get any drives to work with the sound card on W98SE. That was the only good thing I can say about ME. Vista does not see quite as unstable. I think the main thing hated by customers for Vista is the way they are treated by MS. Just upgrade your pc with new equipment, Vista stops. Not good feelings on an OS when this happens. MS should just tie the OS to the processor like other software packages do, that would protect their and customer's rights. Alright, off my soapbox now. :)

carlsf
carlsf

VISTA and the crappy interface and navigation panes. Windows 7 needs to be.... Return to the XP style interface New Codebase from the botom up Do away with the deep security Less bulk As for the ribbon interface in Office 2007 NO way will I be using Office 2007

z0phi3l
z0phi3l

You mentioned THE only two good things that came out of Vista/Office07

Derek Schauland
Derek Schauland

I wouldnt go that far... Windows Vista has a lot of new and quite helpful features and I have become used to both the good and the bad. Windows 2008 pulls in some of the new vista features as well but I would not consider Vista like ME based on fresh code.. Windows 7 hasnt been tossed out to many yet and will surely change by then.

Andy J. Moon
Andy J. Moon

Windows Millenium Edition was a flop from the start, plagued by application compatibility problems despite the fact that it had very few features that Windows 98, its predecessor, lacked. If Microsoft has fast tracked Windows 7 for release next year, it would be one of the shortest desktop OS development cycles in recent memory and may signal that Microsoft wants to put Vista's bad press behind them as quickly as possible. Vista was missing some features that were slated to be central to Microsoft's newest OS when it was still code named "Longhorn" and some of those features may be slated for Windows 7. It almost seems to me that it would be better for many businesses to wait for Windows 7 rather than perform a large Vista rollout. Do you think Vista will turn out to be an ME-like speedbump in the OS highway?

cbrennan
cbrennan

I will admit it I did not like Vista from the get go. I didn't like all the resource hogging, the unneeded graphics, and whatnot, but Vista does have an area where it makes sense, where ME did not. I really do not see any benefit to switching from XP to Vista at the business level, or even for every home level. I do think it does have a place in the media centers though, as well as novice users. Since I put it on my Mother's computer, I have not received a single phone call for help, she even installed a new printer! The problem with ME was that it was not stable at all, where as Vista is. I think the biggest strike Vista has going against it is that XP is stable, and well established in both home and business uses. As far as leaving a black mark on Microsoft, I do not think it will live up to the infamy of ME due to the fact that it is a solid OS, it is just not needed.

Peconet Tietokoneet-217038187993258194678069903632
Peconet Tietokoneet-217038187993258194678069903632

An operating system? When windows 3.1 came out (just a big version of a typewriter) all that could be done was type letters and save them onto floppies, some small databases could be done but that is all. All the operating systems that Microsoft has brought out is certainly different but the base of all of them has not changed much, from browsers to accessing the Internet and typing out Letters etc. What has changed is: access to more memory, access to more usb ports as well as firewire, so the list grows bigger. Not forgetting the processing power that is doing all of these things. Yes some of the operating systems were very hard to figure out, but then that is what change is all about. I still have a customer that still runs Windows 3.1. Yes i do have (still) Windows 3.1 on floppies, just in case his system fails. So with Vista's operating system i find different, so i am still learning new things (stops my mind from going dead). If you like your system and do not want to change, then fine, but if you like a challenge, then change is where it is all happening and i am not just talking about Windows here i am including Linux and YES the Apple mac operating system. A change is like getting new clothes, nice at first, then you get used to them, so you go and look for something different. Good posts by the way. (Well some of them anyway).

becky.cashdollar
becky.cashdollar

I can only hope that MS went back to the XP Kernel to build Windows 7. Vista may be great for the average home computer user that just wants to surf the web and type word docs, but it's awful in a business environment. Too many applications and tools either don't run at all or don't run properly on Vista. I flip flop back and forth between my trusty XP system and my required Vista system constantly. Surely Windows 7 cannot be as big a screwed up mess as Vista. I could easily see our company side stepping Vista and going with Windows 7.

markbagus
markbagus

I just hope Windows 7 does not turn out like Vista - a crappy new OS. Hopefully it will actually make people WANT to change from XP - not force them to as they seem to be doing with Vista. MS will be stopping selling XP sooner than originally planned (now June I believe ?) to force people to move to Vista because of it's slow uptake and bad press - and I guess, a big loss of money for MS (as if they haven't got enough already !) How the hell did the world let MS get so large and influential :-(

Locrian_Lyric
Locrian_Lyric

MS lays an egg with it's software, about every other time. Windows 3.1 was annoying, 95 was a vast improvement and a good OS, 98 was buggy and unreliable, 2000 was more solid and stable, ME was a joke XP was good, Vista is another joke. so, if they stick to thier pattern....

john3347
john3347

Windows 3.1 was troublesome, 95 the worst system ever - EVER (If I had broken a law every time I performed an "Illegal Operation" in Windows 95, I would be in jail for the rest of my life and my children's and grand children's lives!), 98 was an improvement over 95, ME was an improvement over 98, Windows 2000 Pro was the smoothest and most stable operating system ever - EVER, XP screwed things up badly (XP still cannot "hold a candle" to W2K), Vista is running a very close second to Windows 95. (At least I didn't have the problems saving and finding files in 95 as I do in Vista.) SOOOOOOO - - If they really stick to their pattern, maybe Windows 7 will surpass Windows 95 as the most screwed-up OS ever in Microsoft history - EVER. I hope they break their pattern here.

Nice Techie
Nice Techie

When ME came out I prided myself on not falling for Microsoft's stupid release of a widely known unstable OS. Now with VISTA, I can honestly say I have no issues with the OS itself, or it's features. If it does turn out that VISTA is the new ME, I will most certainly feel compelled to feel like a complete ass.

jason
jason

Assume you manage a domain with server 2003, exchange etc... Assume you have been handed a spiffy high end new laptop (because the VP it was Purchased for didn't like how Vista behaved) Now install the adminpak.msi on that laptop -- Ha ha - you can't... (manually register all the dll's and parts of it will run) Now install the exchange management software - Ha ha - you can't... Now assume you have years worth of scripts and script tools that you have collected for simplifying your life - assume you have been a dedicated MS advocate and only use MS released tools so that you can avoid issues... now try deploying a software package to your 600+ desktops using your trusty software deployment script that has worked solidly on NT, 2000, XP (minor modifications) -- Ha ha - you can't... Now assume your nice new laptop is more then twice the hardware of your previous laptop - yet it runs slower then your XP machine (still sitting beside you on your desk). Ha Ha again... Oh ya - add in the multiple monitor TMM issues, slow to connect to network shares, different handling of existing VB coded tools etc... Ha ha again... Vista - if you must use it, limit it to end users that don't know better.

teradude
teradude

I'm another techie who has enjoyed Vista for the most part. There have been minor implementation hassles, not for me, but as I have helped others. Took awhile, for example, to find Lexmark updates so that my girl's new Vista could use her existing and very nice printer/fax/toaster oven. It seems to me, to be fashionable to bash Vista. Maybe I just haven't had to perform some of the tasks, or run some of the apps, that other techs have had to. I never figured out why it was so fashionable to be nasty about Vista. Maybe someone will write an essay here and straighten me out. Feel free.

Editor's Picks