Windows

Windows 7 could be released as early as next year

The folks over at <i>APC Magazine</i> managed to sneak a look at a recently release roadmap for Windows 7. According to them, instead of the anticipated date of 2010, Microsoft could release the major upgrade to its Windows operating system as early as the second half of 2009.

The folks over at APC Magazine managed to sneak a look at a recently release roadmap for Windows 7. According to them, instead of the anticipated date of 2010, Microsoft could release the major upgrade to its Windows operating system as early as the second half of 2009.

Excerpt from APC Magazine:

There are apparently three “milestone” builds planned for 2008, and the first one – M1 – has already shipped to key partners for code validation... M2 should ship around April/May, and M3 some time in the third quarter of 2008. There’s no available roadmap information about further milestone, beta or release candidate builds, except the updated RTM release date of H2 2009.

Since Vista went RTM in November 2006, a similar release of Windows 7 in the second half of 2009 would make it a neat three years.

Do you reckon that Microsoft is prepared to throw in the towel over Vista finally? It does look suspiciously like a repeat of Windows ME to me. What is your opinion of the earlier release date?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stay on top of the latest tech news

Get this news story and many more by subscribing to our free IT News Digest newsletter, delivered each weekday. Automatically sign up today!

About

Paul Mah is a writer and blogger who lives in Singapore, where he has worked for a number of years in various capacities within the IT industry. Paul enjoys tinkering with tech gadgets, smartphones, and networking devices.

74 comments
DavidRS1992
DavidRS1992

APC Magazine is nothing to do with the UPS manufacturer. Rather, it's an Australian tech magazine. So why in the heck is it tagged as relating to American Power Conversion Corp.?

Aknar
Aknar

Yes but that means after product delay we should see RC1 sometime in 2010.

edwin.sibrian
edwin.sibrian

Will it be free????? I don't have a lot of money to change OS, Every time Bill acept that Windows is a .......

jjlamberth
jjlamberth

I am getting overwhelmingly tired of the money machine. I will be moving to a form of Linux. His demise will be on the horizon.

Tech Warrior
Tech Warrior

I'm not that surprised. Many time Microsoft has released an operating system that was not quite perfected and then instead of expending there energy perfecting it first, they go out and build a new OS to make new sales. Somedays I thinks its about the money not a love of technology.

norb_houston
norb_houston

I think anyone that had to suffer through Vista should be able to get W7 at a discounted price or at least be given the chance to give it back with a neat little bow and brown paper bag.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Vista failed to offer any features or killer app to motivate consumers to purchase it, and enough incompatibilities for businesses to ignore it. What will W7 bring to the table to motivate me to care about it's release schedule, either as a home consumer or as a support professional? The only advantage I can see is an early release will allow me to bypass Vista. Big Whoop.

monett.computers
monett.computers

Typical Microsoft...if something doesn't work, rush its replacement to market fast enough that it doesn't work either. Meanwhile, the world still awaits XP Service Pack 3....

paulmah
paulmah

Do you reckon that Microsoft is prepared to throw in the towel over Vista finally. It does look suspiciously like a repeat of Windows ME to me. What is your opinion of the earlier release date?

The Scummy One
The Scummy One

I think this time MS will skip the delay to try to get it out as fast as they can. Vista has a bad rep, even comp illiterate people ask me in terror if they will be forced to use it.

chrisdodds
chrisdodds

Maybe it's just me, but I find 4 or 5 different versions of Windows Vista a little much, I mean really... Does the average home user know the difference between Vista Home Basic and Vista Home Premium? (Some of you do - I realize that, but the "average" home user?) What's so wrong with simplicity? A "home" and a "pro" seemed fine in XP. Seems that so many choices aren't always good. Anyone out there agree or disagree?

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

for as long as consumers accept it.

chris_thamm
chris_thamm

Microsoft -- like every other company in the world -- exists first and foremost to produce a return on shareholder investment. If making a good product happens to be a side-effect of that, then that's what we'll get. Otherwise we'll just continue to get the crap that has come out of Microsoft recently. My clients have been asking for alternatives to Windows. I can't blame them. To say Vista is anything short of a complete disaster is understating the case. I will be re-evaluating the alternatives meticulously before recommending Windows 7 -- and may decide not to recommend it at all.

The Scummy One
The Scummy One

all those early Win 98 adopters? MS wouldnt all ow them to upgrade to 98SE, they had to re-purchase the 'new' SW. There was no patch to change it or anything, just a 'sorry, F.U." to all of those people/companies.

gsyck
gsyck

I just finished a temp job. One of the group came from a mass uninstall of Vista. He worked with 3 others that rolled 250+ systems back to XP. Said user comments were Comparitavely slow combersome to use had to "relearn" the world not worth the effort

james
james

It is all very good and well that MS wants to release a new version of Windows, but what about all of us suckers that bought one or more of the Vista Flavours? Surely MS should hang its head in shame and admit that they really screwed up and will give us a equivalent version of the next, hopefully functional Windows, as a free upgrade? MS is really going down the tubes releasing piss poor versions of Windows (Me comes to mind) and laughing all the way to the bank with no recourse for the consumer. MS Terms and Conditions: You bought it, you are stuck with it, SUCKERS!"

Cayble
Cayble

Windows ME was not a significant upgrade. It was something like a testing ground for some new ideas at best. XP was clearly a far more complete OS, and despite the crabbing about it when it first came out, if Windows 7 is as much better then Vista as XP was compared to ME then Windows 7 will be the OS to own for sure.

jcoons
jcoons

Being an IT consultant and software developer for a major (top 5) IT solution provider, I see what's going on at our clients site. The support people are playing (experimenting on their oun machines) with Vista, and generally, most of them really like it, with one caveat. Vista is not intended for older hardware. Microsoft's new focus in the OS area is geared toward UX, or the User Experience that's beginning to take shape in applications with the use of the 3.0/3.5 .Net frameworks. Corporate IT departments are suppose to get every last nickle out of its hardware, so they are slow on the Vista uptake, and reasonably so. I use XP, Vista, and Linux everyday, and I prefer to do my work in Vista, hands down, even with the little tweaks I have to learn. I had to do the same type of learning with XP and Linux in the beginning. This is no different. Let me just say, before the nose-pickers chide in, that No, Microsoft didn't pay me squat for my opinion (and it's just that). In fact I've been a Microsoft basher for many years, but this time I think Microsofts is on the right track. Plus I love their development tools...

loadie
loadie

Since I am in the IT field I started playing with early betas of vista. I thought it was going to be great. Boy was I wrong. I can only hope that they get things right this time, but I probably have better odds of winning the lottery.

pccoder28
pccoder28

Visual Studio 2008 Orcas was designed with Vista in mind...so, with the ME-ification of Vista now a done deal, should developers mess around with the new WPF stuff in Orcas, given that WPF may just be a passing fancy? LINQ is cool, but perhaps that's not enough to abandon VS 2003/2005? Will WPF be gone in VS 2010? Should I just go Ruby/Python just to keep from having to reinvent myself every 24 months? If only Java had stayed 'write once, work everywhere!'

pccoder28
pccoder28

There's a perfectly good OS just screaming for a buyout from the boys at Microsoft: OS 10 Leopard. Microsoft can provide a virtual machine of sorts for compatibility with the old Vista/XP/2000/95 stuff. All MS developer tools, such as Orcas, MS Office and SQL Server, can be easily ported to Leopard. Leopard is all that Windows 7 needs to be (or what Vista needed to be). So, Bill and Steve, buy up Apple today (you should get a bargain with the market collapse) and your search for a viable OS will be over!

dobbinsm
dobbinsm

Do we need another version of Windows ME? The first one wasn't that great! I think they should just trash the whole ball of wax and admit defeat and start over! (of course we all know they aren't going to admit to a mistake!)

granillo_1234
granillo_1234

I think that we all have to take a step back from our experiences (good or bad) with Vista and look at the big picture. As technology improves and gets more and more advanced, and we do things differently than we used to, of course certain things we all grew up with will have to change. We can't necessarily, nor should we, keep using that 10 year old program. Let me explain why. Creating backwards compatibility is great, to an extent. The further back you allow backwards compatibility the more chance there is for someone to find an exploit in the old outdated code. If you have a program (or whatever) that you absolutely cannot live without and everything in your organization is working fine then you have no real reason to upgrade anyway. Unless Microsoft has used it's marketing into lure you with their hype. Bells and whistles, in my opinion, are simply a lure to get the average Joe user to buy "the new best thing" to brag to all their buddies about. They know that for the most part Admins and organizations won't even consider upgrading to a new platform until at least 1 Service Pack is released; and it isn't for all the pretty GUI features. It would be if it offered some significant benefits to do so. Which in my opinion Vista does not.

tundraroamer
tundraroamer

Everybody complains about M$ and it's products (I do too) but nobody has come up with a viable alternative. Surly there are enough deep pockets out there to fund a competitive product that gives what people claim they want. M$ started out with nothing, why hasn't someone else done so? Everybody dumps on M$ but nobody really challenges them. And please, the *nix crowd is not viable as even giving away their OS has failed to challenge M$ dominance. M$ laughs all the way to the bank each day.

sleepin'dawg
sleepin'dawg

We'll look at it but probably have to wait for SP2 to come out to get something truly usable that doesn't leave us vulnerable to the newer generation of viruses and malware that is almost guaranteed to come out. Use the first iteration of anything from Microsnot??? Get real !!! [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

XDotNet
XDotNet

Will XP be supported until SP1 of Windows 7 is released? 2009 + 1.5 years for SP1...2010 or 2011. Because after Vista, NO ONE will impliment W7 until SP1

GRAYGOAST52
GRAYGOAST52

I BELIVE WIDOWS VISTA IS A COPY OF WIDOWS ME IT ACTS JUST LIKE IT MY NEXT NEW COMPUTER WILL HAVE XP BECAUSE EVERY SOFTWARE AND GAMES I BOUGHT FOR XP DOES NOT WORK ON VISTA, I HAVE WASITED ALOT OF MONEY

Richard_P
Richard_P

I'll agree the intention may be to ship next year ... but when did Microsoft ever meet a major delivery deadline? However, irrespective of the actual ship date, I think I'll skip Vista now there's something to hope for.

Thack
Thack

I can't agree with the other posters here who declare Vista to be a P.O.S. It's been installed on my machine for a year, and although it was fragile to begin with, has got better as the updates rolled in and now it's no trouble at all. In fact, it has NEVER frozen or blue-screened, and this PC doesn't just sit there - it runs 24/7 and gets mercilessly thrashed doing graphics editing, video editing, audio editing, software development, editing giant Office 2007 files plus the usual emailing and surfing (but no gaming). I can't even claim it runs noticeably more slowly than XP SP2 (apart from copying files, which takes ages and still needs sorting out). UAC is a non-issue for me. After the initial settling in period, when I was installing all my software and setting everything up as I wanted it, the UAC prompts became quite rare. In fact, I'm entirely happy that the OS warns me when something with potential security implications is about to happen. After all, it's hardly any different from the elevation prompts in Linux and Mac OSX, is it? So why all this hostility? In truth, I think the biggest disappointment for me about Vista is how *little* has changed from XP SP2 in day-to-day use. Other than the Aero thing (which I can take or leave), the UI is really only what XP should have had to begin with. In that respect, then, I'd be quite happy for Windows 7 to come sooner rather than later. Having read extensively of Microsoft's library of White Papers, it is clear that the biggest changes in Vista are under the hood - basically getting the underlying engineering right. (It started out right in Dave Cutler's original NT, of course, but then got undermined in XP by MS's obsession with backward compatibility and fastest-possible UI response times). So, if we accept that Vista has had lots of basically sensible re-engineering under the bonnet (rather than anything astonishing in the UI), then it bodes well for Windows 7, I think. Hopefully it will build on the quality and engineering improvements in Vista, continue with them, and give us something better thought through. WPF holds all sorts of potential, I feel. Personally, I see Vista as very much an interim release, and I'm actually looking forward to seeing Windows 7. The sooner the better from my point of view. Thack

!thebear
!thebear

We have just received about 200 brand spanking new 6449-A32's. They all came with Vista Business at a much lower price than if we received XP Pro. hmmmmmm. This OS has proven NOT to be useable with our antique software that does work with XP. We do not have the funds to replace the software even if the vendors made Vista version which they say the have no plans to. Thank you Bill and the gang..

mhbowman
mhbowman

still I can't help but notice the non-committal "could be". It is nice the MS has noticed the obvious failures associated with Vista. If they are looking for suggestions I would have the following: 1)Reduce the bloat of the OS and focus on efficiency. Don't expect people to upgrade or buy a new computer everytime an OS comes out. 2)Stop changing the interface and expect people to relearn to do the same tasks. If new features are available, fine. Add them in, but don't change everything on the OS in process. It's incredibly annoying to need to change a config and be forced to use a "wizard". 3)Speaking of wizards... the hardware troubleshooting wizard does and always have sucked. 3)Security is great but STOP REPEATEDLY ASKING ME IF I'M REALLY SURE I WANT TO DO THIS!!!!!!!

michaels.perry
michaels.perry

Seems to me, after more than thirty years connected with computing, that MS are again missing the point. They develop OSs and Apps that do what they want it to do, just ask who actually wanted what Vista can do?. That means we have the 80/20 principle at work yet again. Most people do not want all the 'bells and whistles' that MS insist on including. A very small minority use more than just the key features as they see it, and then only enough to 'get the job done'. Extremely few home users even know what else is 'under the bonnet/hood' and care even less about that. What MS need to do is focus on what the majority of home and business users actually want to be able to do, find that out on a world-wide basis (not just NA) and let us have a system that helps us do what we want the way we want rather than gets in our way. They must also allow for the different ways different cultures work, speak and interact - even US English grammar and spelling are very different from UK English usages. They need to have an option during an install that sets which language(s) are to be used and to instal ONLY those - the default US English still always gets installed and that causes huge problems for many until it is turned off! And how many users/Admins know how to do that?

glfinney
glfinney

I think that Microsoft is having to re-learn the same lessons all over again. Most people want improvement but not at the expense of Price,or having to re-learn how to do the same tasks all over again. My main objection is the Over all Price tag of a stand alone OS package. If they could reduce the price of the os I would be more likely to put up with the changes.

lamont152
lamont152

Agreed! My experiences with Vista sucked. It's extremely slow and unstable. It's defiantly a repeat of Windows ME.

colli2
colli2

By having several different versions of the OS, MS increases it's income. Lower level versions cost less bringing the price of new PC's it is installed on, down. By putting the new OS out there before all of the drivers can be developed, the early income can be used to debug the OS and help pay for the service packs that we all know will follow. Obviously, the customer doesn't figure in as a primary concern at all! When we look at the raging successes (like 98 and XP) you have to wonder why then would MS redo the same mistakes it made with ME . . . like I said, it's all about money!

Tech Warrior
Tech Warrior

As a share holder of microsoft I understand the return, but more of my companies customers would be buying Vista if it was a quality product, and I will not reccomend they upgrade to vista from XP until I have tested it and found it whole myself.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

worse than WinMe by bazillions of miles. edit: I've run both. And a typo I don't give a 'hoot' about.

norb_houston
norb_houston

I guess its Plan B. Place Vista in brown paper bag with a personal "treat" and a nice bow to seal it up and return to MS. Seems like thats all they give is us a P.O.S. OS......

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

I think if they could have WinFS ready for beta releases in early '09, they would have held off releasing Vista in order to include it. That would certainly make me take a good long look at it, although I certainly wouldn't be an early adopter. I don't think kernel or file structure inprovements would inspire the home consumers to open their wallets, though.

Thack
Thack

Ah, at last a breath of sanity in an otherwise bizarre and irrational storm of invective and emotional, illogical ranting!

Tony Michener
Tony Michener

Why would you want MS to buy Apple just to distribute Leopard to the PC masses? Why not just convince Steve Jobs to allow the installation of OS X Leopard directly on a PC... hell, I'd even settle for being able to install it in a VM!

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

That's a whole lot like politics. In America, 2 major parties that grow ever further from the 'middle of the road' mainstream majority. Yet virtually no one is interested in voting ANY 3rd party because 'they don't want to vote for a loser'. Until consumers begin to adopt Mac, Linux, BSD, and whatever else is out there no matter whether or not they are 'adopting a winner', MS will keep its place at the top.

horus9339
horus9339

Why put yourself though it? We have the biggest money making company the world has ever seen and yet they cannot build a stable, secure, user friendly, PC friendly, Hardware friendly, well they cannot produce what is needed. How long do we have to have 64 bit pc's that still have to use 32 bit tech', Linux has supported 64 bit for years and is FREE, Vista Ultimate ?215, it has no software built in, little to no support on most hardware (my X-Fi, nVidia cards, Artpad, and printer are still only half working, will need authentication (with a 30-45 min wait on an expensive phone line, go on try the online authentication), is slower than XP. Oh! and still does not support older hardware or systems. Mandriva 2008 booted my AMD 1500 with fx5200 perfectly and runs lovely, and did I need a driver for any of my hardware? NO!! Windohs is a nightmare.

Thack
Thack

Yes. Take a look at http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/ I think you'll find it quite encouraging. MS are NOT going to pull the rug out from XP users for the next several years. That's why most of the invective in debate is irrational and ill-informed.

jheaton
jheaton

First off, caps is a bad thing. Stop yelling at us. Second, if you don't like the Vista OS, then just downgrade it back to XP. The Vista license allows that.

Thack
Thack

Did you seriously buy it without checking your old software for compability first?? Are you SERIOUSLY blaming MS for this?? You should blame yourself for not doing your research properly. MS has never hidden the fact that some older programs won't run under Vista, and has leant over backwards to make that clear. Some older programs wouldn't run under XP, either. And ditto all the way back to the beginning. Get over it.

bpsull
bpsull

From the point of view of home/SMB users backward compatability with old software and software designed for older systems is very important. The purchase of software is a capital outlay which cannot (generally) be recovered, particularly for home users. Many application packages cannot simply be replaced just because MS has released a new Windows version and you can't get the older version installed on the new machine(s). And since when has MS been "obsessed" with backwards compatibility? I would be hard pressed to recall any Windows release (at least since the 3.x to 95 jump) that didn't cut off the ability to use a large number of programs that were designed for thje preceding version (I won't even go into legacy application support or even support for software from more than 1 version back). As for sacrificing engineering 'perfection' to improve the UI response time... in Windows that is extremely important for end users. Windows doesn't have a command line only interface, it has a GUI. Faster response times for the GUI should be a high priority. If the difference can only be measured in tiny, near imperceivable, fractions of a second that is one thing but when it means a difference of seconds in a GUI only environment then it's hardly 'perfect' now is it?

eric.mar10
eric.mar10

If you are running your business on "antique software" that the vendor does not plan to update... that is your fault. I'm very down with XP over Vista, but you are the ones that bought 200 computers with Vista without testing to see if your software is compatible. Your company tried saving a few dollars and ended up spending more because they didn't follow the basic rules of upgrading. Don't thank Bill and the gang for your mess... look in the mirror. You knew you had antique software and you knew there were many issues with Vista... why then did you buy 200 computers with Vista before testing? Don't tell me because of the cheaper price... you don't buy cat food for your dog just because the cat food is on sale.

jheaton
jheaton

Don't forget, you have the right under Vista licensing to downgrade to XP. You may need to make a call to Microsoft, to get a valid key, but it's better than having a bunch of boat anchors...

ijusth
ijusth

I understnad the anguish but one question I do have to ask. Why did you get in a number of new computers before you did your regression testing to see if the new units understood the old software. Actually you would likely have discovered this problem running Vista on one testbed machine regardless of the manufacturer label. At that point you might have been able to get those new PCs with XP as a retro-install.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

Amen. I spent too much time trying to figure out where to find the things I like to tweak. Ridiculous. Hardware troubleshooting wizard: I am crap at troubleshooting hardware. That wizard is worse. Do I really want to change this font? (I do love hyperbole at times!) edutLruoe

Mark.Moran
Mark.Moran

I'm an IT Consultant & software developer and switched to Vista in June 07. To say it's bug ridden and unstable is just simply nonsense. It certainly is NOT a replay of ME either. I have experienced only a few minor bugs which have been fairly easy to work around. There is a performance difference between it an XP but not so vast as to be really noticeable or irritating, if so I would have switched back as my machine is Vista / XP dual boot.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

"I don't think kernel or file structure inprovements would inspire the home consumers to open their wallets, though." Home users don't even think of their computer in terms of OS, much less kernel or file structure. For anybody besides Palmetto who reads this: I'm not bashing home users. For most home users a computer is a handy-dandy appliance, much like a toaster. They don't give a hoot about the toaster internals and they don't give a hoot about the kernel. edit: JIC there is a typo - I'm past caring about typos tonite.

seanferd
seanferd

Nor that any actual improvement under the hood would impress a home user. Good eye-candy using less RAM might get them somewhere. "Access your files (and fonts?) from anywhere without your own machine" might grab some people, but then, why would they buy any OS or computer of their own for that? Hmmmmm.....

pccoder28
pccoder28

I'd love to see Jobs let 'er rip with Leopard! As a developer, I just want to see a stable, secure and feature-complete OS platform dominate the marketplace--then, I can write and sell my apps confident that a buggy and ever-changing market-dominant OS won't get in the way. The Java frameworks are now a mess, Python and Ruby are slow and the GUI toolkits for these are too crude, and VS frameworks (all versions) cause major hiccups in Vista and XP. It feels like I'm programming in quicksand! If Leopard became dominant, at least the underlying core of things would be rock solid.

ben@channells
ben@channells

I've got a AMD1300, when new had WinME but quickly upgraded to NT4, then Win2k and now XP. Video and Disk plus memory has been upgraded over the years. By today standards the CPU is too slow to play new Games and video editing is sluggish but OK. If it dies it would need a new motherboard and CPU/Video/RAM, but even Microsoft recommends a 2GHz Dual Core and 2GBytes or RAM. Which would be over ?500 for the PC box but Vista Ultimate is over ?300 and does not offer any extra to what I've already got with XP (yes it does have SafeBoot full disk encryption) My 1.5TB SAN has a Linux embeded, but which version of Linux offers media centre features, easy for the kids to use and support VMware hosts ??

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Firefox 2.0 and higher has a built-in spell-checker.

GRAYGOAST52
GRAYGOAST52

do not get me wrong I like vista I have gotten use to it by teaching myself.mybe I came accrose wrong on my blog.and mybe I have no business replying. I have a great life.I alwasys read lables before I buy software for my computer im not an internet tech or programmer,I am a normal guy trying to teach myself software usage, I download alot of software to test it on my computer,I have been told to be careful and do not mess with your registry and I only trust software I download from microsoft I buy what works well on my OS.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

An attempt to force and to actually force are 2 different, though related things. MS has been attempting (successfully) to 'bully people upwards' for years. That is what is objectionable.

Thack
Thack

"Were I to install Vista on my home computers, I would have to replace: A) hardware - an expense that ain't in the budget and furthermore shouldn't have to be. B) ALL but 1 of my software packages - another expense that ain't in the budget and furthermore shouldn't have to be." Fine. So don't install Vista, then. Nobody is forcing you to! "Blatant attempts at forcing me to spend money that I in fact don't have and don't need to spend are insulting (to put it politely) and tyrannical (to keep it polite)." This amazes me. NOBODY is forcing you to spend any money whatsoever!! XP SP2 support continues for two years after the release of SP3 (and indeed further SPs will extend the support period even further). I've never heard such a totally illogical rant.

boxfiddler
boxfiddler

Were I to install Vista on my home computers, I would have to replace: A) hardware - an expense that ain't in the budget and furthermore shouldn't have to be. B) ALL but 1 of my software packages - another expense that ain't in the budget and furthermore shouldn't have to be. Blatant attempts at forcing me to spend money that I in fact don't have and don't need to spend are insulting (to put it politely) and tyrannical (to keep it polite). Most people do not have the discretionary income required to acquiesce to MS bully tactics.

Thack
Thack

Bearing in mind that Vista (32 bit) will still run most DOS and Windows 3.1 programs, I think that says a great deal about the commitment MS have made to backward compatibility. I'm not defending Microsoft, though. They've painted themselves into a corner by making some serious architectural compromises in XP (not enforcing any of the security guidelines, for instance), and they reaped what they sowed by suffering hundreds (thousands?) of security vulnerabilities. Now they've decided to re-engineer the OS properly, but the impact on backward compatibility is inevitable, as is the inevitable UAC policeman - you can't have a complete free-for-all AND decent security. Not in Vista, nor Linux, nor Mac OSX. On balance I support what they are doing. In fact, I wish they'd done this years ago. I think they worry too much about backward compatibility. The bottom line is, nobody is forcing you to upgrade your PC. If you are happy with the software you've got, and the OS you've got, then don't upgrade!! I repeat, if your PC is running XP now, NOBODY is making you upgrade to Vista! If you're thinking of buying a Vista machine, you should check first whether it will support your old software. If it won't, then either upgrade your software or don't buy it! Backward-compatibility is not a god-given right, you know. The degree of compatibility is a strategic decision made my Microsoft based on numerous factors. If you don't agree with their decision, shop elsewhere. But DON'T moan about it!

eric.mar10
eric.mar10

Cayble, I found your statement out of line. The guy was submitting his experience and opinion and just because your differed didn't warrant a personal attack on his computer literacy. Kudos to you for being so superior....

catfish182
catfish182

I oversee 7 clients and only one of them have Vista installed. BUT they have it installed on 7 machines and there is no issue with the machines at all. They are a tech company though so its not like they do not know what they are doing. I run Vista on one of my machines here and i have little to no problems. I do not run Vista at home though as i have a ATI all in wonder card and they do not make drivers for TV capture. They still don't nor do i think they will. I agree though that setup in a enterprise environment is not the best place for it. Home users maybe but why use something when XP is running fine? of course i seem to remember XP being hated until SP2.

The Scummy One
The Scummy One

I use comps all of the time, and currently running a Vista machine (forced) along with 2 PCLOS07, and 3 XP pro systems (at work alone). Now, I am new to Vista since I gave up on it a year ago. But I am being forced (against my will, with many complaints) to use it -- gag... Some of the problems that I have with it (from only a few days of trying to avoid it), on a Vista Compatible system, I have problems when it goes into suspend mode. Although I can see the mouse (bringing it back), I see a black screen, no logon prompt or anything. But, if I press the 3 keys for access and type my PW, the whole system comes back. Many people would freak out about this point and shutdown the system, and/or call for support. I have had plenty of IE7 issues, so I really dont want to get into it much, only 2 of the 3 printers I use would install (I rarely print though, and I upgraded everyones printers in the dept except mine). But this was light usage, my main system is XP, and I try to do things in PCLOS just to be a dept. rebel or something. As for problems, I had more from the early release, but I am not really using it much (as of now). But I think people would be annoyed at the black screen (this may be just this model system, I didnt have this particular problem previously).

Cayble
Cayble

I work in an office packed full of computer neophytes and many use Vista and not a one has had a "Vista" related problem. Just in case you think I'm a Microsoft shill, forget it. My opinion? don't waste your money on Vista as its not really an upgrade of significance. Some might say better security, but the truth is XP is so secure hardly anyone will ever benefit from Vistas improved security, and its nagging about asking you to approve installs and actions is enough of a counter to the security that its not worth the dollars. Yes, Direct X 10 has been a bit of a disappointment, given the hardware you need to see improvement over a very good XP system with Direct X 9. And why anyone in their right mind would even thing of putting Vista on an AGP machine is beyond me.. After we have heard nothing but crying and whining form the anti MS crowd about the high end hardware needed to run Vista? Any IT personnel who suggested that must be mentally unfit. But to say, "For the lay person, even a semi-literate one, Vista is a nightmare" only shows that the person making the statement is well below computer literate, they should probably start using an Apple.

jjsteich
jjsteich

I'm not an IT consultant, just a poor uni schlub who got Vista Ultimate installed on his barely 4-yr old Dell as a "free" uni upgrade. The Dell system has a 2X AGP video slot, so no amount of persuasion would get Vista to run right on that machine. Our IT people insisted I get used to it or "upgrade" back to XP on my own. (We own our own machines.) I eventually did that but in the meantime bought a used iMac G4 and my life has been much more enjoyable. I use the XP-PC for my file, print and email server now. For the lay person, even a semi-literate one, Vista is a nightmare.

jmgarvin
jmgarvin

No really though it isn't THAT bad, but it does have it's problems and they still have a number of frustrating bugs to works out (the copy/paste bug still is a problem for many systems, even after the "patch"). I think the frustration is that it is NOT enterprise ready, not by a long shot. There are too many problems deploying Vista to the enterprise to make it worth while. For the home user it is fine, but I have to say DirectX10 is a HUGE let down...