Windows

Video: What CIOs need to know about Windows 7

This episode of CIO Sanity Savers looks at five different aspects of Windows 7 and the potential impact that they could have on IT.

Operating systems have become very utilitarian and are not something IT leaders spend much time thinking about. But, Windows 7 is poised to replace Windows XP as the standard OS for businesses, so CIOs need to know what it can do and how it can help them. This episode of CIO Sanity Savers looks at five different aspects of Windows 7 and how they can impact IT.

For those of you who prefer text rather than video, you can click the "Transcript" link underneath the video player or you can read: Windows 7 report card: The hits and misses or TechRepublic's Windows 7 article collection.

About

Jason Hiner is the Global Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Global Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He is an award-winning journalist who writes about the people, products, and ideas that are revolutionizing the ways we live and work in the 21st century.

23 comments
anubea
anubea

Maybe Windows 7 is not like that good.

Baldrick9
Baldrick9

I think it is misinformation to say Win7 starts faster than XP. I have 2 machines on my desk at the moment:- an AMD2600+ XP SP3 and an EeeBox Atom N330 Dual Core with nVidia ION chipset Win7. The (old) XP machine definitely boots faster and shutsdown faster than the Win7 machine, by almost 50% - even though the Win7 machine has almost double the processing power (according to Passmark) of the old XP machine. The little Linux netbook I have running single core Atom N270 is faster than both of them, by a long shot, but then it has an SSD, and the others don't. This is just my anecdotal input, I'd like to see some same-hardware comparison tests of XP and Win7.

estcst
estcst

So, you are running this on two different types of hardware with no real benchmarks and you're also comparing them to another OS that isn't running on the same hardware, probably doesn't have the same file system and doubtlessly doesn't have the same functionality at boot time but you're still going around proclaiming that XP boots faster than Windows 7 without even bothering to Google for people who've taken the time to go out and do professional benchmark tests? Am I missing something here?

jhoward
jhoward

I migrated my AMD quad core PC at home to Windows 7 and there is a HUGE difference in boot time. While seeing the desktop in about the same time I never have to wait for the UI to respond to my actions which makes the boot time ACTUALLY faster. I believe that the OS changes that take advantage of multicore processors have made a significant improvement in the responsiveness of the user experience as a whole. I saw similar results with Vista however the amount of bloat and lack of users having the proper hardware really doomed it from the start. In the end it is all about parallel processing. With the OS and applications utilizing more of the multi core CPUs of today and tomorrow we should see better responsiveness moving forward.

fvazquez
fvazquez

If Xp or W7 or W2K should have something to do with the final speed of the computer, then processors like Core2Duo or 64bit technology would be useless. It wouldnt be necessary to change hardware so often... The speed of a PC has to do with harddisc RPMs, hard disc access speed and how much of the hard disc space is free (normally using more that 50% of the hard disc should slow down computer speed response), motherboard speed and technology (32 or 64 bits), and processor speed. So I find it very hard that saying that an OS is faster that another because when talking about computer speed has more to do with hardware than with software. Cheers!

bp4LI
bp4LI

Regarding: "But, Windows 7 is poised to replace Windows XP as the standard OS for businesses, so CIOs need to know what it can do and how it can help them." Why continue to allow Microsoft to force this frustration on you? Thanks to Google, it's no longer necessary. Check out Google Apps as an alternative solution that will ELIMINATE these frustrations. Google Apps Standard Edition is free, so you can try it yourself now. You can also purchase Google Apps Premier through Google's Authorized Reseller Program. The company I work for is one of Google's partners if you'd like to find out more about how you can get away from forced upgrades ONCE AND FOR ALL, visit www.logic-infusion.com

1001001geek
1001001geek

WOW!!! Google apps is now an OS that can do all of those 5 items mentioned in the transcript. IMPRESSIVE! Cheers,

charleswdavis6670
charleswdavis6670

Why has Google interrupted me several times with upgrades to Google Chrome? All software must be enhanced. No group of programmers can get it right the first time -- then the technological advances cause a review of the program.

Migration Expert Zone
Migration Expert Zone

Excellent overview of some of the benefits CIOs should consider. How about following this up with a similar video on the CIO/IT considerations of Windows Server 2008 R2?

MSFTAlexT
MSFTAlexT

Great video Jason, thanks for sharing. It's rare to hear someone talk about Problem Steps Recorder and some other features. I personally use most of these new features like PSR and XP Mode but many IT Pros haven't had the chance to yet, although those who have are usually really satisfied. I just shared your video on our @CIOsConnect stream! Hope you will follow us on twitter. Best, Alex Microsoft Windows Client Team

Slave2theMachine
Slave2theMachine

My testing so far has found 2 major issues with upgrading to windows 7. 1. I had to remove Office 2007, for some reason when the system was migrating programs and files after the update it would fail. Once Office 2007 was removed this fixed this issue. 2. i-Tunes, not a program I like but we do have some users that require it, windows7 upgrade caught this problem prior to installing the update. I have had windows 7 professional running on 2 test platforms well before it was released for retail (and yes it was the full version). I have had no issues running programs from XP, Vista, and even some win 98 Programs that Vista would not run. I have only managed to intentionally crash windows 7 twice, and for programs that failed without me trying to push the system, windows asked if I wanted to run it with the recommended settings. After saying yes the program ran smoothly and has not caused any further problems. I think the thing that most IT staff need to watch out for reviews where people them selves did not do the research but stole it from someone else, much like the vista reports were (and no I am not saying this is one of those, but that most of the vista ones I found on the web were more or less the same exact review reworded).

Petetm
Petetm

According to Norm Judah "CTO" of MS services, some things may not work with Windows 7, like Notes. Which he says you should probably just "discard." WHAT !?!?! First, just discard your email and colaboration infrastructure!?!?! Right! Secondly, Notes DOES work with Windows 7. And there I was thinking Steve Ballmer was the king of FUD. What a bunch of clowns.

Bill Wilson
Bill Wilson

Most of our customers have found the transition easier to Linux (Ubuntu) on the desktop rather than move to Windows 7. They keep the same hardware run disk cleanup and then defrag then install Linux. After the system will offer at boot time the option of XP or Linux. Open Office is compatible with different versions of MS Office and can save to PDF. !!!PCs now work more reliably and zero cost!!!

cjshelby
cjshelby

I tested Vista RC1 back in late '06. I knew something was amiss when I started the install. My almost new 20Gb hard drive was no where near big enough, so I went out and bought a 120Mb drive just to "celebrate the occasion". I had bought what I thought were really descent, but not cutting edge components. Asus Mobo, 3.0 Ghz P4, Asus 512 Mb video card, etc. Not gamer material, but not exactly a 286 either. Besides the (expected) fact that some older programs would not run, some driver issues, etc., the thing was slower than paint drying! I related my experience on another site and some smart a$$ replied, "well you need to buy newer hardware". I told him to send me his Mastercard number and other info and I would order exactly what I needed that afternoon. Some people just don't get the point, and think that it's perfectly acceptable to pour money into solving any problem without thinking first. That's why we're in this financial mess (The U.S. at least). Well being the common sense person I am, I decided to take a second look at Linux. I had played around with Turbo Linux back in '99, but there wasn't much in the way of applications available at the time. I discovered PC Linux OS and Distrowatch, and I haven't looked back. I'm currently using Ubuntu in this replacement for my 7yo Celeron laptop. I immediately set up Ubuntu in dual-boot mode with W7 after I opened the box. As a PC tech I want to keep W7 around for educational purposes. I also need it to watch my Netflix :). I even picked up an old PIII laptop for $5 at a yard sale a few months ago. I set it up with Linux Mint XFCE, and now my 9yo daughter has her very own laptop! And to those who say "Windows just works", I say where? In what parallel universe? I'd rather get my headaches with OS quirks for free than pay $99 or more for an "upgrade" to W7.

The 'G-Man.'
The 'G-Man.'

you are reuired to support 2 Operating systems and are required to reboot to go from one to the other. Not really saving....

briscofan
briscofan

Just wait until all those novice linux users try and upgrade and discover their video stops working, their sound stops and they have to go to the command line and modify many config files to get things back to the way they were before the OS upgrade. I am an avid linux user and even I get frustrated on each major OS upgrade searching the web to find how to fix what the upgrade just broke.

tr
tr

Zero cost until you need support, and then because there are a limited amount of good Linux techs, you get gouged and lied to and ending up spending a ton of cash on stuff you don't need on things you don't understand... Just saying...

Slave2theMachine
Slave2theMachine

True if you need support on Linux, in some geographical areas there are not a lot of techs available that actually know what they are doing. In the end choosing Linux over windows is still a good decision in some environments. In my office we use both Linux and Windows machines. Yet through out the entire process of using both OS's not one user has ever requested a Linux desktop to work from in their cubicle, even with the option was made available. Now this is not because they do not know how to use the Linux operating system, we have 5 stations in our operations area with 2 linux boxes running three monitors in a secure network and one windows box to access outside resources. These users know what they are doing and know what they want. This tells me that even advanced users still prefer their windows boxes. So I got off topic but in the end yes your right the OS is free, but the support can be costly without good techs available to help you.

cjshelby
cjshelby

"you get gouged and lied to and ending up spending a ton of cash on stuff you don't need on things you don't understand..." How does this differ from the "standard" practices employed by some computer repair people? And what, if anything, makes a Linux savvy tech more likely to be dishonest? Just wondering.....

tr
tr

It has (almost) nothing to do with ethics and everything to do with availability. We can't swing a dead cat without hitting a Windows savvy consultant. So you have to be (more) honest than the one Linux Consultant that is available.

Van
Van

It is not about whether you do Linux or M$ OS that makes one honest or dishonest. It is premised on the speculation that YOU agree to from the market place, which, unfortunately puts all the validation and verification of services and its costs upon you.