Chris Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Chicago (IL) - Several industry sources have confirmed to TG Daily that a very early version of Windows 7, previously code-named Blackcomb Vienna, already has been shipped to “key partners” as a “Milestone 1” (M1) code drop for validation purposes. A roadmap received by TG Daily indicates that the new operating system will be introduced in the second half of 2009.While it has generally been believed that Windows 7 was scheduled for a 2010 debut, Microsoft has revised the roadmap and apparently moved up the release date by a few months: A recently distributed roadmap of the OS lists a release to manufacturing in H2 2009. Microsoft declined to comment on this date.More | Here Remembering that release dates don't usually happen with Microsoft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Surely it would be better to get Vista right to all users satisfaction first. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike567 Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Vista is just like windows ME.Which explains why its so crap :lol:. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Vista is just like windows ME.Which explains why its so crap :lol:.I doubt if Vista is as bad as ME was I had Windows ME pre-installed on my first ever PC and it was so dire that a few months later I bought the retail version of XP Home!I tried out Vista last year in BETA and it worked fine for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I have said it before and I will say it again. Vista is an excellent operating system if you have a suitable computer, compatible peripherals and software.Most of the vociferous critics are people who tried to upgrade from XP and found it gave them problems. If you do a clean install on suitable equipment you will soon see the benefits.When Microsoft launch the next operating system - the cycle will repeat itself - and the same critics will leap out of the bushes all over again. After all, they have had a lot of practice murdering the reputation of Windows each time there was a new version. I think most people accept that ME was a dud - but all other versions have been a great step forwards and Vista falls into that category.Management's step-father who is in his eighties and a keen computer user recently upgraded his 3/4 year old XP computer to Vista Home Premium against my advice. Us old uns always know best and he has a Ph.D in know-it-all. It was a disaster.After a couple of weeks struggling and cussing he eventually agreed to let me upgrade the machine with a replacement PSU, motherboard, CPU, graphics card, DVD burner and a pair of SATA hard drives. It was management's Christmas gift for her dad. I installed his Vista and software and it went like a dream. He moaned at first about the differences in how Vista works but after a couple of weeks he agrees it is much better and he would never go back. If a nearly 90 year old can do it - what is wrong with the modern whinging youth who find Vista so difficult...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester1 Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I have to agree with Alan my new lappy with Vista works very well. :D The only doubt I have is Microsoft and their commitment to provide long term support Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuces wild Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Remember this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbj8kMvQDfI After 2 SP's, Win98 was one of the best OS's MS introduced.I think the folks having a problem with VISTA are trying to upgrade on a computer not designed to run it.Having said that..........you have to wonder why MS is introducing a new OS so close to the release of VISTA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 I have always said that MOST of the complaints about XP were from people who had tried to upgrade a W98 computer. This why I won't touch Vista with a barge pole on this computer, it was built for XP. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 My computer was built for XP, but I am 100% sure if I was that way inclined it would run Vista, my last computer was built for 98 and upgraded to XP without problems, the only problem is if you take a computer out of the ark and try to upgrade, that's my opinion any how you shouldn't be afraid to upgrade as long as you don't push it to hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 I think the folks having a problem with VISTA are trying to upgrade on a computer not designed to run it.I am using a 7 year old PC and it ran Vista okay when I tried it out in BETA last year.I think the reason is that my PC specs are quite a bit higher than the minimum requirements needed for Vista.Another thing that helped was that I have 1.5 GB of RAM as Vista seems to be a lot more memory hungry than XP is!Having said that..........you have to wonder why MS is introducing a new OS so close to the release of VISTA. Yes it doesn't make sense as it's likely to put people off upgrading to Vista when a new O/S could be released as early as 2009 or 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 Vista minimum requirementsHome Premium / Business / Ultimate* 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor * 1 GB of system memory * 40 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space * Support for DirectX 9 graphics with: o WDDM Driver o 128 MB of graphics memory (minimum) o Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware o 32 bits per pixel * DVD-ROM drive * Audio Output * Internet access (fees may apply)My current specs:I have a 3 Ghz processor, 1.5 GB of RAM, a 256 MB graphics card and a 120 GB hard drive which is the reason why Vista ran okay on my PC even though it is old! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2008 Ah, but you don't have a 3GHz processor CW :P Although Vista may have ran "OK" for that very brief test, put it into everyday use --day to day and then see how you feel?Vista was a major upgrade to Windows, this new Windows is a minor upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted January 20, 2008 Report Share Posted January 20, 2008 Ah, but you don't have a 3GHz processor CW :PI have an AMD Athlon XP 3000+ that is the equivalent of a 3 Ghz processor as that's how AMD rated it when it was first released It does more 'work' per clock cycle and this is why it is rated higher even though it only runs at a speed of 2.170 GhzAlthough Vista may have ran "OK" for that very brief test, put it into everyday use --day to day and then see how you feel?I ran it as BETA for a few weeks and it ran okay but I never experimented with games on Vista but for everyday use it seemed fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.