Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > Microsoft dangles a few more Windows 7 release details over our heads

Microsoft dangles a few more Windows 7 release details over our heads

Jul. 21, 2009 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

So, they're trying. Microsoft last night (for me) posted some more information about Windows 7. Here are the pertinent (and new) bits…

I have nothing new to add regarding RTM today.

Many believed that Microsoft would have announced RTM last Monday at WPC, and there are indications that that was the original plan. Expect news this week, however.

ISV (Independent software vendor) and IHV (Independent hardware vendor) Partners will be able to download Windows 7 RTM from Microsoft Connect or MSDN on August 6th.

Microsoft Partner Program Gold/Certified Members will be able to download Windows 7 RTM in English through the Microsoft Partner Network (MPN) Portal on August 16th.

Microsoft Action Pack Subscribers will be about to download Windows 7 RTM in English starting August 23rd.

OEMs will receive Windows 7 RTM software images beginning approximately 2 days after we officially RTM.

Volume License (VL) customers with an existing Software Assurance (SA) license will be able to download Windows 7 RTM in English starting August 7th via the Volume License Service Center (VLSC).

Volume License customers without a SA license will be able to purchase Windows 7 through Volume Licensing on September 1.

TechNet and MSDN subscribers will be able to download Windows 7 RTM in English on August 6th and remaining languages by October 1st.

We are going to release an evaluation of Windows 7 Professional for IT Professionals via the Springboard Series shortly after RTM

A special thank you to our beta testers is needed for their time and effort in helping make Windows 7 a solid release ... Beta testers will not receive a free copy of Windows 7. [Emphasis mine]

!!!!

The painful thing here, for beta testers, is that they've been screwed. The rationale here is priceless, too: "Many beta testers are already subscribers to TechNet; those of you who fit that description will be able to download Windows 7 RTM shortly after RTM." But later in the post, it notes that "over 40% of beta testers are IT professionals." So roughly 50 percent of beta testers probably don't, in fact, have TechNet access (as TechNet is an IT pro service). Enjoy your special thank you.

I know there have been some rumors going around about a "family pack" for Windows 7. We have heard a lot of feedback from beta testers and enthusiasts over the last 3 years that we need a better solution for homes with multiple PCs. I'm happy to confirm that we will indeed be offering a family pack of Windows 7 Home Premium (in select markets) which will allow installation on up to 3 PCs. As I’ve said before, stay tuned to our blog for more information on this and any other potential offers.

You know, one of my big complaints here is that we need to know the cost (and, apparently, availability) of the Family Pack in order to determine which is the better deal (the individual retail pre-orders or the Family Pack). But the promotional pre-order offer is over in the US, so it's too late there. I still think it would have been a lot classier to announce this Family Pack, and its pricing, with the promotion. That would have let customers make better educated decisions about which was best for them. Here, we see how Microsoft's lack of clarity just ends up hurting people. And I don't get that at all.

I'll update the Windows 7 FAQ with this date information today.

Discuss this Article 50

ropp29
on Jul 21, 2009
Wow. Even with this, information is still woefully scarce. What bothers me is that they have taken so long to announce the family pack and still haven't announced the price. Stupid. At least preorders can be canceled if need be.
ropp29
on Jul 21, 2009
And I really, really want to know more about the upgrade version, and whether or not it requires an activated previous version of Windows to be present on the hard drive.
romeyinfc
on Jul 21, 2009
Does MS have a history of rewarding Windows beta testers with free versions or discounts? I ran betas of XP and Vista and remember no such incentives. A discount would have been nice, or even extend the 50% offer until RTM or something, but I think it was a pretty fair trade off to be able to install and run free Windows for nearly 15 months (Jan 09 - Mar 10). A reward would have been nice, but I don't really consider myself screwed.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 21, 2009
I'm not sure what's supposed to be "painful" here for people who got the marketing beta. As far as I can remember (and that goes back to the 1980s and Windows 3.0) the people getting the broad-based marketing beta have never gotten free copies of retail product for nothing more than using the product. (A few people did as a reward for turning in high quality bug reports for Vista but not just for being willing to use free software for a few months) They also don't get a free pony. I'm sure that horrifies Paul equally and was as equally not promised or expected by anybody. Oh, and to show I'm taking this malarky as seriously as Paul did with his "!!!!", here's a "????" for anybody who thinks you get free product as a thank you for using a free product.
redunion1940
on Jul 21, 2009
Yeah what is the surprise here Paul, I know that in 2010 I have to go and buy Windows 7 Home Premium, would like Pro, but depends if I get a student discount. Also to say we have been screwed is inaccurate, this wasn't a select beta test system, you didn't have to jump through a bunch of loops, fill out a bunch of paper work. You simply provided a couple bits of info and got Win 7 7000 or later on Win 7 7100. I am just happy that Microsoft is coming out with a great OS and that it provides everything I need, it will increase the cost of my $478 dollar home assembled machine, but I think it is worth it.
robertsjoe
on Jul 21, 2009
Microsoft's YouTube closes down: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10292031-75.html?part=rss&subj=news&ta...
dgrisman
on Jul 21, 2009
I agree totally with Mike G. on MSFT's beta user policies. Frankly, if you really interested in evaluating their software, one should purchase a Technet subscription. For about $300/year you get access to almost the entire MSFT software portfolio via a download subscription for evaluation purposes. This is an incredible offer that is not matched by any other major software company.
Andreas J
on Jul 22, 2009
"Enjoy your special thank you" I did, it was the $50 Win7 Home Premium. A price cut is better than nothing, even if temporary.
Dipsh t Admin
on Jul 22, 2009
Paul, while I mostly agree with you concerning the lack of clarity, the expectation that beta testers would receive a free copy is a little absurd quite frankly. Would it be nice? Of course, but I never expected a free copy when I started testing the beta and RC, and I really don't think anyone else did. And it is not like using 7 has been some hard slog that took hours and hours of time to install and fill out bug reports. It's been extremely stable and bug free. It's not like I had to "work" in order to use this thing. So I don't know how it is that we've been screwed. As others have mentioned, MS has no history in doing this, so why the expectation now?
lketchum
on Jul 22, 2009
Perhaps, in light of their many markets and the complex needs of different groups, the company's sales strategy and pricing is not fully evolved? We're seeing information released once plans are solidified. I don't think this is a problem, or new. I don't want companies to give things away for free. I want them to support the products they sell and Microsoft does that. I think they are right about the information that a great many BETA testers already have access to MSDN and TechNet. This isn't new either. IT professionals already test a lot of software and they should have no expectation that they will be rewarded, or thanked in any way. They should be testing as part of their efforts to develop their own plans and as part of their own participation in evaluations. The idea that testers are being "screwed" is ridiculous. Testers should have the right objectives in mind before the sign up and test and receiving free this or that should not be among them.
Saucy
on Jul 22, 2009
@Paul Way back, no not regular time, way back in Internet time, well it was a while in real time too, I wasn't an official beta tester but I was quite involved in running the Betas and release candidates of Windows 2000. There was talk of a free copy 'n all for anyone who put in a lot of time etc. etc. But in restrospect, it's not like they asked me. And Beta testers for Microsoft usually apply to become beta testers - it's not like they are imposed upon. They want their hands on the latest and greatest etc. etc. they want to live in the future so to speak and to do so apply to the Beta program. So while it might be nice if Microsoft sent them a free coupon or issue of Technet Magazine (although sending everyone a copy of a magazine would probably cost more than sending a copy of Windows DVD lol), I do not see how in any way Microsoft is obliged nor should feel obliged to send Beta testers a free copy nor anything at all. Besides, people who are serious about trying out all the Microsoft stuff should get a Technet subscription, that's what it's there for.
kent909
on Jul 22, 2009
Here is a different perspective. I used the beta of Vista. To get the full benefit of Aero I had to purchase a better video card. There were a few issues with the beta, mainly a couple of applications I used would not run correctly in the beta. When it was released I paid $150 for Vista thinking for sure, that the problems with my applications would be fixed. Not the case they remained. SP1 was released and the problems still existed. I gave up. Was the beta software free, not really. Do I think I should or would get a free copy of RTM, no. However it would have been nice to be able to download the RTM and have it run for say three months so I could have determined that they did not fix my issues. That would have saved me $150. Funny thing is the problems did go away in Win 7. Nice to see that they finally do fix things. However I will never pay for another MS OS again.
planetarian
on Jul 22, 2009
Where did anyone say beta testers would be getting a free copy of the OS? silly. It's amusing how, just because MS brings attention to it, it's somehow abnormal and those 'affected' are being screwed.
shark47
on Jul 22, 2009
So, I'm not getting a free laptop with the RTM version of Windows 7 Ultimate installed? Way to treat your beta testers, Microsoft.
RaaJ
on Jul 22, 2009
Kent909: I understand your frustration for having had to buy new hardware to take advantage of new features in Vista. But was it your decision or was it imposed on you by Microsoft? So you are never going to pay for a MS OS again because you had an issue that wasn't solved in the GA version. Please let us know when you find an OS that does not have even a single problem for any of its users. Whatever your current choice of OS, I am sure you'd feel justified in your choice, but I could show you at least one person who has/had problems with that OS.
lketchum
on Jul 22, 2009
@kent909 Microsoft has always provided evaluations of its software. evals have been available for Vista and other MS products. There is an eval center especially designed for customers considering the OS. Please see, http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/aa905059.aspx There are also resources which are especially designed for consumers and small businesses - please see, http://www.microsoft.com/windows/compatibility/Default.aspx Finally, it would be easy to locate any small builder in your area and engage them to help you eval software. We for example, routinely test software for people and welcome such inquiries - they most often lead to new business. There are a lot of resources out there and a lot of good answers based upon proven results.
RaaJ
on Jul 22, 2009
@lketchum: That is great information. But how many regular joes know those avenues to get evaluation versions of a Windows OS? Microsoft does squat about publicizing these avenues of help to average customers - because they are not serious about helping people find out any issues before paying up. Their approach with Windows 7 through the engineering 7 blog and increased PR shows that they are learning the value of good, honest communication with their customers, but they still have a long way to go in achieving clarity in their communications. It doesn't matter if Apple doesn't do it either. This is about Microsoft doing the right thing.
EricoF3
on Jul 22, 2009
Paul is right, I pre-order Win7 Home Premium but I would prefer pre-order Home Family Pack if I could so... But I assume I will be able to upgrade my Home premium License to a Home Family Pack License after installing it so...
DRWAM
on Jul 22, 2009
Shark, laptop? Heck, my kids will be pissed that they won't get the pony! They are just gonna have to settle for a new shiny Win 7 laptop [purchased by daddy]. I'll through in a few Webkinz too ;)
shark47
on Jul 22, 2009
Considering that you can cancel your pre-orders for the Home Premium Upgrade, that smart thing to do would have been to order 3 copies of the upgrade and then cancel it if the family pack was cheaper. And then complain about it, probably.
RaaJ
on Jul 22, 2009
Shark: That is a totally legal and valid way to go about this unclear situation around family pack pricing, but WHY does the user need to play the game? Is an OS really worth all these shenanigans? Also consider the dicking around the user has to go through should they ever need to reinstall Windows 7 upgrade version a second time. Can you imagine average Joe happily figuring out a way to install Vista and activate it before even beginning to install Windows 7? With the way the computer makers are jerking around users by not bundling installation media, why is the user supposed to create recovery media by themselves, and make sure that the discs created properly? Now more and more users need to use these recovery media to reinstall Vista before installing Windows 7. Can you imagine what a great recipe for disaster and bad karma this is for Microsoft? Compare all this with the simple approach of Apple selling just one full version at a reasonable price. Whatever the technicalities behind that price and approach, it greatly simplifies life for the user.
EricoF3
on Jul 22, 2009
Things are always sold for the prices it worth... So if Apple sell their OS at a low price it is because they evaluate their OS worth near to nothing ... So if their OS worth near to nothing not mean the Mac Computer have no value... As we can see, Apple evaluate a Mac Computer (including the Full OS) for a High price, so it mean they conciser that a Full Mac Computer worth a lot but the OS alone worth nothing... It is the same thing for Microsoft... But Microsoft don't do computers so ... But ... This is completely off topic here ... Sorry
de Silentio
on Jul 22, 2009
Glad to hear they finalized SA and TechNet/MSDN dates. Being in public education, we do the bulk of our purchase in the summer. Luckily, some of our SA machines will still be covered August 7th. A bigger bonus is that I can begin deploying Windows 7 on the appropriate machines well before the start of the school year.
de Silentio
on Jul 22, 2009
@Raaj: "Compare all this with the simple approach of Apple selling just one full version at a reasonable price." Yes, Raaj, Apple does pricing and licensing better than Microsoft. All of us know this and I don't think anyone will disagree, even if they try the apples and oranges argument (oranges are better than apples, by the way). There. Does that satisfy your need to point this out as so many have done in the past.
Saucy
on Jul 22, 2009
P.S. Microsoft offered the Beta testers a coupon of sorts anyway. Most people who were in the know enough to get on the Beta program or download an RC would have been aware of the pre-order special. I took advanatge of it and got Winodws 7 Professional at about half price. Quit complaining and have a nice day. :o) --
kent909
on Jul 22, 2009
@Raaj I understand your frustration for having had to buy new hardware to take advantage of new features in Vista. But was it your decision or was it imposed on you by Microsoft? So you are never going to pay for a MS OS again because you had an issue that wasn't solved in the GA version. My point was to say MS public beta's while they are free from MS does not mean that the people who try them out are not spending any money to do so. You are correct, it was my choice to buy new hardware. I have downloaded all MS OS public beta's since Win95. I have never had any issues even with the beta's until Vista. I accepted that Photoshop Elements 4.0 did not work on the Vista beta, it was a beta after all, but fully expected to have it work on the RTM version and at worst case on SP1. Since it did not and that I had already demostrated that I am at choice, I choose to move to the Mac platform. Had the software been some obscure DOS program from 1997 it would be understandable, but a 4.0 release from a major company is just plain unacceptable for software that cost me $150. Then to have it work in Win 7 shows it was a choice by MS to not have it work in Vista.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
Quick question for any Certified or Gold Certified Partner out there that downloads their internal-use software from the http://www.microsoft.com/msppdd site: Is Microsoft offering up a Service Pack 2 Integrated Vista ISO? I'm a Registered-level Partner with an Action Pack, and so far there's still only just an SP2 update ISO, as well as the individual EXE downloads, but only an RTM and SP1 integrated Vista install ISO. I'll be marking August 23rd on my calendar though.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
Has there been any confirmation about the release for Server 2008 R2? Is it shipping day and date with Windows 7?
de Silentio
on Jul 22, 2009
@Waethorn: "Is Microsoft offering up a Service Pack 2 Integrated Vista ISO?" I know this doesn't answer your question, but I've had a Vista sp2 Integrated ISO on the VL site for quite some time.
DRWAM
on Jul 22, 2009
Don't rule out the possibility of a family package upgrade, and a reasonable price. Time will tell.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"I know this doesn't answer your question, but I've had a Vista sp2 Integrated ISO on the VL site for quite some time." I've got a few customers that have me as the "admin" for their VL's so I'll check on there. I'll obviously use my own product keys though, since I have 10 licenses per client software key (I think I read somewhere that SBSC members get double the number of client licenses though).
subzerohitman721
on Jul 22, 2009
I really didn't think any of the beta testers were going to get free copies from Microsoft. Obviously, that would have been the obvious thing to do. However, most corporations lack common sense and only think about the bottom line. The individuals who aren't technet members who engage in beta testing just for the fun of the process, shouldn't be left out in the cold. The very limited time pre-sale that was available to everyone isn't in my opinion good enough. There should be a special discount given just to the non-technet beta testers as a real thank you. Not just words posted on the web. Being thanked sometimes means going the extra mile to show actual gratitude. I am glad that a family pack option is the best thing out of this announcement. Unless we hear of another option for beta testers, that looks like the route that most likely I will choose. All I know is that other companies participating in public testing of products that I have been involved with in the past, has done more for the testers than Microsoft has done. This is another area Microsoft could learn from other companies in how to actually treat customers right.
shark47
on Jul 22, 2009
"All I know is that other companies participating in public testing of products that I have been involved with in the past, has done more for the testers than Microsoft has done. This is another area Microsoft could learn from other companies in how to actually treat customers right." Do you test products with the expectation of receiving something at the end of the test period? I don't know why this is even an issue. Most people take part in beta tests because it gives them an opportunity to test the software before it is released.
redunion1940
on Jul 22, 2009
"Compare all this with the simple approach of Apple selling just one full version at a reasonable price. Whatever the technicalities behind that price and approach, it greatly simplifies life for the user." It is simple for apple because they have a range of 5 different models. Mini Mac, iMac, Macbook, Macbook Pro, and the Mac Pro Tower,all sold by Apple. Also to say it is simple depends on the situation, I don't like the way OEM manufacturers jerk the customer around either, but it is needed to keep cost down. To make there cheap model seem better than competitor x, y, z. You can get the disc media for 19.99 from most OEM manufacturers if you really need it. Also why would you need Vista, you could have XP to do an upgrade from.
EricoF3
on Jul 22, 2009
shark47 is right but It seems that Microsoft conciser it's us that had the chance to user Win7 before the release, more than benefit they get from our Beta testing ... lolol I must admit that Microsoft should stop arrogance on this one...
Saucy
on Jul 22, 2009
@subzerohitman721 I think the pre-order thing was enough. It was a way of offering those involved a discount without making any legal commitments and, hey, half price on retail Professional is pretty good considering the license is transferable and perpetual.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"Do you test products with the expectation of receiving something at the end of the test period? I don't know why this is even an issue." I only expect that my tests result in a better final product. I also know that some off-hand suggestions that I've had (like VHD boot - or more generally, VHD and WIM cross compatibility/conversion because IT people love to move images back and forth between physical and virtual machines, or at least some kind of interim solution until Windows 8) have made their way into final products.
truffoo0
on Jul 22, 2009
Comparing Microsoft and Apple pricing/licensing is a bit dopey really (like comparing butterflies to buffaloes). One is a hardware company that does a bit of software (but the hardware subsidises the software to an extent), while the other is a software company (that also does some optional hardware). Therefore your pricing and licensing models will always be different. It's actually healthy for the industry for this to be the case. People who prefer Apple's model can go that way, those who prefer Microsoft's can go that way. Whether Microsoft should have done something to atone for Vista is really a moot point. They haven't so we just need to get on with things. Pricing and licensing is in the same vein as all other Windows, with the carrot of a family license (which they REALLY need to get the final details out on!).
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"half price on retail Professional is pretty good considering the license is transferable and perpetual" I know this is countering what a lot of people feel on here, but how many of you are actually considering or have already bought Windows 7 at retail? What percentage of people do you think will actually take advantage of the upgrade and will see these benefits rather than just buy a new computer with it?
routerbad
on Jul 22, 2009
"It seems that Microsoft conciser it's us that had the chance to user Win7 before the release, more than benefit they get from our Beta testing" If Microsoft releases a solid OS, doesn't everyone win? Why are some people so obsessed about getting a "cookie" for taking on the arduous task of using software, before its release, for free? So you filed a few bug reports, good for you, but someone at microsoft has to be the one to write the code to fix the bug, no? Really, people are bitching because Microsoft didn't reward them for bitching (about bugs). They are the ones toiling over a hot OS for you, while you are installing free software, complaining about bugs, and sipping mai-thai's on the beach, and you complain about this! Pull yourself together, man!
truffoo0
on Jul 22, 2009
@Waethorn I haven't pre-ordered the upgrade, but then I'm not in the US/Canada and don't think we had discount versions available anyway. I think that Windows 7 will likely see the greatest number of upgraders (of existing systems) than previous Windows versions. Every other Windows needed a good chunk more performance to run acceptably. For the first time, Windows 7 can run on less than its predecessor (admittedly, this shouldn't have been difficult to achieve ;) , but I suggest it has been achieved exceptionally well). Anyone who allowed any form of future proofing (i.e., enough RAM) when they bought a machine in the last 3 years or so would be capable of running 7 quite happily (I had it running on a 4yr old IBM Notebook quite nicely with 2GB RAM). RAM is dirt cheap now as well, and the cost of a bit of RAM and the upgrade is likely going to be cheaper in the long run than using XP with its "old-fashioned security".
EricoF3
on Jul 22, 2009
@routerbad : Personnaly, I don't Tested Win7 Beta to get cookies... I test it to begin using Windows 7 before the release date ... Because I like to Use and try new OSs... So I pre Order a Win7 Upgrade without any problem...
panache1023
on Jul 22, 2009
Waethorn, I took advantage of the pre-order to get a copy of Home Premium Upgrade on the cheap.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"For the first time, Windows 7 can run on less than its predecessor" That's misleading, and not entirely true. The only exception to the general rule that future Windows versions require higher processors is with the Atom processor, because Vista wasn't optimized for the Atom. It's not exactly the easiest thing to just take the existing code base and make it run on a processor that came out later. Instead, they integrated certain optimizations in Windows 7. Performance is pretty much on par with Vista, except that Windows 7's disk cache isn't as agressive, so it scales better for low memory machines. That's another point of interest though: Windows 7 requires a 1GHz processor with 1GB of RAM. Windows Vista only required an 800MHz processor with 512MB of RAM, so that also dispels the theory that it takes a more powerful computer. They also tuned the animations so that they "play back" faster. That doesn't really improve the overall performance of applications. They made some things easier to find. Again, it's faster from a workflow perspective, but it doesn't make the computer process information faster. It's really not a huge change to Vista, performance-wise. O/T: Speaking of betas, does anybody else find that when you install Microsoft Security Essentials on XP, the registry key for the startup item doesn't have quotes around the long filename and it just opens the "C:\Program Files\Microsoft" folder on startup instead of the actual program? Digging into the registry, if you go to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run and put quotes around the program file (around the full path, excluding the -hide parameter), it solves that issue.
EricoF3
on Jul 22, 2009
@Waethorn: I am sorry but I install Windows 7 RC on My Old ThinkPad Celeron 2Ghz with 380Mb of RAM and It run correctly... It clear that it was not running like a bomb but it run better than Windows XP on the same laptop...
truffoo0
on Jul 22, 2009
@Waethorn "It's really not a huge change to Vista, performance-wise." My impression is that it is an increase in performance over Vista with SP2. Whether that translates into a measurable difference isn't really the point. If I "feel" that it's faster, then that's what is important. It's much like the effect that I got from users when upgrading them from CRT to LCD monitors. Thinks looked cleaner which made them think that things ran better, even if that wasn't really the case. It's all about perception. Vista has a bad perception (wrongly, especially with SP2), Windows 7 has a good perception.
Backup77
on Jul 22, 2009
I don't think for one moment that beta testers were going to get free copies of Windows 7 but there was at least a special thank you notation on the Windows 7 Team Blog from Brandon LeBlanc http://windowsteamblog.com/
Backup77
on Jul 22, 2009
@Waethorn I installed the 32bit version of Windows 7 RC on a 3YO laptop running a single core Intel Centrino with 1.5GB of RAM. It runs beautifully and better than it ever did on XP.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"I install Windows 7 RC on My Old ThinkPad Celeron 2Ghz with 380Mb of RAM and It run correctly... It clear that it was not running like a bomb but it run better than Windows XP on the same laptop..." There is nothing "correct" about that. I wouldn't say that it's acceptable to run any operating system today on less than 512MB of RAM. Vista and 7 on nothing less than double that. If XP is slower than 7 on that amount of RAM, something is wrong with your XP install. Moreso, something is wrong with your 7 install for it to even allow you to do that. "I installed the 32bit version of Windows 7 RC on a 3YO laptop running a single core Intel Centrino with 1.5GB of RAM. It runs beautifully and better than it ever did on XP." Again, I would say something is wrong with your XP install if it is in any way slow on 1.5GB of RAM. For 7 to be faster just proves it. XP's disk cache is the least agressive of all 3 operating systems, so it will leave you with more free RAM towards application use than all the others. What it won't do is give you better security options, offer better multimedia, support new hardware technologies, or give you a computing experience that doesn't look like it was designed by Shigeru Miyamoto.
Waethorn
on Jul 22, 2009
"If I "feel" that it's faster, then that's what is important." Fine. But for someone to make a gross exaggeration and say that it IS faster is the problem that I have. You don't really "use" the operating system - it should be a launching point for applications, and application benchmarks show that Windows 7 is realistically no faster than Windows Vista at launching and processing data within those applications. If Kennedy was right about only one thing is that Windows 7 isn't really that much faster than Windows Vista. What he says about Vista being bad and not worth it are completely wrong though. Vista improves security, and deployment options, and has many new consumer multimedia features that XP lacks. Windows 7 is a worthwhile upgrade IMO. Most of the blogosphere that is now ranting about Windows 7 hasn't really seen that Windows Vista has long since improved over RTM, and still won't let go of their bias, so they see Windows 7 as this miraculous saviour because they weren't there when Windows Vista was actually improved (and they still won't go there), so Windows 7 seems like a big jump. I see through that already because I've been using Windows Vista since day one and haven't deviated. Don't get me wrong though. I will still upgrade to Windows 7 because I'll get it in my Action Pack. I just don't pretend that Windows 7 is something totally different - that's what Windows 8 will hopefully be. "Vista has a bad perception (wrongly, especially with SP2)" Actually, the majority of the most important performance and compatibility updates happened PRIOR (a couple months before actually) to SP1. People credit SP1 for that, but that's only because that's when they noticed this "huge update" to install and assumed that SP1 had fixed something. The biggest change to Windows Vista in SP1 is with the servicing stack and the kernel update - neither of which actually improved performance over what the prior compatibility and performance packs did.

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 20

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc