Microsoft launches Windows 7 blog

Looks like the Windows 7 information blackout is finally over. I received an email from "Steven Sinofsky" (though I honestly wonder about that) this morning, which reads as follows:

a quick heads up

Howdy,

We haven’t been in touch directly in a while, but I wanted to give you a heads up about a new blog that we are starting this week.  As we lead up to a series of events this fall that will feature Windows 7, we thought it would be fun for us to start a blog about how we make Windows 7.  The blog will be hosted (and written) by myself and Jon DeVaan and will focus on the overall engineering aspects of building Windows 7.  Think of it as a companion to the overall external communications about Windows 7.

I ask that you not discuss or write about this till the blog posts since we aren’t really letting folks know in advance and we would not want to offend anyone. :-)

The blog will be hosted on http://blogs.msdn.com.

--Steven Sinofsky

Apparently, they decided not to wait too long. The blog is now available and the initial post has some interesting info:

Welcome to our first post on a new blog from Microsoft—the Engineering Windows 7 blog, or E7 for short. E7 is hosted by the two senior engineering managers for the Windows 7 product, Jon DeVaan and Steven Sinofsky. Jon and Steven, along with members of the engineering team will post, comment, and participate in this blog.

Beginning with this post together we are going to start looking forward towards the “Windows 7” project. We know there are tons of questions about the specifics of the project and strong desire to know what’s in store for the next major release of Windows. Believe us, we are just as excited to start talking about the release. Over the past 18 months since Windows Vista’s broad availability, the team has been hard at work creating the next Windows product.

The audience of enthusiasts, bloggers, and those that are the most passionate about Windows represent the folks we are dedicating this blog to. With this blog we’re opening up a two-way discussion about how we are making Windows 7. Windows has all the challenges of every large scale software project—picking features, designing them, developing them, and delivering them with high quality. Windows has an added challenge of doing so for an extraordinarily diverse set of customers. As a team and as individuals on the team we continue to be humbled by this responsibility.

We strongly believe that success for Windows 7 includes an open and honest, and two-way, discussion about how we balance all of these interests and deliver software on the scale of Windows. We promise and will deliver such a dialog with this blog.

Planning a product like Windows involves systematic learning from customers of all types. In terms of planning the release we’ve been working with a wide variety of customers and partners (PC makers, hardware developers, enterprise customers, developers, and more) since the start of the project. We also continue our broad consumer learning through telemetry (Customer Experience Improvement Program), usability studies, and more. One area this blog will soon explore is all the different ways we learn from customers and the marketplace that inform the release.

We have two significant events for developers and the overall ecosystem around Windows this fall. The Professional Developers Conference (PDC) on October 27 and the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) the following week both represent the first venues where we will provide in-depth technical information about Windows 7. This blog will provide context over the next 2+ months with regular posts about the behind the scenes development of the release and continue through the release of the product.

In leading up to this blog we have seen a lot of discussion in blogs about what Microsoft might be trying to accomplish by maintaining a little bit more control over the communication around Windows 7 (some might say that this is a significant understatement). We, as a team, definitely learned some lessons about “disclosure” and how we can all too easily get ahead of ourselves in talking about features before our understanding of them is solid. Our intent with Windows 7 and the pre-release communication is to make sure that we have a reasonable degree of confidence in what we talk about when we do talk. Again, top of mind for us is the responsibility we feel to make sure we are not stressing priorities, churning resource allocations, or causing strategic confusion among the tens of thousands of partners and customers who care deeply and have much invested in the evolution of Windows.

Related to disclosure is the idea of how we make sure not to set expectations around the release that end up disappointing you—features that don’t make it, claims that don’t stick, or support we don’t provide. Starting from the first days of developing Windows 7, we have committed as a team to “promise and deliver”. That’s our goal—share with you what we’re going to get done, why we’re doing it, and deliver it with high quality and on time.

We’re excited about this blog. As active bloggers on Microsoft’s intranet we are both looking forward to turning our attention and blogging energies towards the community outside Microsoft. We know the ins and outs of blogging and expect to have fun, provide great information, and also make a few mistakes. We know we’ll misspeak or what we say will be heard differently than we intended. We’re not worried. All we ask is that we have a dialog based on mutual respect and the shared goal of making a great release of Windows 7.

Our intent is to post “regularly”. We’ll watch the comments and we will definitely participate both in comments and potentially in follow-up posts as required. We will make sure that members of the Windows 7 development team represent themselves as such as well. While we want to keep the dialog out in the open, please feel free to use email to steven.sinofsky@microsoft.com should you wish to. In particular, email is a good way to suggest topics we might have a chance to discuss on the blog.

With that, we conclude our welcome post and ask you to stay tuned and join us in this dialog about the engineering of Windows 7.

Steven and Jon

Please note the availability of this blog in several other languages via the links on the nav pane. These posts are also created by members of our development team and we welcome dialog on these sites as well. We will continue to expand the list in other languages based on feedback.

Discuss this Article 64

mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 15, 2008
runner7775 OK, here's the quick version of the boot in Win 95 as I remember it (It's been a decade or so since I worked on it so it's almost certain I'm missing something): Power comes on The processor starts in Real Mode (all x86 chips start in real mode since the 80286) Check for CONFIG.SYS If present - load MS-DOS minimal system - load real mode device drivers identified with DEVICE=*.SYS entry Check for AUTOEXEC.BAT If present - load MS-DOS minimal system if not already loaded - execute statements in AUTOEXEC.BAT Switch processor to 386Protect Mode If MS-DOS minimal system exists - use MS-DOS minimal system if present as template of System VM Begin Windows OS init in System VM Load SYSTEM.INI if present and process entries (generally a stub) Load WIN.INI if present and process entries (generally a stub) Load registry Local Machine hive and process entries Init GDI graphics engine Init Window manager Process logon Load registry Local User hive and process entries Create Desktop Again, that's from memory and simplifies some details. Let me know if that isn't clear or I missed some detail you care about. If you really want the details, I'd suggest a copy of "Microsoft Windows 95 Training: Hands-On, Shelf-Paced Training for Supporting Windows 95 (Training Kit) (Paperback)" available at Amazon for under a dollar. Note that it IS 1200 pages of training material and shipping might be a bit high. The URL for the book is http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Training-Hands-Shelf-Paced/dp/15...
subzerohitman721
on Aug 15, 2008
@gorath I'm aware of the dolby digital certified audio cards. However, something doesn't sound right even with good speakers. (I'm a former music major with the hearing ability known as perfect pitch. I'm usually not wrong but something doesn't sound right with those cards.) I am also aware of the THX certification. Most Bose computer speakers are THX certified and the THX group does do assist people with the certification process. I know THX is a costly business but there are some audiophiles like me who are willing to pay for it. I just think there needs to be more native API's in Windows to better render sound. Also a good music recording app native in Windows would be appreciated. What I mean is something as good if not better than GarageBand. Also I know for certain that the WMP equalizer and presets are garbage and needs an overhaul. Peace.
Waethorn
on Aug 16, 2008
"a good music recording app native in Windows would be appreciated" I usually recommend either these: http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/products/acidfamily.asp or for more advanced home users (on a budget), looking to get into the industry, I recommend this: http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/MusicCreator/default.asp Both are extremely good, although the Cakewalk software has a higher learning curve. As a note: I've used Steinberg's Cubase before, and I absolutely hate it with a passion. Reason is also a pretty decent platform, but I wouldn't rely on it as a primary music application. "Also I know for certain that the WMP equalizer and presets are garbage and needs an overhaul." Most sound chips/cards have their own EQ settings that are better. Each codec chip has a slightly different way of presenting baseline audio, so the WMP options aren't the best option to choose. For example, on notebooks with Realtek HD audio codecs, usually the "Powerful" option in the Windows Vista EQ settings is the best balance of bass and treble for underpowered notebook speakers. Of course, it's all up to the individual's preference too.
shark47
on Aug 16, 2008
While MS had the right idea with the Vista versions, it clearly backfired. First of all, as Paul has mentioned on numerous occasions, some of the differences between versions were arbitrary. (That said, I don't agree with Paul that business users don't need WMP and other media components.) Secondly, Vista Home Basic is terrible. That said, I really don't know what they can do about it. They definitely cannot come up with a "one size fits all" solution like OS X.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 16, 2008
Shark There really aren't many versions. Essentially, we've got the Full Product (Ultimate) and several versions that have features removed that are likely to not be used by their target group and are discounted to reflect that. First, let's strip out the specialty ones (The "N" versions for EU compliance that nobody buys) and Enterprise since that's not sold at retail. What we end up with are: Business, Home Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate Home Basic really should be called "Vista trimmed back to run on that old computer you really should have replaced" but that's awfully hard to put on a label. So really there are two versions that are optimized and discounted: Home (Premium) and Business along with one version that has everything and goes for full price. Home Premium pretty much is the best choice for anyone not on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most home users would never want. Business pretty much is the best choice for anyone on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most business users would never want. If the discounted packages don't fit your needs (and no package will be perfect for everyone) then you can always buy Ultimate at full price. What I've found is that people complaining about the versions really mean this: I'm a computer hobbiest and I want Vista Ultimate (not that I really need the corporate stuff but I like having everything) but I still want the "Home" discount.
gorath
on Aug 16, 2008
@ mike, whilst I agree that in practice, there aren;t that many versions of Vista I still think having them all around can cause confusion to people. I do honestly believe it would have been better to scrap the home basic version, and have at most only 3 avaialbe, namely, home premium, business, and ultimate. What I'd like to see however, is simply ultimate, or business.
gorath
on Aug 16, 2008
@ subzerohitman721 The sound output from your computer will depend very heavily on the eventual digital-analogue converter that is used, whether that be on a crappy SoundBlaster card, or on an Apogee or Prism D/A. I can verify that if you play stereo audio through a high-end audio mastering workstation, ad then play it in media player, the sound is identical. And, no disrespect, but I have to have a little giggle at an "audiophile" who claims that the EQ in media player is flawed. Why do you need an EQ if you want to hear the music as intended?
subzerohitman721
on Aug 17, 2008
@gorath, Because if you're a music teacher, preparing for a contest, you might want to turn up or down different sections of your band recordings. Many of my high school and college teachers did so, to find chords that might not sound correct. I'm sure there are other reasons, thats one of the few that I can practially state. Especially since high schools and colleges play some stuff thats very unusual for performances. For the Texas region, the UIL contest usually demand strong performances.
gorath
on Aug 17, 2008
Sorry, subzero, but that's an uneducated use of EQ, at best. If you really want to be precise enough to be able to pick out individual notes or chords, then you're really looking at something along the lines of a parametric, or paragraphic EQ. They're pretty specialised, and aren;t likely of making into the default load-out of any consumer oriented playback device soon, or ever, ideally.
Waethorn
on Aug 17, 2008
"Home Premium pretty much is the best choice for anyone not on a managed corporate network. It gives a good discount in exchange for deleting features most home users would never want." I disagree. I find the Ultimate is the best choice for an unmanaged corporate network, since it offers Bitlocker, as well as the usual Vista Business features such as remote desktop support. Many users on an unmanaged network will use the same PC for home, so having the multimedia features is a bonus. In a managed network, obviously those options need to be locked down, but Ultimate would be a smarter investment in the event that the network in question is upgraded later with a server. Otherwise the company would have to upgrade user systems to Business/Enterprise, and if the network isn't server-based yet, a startup company would find a volume license agreement with Software Assurance (in order to get Vista Enterprise) a fairly hefty investment. With Ultimate already loaded on a machine here or there, there is no additional investment required. Ultimate OEM is also cheaper than Business OEM + SA. If Bitlocker were one of the primary purchase reasons, I'd have to recommend Ultimate. SA offers other benefits, I know, but for smaller companies that don't have central management, I'd say Ultimate is the smarter choice overall.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 17, 2008
Waethorn And for users like you, Ultimate is the obvious choice. The real question is how many businesses want their average employee desktop to have: DVD Playback Media Center HD support for Movie Maker Parental Controls Bitlocker Multilanguage UI Subsystem for Unix-based Applications Out of these, I could see Bitlocker for laptops and Unix app support in some specialty cases. I could see getting Ultimate for laptops now that there are good ways of managing keys but stil don't see it for the majority of business desktops.
tayme
on Aug 17, 2008
@jp - "I only question whether talking Windows 7 now will reinforce the sense that MS is anxious to turn the page on Vista." And if they do want to turn the page on Vista, is that really a problem? Apple was very ready to turn the page on the first AppleTV and the iPhone, right? --tayme
Waethorn
on Aug 18, 2008
" I could see getting Ultimate for laptops now that there are good ways of managing keys but stil don't see it for the majority of business desktops." See, that's my point. The majority of business desktops will be connected to a managed server-based environment. Once connected, Ultimate can be locked down. For non-server based unmanaged environments, having Bitlocker installed on an OEM version of Windows in a workplace is a necessity. Unmanaged networks still need to have those options, and I would say that the majority of unmanaged networks would do better with Ultimate than with Home Premium, since it offers features only available via a volume license agreement to get Enterprise. Remember that Windows licenses in volume license agreements are only UPGRADES, not full versions, although you pay MUCH more for them than OEM versions cost (albeit ON TOP OF the price of the bundled OEM version you get with a PC), so if a company still doesn't manage their network, they're likely small enough that they don't have a volume license agreement. Getting an OEM copy of Ultimate makes perfect business sense to them because the investment is much more economical, and they'll still get access to features only available in Enterprise. Also, if you have mobile workers that don't VPN into the workplace (remember - this is UNmanaged environments we're talking about here), they'll often have all of their business data on the local hard drive. This is the argument for having Bitlocker. The best option for small businesses that already have a server/AD-DC is to use Vista Business+SA-on-OEM. If they don't have a server, it's Ultimate w/ optional SA-on-OEM. As a note: Even when using SBS, Microsoft still recommends using OneCare on client workstations. I haven't tried OneCare for Server on SBS 08 yet, so I don't know what happens to the "OneCare Circle" micro-management that you normally have on PC's when installing it at home. SBS has always had simplified user folder redirection to the server, so I also don't know how client backups are done, but supposedly it is still done on the server end. The normal SBS backup would back up the entire server anyway, so I don't know what else OneCare for Server does about backup, besides monitoring it.
subzerohitman721
on Aug 18, 2008
gorath said: Sorry, subzero, but that's an uneducated use of EQ, at best. If you really want to be precise enough to be able to pick out individual notes or chords, then you're really looking at something along the lines of a parametric, or paragraphic EQ. They're pretty specialised, and aren;t likely of making into the default load-out of any consumer oriented playback device soon, or ever, ideally. My Comments: You know, I think you might be right. Its just that a lot of public school bands don't get state funding and are limited to what they can fund raise. They are also stuck with what they get from the school district. I just have seen that frustration from those teachers and anything that can help them out I am all for. Peace.

Please or Register to post comments.

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