PDA

View Full Version : Who needs Vista, when Windows 7 is coming next year.


Pages : [1] 2

Airbrushkid
04-05-08, 08:56 AM
It looks like Microsoft doesn't have to much hope for Vista. So they may be releasing Windows 7 next year instead of 2010 when it was suppose to be.


http://www.news.com/8301-13860_3-9911470-56.html

BronzeGod
04-05-08, 09:52 AM
They better have fixed that refresh bug, or else someone is gonna die.

bacon12
04-05-08, 10:21 AM
Three years is ancient in the Linux world. Most distros release ever three to six months. So I am not surprised windows life cycle will become shorter.

I don't know if windows 7 is gonna be the great desktop os or not. The modular, subscription to what you need could be good or bad.

grey_1
04-05-08, 11:25 AM
There's been talk of releasing early for a while now. Here's hoping it's a reasonably worthy OS.

mojoman0
04-05-08, 11:31 AM
Engadget thought he might have been talking about just the beta or something

LycosV
04-05-08, 11:46 AM
I don't think Windows 7 will come out next year. Not enough time has passed to make any significant changes whatsoever.

einstein_314
04-05-08, 12:33 PM
Who cares if it comes out next year? Windows used to be refreshed every 3 years. 95, 98, ME, XP? XP lasted for an unprecedented long time.

It has nothing to do with them not having any hope for Vista.

Gorion
04-05-08, 12:36 PM
Who cares if it comes out next year? Windows used to be refreshed every 3 years. 95, 98, ME, XP? XP lasted for an unprecedented long time.

It has nothing to do with them not having any hope for Vista.

Exactly!! XP was the first OS in a long time to go that long without a new OS.

ViN86
04-05-08, 02:28 PM
Who cares if it comes out next year? Windows used to be refreshed every 3 years. 95, 98, ME, XP? XP lasted for an unprecedented long time.

It has nothing to do with them not having any hope for Vista.
+1

if you look at the old releases, it was always this way. tbh, the large time gap between XP and Vista probably contributed to the initial lack of adoption of Vista. everyone cried "it's such an unnecessary release, youre forcing it down our throats." but if you look at windows 95, 98, and ME, theyre practically all the same thing lol. (except ME was a giant POS lol)

nekrosoft13
04-05-08, 02:43 PM
They better have fixed that refresh bug, or else someone is gonna die.

there is no bug

crainger
04-05-08, 05:56 PM
there is no bug

Oh there is. He can see LCD flicker. ::retard::

I think the trouble is he sees tearing with vsync off, turns vsync on and things slow down. Obviously hasn't discovered Triple Buffering or D3D Overrider.

BronzeGod
04-05-08, 07:47 PM
Oh there is. He can see LCD flicker. ::retard::

I think the trouble is he sees tearing with vsync off, turns vsync on and things slow down. Obviously hasn't discovered Triple Buffering or D3D Overrider.

I've have those very same things you just mentioned on and with 60hz, it was still pathetic. And whoever doesn't run Triple Buffering while vsync is on is a complete retard.

It's not flickering, it's screen lag, like after images. My solution fixes that problem in XP. I was just informing people of my discovery. I SEE the difference, so it's not just talk. And Vista does have a bug, and the current solutions are not addressing it. Vista doesn't hold refresh rates, it's a known fact it doesn't. And that's a pretty serious issue for gamers.

crainger
04-05-08, 09:12 PM
Guess I just have to be thankful my setup works fine.

Absolution
04-07-08, 05:18 AM
here is one reason: how about the fact that once windows 7 will come out, it will be as buggy as vista was when it first came out! by then, vista will be nice and bug free (for the most part)

qube
04-07-08, 07:23 PM
hope it use a new filesystem ntfs is old.
wats the the name on the filesystem in fista they removed

crainger
04-07-08, 07:28 PM
WinFS.

qube
04-07-08, 07:57 PM
tack:D

nekrosoft13
04-07-08, 09:04 PM
hope it use a new filesystem ntfs is old.
wats the the name on the filesystem in fista they removed

vista doesn't use the same excact NTFS that was in NT 3.1

DRen72
04-07-08, 09:07 PM
Even if Windows 7 does come out in 2009, it will basically be Vista "Reloaded" rather than a complete rebuild. No way they can develop a brand new from scratch OS these days that fast. Now, if they go back to XP SP3 and try to build from that, then they might come up with what Vista should have been from the beginning.

I was involved in the Vista beta program and I can tell you having beta tested since Windows 95 that the Vista beta was the worst of all of them by far. I knew Vista was not destined for greatness right from the start. However, it does run pretty well on my rig even though (to me) it is more of a Window XP remix than anything else.

mojoman0
04-07-08, 09:39 PM
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/07/windows-7-still-slated-for-2010-says-microsoft-bill-gates-just/

2010

Absolution
04-08-08, 05:08 AM
whats wrong with NTFS? WinFS emulates the way databases are stored. While this is nice for searching for files - thats about its only advantage last time i checked.

WinFS wasn't scrapped because it was too hard to program or because of time restraints. I doubt it will be in windows 7. If they do actually introduce it int W7, they will probably make it apart of Vista SP2.

Airbrushkid
04-08-08, 05:55 AM
I just found that it is set back to 2010. They need to make there minds up.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207100040

LovingSticky
04-08-08, 06:09 AM
vista doesn't use the same excact NTFS that was in NT 3.1

Exactly :-) Transactional NTFS, reparse points, etc., all new to Vista:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ntfs

nekrosoft13
04-08-08, 06:48 AM
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/07/windows-7-still-slated-for-2010-says-microsoft-bill-gates-just/

2010

in 2009 they will probably announce that it will be released in 2011

Logical
04-08-08, 08:36 AM
To think that Microsoft would release a replacement to vista by next year is absurd. To say the next windows is gonna replace vista is just as absurd.