Windows 7, please enlighten me with your opinions on this to be released OS

Despite the fact that I'm running the 64 bit flavour I do not agree, MS must keep the 32 bits flavour of Windows 7.
Windows 7 runs fine on some platforms Vista does'nt.
E.G. I friend of mine is running Windows 7 32 bits (Pentium III 1 GHZ with 1MB of memory)
With MS dropping down support for XP skipping the 32 bits version amounts to give up this market share to Linux.

Are you sure that your friend wasn't using 1GB of RAM, because Windows 7's minimum requirement for RAM is 512MB.

1GB of memory

I FOUND WHILE BETA TESTING THE OS THERE WAS A LOT INCOMPATBILITY ISSUES WITH OTHER PROGRAMS AND THEY WOULD NOT RUN PROPERLY IN COMPATIBILITY MODE EITHER. IM WELL VDERSED IN THIS SENSE I STARTED MY
COMPUTER LIFE WITH PDP8,16,32 AND THERE WAS THE INTRODUCTION OF VIRTUAL MEMORY IN THE VAX 11670, BUT THE MAIN PROBLEM THEN [1978]WAS
THAT THE SOFTWARE WAS LAGGING BEHIND WHAT THE HARDWARE WAS ABLE TO DO
IN SPEED OF BIT TRANSFER.NOW IT SEEMS THAT ITS SLIGHTLY THE OTHER WAY
IN MOST CASES. ONECE THE CHANGE OF DATA TRANSFER IS GIVEN TO THE MENORY DRIVE THEN SPEEDS WILL BE MUCH BETTER AND THE COMPATIBILITY ISSUE WILL START TO EASE A LITTLE.FROM WHAT I COULD SEE WAS THAT THE 32BIT VERSION WAS ACTING LIKE A 64BIT VERSION AND THE 64BIT VERSION
WAS ACTING LIKE A 128BIT VERSION BECAUSE THE C CHECK BIT WAS ALWAYS ON
AND ERRORS SEEM TO FLUCIATE IN THERE OPERATION.

I have no idea as to what you wrote because I have too much difficulty reading things typed in all capital letters. I hope it wasn't anything too important ...

Actually large caps are better for people like me with eyesight problems so I appreciate what you call shouting. And it isn?t really shouting now is it, its just that someone somewhere made up that silly idea. Large caps are the old standard. (very old)

BBp

You shouldn't be mean to someone because they type in all capitals.

Maybe his keyboard is busted and is stuck in all capitals?

LARGE TYPE IS MUCH BETTER FOR SOME OF US TO READ.

for those of us who used to do everything in UC, i think it shows experience. used to write a little assembly language for ms-dos back in the day. always used UC too.
remember this guy for INT 21H

DOSCALL MACRO FUNCTION
; specify function desired
MOV AH,FUNCTION
; call DOS to perform the desired function
INT 21H

ENDM

because there is a possiblity that this person didnt just start yesterday or even when unix came out with the lower case deal in the 80's . i would advise you not to accuse him of shouting.
f u

you never actually tied it, otherwise you would have seen that there are very few if any comatability problems with Windows7, even in the official beta version which is build 7000. Not only that there have been no significant driver issues to date. So, if you wish to comment be at least a little honest in your replys.

what exactly would someone do to tie windows 7 ?

I have been around a little (windows 2.0, Novell 2.0). If I recall the PDP's and Vax's were mini's. The ALPHA's were RISC micro's. Ran a DEC ALPHA 2100 as an NT 4.0 Server. Ran circles around the intel based processors. Used to work for a company called Datapoint which gave Intel the 8008 based (predecessor of x86) processor which was mini based. Decided the micro version (intel fabed it for them)...to slow...and gave it to intel...funny, the rest is history. Comparing current stuff to old mini based processors is apples and oranges.

Having said that, I find it interesting that there is a lot of old DEC/COMPAQ/HP VMS OS in windows 2000 and up.

My history is a bit pre-gui OS based. RISC processors were a fantastic add to the computing power of today's chips. Raw speed learned from these processors is now incorporated into the multi-capable chips. Raw speed was not enough though. Today's chips combine complex (CISC) instructions with RISC speed to give programmers abilities that just raw speed alone could never have achieved.

If We could re-visit history, I'm sure a LOT of things would be different. But, to stretch to call it better would be impossible due to the dynamics of what a modern computer is made of today. It all comes down to how much we know, and if we knew differently it may or may not be better.

RISC is the acronyum for Reduced Instruction Set Computer. It is what it implies. The issue between Mini(Datapoint 220 and Micro (Intel 8008/x86) is the input/output buss. Where as, the Main/Mini (realcomputers) support a parrallel bus (multiple bits per instruction cycel) vs Micro/PC's (Play Computers...just kidding) supports a serial buss (one bit at a time). Though the modern day micor processors run at relative blazing speeds...again subject for debate...can only input/output serially. A major bottleneck. Therefore no matter How fast the clock, instruction cycle and or memorey recovery time is, They are essentially going nowhere fast...pun intended.

When I started in computers (Nova , though they where parrallel processors, they had a major bottleneck...we used to hand load boot through a switch registor...binary to octal or hex.

Believe me...I have met people that can tell me stories about things like the development of, and where part, things like the disk drive.

It's all MFM to me.

NT et al. were driven by Dave Cutler... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler

I had a similar issue with the build 7000 beta (the official release from MS). However, with later builds which were leaked on the internet, things got better. ALL my programs run well, and in compatibility mode if I choose. I am running build 7077 and I can say that it is the BEST OS yet from MS. I wonder why they even gave us Vista when they could make something like Windows 7???
Try this build 7077 (which you can get if you search for it) and see if you will still complain.
Cheers...

dude its a beta

first pdp 8 showed up in dallas in 68. guy i knew worked on it too for sam wiley, a service provider.
i started on the sinclair zx80 and then went to the dec pdp 11 23+
nice machine. i liked dec a lot, was too bad about them. they hung out for a while in the 80s just doing service but eventually died.
i paid over 4k for my first ibm pc and wrote assembler and compiled basic back then
those were the days.

Hello i tried Windows 7 Beta , and for me it was a nice experince everything worked fast and perfekt . Idid only experinced a few minor problems (some missing drivers )And that was okay for a beta version. So i am looking forward to try the full version. So if you wan?t a program that seems to bee a cleanet up vista thats easy to to run and use then i can recommend windows 7 ( if the full version is as good as the beta version.

Wrong to assume 64 bit for all Win7 clients - Atom is not 64 but, my HP Tablet is not 64bit, and these are viable platforms for Win7.

My findings using the beta for a week, it is faster on current corporate gear, so 1GB ram is OK, but of course it flies well with 2GB, no matter what the CPU is. My test was with a 1.8GHz dualcore Intel, which can slow down to 1GHz dynamically on battery, I did notice much better battery life under Win7 than with Vista, but suspend/resume brought back problems with wifi not reconnecting.
Boots much faster, colt to desktop in under a minute. Over 2minutes 7 seconds for my laptop under Vista.

The new task manager is pretty good, but gets cramped really quickly on a small screen.

Still has all of the old baggage of all Windows relaeases - patch management is painful, with initially randon delays on startup and shut down while patches completed their installation process. Annoying when you might have only 2 mintes of battery left, and you shut down to find it is trying to install a patch, or startup being delayed in a similar way when you just need to boot quickly in a meeting.
And it it still reboot city for installing many services and applications.

Overall, I will try and get Win7 to replace vista on my work laptop ASAP as it is much better than Vista, however for my real work (Managing webservers, switches, routers and networking equipment) I will still be using Linux, and for home I still have my Mac (which as long as bootcamp supports Win7 will also get updated - but only to enjoy the faster boot times. Lower requirements for memory will make it a better candidate for my Virtual machines too over tinyXP.)

HUGE mistake! Win7 will be and already is a superior product to Vista. Better driver control and program compatibility better GUI and most of all better hardware handling. Win 7 is probably the best version of Windows yet and I've used them ALL!

I have used the Windows 7 Beta on my machine with an Intel Celeron D 356, with a Gig of memory, and because I have used every version of Windows since 3.0, (except 2000, which sucked), I can report that Win 7 is the best version yet. None of the constant security pop-ups, and software conflicts that plagued Vista. A nice GUI that can be adjusted downward to increase performance, and a smooth, intuitive feel that should suit users both advanced and basic. The only problem I had, was when I needed Acrobat 9 to do my taxes, it wouldn't work with "7", so I used my XP machine to do the work on my business bookkeeping.
I'll buy It in a heartbeat!

If as you haven't used win 2000 How can you tell it bad ?
Many of my bussines Customers sware by it wil not change to
Vista or Xp until somthing better like Win 7 comes along.

I did "try" 2000, and serviced several business computers that used that OS, that's how I can say "It Sucked".
I also realize that business users found it reliable and some continue to this day. That said, I found it bland, slow, and ugly, but that's just me !

I do not know why you think it sucks. Maybe you could be more specific. I just resurrected an old Compaq N610c and decided to load 2000 Pro as I never really used it and out of the box, it installed easier and ran quicker than when I had XP on the laptop. It has not crashed not hung up and drivers have been easy to find.

I decided to also load it on a Dell Dimension 8100 that I tried XP on and found it ran like a slug, especially coming up and shutting down. With 2000 Pro, it is running well and seems less twitchy then the XP.

The only limitations I've come across are that IE only goes up to 6, Windows Media player will not upgrade to 10 and hence Activesync while loading and running will not convert MP3 files for loading to my MS 5.0 based PPC. It is not an issue as I do not use the phone to play music anyway.

The office network was easy to set up on it, actually easier than with XP.

Also, it takes only a gig or slightly more to install leaving plenty of room on those old 40 gig hard drives.

I never really used 2000 Pro as I went from 98 to XP when I built my new computer back some years ago and now wish I had tried it first. Admittedly, the limitation is that while the updates are currently still available off the MS site, they are slated to be withdrawn in the not too distant future I understand.

I'm hoping that Win 7 will be lean enough to mount on these computers eventually.

I can swore you are talking about my car and not an OS! Give me the low down on "7". Haha.

I have 4 computer in my home, the OS is either 2k, linux, or both.

I still use it on older machines and think it's most intuitive and most reliable of all windows so far.