Microsoft to let consumers test Windows 7 on Friday

I do wish microsoft would release home premium as beta.
there is no way i would cough up for ultimate. so i would like to know what windows 7 home premium has.

 

lodore, I read the other day that MS had released Win7 Home Beta along with the Win7 Server Beta. The Home beta was more for testing the Anytime Upgrade.'

There was also a report that there will be only 3 versions of Seven: Netbook, Consumer, and Enterprise. But being this early in the game you never know.

EDIT: here is a ZdNet article on Win 7 Home beta, I haven't found out where I read about both Home and Server yet

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3310

 

Hey Midway40,
Thanks for the link.
Only three versions would rock.
Would be much easier for everyone.
guessing netbook edition would keep most stuff but take out media centre. that is assuming there is only 3 versions at the end.
i may be an early adopter to windows 7.
pretty much all my programs work in windows 7.
only one that didnt and ive already found a better program that does the same job.
all my vista drivers work with windows 7 if i use compatibility mode set to vista for installers

 

You're welcome, lodore. We both may disagree on Vista but I don't hold it against ya

Here is the source of where I read about the three versions of Seven on the Aussie CNet site. I am still looking around for that article I saw about the Home (Consumer?) and Server Beta. I am starting to wonder if I had dreamt it, lol.

I have been too busy lately at work (also fighting an respiratory infection as well) to even think about playing with Seven. I did have some reservations about if it would play well with my Windows Home Server but I just ran across this article on HomeServerHacks that says it will work.

 

Contrary to what many believe that i abhor microsoft i just want to set the record straight for the umpteenth time here. MS is been a milestone of sorts in setting the pace of what can be a reliable and dependable operating system. I harbor no qualms that they have pioneered a technology that is not only useful but immensely educational.

Thats why i get furious that after all this time they KEEP MISSING THE MARK like a bad arrow shot when it comes to producing what customers would absolutely drool over if only they would concentrate on what users complain about about and do something to satisfy them.

I knew Longhorn was going to flop eventually as Vista and their sour returns from customers is testimony of that. Now they are pushing what they call now Windows 7 in an effort to distance themselves once again (this time) away from Vista in much the same manner they abandoned Windows 98/Me as though it was the black plague instead of revisiting it with a new rewrite and making it right before moving on.

I can't subscribe in good conscience that malware exploiters are driving MS in some haste to make up for lost revenue and reputation. A truly reputable company no matter what product line they are involved in always at least make an honest effort to correct mistakes made earlier. Automobiles are recalled all the time when defects are discovered and instead of the makers forcing their dealers saying scrap those models for these new ones instead call them back in for fixes.

This is my personal beef with microsoft. You can't run away from your mistakes because they will return again to haunt you unless you attack the problems head on first, before opening up new releases.

Well, that about sums up exactly how i see things from these computer O/S's point of view made from M$.
As the old saying goes, those who never learn from their past mistakes are bound to repeat them again, and again, and so on.

EASTER

 

That's what i keep noticing Pete.

Why in hade's name do they do to create such a calamity of errors in decisions?

It's like a never ending saga of the bump and run, end around, looking for a receiver to catch a backward lateral in a football game.

Beats me. Guess i'll stay glued to XP untill after Windows 7? now?

That company needs a VERY serious internal overhaul from the top table seats down IMHO. Theres just no logic or sense behind these careless blunders. And they just keep repeating the same patterns over and over again.

EASTER

 

I need an update of xp as a new os, not an update over vista.

 

I don't know whether this is any consolation but my upgrade from Vista Ultimate to Windows 7 Ultimate went well according to the process (I was duly informed during the transition that no problems were detected analyzing my system). When the Windows 7 desktop opened for the first time, I thought great everything works well indeed, 20 seconds later it bluescreened!

Now running ShadowDefender + FirstDefense PC Rescue + my HP scanner might be too much to ask a beta program for flexibility. I found Win7 milliseconds faster than Vista, that's all. I like Window7 because I like Vista, and they are very similar.

 

It's time to face facts. Newer will never ever equate to better where concerns Microsoft untill some real computer scientists with revenue to make a buyout acquires this feeble and flaundering O/S maker.

IMHO they already seen their better days and the rest is all downhill untill some other entity takes it over. Maybe Symantec?

 

I always do a clean install but that's a very valid point Pete.

 

Hey Peter,
i always think upgrade installs are very risky. a clean fresh install is much better. im sure a fresh install wouldnt take to long.
there is quite alot of under the covers changes from xp to vista. windows 7 has some more under the covers changes so a upgrade install isnt wise at all IMO.
if microsoft provided an upgrade install option and stuff doesnt work afterwards then people will complain. where as a fresh install of windows 7 would work very well.

 

I only performed one upgrade--Win95 to 98--and I vowed never to do so again. During the update the HDD crashed and left a physical bad place on the drive. It is so much better, especially for stability, to perform a clean install.

 

It is a common fact that upgrading a Windows system is not as good as doing a clean install. Also, Windows XP's mainstream support will end in April 2009, well before Windows 7 is released. That could be the reason why they will not support upgrading from XP.

Why do you think newer Microsoft products will never be better? The latest consumer products from Microsoft, namely Windows Vista and Microsoft Office 2007, were both successful. Don't tell me they weren't successful, because they were. Its success is overshadowed by the bad press it got at the beginning, which wasn't completely Microsoft's fault.

To you, Microsoft might be going downhill. However, Microsoft is far from that. PCs will continue to be the dominant computers in the world in the foreseeable future (Windows). And with newer releases being better than previous ones (really, Vista SP1 is improved compared to XP), I don't see why consumers, businesses, and the academia would stop using it. However, I do agree that Microsoft needs to shape up as far as decision making is concerned. It is the top-executives' decision that cost the company a lot of trouble (which translates to lost revenue as well). If only Steve Ballmer can think like Steve Jobs, Microsoft would be in a much better position.

Lastly, no company that I can think of can buy Microsoft. Symantec is only 1/5 the size of Microsoft. In fact, it is Microsoft that is more likely to buy another company.

 

Hi guys,

Got a copy from MS, I've already tested it ... gonna post me own review in about a week or so ...

@Pete, I agree. Although most OS cannot be upgraded two notches. Even Ubuntu 7.10 has to go first to 8.04 before you can upgrade to 8.10. Another example, SUSE 9 can't even upgrade to 10.

Cheers,
Mrk

 

I was under the impression that one could always "upgrade" by doing a clean install, as long as you had the disc of the prior OS, so for example, why couldn't one do a Win 7 upgrade from XP, by just inserting your XP disc to verify ownership, and then proceed to do a clean wipe and install of 7? Or maybe it doesn't work that way? If not, then I guess they want to make sure you bought every OS along the way also, including Vista?

 

How does that prove ownership? You could use the cd on any computer. And then, you'd need internet connection to a database to verify the ownership and then problems begin ...
Mrk

 

I don't know Mrk... I thought that's how the "upgrade" packages worked that you buy in stores, for example, the Vista Home Premium "upgrade". I had heard that you don't necessarily have to have XP installed, as long as you have the disc of the prior OS. But perhaps I am completely mis-informed here.

 

Hey midway40,
im not sure i do like vista the only problem ive had since SP1 is that when under a certain amount of load it slows down so much i cannot even use my mouse. if you give it time it will carry on and work fine.
i hope SP2 solves that issue. vista SP1 is stable just slow.
if vista SP1 was the orignal vista i think people would of liked it alot more. if windows 7 was vista with no service pack everyone would be so happy.
tbh at this point in time im having more issues with Fedora 10.
@ Mrkvonic,
i will be looking forward to your review of win7 beta

 

Likewise.... I am interested in hearing an objective review of 7 beta as it stand right now.

 

The fact that you don't like MS is well known, that you want the company to disappear with XP in the hands of Symantec is the biggest fallacy I've heard in years.

I agree with ambient88, MS not only has enough money (liquidity) to buy Symantec 10 times over (that I must admit wouldn't be a bad idea), but the fact that the corporate world hasn't taken to Vista, it doesn't make Vista unsuccessful.

I remember when XP first came out I used to deal with several companies for different reasons. For the first 2 years most of them were running with Windows 95 and 98, XP was considered a " Swiss cheese".

Windows 7 runs with less resources than Vista, I personally was expecting more changes, on the other hand it will be a more efficient version of Vista.

 

Best of luck for your great expectations but sorry to say that everything runs it's course in due time eventually and Microsoft is no exception to that rule.

All i can offer in conclusion is wait and see. And if not Symantec, maybe Intell or better yet why not Google which is pretty deep in liquidity itself with revenue.

But in case you haven't kept up with news, MS is been rumored lately to entertaining the idea of moving it's main corporate business overseas. Remains to be seen but is not out of the question by any stretch imo.

Win7 is their last ditch effort to redeem itself yet again.

EASTER

 

I was expecting that the Win7 Home/Ultimate differences would be the same as Vista's. The only thing that I needed from Ultimate was Remote Desktop Connection which can be hacked into working in the Home versions. Since my server is "headless" (no monitor or input devices) I needed a way to remote into it do perform certain tasks I couldn't do in the WHS console (I know about programs such as VNC but Win's RDC works better for me).

I wish I knew what would be causing your slowdowns you mentioned as I don't experience them here. The last glitch I had was eliminated when I went from an ATI card to Nvidia. I haven't experienced any driver crashes since.

Of course, I also would be interested in Mrkvonic's review of Win7 from the "other side"