LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Microsoft has remained tight-lipped when it comes to Windows 7, but we now learn that your Vista-capable hardware will be sufficient for Microsoft's next major release.
Read more.Microsoft has remained tight-lipped when it comes to Windows 7, but we now learn that your Vista-capable hardware will be sufficient for Microsoft's next major release.
Boo. So much for hoping to raise PC standards to a level they can be expected to run most entertainment software.
Does it really matter what they say now.... the supposed release date for Windows 7 in 2010, given past performance that is going to slip and slip.... Personally I would be supprised if W7 is released before 2012 at the earliest, and will be vastly different to what they currently expect it to be.
"Vista Mk2... This time we'll get it right!"
Lets hope so. I wont be using vista anytime soon. Certainly until they fix the performance issues.
Re: Headlines - Windows 7 will run on Vista's recommended hardware
What "performance issues" would those be then?Originally Posted by mercyground
The only one I can think he means is slow file copying. Other than that its probably the usual, I dont own Vista but its good to slate it brigade...
Ah, yes, because one (massive) delay means that's company policy
Good question - speaking as someone who uses it every day (for the past 1.5 years or so) who somehow manages to 'cope'
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
Apparently fixed in SP1 anyway. I say apparently as I was one of those to have never suffered it in the first place, so wouldn't know.
You could argue Vista is faster than XP as it has SuperFetch, but it's all a bit pointless. Those who know made their own decision based on their needs. Vista didn't offer enough for most enthusiasts (x64 did, but there was XP64 too). I like what it offers, but what it does offer is limited. I bought it for my HTPC, but had I not been one of those winners in the competition Microsoft ran on launch day (getting a free Ultimate license), I doubt I would have gone out and bought it.
I hope this means they're tweaking Vista and trimming it for Windows 7 rather than essentially lowering the system requirements, back to where we were with the rather hilarious XP requirements, leaving OEMs to build silly little systems that still qualify as Windows 7 capable.
when you compare server 2008 to vista, its shocking to see how much it was rushed.
2008 runs faster on the same hardware as vista..... I thought i'd set it up wrong. An out of the box server os install, faster than workstation, for workstation tasks!
So windows 7, is basically going to be the same kernel, the same fundimental UI API set (as it was those features which really dictated the spec). Well that does make sense, but whats really disapointing is this means definately no WinFS. (am i the only one who liked that idea?)
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
That's interesting - not tried server 2k8 yet. Although I do know the kernels are already aligned with Vista SP1/2k8.
Nobody really knows the feature set - MS are being quiet on it - but i'm less concerned about the WinFS sidestreet and more interested in .NET/WPF acceleration or even an native .NET API for the next version of Windows.
I'm guessing we'll see a fair bit of bling too - MS really need to keep on updating the look and feel (top to bottom) on Windows to keep it feeling current.
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
there is effectivly a native API for .Net
Ngen runs against all the main framework APIs, producing native modules. This is important performance because in windows, once a PE is loaded into any proccess, it can be replicated very swifly into others. .Net assemblies can't so quickly
The big bug bear with WPF is how it dosen't use windows. By that i mean a text box won't neciescerally have a hWnd. So try using that fancy WPF GUI over RDP. Yuck.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Yes NGEN provides native 'compiled' images for the machine but it doesn't get away from the fact that .NET wraps WIN32 (which is what I meant) etc. Imagine a 'managed' OS (on second thoughts maybe we're not quite at the power level to run one yet lol)there is effectivly a native API for .Net
Ngen runs against all the main framework APIs, producing native modules. This is important performance because in windows, once a PE is loaded into any proccess, it can be replicated very swifly into others. .Net assemblies can't so quickly
A text box won't have an hwnd ever in WPF in fact - unless you explictly create a hwndhost for one and that's not a normal scenario (unless you need windows messaging). I'm sold on WPF as a concept - what I was getting at is that really the performance isn't there in certain circumstances.
Vista helps a lot (the caching, the 3d desktop) but it's not really 'aware' of the .NET framework (i.e actively/cooperatively designed for it).
MS are aware of the shortcomings of .NET and are thinking about it - it's just a question of how long it'll take them to do something about it and whether it'll make Seven.
Last edited by dangel; 28-05-2008 at 01:32 PM.
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
I'd imagine that's because of how many extra services Vista has running by default, just to make sure everything works for the grannies out there. Windows Server (not tried 2008 though) is generally just very basic out of the box, and then as you enable DNS and so on, those services kick in. It's not really any different between XP SP2 and Server 2003 R2. 2003 R2 is just much quicker in a bog-standard install.
For example Vista has 4 services enabled by default just for Media Center, whether you use it not.
My only complaint with Vista is how flaky Explorer is - how it sometimes randomly just changes the view to something else when you come back to a previously fine folder. How the hell wasn't that sorted in all the BETA, RCs and even SP1?! It seems to affect everyone, so it's hardly isolated. I want an option where I can make all folders identical too - keep it intelligent by default by all means, but I'd like a ticky box that makes all folder the same as a view I specify, without changing to thumbnails for video and pictures, and ratings and so on for music. Even if you select "apply to all folders" (of this type), it still sometimes wanders off and changes views or thumbnail size. Aaagh. Just keep it the same dammit!
Last edited by this_is_gav; 28-05-2008 at 02:39 PM.
Will it run on ULPCs though?
I find IE 32 bit in Vista x64 to be particularily crash prone. Its irrititing enough that I use firefox most of the time now.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
i found IE32 bit to be naff, but stopped all problems by disabling flash.
This is my other big major disapointment with Vista. I get very upset with how the tech press rips on vista, because they ignore the major things like.
They messed around with explorer. Thats fine, i can coupe with having every shell extension/enhancement broken. But please, for the love of CS, fix the plug-in model.
Yes COM was all good and fine in like 1995, but this is 2008, we've gone beyound that idea for an extenable plugin architecture even those not in a managed world yet.
Why the hell wasn't explorer written to have full isolation of all plugins? Things like video previewing should be done on a totally isolated Appdomain (oh please please make it .Net!) The same goes with IE.
Most of the time someones having issues with explorer crashing, its a duff codec. Excuse me? A codec shouldn't be able to prevent the shell from doing anything but preview the filetypes that codec is registered for.
The same goes with IE, add-ins should be restricted by a sandbox. (also same goes for FF, but if they're trying to be multiplatform, in C++ desgin patterns, this would be very hard, as you'd be asking them to make their own OS in effect) Add-ins shouldn't be able to bring down a host application any more than a text editor would be expected to bring down an OS.
However, i've not heard anything about another shake up of explorer, so i don't think its going to happen
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote