First experiences with Windows 7

Well.. it's been fun trying out the new beta from Microsoft and so far I can't say that it hasn't been an interesting experience.

The first step was getting the ISO from the Microsoft site.

The second step was the install. Just needed to be a bit to careful to select the new install rather than the upgrade.

After the install came the part where we're asked to add the beta serial key and of we go with the experimental steps.

---------------------

The first thing I noticed was the fact that the virtualbox addons refused to work. This was solved by choosing to run the program in compatibility mode for Vista. Then it was only a matter of changing the network and sound type to get everything working as expected (tutorial - http://www.boot-land...showtopic=6791)

Funny thing because this windows didn't recognized the audio driver and went online to see if there were any Audio drivers available. In all my years of windows experience I had never seen this sort of tool function in previous windows editions but was really happy to see something like this working.

It's almost as good as Ubuntu..

----------

Looking at the overall size I see that this windows is using around 7Gb worth of disk space. This is still a lot of room to be used by any OS but at the very least it is a serious improvement when comparing to the default size used by Vista.


The overall UI is a lot more "squared", gives a more professional feel & touch to all the windows and controls.

IE8 is included and includes less annoying phone-home features at the startup configuration, which is also an improvement.

There is a tool called "snipping tool" that allows to cut&paste small portions of the desktop onto an image file. It's a simple tool and works good.

--------------

Windows 7 also comes with a Recovery Environment, I incidentally got acquainted on the reboot process after shutting down the virtual machine.. It was a bit annoying since there was nothing wrong with freshly installed OS but the diagnostic tool still insisted in waiting a very long time to finish all testings.

---

The start (orb) menu is also changed to the better (or at least I think this way), the tools available on the menu are much orientated towards people who work seriously with their machines.

For example, the run command is no longer hidden away and even Power Shell comes installed by default.

-----------

And these are my initial thoughts for this new OS, I'm running from a Virtual Machine at 1Gb of RAM and windows 7 is running at 432Mb. I must say that the dev team really seems to be putting a lot of good effort to produce a valuable OS.



--------

So, what's your opinion so far?

My opinion? More pictures!

Ok, added a simple screenshot to the first topic.

It seems that now your programs are grouped together but don't show any text labels. I find it a bit more confusing to work with. Under XP/Vista I usually placed the Start Menu as a bar on the left to keep all programs visible and accessible at the click but this sort of thing can be disabled to show the text labels as before under the properties menu.

There is also no more gadget side bar on the left by default, guess the fashion didn't picked up much popularity.

Explorer by default hides the menu options, you need to manually select them. Was a bit difficult to figure this, I was trying to find the option to connect a share as drive, but I guess most users won't need to know this "feature" exists.

The desktop wallpaper you see on the screenshot it's a bit different from the one that comes by default. It's a bit more difficult to find the place where themes can be changed (still think the XP menu is simpler and straight to the point)

By biggest complaint about Vista was not the look or the size or the hideous slow pace, but that fantastic invention that the menu structure was not identical to the folder structure.
Spend once about 30 min to find a setting to correct, which i already knew where it had to be.
Boy was i happy after that, that none of my computers runs Vista.

I give W7 that it looks nice, but if you tell me it looks professional, i object.
Those new menus are already bad by themselfs, but that they constantly reconfigure themselfs makes them worst.

From a professional solution i expect, that i can use menus while my brain is on autopilot or to use them blindfolded, if you prefer this analogy.

Instead of yet another skin, maybe someone in Redmont should think about a new and better GUI? Not just variations of the old one. Which was perfect from the start, imo.

Well.. I was avoiding to formulate any opinion about their choice of available skins..

But, yes. The XP way of doing things is still simpler from a sense of doing things in complete auto-pilot since it been that way that you've been doing them for years, but the younger generations are already using Vista by default on their machines.

I give W7 that it looks nice, but if you tell me it looks professional, i object.
Those new menus are already bad by themselfs, but that they constantly reconfigure themselfs makes them worst.

I meant when comparing to Vista, not XP Pro..

Windows 7 "seems" more serious and ready for work, also, UAC isn't as annoying as before.

I really like the orb menu (also did on Vista), there isn't anything working this good on linux (yet).. KDE4 is organized a bit like MS is doing but it's not really very good to use at all.

I really like the orb menu (also did on Vista), there isn't anything working this good on linux (yet).. KDE4 is organized a bit like MS is doing but it's not really very good to use at all.

Yes the Linux guys can do a lot of great things. An intuitive GUI isn't one of them!

Windows 7 does seem to be a little more stable (than Vista)
I also found the hardware detection & install to be very good,
this is the first OS to correctly install all of my hardware.
I miss the "Edit>Invert Selection" in windows explorer though
Also Daemon Tools still won't work (Likely never will)
Still it seems a goood improvement over Vista.

Hi there, I stumbled upon this page via Google so prepare for an annoying n00b question :

I am all impressed with "Windows XP SP3" stripped "slim" with Nlite, then enhanced with BashRat's driver packs.

I just love it

It's stable, fast, compatible, and works a treat.

I see all this "Vista" and "Windows 7" business and never think twice about it.

But you seem very impressed with it. I wonder, if there is already a great OS why "upgrade" ?

"XP SP3" versus "Vista" versus "Win7"

It's funny you should mention "Ubuntu Linux", because there are now so many "flavors" of Windows to choose from, it's becoming a tough choice like browsing Linux distros!

Also, you mentioned this "tool" which takes a portion of the desktop and makes it into an image? "Print Screen" button on my keyboard has been doing that for many years!

I wonder if these new operating systems just have us doing that same things we have always done, only now they require much more resources and are less compatible??????????????

Sell me on Windows 7

Cheers,
Craig

I loaded Windows 7 into a VMWare Server virtual machine last week, and assigned only 400mb of ram. I'm quite impressed how well the OS runs with such little ram.

I still don't like the start menu and haven't found a way so as to "expand" programs menu, rather than having the link simply open on the start menu and then having to usually use scrolling. It can be a bit tedious.

Regards,
Galapo.

I would be interested if there is a way to disable the most annoying improvement ever.
The fact that real folder structure and presented folder structure are not indentical!

Havn't spend so much time on a command prompt since good old DOS times, as i did in a broken vista!

Just for the record, I have seen (here and there) the expressed feelings of a lot of users that think that history always repeats itself, we are right into a "re-make" of the original 1999 movie (I mean probably filmed in 1999 but released in 2000), with:

• Vista in the role of Windows Millennium Edition
• XP "as" Win98 SE
• Windows 7 "as" XP

If only Windows 7 could play 2K in this saga .... I would really be a happy dude.

jaclaz

But you seem very impressed with it. I wonder, if there is already a great OS why "upgrade" ?

"XP SP3" versus "Vista" versus "Win7"

It's funny you should mention "Ubuntu Linux", because there are now so many "flavors" of Windows to choose from, it's becoming a tough choice like browsing Linux distros!

eheh.. it's not difficult to choose from either XP, Vista or 7.

It's far more difficult to choose between the right Vista distro, let it be home, enterprise, ultimate, basic, whatever...

Also, you mentioned this "tool" which takes a portion of the desktop and makes it into an image? "Print Screen" button on my keyboard has been doing that for many years!

Yes I also use the Prtscr button and pressing the ALT+PRTSCR would copy the currently selected window but the difference is that you can use this tool to only copy a portion of the screen as necessary.

Just a gimmick, one could always grab some freeware tool for the same task but it's nice to see this feature already bundled inside.

I wonder if these new operating systems just have us doing that same things we have always done, only now they require much more resources and are less compatible??????????????

Yes, I know what you mean.

But while you speak about your experience with Operative Systems, I did found Ubuntu to be quite refreshing. It's modern and efficient, a nice project with no doubt for those who like to try out new things.

Even the other day I was experimenting a new effect on compiz that would split 4 desktops into 4 separate images of the earth globe.

Funny because these features run perfectly well on a old machine with a 1Gb of RAM and it became a good way to break a bit from the usual work desktop. I'm still a windows user but Ubuntu/linux is seemingly more active in bringing innovation than windows these days.

Here is an example of the effect I mention
9whNGv-3Th0

Who says now that we can't mix work & play?

Sell me on Windows 7

Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated sooner or later!

Just for the record, I have seen (here and there) the expressed feelings of a lot of users that think that history always repeats itself, we are right into a "re-make" of the original 1999 movie (I mean probably filmed in 1999 but released in 2000)

If it depends on MS then I wouldn't doubt this would occur again. Who knows what the future reserves..

Yes, Windows 7 is vista sp3, but hey, it's a much better OS overall.

I've been using the beta and it's so stable and faster and I find going back to Vista a pain. If this beta didn't expire, I'd use it forever as I've got almost all my useful apps to install.

Nuno, upgrading does work beautifully. It even supports build to build upgrading!

Nice.

Hi

Does any bdoy have a problem with permission on Win 7?
Parallel installed with XP Pro, can't manage move, copy or delete files/folders on XP drive.
When taking ownership, there is no user visible on XP.
But I can make new file/folder on XP.
Even using with Admin right (same user name and password).
UAC disabled on Win7.
Other similar permission problems are found on network.
Might be solved on RC version, hopefully.

B Regards,

yahooUK

I do not want to buy new hardware all time just to do the same things I can do currently. Maybe I could work in a more effective way?

For now I do not see what great new features are in Win 7 which I can not get in Win XP with freeware. Well, DirectX 10 I am not interested because I am not a gamer. VHD booting support sounds nice. But anything else?

Also XP runs in VMware with just 256 MB of RAM and I can even cut it down to 128... Faster operating system = more effective for me, I do not like to wait. About ~400 for Win 7? Where is the improvement?

Win 7 has still not native support for USB booting which is a very poor achievement. Also moving from one computer to another is still not supported.

While with Linux I can
- exchange the boot medium (IDE, SATA, Zip, FireWire, USB...) without complaints.
- exchange the underlying filesystem for any supported root filesystem
- exchange the whole hardware without bluescreen
- install to "non-standard" medium (again Zip, FireWire, USB...)
- native boot from a BIOS-supported device and chainboot from an BIOS-unsupported device
- install to non-first harddisks without touching the first harddisk
- install to non-first partitions without touching the first partition
- native support for installing into non-primary partition

I am not one who claims Linux is overall better then Windows and Windows is still my main operating system but I really can't understand why ms doesn't copy this features.

Still also no innovative new concepts in controlling the desktop, such as reliable speak input, mind control or whatever. The new innovations are boring.

After them made a good and stable operating system (XP) with (for now) reasonable needings in hardware them will have a hard time to sell me another operating system which needs more resources and which breaks compatibility to anything. The only way I see to get me to use Win 7 is to get forced by them such as ending support for XP + no third party support + remote exploit (and therefore unstoppable viruses) or software which will have minimum requirement a later version then XP, but forcing isn't a way to get happy costumers.

Win 7 has still not native support for USB booting which is a very poor achievement.

USB booting is a hardware issue, not software.

You probably should stick with Linux.

USB booting is a hardware issue, not software.

Yes and no but more no then yes.

The only USB booting hardware issue is if your BIOS can either not boot from USB or if the implementation in BIOS is buggy.
- for this situations you can either use a BIOS extender like approach (PLoP Bootmanager)
- or an operating system specific kicker disc, this means boot from a device supported by BIOS and chainboot from a device not supported by BIOS (like kexec-loader or Fake Signature Method)

However you boot from USB (by BIOS, by BIOS extender or by kicker disc) this is ALWAYS working well with Linux, DOS and there are positive reports for Win9x (haven't confirmed them yet myself).

NT-like Windows have s software related issue, bluescreen of death, unmountable boot device.

You probably should stick with Linux.

I've already stated by opinion about that.

I really can't understand why ms doesn't copy this features.

They probably could, but if they let us run windows off usb and with any random hardware, they would have to kiss goodbye to activation, and probably all of the DRM 'features'. The restrictions come from the marketing department, I suspect.

I hope the marketing department will realize that this activation stuff does only infantilize and make honest users angry. On IT news websites I read at all time that their copy protection has been cracked even before the official release date, it does not make it harder for unlicensed users, only harder for crack programmers and wasted developement time.

Do you really thing this is the reason?

I mean, you can also move XP from one internal ide to another internal ide if you use repair install. Or is this just not well thought by them? I doub't that as it has nothing to do with activation, you need to activate again so or so. If it would work without repair install I would not see the disadvantage for activation.