From "The Wallstreet Journal" By Walter S. Mossberg

Microsoft's New Operating System Is Good Enough to Erase Bad Memory of Vista

In just two weeks, on Oct. 22, Microsoft's long operating-system nightmare will be over. The company will release Windows 7, a faster and much better operating system than the little-loved Windows Vista, which did a lot to harm both the company's reputation, and the productivity and blood pressure of its users. PC makers will rush to flood physical and online stores with new computers pre-loaded with Windows 7, and to offer the software to Vista owners who wish to upgrade.

With Windows 7, PC users will at last have a strong, modern successor to the sturdy and familiar, but aged, Windows XP, which is still the most popular version of Windows, despite having come out in 2001. In the high-tech world, an eight-year-old operating system is the equivalent of a 20-year-old car. While XP works well for many people, it is relatively weak in areas such as security, networking and other features more important today than when XP was designed around 1999.

After using pre-release versions of Windows 7 for nine months, and intensively testing the final version for the past month on many different machines, I believe it is the best version of Windows Microsoft has produced. It's a boost to productivity and a pleasure to use. Despite a few drawbacks, I can heartily recommend Windows 7 to mainstream consumers.

Like the new Snow Leopard operating system released in August by Microsoft's archrival, Apple, Windows 7 is much more of an evolutionary than a revolutionary product. Its main goal was to fix the flaws in Vista and to finally give Microsoft customers a reason to move up from XP. But Windows 7 is packed with features and tweaks that make using your computer an easier and more satisfying experience.

Windows 7 introduces real advances in organizing your programs and files, arranging your taskbar and desktop, and quickly viewing and launching the page or document you want, when you want it. It also has cool built-in touch-screen features.

It removes a lot of clutter. And it mostly banishes Vista's main flaws -- sluggishness; incompatibility with third-party software and hardware; heavy hardware requirements; and constant, annoying security warnings.

I tested Windows 7 on 11 different computers, ranging from tiny netbooks to standard laptops to a couple of big desktops. These included machines from Lenovo, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Acer, Asus, Toshiba and Sony. I even successfully ran it on an Apple Macintosh laptop. On some of these machines, Windows 7 was pre-loaded. On others, I had to upgrade from an earlier version of Windows.

In most cases, the installation took 45 minutes or less, and the new operating system worked snappily and well. But, I did encounter some drawbacks and problems. On a couple of these machines, glacial start-up and reboot times reminded me of Vista. And, on a couple of others, after upgrading, key features like the display or touchpad didn't work properly. Also, Windows 7 still requires add-on security software that has to be frequently updated. It's tedious and painful to upgrade an existing computer from XP to 7, and the variety of editions in which Windows 7 is offered is confusing.

Finally, Microsoft has stripped Windows 7 of familiar built-in applications, such as email, photo organizing, address book, calendar and video-editing programs. These can be downloaded free of charge, but they no longer come with the operating system, though some PC makers may choose to pre-load them.

In recent years, I, like many other reviewers, have argued that Apple's Mac OS X operating system is much better than Windows. That's no longer true. I still give the Mac OS a slight edge because it has a much easier and cheaper upgrade path; more built-in software programs; and far less vulnerability to viruses and other malicious software, which are overwhelmingly built to run on Windows.

Now, however, it's much more of a toss-up between the two rivals. Windows 7 beats the Mac OS in some areas, such as better previews and navigation right from the taskbar, easier organization of open windows on the desktop and touch-screen capabilities. So Apple will have to scramble now that the gift of a flawed Vista has been replaced with a reliable, elegant version of Windows.

Here are some of the key features of Windows 7.

New Taskbar: In Windows 7, the familiar taskbar has been reinvented and made taller. Instead of mainly being a place where icons of open windows temporarily appear, it now is a place where you can permanently "pin" the icons of frequently used programs anywhere along its length, and in any arrangement you choose. This is a concept borrowed from Apple's similar feature, the Dock. But Windows 7 takes the concept further.

For each running program, hovering over its taskbar icon pops up a small preview screen showing a mini-view of that program. This preview idea was in Vista. But, in Windows 7, it has been expanded in several ways. Now, every open window in that program is included separately in the preview. If you mouse over a window in the preview screen, it appears at full size on your desktop and all other windows on the desktop become transparent -- part of a feature called Aero Peek. Click on the window and it comes up, ready for use. You can even close windows from these previews, or play media in them.

I found this feature more natural and versatile than a similar feature in Snow Leopard called Dock Expose.

You can also use Aero Peek at any time to see your empty desktop, with open windows reduced to virtual panes of glass. To do this, you just hover over a small rectangle at the right edge of the taskbar.

Taskbar icons also provide Jump Lists -- pop-up menus listing frequent actions or recent files used.

Desktop Organization: A feature called Snap allows you to expand windows to full-screen size by just dragging them to the top of the screen, or to half-screen size by dragging them to the left or right edges of the screen. Another called Shake allows you to make all other windows but the one you're working on disappear by simply grabbing its title bar with the mouse and shaking it several times.

File Organization: In Windows Explorer, the left-hand column now includes a feature called Libraries. Each library -- Documents, Music, Pictures and Videos -- consolidates all files of those types regardless of which folder, or even which hard disk, they live in.

Networking: Windows 7 still isn't quite as natural at networking as I find the Mac to be, but it's better than Vista. For instance, now you can see all available wireless networks by just clicking on an icon in the taskbar. A new feature called HomeGroups is supposed to let you share files more easily among Windows 7 PCs on your home network. In my tests, it worked, but not consistently, and it required typing in long, arcane passwords.

Touch: Some of the same kinds of multitouch gestures made popular on the iPhone are now built into Windows 7. But these features won't likely become popular for a while because to get the most out of them, a computer needs a special type of touch screen that goes beyond most of the ones existing now. I tested this on one such laptop, a Lenovo, and was able to move windows around, to resize and flip through photos, and more.

Speed: In my tests, on every machine, Windows 7 ran swiftly and with far fewer of the delays typical in running Vista. All the laptops I tested resumed from sleep quickly and properly, unlike in Vista. Start-up and restart times were also improved. I chose six Windows 7 laptops from different makers to compare with a new MacBook Pro laptop. The Mac still started and restarted faster than most of the Windows 7 PCs. But the speed gap has narrowed considerably, and one of the Lenovos beat the Mac in restart time.

Nagging: In the name of security, Vista put up nagging warnings about a wide variety of tasks, driving people crazy. In Windows 7, you can now set this system so it nags you only when things are happening that you consider really worth the nag. Also, Microsoft has consolidated most of the alerts from the lower-right system tray into one icon, and they seemed less frequent.

Compatibility: I tried a wide variety of third-party software and all worked fine on every Windows 7 machine. These included Mozilla Firefox; Adobe Reader; Google's Picasa and Chrome; and Apple's iTunes and Safari.

I also tested several hardware devices, and, unlike Vista, Windows 7 handled all but one smoothly. These included a networked H-P printer, a Canon camera, an iPod nano, and at least five external flash drives and hard disks. The one failure was a Verizon USB cellular modem. Microsoft says you don't need external software to run these, but I found it was necessary, and even then had to use a trick I found on the Web to get it to work.

System Requirements: Nearly all Vista PCs, and newer or beefier XP machines, should be able to run Windows 7 fine. Even the netbooks I tested ran it speedily, especially with the Starter Edition, which lacks some of the powerful graphics effects in the operating system. (Other netbooks will be able to run other editions.)

If you have a standard PC, called a 32-bit PC, you'll need at least one gigabyte of memory, 16 gigabytes of free hard-disk space and a graphics system that can support Microsoft technologies called "DirectX 9 with WDDM 1.0." You'll also need a processor with a speed of at least one gigahertz. If you have a newer-style 64-bit PC, which can use more memory, you'll need at least two gigabytes of memory and 20 gigabytes of free hard disk space. In either case, you should double the minimum memory specification.

Installation, Editions and Price: There are four editions of Windows 7 of interest to consumers. One, a limited version called Starter, comes pre-loaded on netbooks. A second, called Business, is mainly for people who need to tap remotely into company networks (check with your company to see if you need this). A third, called Ultimate, is mainly for techies who want every feature of all other editions. Most average consumers will want Home Premium, which costs $120 for upgrades.

The system for upgrading is complicated, but Vista owners can upgrade to the exactly comparable edition of Windows 7 while keeping all files, settings and programs in place.

Unfortunately, XP owners, the biggest body of Windows users, won't be able to do that. They'll have to wipe out their hard disks after backing up their files elsewhere, then install Windows 7, then restore their personal files, then re-install all their programs from the original CDs or downloaded installer files. Then, they have to install all the patches and upgrades to those programs from over the years.

Microsoft includes an Easy Transfer wizard to help with this, but it moves only personal files, not programs. This painful XP upgrade process is one of the worst things about Windows 7 and will likely drive many XP owners to either stick with what they've got or wait and buy a new one.

In my tests, both types of installations went OK, though the latter could take a long time.

Bottom line: Windows 7 is a very good, versatile operating system that should help Microsoft bury the memory of Vista and make PC users happy.

******************************
Click "HERE" for the original review. You can also watch a video and make comments there as well.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: tuddley3,

Its indeed quite good. To me it feels like all drawbacks that came with Vista have been eliminated.

Installation is very easy and it seems to recognize every piece of hardware on its own , downloads and installs the required drivers afterwards , also all on its own.

Re-installing your entire system is not nearly as much of a pain in the that it used to be before.

Vista already did this aswell but things seems to have become a bit faster now.

If you should worry that one or the other driver for a exotic piece of hardware you might call your own isnt yet available in its Windows 7 version, dont worry , all Vista drivers seem to run under W7 aswell.

For now , it seems that gamers have much less trouble than under Vista.

So far ive heard of just a handful of games that are making problems in W7, sometimes just because of their DRM's being yet incompatible.

I cant confirm it yet but throughout the last weeks i heard many voices saying the game performance lag that came with Vista is completely gone and many people seem to think that games even run a slight bit faster than on WinXP.

W7 comes with the already known compatability options for your applications now including WinXP SP3 and Visa.

In WinXP it often felt to be completely useless but the comp-mode really seems to have effect on programs which were solely written for XP.

It is intentional that im using "seems to" so often as i cannot give any definite confirmations after just 2 weeks and not having done everything with it.


I still have XP running here at the moment but im already considering to switch to W7 in the coming days.

What ive seen of it so far beats XP in every aspect.

Tuddley, thanks for your review. I'm also looking forward to eventually getting my hands on Windows 7. I have Vista 64 running on two new laptops I bought for my daughters in school, but I do not have it on any of my own PCs. I vowed never to buy Vista for myself, but from what I have heard so far, W7 seems worth investing in. However, as I am loath to pay twice for an OS on one machine, I'll be waiting until the next time I buy a system or build one from scratch. It just does not feel right to me to pay twice to run a machine and as those machines are already nicely running XP I see no need to upgrade. [I even have three old PCs in my house that are running Windows 98 one running Windows 2000 Pro.] I don't know how efficient W7 is on older machines, but my experience with Windows is that each new OS requires more resources to run smoothly; upgrading an OS usually means degrading the performance of the hardware. It feels like removing a V-8 engine from your car and installing a 4 cylinder engine.

My V-8 reference must be coming from my recent trip to the Dodge dealer. I am currently drivin a 2006 Charger with a V-6; the lease is up in 8 months and I am planning for my next car. I love the looks of the Challenger, but I think my heart is really on getting a Charger R/T, or if not a car, then one of them nice new Ram 1500's.

Right, boys, aside from my brief digression, this thread is about Windows 7. Let's not hijack Tuddley's Windows 7 review and turn it into a car discussion.

Oh, one question before I close this post. Has anybody installed SH3 or SH4 on a W7 system?

quote:

Oh, one question before I close this post. Has anybody installed SH3 or SH4 on a W7 system?

Back when MS released the RC1 of Win 7 I downloaded a copy and ran it for quite awhile. Even for a pre-release version it was very stable and worked perfectly with all my programs. Also installed SHIV on it and SHIV ran perfectly. No problems whatsoever.


Nice review BTW, tuddley.

Tuddley...thanks for the review, you should be writing for a website that reviews such products. Told me just about everything I need to know about Windows 7.

Thanks very much

Maverick

As much as I would like to take credit for this review, I did not write it. I edited the post to give credit where credit is due, Mr. WALTER S. MOSSBERG of "The Wallstreet Journal".

Ah, puts a different complexion on things....

The Wall Street Journal?????

Is that a publication I can trust????

Is it reputable???

Is it well known????

Maverick

Yes Mav, the Wall Street Journal is trustworthy. If it came from Wall Street itself, that would be a different story. If you ask anyone that has tried W7, they would agree with this review.

Well i'm having it, i'm truly fed up with my Vista 64bit and i have only had it a couple of months.
I STILL have to change the screen resolution practically every time i log onto it. It seems to change randomly to whatever it feels like.
However ask me to complain about XP and i can't think of anything after 7 plus years....


D.

I must have been one of the lucky ones, I have Vista , albeit the 32 bit edition, but I have not had any problems with it and actually like it.

Maverick

I have vista 32bit on my laptop, but my laptop is pretty much not used much and as yet i have'nt encountered anything i'd really call a problem. But as i say, i've not used it much so it could just be that i have'nt found the problems.

D.

quote:

Originally posted by Maverick_U2007:
I must have been one of the lucky ones, I have Vista , albeit the 32 bit edition, but I have not had any problems with it and actually like it.

Maverick

Its not that Vista is bad, it just had some awkwardness to it in some spots.

Like a strange tendency to use more memory than necessary and a very awkward performance lag when playing games that might be connected to that.

Ive tested it side by side and games were running a little bet slower than under XP even when using the same DirectX versions.

Not saying that Vista has a outright memory leak in its code but it is , lets say a bit wasteful which you recognize when you play performance hungry games.

Another thing was a certain lack of compatability with some XP applications and games which could not be solved by Vista compatability modes.


So beside all the points in which Vista is better than XP, it also had points in which it was not as good as XP.

This is the main reason why so many complain about it. When you switch to a new OS you want it to be better in 10 of 10 points than your current one and not better in 8 of 10 and unexplainably worse in the other 2 ones. (Even if its just slightly worse)

Windows 7 (which you could call Vista Reloaded or Vista Revised) as it basically is Vista in its latest version adresses the drawbacks that were identified with Vista AND pays respect to user demands (like the applications that do not get automatically installed anymore).

Yeah there is something to the claim that Vista users were abused as sort of Windows 7 beta testers.

I would at least demand that Vista users should get a discount for a Windows 7 purchase.

More chance of finding water on the moon than that happening Celeon

Maverick

Whilst attention is being drawn to Windows 7, which version does anybody intend on purchasing and by that I mean 32 bit/64 bit.

I play games online (Silenthunter,COD4, COD5, Rfactor, etc), manage 2 websites and do some Video and Photo editing.

Can someone explain to me what reasons there would be for me to choose 64 bit as opposed to 32 bit.

Maverick

@ Mav - Maybe this will help. I don't understand much of it, and it is an old article about XP, but the concept might be the same.

How much does the transition from 32-bit to 64-bit matter?

One of the biggest advantages of 64-bit over 32-bit is that 64-bit will read more memory than 32-bit. 32-bit will only read up to 3.3 gigs of memory where 64-bit will find more memory starting at 4 gigs and up. Do a quick Google on 32-bit vs 64-bit and you'll find all kinds of information on the subject.

If you buy Windows 7 retail box it comes with both 32 and 64bit dvds. OEM's are individual sets dvds.

I've completely switch to win7 64bit. I can't go back. win7 runs so much better than vista.

Vista worked for me for many years but I hated having to tweak and jury rig my system to get programs to work right.

Windows 7 I don't need to break my head so much.

The only issue with windows 7 are companies who aren't supporting it or DRM's who are bugging it. Other than that its a must have.

I will be getting the OEM version of 64-bit Win 7 Ultimate next week.

Have ordered Windows 7 and it is due next week. Still cannot make my mind up whether to install the 32 or 64 bit edition. My motherboard support up to 8Gb of memory, so in theory I could benefit from the 64 bit edition.

Is anybody else going to use 7, if so which version will you use.

Wolfehunter and Tambor are both already going for 64 bit.

Maverick

quote:

Originally posted by Maverick_U2007:
Have ordered Windows 7 and it is due next week. Still cannot make my mind up whether to install the 32 or 64 bit edition. My motherboard support up to 8Gb of memory, so in theory I could benefit from the 64 bit edition.

Is anybody else going to use 7, if so which version will you use.

Wolfehunter and Tambor are both already going for 64 bit.

Maverick

It fully depends on what you want to do with your computer. What programs you want to run.

For instance, having the theoretical option of installing 8 GB in your system is nice but doing it would be mostly pointless as only a handful of programs like professional 3D rendering software make use of bigger amounts of RAM.

Most programs use around 3.2 to 3.5 GB.

So 4 GB is still perfectly enough for the average user and i do not expect that to change all too soon.

There are some crazy people who think that putting 24 GB of RAM into their systems makes them faster. Nope. Its just costs them money.

Only servers need that much RAM.

Also be advised that many 32 bit programs did not run properly or not at all under Vista 64 so this might be the same with W7 64.

When you do a lot of gaming for instance, you should install the 32 bit version or you may encounter lots of problems with your games.