[Robo]

It's not just a codename any more!

It makes sense, I suppose. Windows 7, Windows Mobile 7, and the Xbox 720, all coming out around the same time. Admirable symmetry, no? (All they need is a Zune 720, named so as to better compete with the 7G iPod classic, and they'll be all set.)

There's a part of me thinking that Microsoft's return to numerical naming might owe a little to the success of OS X, but it's not like Apple can honestly own the idea of naming versions after their numbers.

But I like it. It's simple and sensible, unlike "Windows Vista," which sounds like a sparkling beverage.

I actually drew a logo for Windows 7. It's a lot like the current logo, only there's 7 "panes" (essentially, two of the current Windows logos overlapping on one pane) and it's simpler, with less curves. It's not as good as my Xbox 720 logo, but whatevs.

Anyway...erm, discuss.

[Mugge]

Windows 7:

• Netbook Edition (XP)
• Home Basic
• Home Premium
• Home Media
• Small Business
• Enterprise
• Ultimate

[Robo]

"I said Windows 7, not seven Windows!"

[chucker]

So after 13 years, Microsoft finally returns to sane, non-marketing-driven version numbers for Windows. Congrats!

[Luca]

Originally Posted by chucker So after 13 years, Microsoft finally returns to sane, non-marketing-driven version numbers for Windows. Congrats!

"Jaguar" "Panther" "Tiger" "Leopard"

[Banana]

What are the odds that it will come with a logo featuring a carp table? A pair of big fuzzy dies to hang by the monitor?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Luca [OS X marketing tags]

They've always been marketed as "Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar", "10.3 Panther", etc., though. Had it been just "Mac OS X Jaguar", I'd agree.

You could have made a much better point: iWork and iLife.

[Robo]

But iWork and iLife are named after years. I don't think that's "insanely marketing driven" or "aspirational" or "stupid" or whatever. I think that sort of make sense, especially since they almost always come out in January. Plus, it's a bundle of apps - they're not all going to be at the same version number at the same time. You can't call it iLife 5 when it's GarageBand 2, iTunes 7, iPhoto 5, iMovie 6 etc.

[hmurchison]

Bad Idea.

There are 7 deadly sins. This OS is doomed.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by hmurchison Bad Idea. There are 7 deadly sins. This OS is doomed.

But 7 is also considered a lucky number by many!

[curiousuburb]

When 7.0.7 crashes, it will spell LOL!

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by curiousuburb When 7.0.7 crashes, it will spell LOL!

Upside down. That's just satanic!

[chucker]

Originally Posted by curiousuburb When 7.0.7 crashes, it will spell LOL!

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by chucker So after 13 years, Microsoft finally returns to sane, non-marketing-driven version numbers for Windows. Congrats!

Agree. Windows 7 even has a nice ring to it. Hopefully the trend will continue after Windows 7.

[Moogs]

"Windows 7, now in pre-pre-beta... available in 2009 as a pre-beta to developers, and available to customers in 2017. Simply Amazing!"

[morningstarrising]

Originally Posted by Moogs "Windows 7, now in pre-pre-beta... available in 2009 as a pre-beta to developers, and available to customers in 2017. Simply Amazing!"

Uhh.....

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2009/0...oft-relea.html

Microsoft's excitable CEO Steve Ballmer showed off Windows 7 -- the slick, fast, user-friendly successor to the much-maligned Windows Vista -- and said it will be available as a public beta on Friday. Unveiled by an intense Ballmer during his keynote address on the eve of CES 2009, Windows 7 will offer better performance on underpowered machines such as netbooks, support for multitouch interfaces, and simplified home networking. Ballmer said that this would be the "best version of Windows ever" and pointed out features that implicitly acknowledged the problems with Windows Vista. Microsoft is also eager to get Windows 7 into people's hands given the negative reaction to Windows Vista, which was widely panned. Released in 2007, Vista annoyed many customers with its hunger for computing resources and its seemingly incessant security notifications. According to Ballmer, Windows 7 will be available to developers immediately, and to the general public on Friday, January 9. It will be a free download from Microsoft's site.

[Luca]

Sounds good. MS is taking the years of work they put into Vista and adding the years of fixing problems and addressing criticisms to it.

It might be a fun thing to try, but I don't think it's worth the hassle of installing.

[bassplayinMacFiend]

Originally Posted by Luca Sounds good. MS is taking the years of work they put into Vista and adding the years of fixing problems and addressing criticisms to it. It might be a fun thing to try, but I don't think it's worth the hassle of installing.

I'd like to see if it uses less than the 1.9GB of RAM Vista 64 sucks up just getting me to the desktop.

[zsummers]

Originally Posted by Luca Originally Posted by chucker So after 13 years, Microsoft finally returns to sane, non-marketing-driven version numbers for Windows. Congrats! "Jaguar" "Panther" "Tiger" "Leopard"

I disagree... there is a clear progression there from spots, to black with no spots, to stripes, back to spots but smaller. And now, with snow leopard, to white with spots.

HOW IS THAT NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR LIKE NUMBERZ?

[curiousuburb]

Countdown to the new John Hodgman "I'm a PC, and instead of downgrading to XP to avoid Vista, I can now upgrade to avoid Vista, Wo0t" ad... 3... 2... 1...

Maybe he'll burn the big pile

[Wyatt]

I'll absolutely be trying the beta on Friday. I actually think 7 looks pretty promising (as Windows goes), so I'm excited to try it out, if only for the geeky pleasure of trying a pre-release OS.

[Capella]

I'm going to wait a month or so, see how it goes, and then decide if I want to try the pre-release.The only thing I worry about is games- Vista is hell on a lot of older games, and 7 might be the same way. And since my Windows box is solely a gaming machine, MORE compatibility issues would drive me crazy.

[Moogs]

Hrm. How would one download this from VMware and then add it as a secondary system? I still don't think it will be released for two years at least if I know MS, but WTH. As long as it's isolated on my machine I'll try it.

[spotcatbug]

And just to make it all the clearer:

Why Does Windows 7 Think It's Windows 6.1?

Yeah, they have a good reason to do it, but it still strikes me as funny. They finally get back to a sane numbering system for Windows versions, and they still need to muddy-it-up just a bit.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by bassplayinMacFiend I'd like to see if it uses less than the 1.9GB of RAM Vista 64 sucks up just getting me to the desktop.

I run it on a VM with 832 MB of RAM, with Visual Studio 2008 (no Aero Glass, though)… so, yes.

Originally Posted by spotcatbug And just to make it all the clearer: Why Does Windows 7 Think It's Windows 6.1? Yeah, they have a good reason to do it,

It's a valid reason, but is it a good one? I'm tired of Microsoft tolerating developers who do something as stupid as checking for the OS major release to determine "compatibility". That's not what you do. And certainly not in a forward-looking manner. (I can understand checking "if OS_MAJOR_RELEASE >= 5", but < 7? That's just dumb. I realize it's a way for third parties to rake in money for "upgrades" that "add compatibility", but Microsoft shouldn't support such crap.)

[Banana]

Originally Posted by chucker I run it on a VM with 832 MB of RAM, with Visual Studio 2008 (no Aero Glass, though)… so, yes.

I'd like to know how you accomplish this. It's still sluggish despite having all blings off. Server basically wipes the floor after XP.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Banana I'd like to know how you accomplish this. It's still sluggish despite having all blings off. Server basically wipes the floor after XP.

To clarify, I was talking about Windows 7 (build 7000), not Vista. I've found Vista to be virtually unusable in a VM; Server 2008 is far more lightweight, though.

[Banana]

Ah, I got confused. Glad to know that I wasn't doing something stupid with Vista copy.

It's weird that Server would be usable even though it's supposedly same codebase as Vista. There are some people suggesting to run Server as a "Workstation OS" in lieu of Vista.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Banana It's weird that Server would be usable even though it's supposedly same codebase as Vista. There are some people suggesting to run Server as a "Workstation OS" in lieu of Vista.

It's actually quite simple: Server starts off with far fewer components; it's more modular. Vista's "desktop experience", for example, needs to be explicitly installed in Server 2008 after the fact.

It's a shame this obviously isn't an option for the regular user. I can do it because, as a professional Windows developer, I get basically whichever Windows license I want (including, in this case, Windows Server Enterprise) "for free", but nobody would really spring $3,999 just to have a less bloated system, right?

In any case, going back to the topic, it looks like Windows 7 has vastly improved the minimum footprint. I don't have the VM here with me, so I can't give you the hard data, but it "feels" like it uses as few resources, if not fewer, than Windows Server 2008.

[edit] Anyone have experiences trying to slim down Vista using vLite or something similar?

[Banana]

Yes, that's right, but the weird part is if the guy who runs the site is accurate, even if you turn on the Vista's features (e.g. Desktop Experience) on Server 2008 and disable features not available in 2008 on Vista, so the Vista and Server are nearly identical, Server stills outperforms Vista anyway, so there's more than just a modular build and activating fewer components.

Nonetheless, your reports of Windows 7 is promising, though.