Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Windows "7"  (Read 7331 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matt_HTopic starter

Windows "7"
« on: November 21, 2009, 01:35:24 AM »
Had a very brief chance to play with Windows 7 for the first time last weekend. Here I am thinking that Microsoft has finally moved away from arbitrary names for their products ("ME", "XP", "Vista") and gone back to a nice, sensible naming scheme based on version numbers.

Not so! A quick glance at the "About Windows" entry in the help menu reveals that Windows 7 is actually Windows 6.1, internally.

While it's true that Windows 7 is barely different from Vista, you'd think they would have at least bumped the internal version number.
 

Offline Vlabguy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2006
  • Posts: 1262
    • Show only replies by Vlabguy1
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2009, 02:01:02 AM »
So Windows "7"  has actually been surpassed by Windows Mobile 6.5..hehe..which eh isnt that good either.  I had the HTC Imagio phone for about a week and returned it. the OS(Windows Mobile 6.5) is not quite there(yet). Mobile Explorer is very slow and always locked up.  Not too mention the typical windows quirks etc.  Great phone though but the OS should have been Android.  MMM..dang I really want an Amiga OS powered phone.  
I have not had a chance to seen or use Windows7, not really in a rush to do so..but Im sure I will at some point.

Rich
ny



Quote from: Matt_H;530557
Had a very brief chance to play with Windows 7 for the first time last weekend. Here I am thinking that Microsoft has finally moved away from arbitrary names for their products ("ME", "XP", "Vista") and gone back to a nice, sensible naming scheme based on version numbers.

Not so! A quick glance at the "About Windows" entry in the help menu reveals that Windows 7 is actually Windows 6.1, internally.

While it's true that Windows 7 is barely different from Vista, you'd think they would have at least bumped the internal version number.
 

Offline tone007

Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2009, 02:02:48 AM »
Opera on WM6.5 is great, I've got the AT&T Fuze (HTC) and I'm pretty happy with it.
3 Commodore file cabinets, 2 Commodore USB turntables, 1 AmigaWorld beer mug
Alienware M14x i7 laptop running AmigaForever
 

Offline persia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 3753
    • Show only replies by persia
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2009, 02:09:04 AM »
I love my iPhone, it's what Amiga should be...

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

What we\'re witnessing is the sad, lonely crowing of that last, doomed cock.
 

Offline Vlabguy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2006
  • Posts: 1262
    • Show only replies by Vlabguy1
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2009, 02:22:55 AM »
Agreed ..I almost typed that..in my post.  Opera is great!  Although lacking in Flash :-(.  
I know Adobe is going to release mobile Flash..or have they already??  In the end the Imagio was just a bit too much phone for me.  The HTC Droid is also a nice phone.  I though about the iPhone but AT&Ts service is not that great where I live.  Plus I think the "data" plans should be choice for the customer and available al a carte ..or as needed.  

HTC makes some great phones.  The 5.0mp camera on the Imagio is pretty good. The iphone should have a 5.0mp camera and the 3.0mp camera should be moved to the iPod Touch...

Rich
ny




Quote from: tone007;530560
Opera on WM6.5 is great, I've got the AT&T Fuze (HTC) and I'm pretty happy with it.
 

Offline TheMagicM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 2857
    • Show only replies by TheMagicM
    • http://www.BartonekDragRacing.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2009, 04:21:59 AM »
I'm going to pick up a Droid phone tomorrow.. to replace my Palm Centro that I broke.  lol.

Windows 7 is all right.. My son had Vista on his quad core system so I put Windows 7 on it and it runs great.
PowerMac G5 dual 2.0ghz/128meg Radeon/500gb HD/2GB RAM, MorphOS 3.9 registered, user #1900
Powerbook G4 5,6 1.67ghz/2gb RAM, Radeon 9700/250gb hd, MorphOS 3.9 registered #3143
 

Offline DonnyEMU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2002
  • Posts: 650
    • Show only replies by DonnyEMU
    • http://blog.donburnett.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2009, 05:21:13 AM »
You are assuming to much. They didn't bump the revision # up because of the following reason:  Version 7.0 breaks many applications install programs.  They decided not to revise up to 7.0 because so many poorly coded .net applications don't like the # 7.. I have all of this on video and can link to official comments about it (found on channel 9.msdn.com) should anyone doubt it..

Let's talk about the difference between Vista and Windows 7..

from the UK publication the Register:

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/11/18/windows_7_heart/

as well as support for 256 cores and a bunch of other add ons..


How about virtual wifi add-ons to drivers.. making your wifi adapter now a router..

See:

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20090516/windows-7-native-virtual-wifi-technology-microsoft-research/

and

http://connectify.me/

How about directly using your GPU as a second co-processor built-in not requiring an API for the system to take advantage of it (like openCL on the Mac)..

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-directx-compute-gpgpu-windows,8349.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvDJzpBOieU

http://www.nvidia.com/object/directcompute.html

(VERY AMIGA ESQUE)

By the way I have a new droid phone (samsung moment) and love it..
« Last Edit: November 21, 2009, 05:22:10 AM by DonnyEMU »
======================================
Don Burnett Developer
http://blog.donburnett.com
don@donburnett.com
======================================
 

Offline quarkx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Posts: 854
    • Show only replies by quarkx
    • http://www.amigalounge.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2009, 05:30:07 AM »
If you REALLY want to get technical about the numbers, After NT 4, NT 5 was sent out for beta testing, but it was too late in the cycle, and they pulled it. Windows 2000(was completely different then NT5) (should be Windows 6) and then ME (Windows 7 -Technical), then XP (Windows 8, but called 5.1), then Vista (Windows 9) and Finally "Windows 7" should be Windows 10 in my book, and thats not including all the "server" packages which are technically different.
I have Amiga stuff for sale at http://amigalounge.com. You can follow my builds there also.
 

Offline Opus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 134
    • Show only replies by Opus
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2009, 05:44:30 AM »
Amiga powered phone would be nice, I'll just have to settle for UAE on my Nokia N95  =)
 

Offline motorollin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2005
  • Posts: 8669
    • Show only replies by motorollin
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2009, 08:34:35 AM »
Quote from: quarkx;530577
"Windows 7" should be Windows 10 in my book

They probably wanted to call it WinOS X :rolleyes:

--
moto
Code: [Select]
10  IT\'S THE FINAL COUNTDOWN
20  FOR C = 1 TO 2
30     DA-NA-NAAAA-NAAAA DA-NA-NA-NA-NAAAA
40     DA-NA-NAAAA-NAAAA DA-NA-NA-NA-NA-NA-NAAAAA
50  NEXT C
60  NA-NA-NAAAA
70  NA-NA NA-NA-NA-NA-NAAAA NAAA-NAAAAAAAAAAA
80  GOTO 10
 

Offline Matt_HTopic starter

Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2009, 01:47:20 PM »
Quote from: quarkx;530577
If you REALLY want to get technical about the numbers, After NT 4, NT 5 was sent out for beta testing, but it was too late in the cycle, and they pulled it. Windows 2000(was completely different then NT5) (should be Windows 6) and then ME (Windows 7 -Technical), then XP (Windows 8, but called 5.1), then Vista (Windows 9) and Finally "Windows 7" should be Windows 10 in my book, and thats not including all the "server" packages which are technically different.


Sure, if you want to replace each named release with a sequential number, that makes sense. But I'm talking about internal version numbering with the traditional version.revision numbering convention.

Windows 95 was obviously Windows 4.0 - prerelease hype even referred to it as such. 98 and ME - though marketed (and priced) as major releases - were not fundamentally different. Hence they have internal numbers in the 4.x range. Windows 2000 was a significant enough change to see the version number bumped to 5. XP was another incremental improvement, so its version is 5.1. Vista was a fairly substantial overhaul, so there's an internal bump to 6.0, while Windows 7 is apparently a minor improvement on that, to 6.1.

My point is that I thought Microsoft's marketing machine was once again making the internal match the external, but it seems that's not the case. Windows 7 is just another name, not a number of any internal significance.
 

Offline Tripitaka

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2005
  • Posts: 1307
    • Show only replies by Tripitaka
    • http://acidapple.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2009, 01:47:29 PM »
I must admit Windows 7 has been rather handy for me. I've been with it since the beta, now on RC. Consider this; My system uses 2 NVidia 7900GTO cards in an SLI setup with an AMD 4200 X2. Under Vista I'm limited to DX9 due to my cards. Under 7 I use DX11, the bits my GPU's can't do my CPU does instead. Now GFX cards are working at full steam but  CPU (that rarely ran at more than 50%) is working harder too.
Fallout 3 never looked so good.
It's still a huge lump of bloat with far too much nannying but that's windows for you.
Falling into a dark and red rage.
 

Offline Matt_HTopic starter

Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2009, 01:54:35 PM »
@ DonnyEMU

I just reread your post. Incredible! It's a design flaw! They've really boxed themselves into a corner, haven't they?

From the Register article you linked:
Quote
The problem is that the operating system is full of internal dependencies, and as Russinovich admitted: "We don't really understand those dependencies".

Hilarious!
 

Offline quarkx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Posts: 854
    • Show only replies by quarkx
    • http://www.amigalounge.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2009, 04:21:47 PM »
Quote from: Matt_H;530602
Sure, if you want to replace each named release with a sequential number, that makes sense. But I'm talking about internal version numbering with the traditional version.revision numbering convention.

Windows 95 was obviously Windows 4.0 - prerelease hype even referred to it as such. 98 and ME - though marketed (and priced) as major releases - were not fundamentally different. Hence they have internal numbers in the 4.x range. Windows 2000 was a significant enough change to see the version number bumped to 5. XP was another incremental improvement, so its version is 5.1. Vista was a fairly substantial overhaul, so there's an internal bump to 6.0, while Windows 7 is apparently a minor improvement on that, to 6.1.

My point is that I thought Microsoft's marketing machine was once again making the internal match the external, but it seems that's not the case. Windows 7 is just another name, not a number of any internal significance.


No argument here about that. I have been saying since the beta, that windows 7 is just Vista version 2.0 or "Vista Reloaded" (ME 3.0) :)
I have Amiga stuff for sale at http://amigalounge.com. You can follow my builds there also.
 

Offline kd7ota

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2002
  • Posts: 1433
    • Show only replies by kd7ota
    • http://www.qrz.com
Re: Windows "7"
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2009, 05:15:06 PM »
Windows 7 have been great to me. I have no complaints so far.  From the old Med SoundStudio program that I had back in like 2000 or so works great lol.  But it does its purpose..... Do my school work and play music hah. :)
-=-=-=-=-=-
Mine!  :-D