You are got Windows 7 questions, I have got answers
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 30.10.2008
Tip: Click here to update all your PC's outdated driversIt’s impossible to offer a comprehensive evaluation of a product as big and sprawling as Windows 7 with just screenshots and specs.
That’s doubly true when looking at a preliminary release that’s still missing some key features. My first look at the pre-beta PDC release of Windows 7 inspired plenty of great feedback and questions, along with an understandable amount of confusion and apprehension. I’ll address some of the most prevalent questions and comments in this post.
Isn’t the new Windows 7 user interface just a coat of paint slapped over the Vista UI?
Short answer: no. The build I have to work with is very Vista-like, missing the new Start menu, desktop, and taskbar enhancements. The demos I’ve seen here at PDC use more recent builds where those features are available. Those features will reach users in the form of a beta “early next year.”
In the past 48 hours, I’ve had a chance to get a closer look at those new UI features. One thing becomes obvious after only a few minutes of playing with the new interface: The Windows 7 design team has paid an enormous amount of attention to small details and have focused on workflows and end-to-end experiences, not just on dialog boxes and feature sets. The result feels comfortingly familiar to any Windows user, although the overall experience is often significantly different when you break down its small details.
One example that illustrates the point is the difference between Backup programs in Windows Vista and Windows 7. The Windows 7 version, shown below, includes a key feature missing from its Vista predecessor – the ability to include or exclude a folder from a backup set. But that’s not all: the entire workflow of the backup process has been streamlined dramatically. It takes 10-15 clicks to perform an image backup in Windows Vista; on a Windows 7 notebook I tested, the operating system offered to perform a backup when I plugged in an external hard drive. The entire process took three clicks and less than 10 minutes. The customization screen shown here added only two clicks to the entire process.
Is it faster? Really?
Measuring performance is tough enough with released code. For something billed as a “pre-beta” release and offered primarily for developers, it’s inappropriate and frankly foolish to even attempt granular measurements of speeds and startup times. My subjective impression is that this OS feels quick and impressively responsive, but I’m not prepared to break out the stopwatch until I have a more polished build.
Isn’t this just a blatant ripoff of OS X/KDE/etc.?
Tracing the ancestry of UI innovations is tricky. There are, after all, only so many ways to interact with pixels on a screen to make things happen. And it’s foolish not to pay attention to what competitors past and present have done. As I pointed out in my first look, the new taskbar clearly borrows some concepts from the OS X dock, but it retains the Windows DNA and adds some smart behaviors that one-up Apple, most notably Jump Lists and live, clickable previews.source:
blogs.zdnet.com
>> Click Here to Run a Free Scan for PC Errors <<
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
Answers to Windows 7 upgrade questions || Your top Windows 7 questions, answered || Microsoft's Bing: 10 burning questions || Windows 7 RC Brings Windows XP Mode Beta and Windows Virtual PC Beta || Windows Reactivator 2.0 - Backup & Restore Activation Status of Windows XP with Windows Reactivator
Comments(16)
i'm sick of all this "feels fast" stuff. it's either fast(er) or it's not. vista was
not fast and ms tried to impress users with a more responsive os (like displaying the
desktop while it took another 5 minutes to fully boot). microsoft tried to make up for it
in countless ways, but overall failed.
windows 7 will be the true vista, the
one that was suppose to be released years ago. will it top xp? only time will tell. can't
wait until microsoft starts to compare windows 7 against vista (as if thats some kind of
competition). if windows 7 is anything like vista, microsoft is in some deep shit.
ur computer must be seriously crap. its seriously time to consider packing away that old
pentium 2 if it takes that long. seriously, it takes like 30-40 seconds to boot fully to
the desktop and ive got a pentium d at 3.6 ghz :d
apart from that i find vista
to be as fast or faster than xp. it also looks nice
windows 7 fast?
a revolution at some linux camp is about to errupt in the form of
pre-installed/configured linux ssd's which is going to leave the "fast" windows 7 at
the starting gate, leaving those unfortunate users starring at spinning
circles...waiting...waiting...
the explorer in windows 7 is a lot better and very stable so far
also win 7 build 6801 is faster than vista,and faster than xp imo. explorer opens
instantly,everything is faster. i'm impressed
you have got to try this pre beta windows 7. apple look out.
faster than xp? cool down man.
windows xp by far was the best and fastest in the windows line but seeing how vista was
slow and rubbish maybe they learnt their lesson and this is going to be top in the line.
i have seen some of the next apple osx and windows 7 is nothing compared to it even so
microsoft may actually catch up.
fine, it doesnt take 5 minutes to boot... but it feels like 5 minutes and thats important
to me. i wouldnt call vista faster than xp, its the computer itself that is faster. are
you talking about a clean boot of vista vs a clean boot of xp... in that case yeah, vista
is probably seems a bit quicker with displaying the interface of programs, but no one in
the right mind would use xp right out of the box. you go in and tweak microsofts lame,
default settings. plus, check out the dozens (at least) of studies people have done with
timing xp and vista. xp finishes everything in 1/2 of the time of vista. have yet to see
any that show vista faster than xp overall
hi to all
i downgraeded alot of laptops form vista to xp
vista is the
worst os ever made
thanks
you're down grading has what? to do with a windows 7 thread? silly twits have to work
their fear/hate of vista into every thread.
i think it's waay too early to
offer any real insight into 7. i just hope that by the end of testing they actually pony
up with some of the features they've been promising for years and not delivering on.
vista 64 is so much faster then xp. no body can say nothing......64x is way faster then
lame 32x and it's a fact!!! hands down........so if you want a fast ms pc go for 64x
hands down....it's the fastest...and by the way xp 64 ain't got no drivers !! so that
don't work!!!!
i'm using x64 vista and its pretty slow to boot up. but xp was as well. once you start
installing stuff like av, nero, etc., things start to slow down. but having said that, x64
vista is pretty fast once it has booted up. btw i have q6600 quad with 6 gig ram.
i'm using x64 vista and its pretty slow to boot up. but xp was as well. once you start
installing stuff like av, nero, etc., things start to slow down. but having said that, x64
vista is pretty fast once it has booted up. btw i have q6600 quad with 6 gig ram.
can i install win 7 64 bit over vista 32bit sp1 or must i only install win 7 32 bit has
anyone tried and been succsesful please help ive heard i can and ive heard i cant
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Windows 7 RTM 7600.16385.090713-1255 HERE !
"Feel" Fast?
By Al on 31.10.2008 - 06:10