# Windows 7 Pre-Beta October 27th



## TechGuy (Feb 12, 1999)

A pre-beta version of Windows 7 will be released to attendees at a Microsoft Conference on October 27th:

http://www.microsoftpdc.com/View.aspx?post=91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8962840&tag=PDC2008


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

Do you think Microsoft could abordon Vista that quick? What happen to Vista users?


----------



## TechGuy (Feb 12, 1999)

Is any different that every previous version of Windows? The time between Windows XP and Vista was the longest ever. Every previous version of Windows had a new one introduced within about 2 years (like Windows 95->98->2000->Me->XP). If estimates are correct and Windows 7 comes out at the end of 2009 (which seems hopeful to me), that seems to fit the schedule. I don't see them abandoning Vista at all.

So, I'll go ahead and look into the future for you: everyone who hates Vista will love Windows 7 (because otherwise they'll be stuck in XP). Then those same people will hate whatever happens in Windows 8, primarily because it isn't compatible with their old hardware and drivers will exist immediately. Just like every other new operating system. *sigh*


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Hell, I haven't really made the total transition to Vista yet, and they're already replacing it!


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

Hmm.. I wonder what Windows 97 looks like?


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

I have vista on my laptop (preloaded with it out of the box) and it works fine. Only thing that irks me to no end is that it will completely consume 3 gb of RAM like its nobody's business. Had me a little mad honestly because the machine really is current, 3 gb of ram on a 2ghz dual core intel centrino chipset with independant NVIDIA memory, although they insist on sharing memory for some reason. If windows 7 is more resource efficient than vista which by what im hearing i think it will be, i might just switch my laptop to it as vista really is recource hungry.


----------



## TechGuy (Feb 12, 1999)

It is true that Vista is very resource heavy -- it runs terrible on slower computers. That said, my computer at work has 2GB and runs great -- but it does have a very nice graphics card, which helps a lot.


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Yup mine does have its own graphics recources, 256mb of onboard memory but this turbocache thing i honestly didnt expect on it or i wouldnt have purchased the pc. However, it does run fine on vista, just goes to show me how hungry on recources this is. My sister's computer is lower end and i had to redo windows after some work was done to it. It had the rollover to vista thing but i went and put xp back on it this time around just because the performance was so poor on vista. Im still wondering how it played her games on it. However, it is getting harder and harder to find a pc with a decent graphics card i found. Very few truely run on their own recources nowadays. I found out the card was sharing because it shows shared memory when i pull up card info from the nvidia control panel. Just says shared so i dunno if its shared when needed or what, but in any case its getting hard to find a car which does not share its memory.


----------



## windgod14 (Oct 8, 2008)

The main problems with vista-

Unstabability - Games tend to crash 50% more on vista machines due to driver errors.

HOG - Requires tons of memory, 1gb just isn't enough, most people need to buy more when getting there computers.

Hopefully, Windows 7 will try to fix these problems.


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

Wondering when's we can allowed to preview the Windows 7?


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Supposed to have a prebeta out on 27th ccm, just read the OP


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

> attendees at a Microsoft Conference on October 27th


I thought this means Microsoft staff


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

I think it is a closed audience. Gen public can probably see it when its on beta. Dont forget as well that ui is one of the last things done so it will look like vista till probably public beta.


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

I will get my PC pepared for Windows 7 Beta!


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Wait....why would you go run a beta os that is really half broken when you can use a stable os that works? Like xp or vista... I would dual boot if i were you for it.


----------



## Sithtiger (Aug 2, 2007)

Can anyone go to the MS conference and where and how much does it cost to get in. Also does everyone get a copy of the pre-beta Windows 7 or just a select few? I get an error when I click on this link http://www.microsoftpdc.com/View.aspx?post=91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8962840&tag=PDC2008

Thanks


----------



## Sithtiger (Aug 2, 2007)

new tech guy said:


> I have vista on my laptop (preloaded with it out of the box) and it works fine. Only thing that irks me to no end is that it will completely consume 3 gb of RAM like its nobody's business. Had me a little mad honestly because the machine really is current, 3 gb of ram on a 2ghz dual core intel centrino chipset with independant NVIDIA memory, although they insist on sharing memory for some reason. If windows 7 is more resource efficient than vista which by what im hearing i think it will be, i might just switch my laptop to it as vista really is recource hungry.


You know if you had 16GB of RAM in that laptop it would consume all of that too. That's actually a cool feature called SuperFetch in Vista. It's the newest evolutionary process from XP's prefetch. What it does is learn what you use the most and put it into the RAM. If however you want to use something that is not already stored in the RAM, Vista will immediately give you back the amount of memory that you need to use for that application.

It's actually one of my favorite things about Vista. I used to hate it but I love it now. It works best with dual cores and above of course. If I was using Vista with a single core CPU, I would disable that process (yeah, you can do that, but I wouldn't recommend it).


----------



## Sithtiger (Aug 2, 2007)

windgod14 said:


> The main problems with vista-
> 
> Unstabability - Games tend to crash 50% more on vista machines due to driver errors.
> 
> ...


That's really too bad that you're having all these problems with Vista. Is it possible you had a bad install....maybe it got corrupted or something. Have you tried to format and reinstall. Oh, when you installed Vista, was it upgraded or was it a fresh install?

I'll admit initially Vista was a pain in my butt for the first four months from May to August of 2007, but since MS fixed pretty much all the problems since then, Vista has been rock solid. Honestly, my experience has been that Vista is every bit as stable as XP. I'm running Vista x64 by the way.

If you're still having problems after downloading SP1 then it's either a bad install or your 3rd party drivers haven't released good drivers yet. I had that problem with my X-Fi card for a while...it's fine now but Creative took their sweet time about it.


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Yes i have looked around and discovered what superfetch was on blackvipers site. I turned it off to compare at one point and honestly noticed no performance difference. So im not really sure how much "performance" gain there is to this.


----------



## Sithtiger (Aug 2, 2007)

You didn't notice that your programs came up faster with it on? When you disabled it didn't you notice those programs that were kept into RAM came up noticeably slower after that? I tried it both ways and I like it on. Initially it bugged me because of the hard drive thrashing the first few minutes at boot but I'm used to it now and I don't even notice it anymore.

I can't wait for Solid State drives to come out and drop in price. Intel is about to release one and they estimated it would go for $600. That's for an 80GB drive. Of course you could just install Windows on that and everything else on a normal drive. Just think, when solid state drives are so affordable that you don't need our old magnetic based drives, everything will be much much faster and quieter. In the Intel SSD, Windows fully booted in just 40 seconds. Check out the video review here: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU1OSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


----------



## new tech guy (Mar 27, 2006)

Yeah but right now the technology is not reliable enough for this and honestly, i dont think i noticed any performance difference. Did not do anything intensive in terms of experimenting however. But i will wait for the drives to be able to support as many write cycles as needed. That will be good as you no longer should have to replace the storage device on the pc due to age and wear.


----------



## arcticphoenix (Aug 22, 2008)

hmmmm...(puts hands together gets on knees and prays prays less of a hog like vista) i have a good feeling of this one...then again had a lil bit on vista...so...ill kno when its popped out wid the cord cut i guess...:-?:-/


----------

