Quote :

"While I'm at it, you all might enjoy this if you don't have it already... Disclaimer: I haven't tried this yet, so don't blame me if anything goes wrong. http://www.blogsdna.com/1802/remove-time-based-expiry-of-windows-7-beta-1-build-7000.htm"

except your url doesn't work.

1/12/2009 9:22:59 PM

Why even bother doing that since the beta is good through August? Provide enough valuable feedback and you might even get a free copy.

1/12/2009 9:31:49 PM

Okay I installed VMWare Workstation and I get the same message. Does anyone have a Windows 7 Beta 1 7000 !!!32 Bit!!! .ISO that I could put on a flash drive or something if you're still a student here? I have downloaded this twice but both are saying 64 bit. So frustrating...

1/12/2009 9:41:23 PM

@ "your URL doesn't work"

That's odd, it's working for me, and I just rebooted firefox...

1/12/2009 9:42:55 PM

^did you download this from the microsoft site, or from a torrent? You should do a MD5 comparison to the Microsoft iso's to verify it is the correct one.

Also

Quote :

"i thought there was a limit to # of registrations, that's why i'm upset. if not, then i can wait."

http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windows7/archive/2009/01/10/here-s-where-we-stand.aspx

Told you guys to just wait it out .

#3:

Quote :

"Let's just cut to the chase here: Windows 7 is built on top of Windows Vista."

This isn't really true. Arstechnica missed the boat here. This is NOT Vista + 1. Yes the kernel and security architecture are basically the same. But major portions of the shell have been entirely rewritten for Win7, application compatibility will be better, and the OEM fiasco that happened with Vista has been fixed from the get-go with 7.

The popular opinion is "This should be free, it's just Vista + fixes", but that's just not the case.

1/12/2009 9:47:44 PM

7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULFRE_EN_DVD is the iso you are using? If you have installed and used Windows 7 for any period of time you can tell that this is just not Vista rebadged. Windows 7 seems to be a great OS so far and my hats off to Microsoft because this time it seems they have done it right.

Hopefully Microsoft will stop showing Vista commercials now so people can get the bad taste of that out of their mouths and be willing to accept Windows 7.

[Edited on January 12, 2009 at 9:52 PM. Reason : ]

1/12/2009 9:49:34 PM

Quote :

"@ "your URL doesn't work" That's odd, it's working for me, and I just rebooted firefox... "

let me rephrase. your url does work..the url to the crack on the page that you linked to however, does not work

1/12/2009 10:00:55 PM

am i the only one that likes vista? i've had zero problems and its been more stable than any xp machine i've had. i'm running vista business on a lenovo x61t

1/12/2009 10:01:27 PM

You're in the minority for sure.

1/12/2009 10:02:56 PM

Quote :

"am i the only one that likes vista?"

yes.

1/12/2009 10:03:00 PM

I just went from using a 3 year old laptop running Windows 7 to a brand new desktop with 6 gigs of ram running Windows Vista and I could not wait to get back to the laptop. That desktop is getting formatted shortly with either XP or Windows 7 because that shit sucks.

1/12/2009 10:06:19 PM

Quote :

"am i the only one that likes vista? i've had zero problems and its been more stable than any xp machine i've had."

i love vista. i installed it a few months ago and haven't had a single problem with it. XP didn't crash very often, but Vista hasn't at all. it was buggy until I did the SP update, but it's a great OS.

1/12/2009 10:07:07 PM

look joe

just because bill gates paid you a billion to put his pee pee in your cornhole doesn't mean you have to shit all over this thread, k?

jk

1/12/2009 10:10:17 PM

shit id probably let him put his pee pee in my cornhole for far less than a billion

i stayed away from vista because people said it sucked so bad. but ms sent me a free copy and i sat on it for months until i got bored one afternoon to try it. i dont do gaming and all that stuff so i dont know how vista performs wrt to games, but for the simple stuff i do it works great.

1/12/2009 10:13:15 PM

I hate Vista's redundant Documents and Settings and MY Documents folders.

I hate that it was never able to detect properly what resolutions my CRT monitor supports (it did however get my TV being able to do 1080p, which I had to hack OS X to do)

And I generally hate the Vista UI.

1/12/2009 10:32:13 PM

Quote :

"brand new desktop with 6 gigs of ram running Windows Vista and I could not wait to get back to the laptop. That desktop is getting formatted shortly with either XP or Windows 7 because that shit sucks."

Your problem is probably that the desktop is brand new and has tons of software bundled with it. How much stuff do you have loading at startup? Vista makes it even easier to monitor all that stuff, I bet if you took a few minutes to check everything and optimize the setup it would run a lot better.

1/12/2009 10:35:27 PM

I figured out what my problem is... The .ISO file direct download links on BlogsDNA linked to the same ISO, which was the x64 one. I'm redownloading AGAIN, the 32 bit for sure for sure this time.

1/12/2009 10:41:48 PM

pooljobs - I built the desktop, it doesn't have all the bundled shit installed on it. I'm in IT as a profession and am not suffering from the junk that comes preinstalled with all boxed computers these days.

1/12/2009 10:44:21 PM

well you fucked up then if you are having performance problems

1/12/2009 10:45:19 PM

I'm not having problems. I'm just unhappy with the performance that my computer is giving me at the moment. Running Windows 7 on a Intel Core Solo with 2GB of ram is faster than running it on a AMD x2 with 6GB of ram running Windows Vista.

I should also point out that the desktop is not running SP1 because I've been meaning to format this for quite some time and don't care to install the SP before doing this.

[Edited on January 12, 2009 at 10:49 PM. Reason : ]

1/12/2009 10:47:20 PM

^Yep. Win7 was built to work on everything from Netbooks on up.

1/12/2009 10:59:58 PM

Didn't install the drivers for my wireless card on my desktop. Seemed to run fine other than that. I can't take the time to figure out how to load the drivers, I'm too impatient and need the 'trons all the time, so I switched back to my XP SP3 install.

1/12/2009 11:50:48 PM

^just install the vista drivers, they will work fine.

You do not need "Windows 7" drivers for anything.

1/13/2009 5:09:11 AM

^not exactly, but close enough. most vista drivers should work just fine

1/13/2009 5:11:19 AM

Quote :

"I figured out what my problem is... The .ISO file direct download links on BlogsDNA linked to the same ISO, which was the x64 one. I'm redownloading AGAIN, the 32 bit for sure for sure this time."

I would have hoped that with Windows 7 they would have taken the opportunity to move away from a 32 bit OS, but I guess it does have to work on everyone's older processors.

1/13/2009 7:29:17 AM

^Whats the plan to move from 32bit to 64 bit? I thought Windows7 was suppost to be a start to it.

1/13/2009 8:50:26 AM

agreed on the 64-bit thing...i see very little reason to even bother with a 32-bit build, EXCEPT for things like netbooks (or are the atom processors 64-bit? i haven't bothered to look, yet)

anyone who has a 32-bit processor by the time win7 goes live should probably upgrade anyway, as their hardware will LIKELY be inadequate or at the VERY bare minimum

i just dl'd the 64-bit beta and i'll be wiping out my laptop (well, ghosting it so i can restore completely if necessary) this evening to install win7 on it, see what happens

a question for those who would know, though: is it still virtually impossible to COMPLETELY change the "my documents" location? in XP, i LOVED that you could just right-click and change the my documents directory to its own partition - makes life so much easier in case your OS dies...vista, on the other hand, is out and out retarded and i've yet to find a SIMPLE way to do it...all of my computers are set up like that: OS partition, "mydocs" partition, page partition

1/13/2009 9:07:00 AM

^^I thought I had heard that very early on. They probably shied away from it because one thing that people wanted was something with less bloat that could run on their older systems. P4s and maybe even older processors.

I guess at minimum they'll still have
Windows 7
Windows 7 Pro
Windows 7 Server (64-bit only)
Windows 7 64-bit
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit

So when they reduced the amount of available versions they were really only getting rid of Ultimate and Business.

I'm still a bit skeptical. It seems like Windows Vista and Windows 7 are both suffering from the same phenomenon. People tend to want to agree with the majority consensus. Vista sucks because that's what everyone is saying. Windows 7 is awesome because I waited to see what the general consensus was before making my opinion of it publicly known, but the only reason why the general consensus says it's awesome was because of a few early positive reviews.

I'll just have to try it out sometime, though I'm in no hurry.


[Edited on January 13, 2009 at 9:17 AM. Reason : -]

1/13/2009 9:14:19 AM

^ With the version changes, they were getting away from the 20 million versions they had with Vista and going back to an XP model where its only like 2, and then again for the x64 (and maybe a few more for ppl in Europe).

1/13/2009 9:19:46 AM

Windows 7 won't recognize my XP drivers. Did anyone else have this problem?

1/13/2009 11:11:06 AM

what part of Vista Drivers made you think XP drivers were fine ?

1/13/2009 12:14:08 PM

I didn't read it

1/13/2009 12:19:05 PM

Obviously. Go fuck yourself.

1/13/2009 2:46:27 PM

^ fag

1/13/2009 2:57:31 PM

Quote :

"anyone who has a 32-bit processor by the time win7 goes live should probably upgrade anyway, as their hardware will LIKELY be inadequate or at the VERY bare minimum"

Sorry this is entirely wrong. Most mobile processor are, and will remain, 32bit for the next generation or two. And Win7 requires a 1ghz, single core, 32bit cpu. It will run fine on a damn Athlon XP system.

From the rumbling I've heard (I have not used Win7-x64 myself yet), it's finally in parity with the 32bit version.

My intuition tells me that the shipping version of Win7 will be a unified disc, that will either auto-detect a 64bit cpu, or just prompt the user to choose which platform to install for. But I have absolutely no knowledge to back that up.

1/13/2009 3:08:44 PM

Quote :

"Sorry this is entirely wrong. Most mobile processor are, and will remain, 32bit for the next generation or two."

i admit that i don't have any evidence one way or another, but are you saying that the intel yonahs (core solo/duo) and intel atoms are CURRENTLY in the MAJORITY of mobile computers sold TODAY? if you are saying that, are you also saying that for the next two generations, we will NOT see 64-bit processors gain enough market to overtake your supposed 32-bit domination?

the yonahs and atoms are the only two families of mobile processors, that i'm aware of, that are 32-bit...it seems kinda silly for you to assert that not only are the majority of mobile computers produced today 32-bit, but that it'll take two more generations before that changes

does AMD even make 32-bit processors anymore, let alone in mobile computers (or are we ignoring them for the sake of your argument)? or are you counting OLD hardware in your estimation (which is the only way i can figure out that you're right in your assertion)...in which case, are you really saying that more people would rather pay hundreds of dollars for a new OS on an old machine, rather than put those same hundreds toward a newer, faster computer that comes with the new OS, too?

1/13/2009 3:55:30 PM

my "old" machine was a premium mobile just a year ago and it has a 32-bit processor

[Edited on January 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM. Reason : h]

1/13/2009 4:10:01 PM

anyone care to inform me about 32 vs 64 bit machines. other than knowing they exist and that 64 has better performance specs, what else is there?

I guess I'll list my questions.
why isn't there a larger push for 64 bit anyways?
why don't some software/hardware companies make compatible versions for 64 bit?
what popular h/w and s/w won't work on 64?
is there a way/how can you get 32-bit s/w & h/w to work on 64-bit?

1/13/2009 4:11:58 PM

unless you need the address space, it doesnt really make a difference

1/13/2009 4:20:31 PM

I havnt had any software 32bit wise have issues with my system (Vista x64). Several older games have issues but thats to be expected. I havnt tried to run any 16bit stuff yet.

Address space is the main thing, which is really needed with Vista/7 nowadays, esp if you really use your computer as a workhorse.

One of these days Id like to see a map of how computing has progressed with memory sizing over the ages. My first one was a 64 MB RAM thing, and now Im up to 4GB. I hate to think how much the old IBM I first used at grade school had.

And I go backwards and now am programming on 64 KB microcontrollers...

1/13/2009 4:40:19 PM

thanks. I'm running Vista32 now. And I could use the address space. Sometime, I'd like to put together a desktop to be my workhorse.

My Vista32 runs fine (4 gb RAM, 1.5ghz Dual Core processor) but I do often work it enough to slow things down

1/13/2009 7:02:05 PM

Quote :

"I guess I'll list my questions. why isn't there a larger push for 64 bit anyways? why don't some software/hardware companies make compatible versions for 64 bit? what popular h/w and s/w won't work on 64? is there a way/how can you get 32-bit s/w & h/w to work on 64-bit?"

Because there isn't any real need to do so. The reality is, 64bit is a technology push, not a business or consumer pull. There are a handful of real-world applications and industries that benefit from 64bit envrionments.

Technically all software written for current-gen x86 based processors should be forward compatible. Both Intel and AMD's architectures allow 32bit applications to run in 64bit environments.

Poorly written, non-standard x86 32bit applications (which, they are relatively rare, but there are more than a few popular apps out there). This is similar to the pain felt in the Vista driver model changes when Vista came out. Users blamed it on Microsoft, when in reality the reason drivers stopped working is that many many companies wrote horribly shitty drivers.

Emulation can get 32bit hardware to work in 64 bit, but it's unusably slow.

[Edited on January 13, 2009 at 7:29 PM. Reason : .]

1/13/2009 7:28:54 PM

Quote :

"i admit that i don't have any evidence one way or another, but are you saying that the intel yonahs (core solo/duo) and intel atoms are CURRENTLY in the MAJORITY of mobile computers sold TODAY? if you are saying that, are you also saying that for the next two generations, we will NOT see 64-bit processors gain enough market to overtake your supposed 32-bit domination?"

Sorry, when I say mobile processors, I specifically mean embedded devices like phones, netbooks, internet appliances, pdas, pmps etc.

Not referring to laptops, which are almost all 64bit off the shelf.

But you also make a good point about existing devices, it will take a LONG time before 64bit becomes dominant, especially in business markets, because existing hardware is already overly powered for common tasks.

1/13/2009 7:33:26 PM

hey Noen, do you know if there's any way to add folders of shortcuts to the new quicklaunch like in XP?

1/13/2009 7:42:29 PM

^Right click on the taskbar, Add Toolbar -> Specify folder. Just create a folder with all the special links you want in it. But if it's an application you are linking to, you're better off just dropping it onto the taskbar, it will automatically link it.

1/13/2009 8:00:59 PM

sweet, thanks. Yea, I know about just dragging single apps, but I like keeping pretty much all the apps I use in the taskbar, and eventually got tired of the clutteredness.

1/13/2009 8:35:01 PM

Noen, do you know if Windows 7 supports QAM in Media Center?

1/13/2009 9:48:52 PM

Quote :

"It will run fine on a damn Athlon XP system."

Running just fine on my 3700+, though I think I did notice TF2 chugged a bit more than it does on my XP boot. Not sure if its maxing the proc/mem or vid card.

1/13/2009 10:04:03 PM

^^There is limited support for some devices. And only clear QAM. A little googling with whatever card you use should answer your question specifically. But it appears WMC no longer blocks QAM as it does in Vista.

http://www.missingremote.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3247&Itemid=226 for Hauppauge 1600 cards

FusionHD 5 cards supposedly work as well.

1/13/2009 11:19:55 PM

I still wish you could add a toolbar to the top of the screen. I've been using one since Win95, that's not something I am getting used to easily.

I wonder if that's something they will change in the final version. Somehow I doubt it.

1/14/2009 1:15:37 AM