They do not call it 7.0. They call it 7 because it is the 7th version of the OS (as they count it). The kernel does get the number 6.1 because of compatibility concerns. A lot of apps look for the main version number (6) before installation. Becasue Windows 7 does use the same driver models as Vista, this does make a lot of sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuisDias
The problem with this rationale is that Windows XP was also 5.1, because of compatibilities issues with Windows 5.0 (Win2000, great OS btw), but it didn't got to be "OS number 6". That went to Vista. So the logic is entirely different. The only reason why Windows Seven is 7, although it is "6.1", is from a pure marketing point of view. They want to market it as being different than Vista, and Seven is a good marketing cool number.
Other way to see it is by asking what will be the number of next OS. Will it be 6.2? Or will it be 7.0, despite it not being "Seven"? Or will it pass "7.0" to "7.1" (which would be ridiculous) or "8.0"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT
Let's call it Vista 7 just to annoy Microsoft marketing.
I think I see a "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ad coming out of this.....
- MS never attempted to tie Vista's desktop search to Live Search! Google complained because they want to use their search technology inside of Vista. Can you change the desktop search provider for Spotlight in OSX? You can with Vista SP1.
- MS did not jumped on the multitouch bandwagon. You may know that they have invested long ago in research projects (like PlayAnywhere) and that Windows is fully controllable with touch since the introduction of the Tablet PC Edition years ago.
Thanks for posting that. I was sure that Microsoft introduced the touch interface long before Apple did.
Not sure changing the desktop search provider is that big of a deal: it's the OS' built-in search function! I don't see anything nefarious with Apple in this.
If you really believe that the world's most ubiquitous platform can't handle a version number increment without failure, then sure, Windows 7 needed to be numbered as 6.1 internally while beta testers are told it is version 7000.0 and it is marketed as version 7 of the NT kernel OS (a system which never had a version prior to 3.1, but whatev).
.
I don't want to sound like a MS employee here but you make it really too easy:
- "7" is the name (!) of the OS, not the version number, nor the build string or something different.
- It's not the problem of the OS but the third party developers. I'm not a developer but I do know that the Windows logo program does not allow applications to look for the version number of the OS. But a lot of developers do it regardless.
Touchscreens could become far more popular if the netbook builders keep imitating Asus and do "TabletNetbooks". Asus finally has greenlighted the one it had been showing around: it looks like being just perfect (and a great candidate to go Hackintosh ).
To disassociate Windows 7 from the Vista brand, the new release will sport a subdued, simplified, more conservative appearance. One example of this is the new Taskbar, which sheds layers of complicated and inconsistent cruft accumulated since Windows 95 and now simply presents one icon per running application, similar to the Mac OS X Dock (below). When selected, the Taskbar application icon displays previews of each of the application's open windows, similar to using Mac OS X's Exposé, albeit with much smaller views of the app's open windows. Like the Mac OS X Dock, app icons can now be reordered in whatever position you want, although there's no obvious mechanism for resizing the Taskbar.
The Taskbar handles half of the features of the Mac OS X Dock; actually launching an app or document still requires navigating the Start Menu. To speed things up, Windows 7 now gives users a recent and frequently used "Jump List" for each application (below). Jump Lists also appear when you right click on a running app's icon in the Taskbar, just like the Mac OS X Dock.
versus
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgiovanni
False. The new taskbar is both for launching and managing active windows. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
Now I'm confused. Are the screen shots we've seen of Win7's new Taskbar showing only running apps, or both running and non-running apps!?
Thanks for posting that. I was sure that Microsoft introduced the touch interface long before Apple did.
Not sure changing the desktop search provider is that big of a deal: it's the OS' built-in search function! I don't see anything nefarious with Apple in this.
Nor see I. But I ask myself when Google will go against Spotlight integration in OSX.
Now I'm confused. Are the screen shots we've seen of Win7's new Taskbar showing only running apps, or both running and non-running apps!?
Both. Running apps do have a glass-like border/gradient around them just like the Dock do have that little glow spot under an icon. If there are multiple windows of an app, there are multiple borders.
Nah, what you posted is patent nonsense as many have pointed out now. Also, it's word for word what Microsoft uses as it's explanation for the "7" so I think me saying you have been drinking MS's Kool-Aid is pretty much on the money.
Also, your argument was in two parts and each part kind of contradicts the other part a bit. The first part argued that, (paraphrased) "They had to call it '7' because they believed it was the seventh OS they made," (as dumb as that is). The second part argued that (paraphrased) "they had to call it '6.1' internally, because it actually is 6.1." ???
The internal version number argument has some logic to it but the first part is total nonsense. It essentially argues that they called it 7 because they felt like it and that despite it's strong resemblance to a version number, it isn't actually meant to imply a version number.
Microsoft actually tried this baffle-gab with Windows 95. I remember reading an article back then where the reviewer kept pointing out that it wasn't actually 1995 when the OS came out for the most part, and were they going to put out windows 96 next year etc.? The MS guy he phoned replied that although it was called "Windows 95" and it *did* come out at least partially in that year, that the "95" did not necessarily refer to "1995" and was instead "just a name."
MS just wants to have it's cake and eat it too when it comes to their marketing names.
I'm not talking about disconnecting from a network.
On the Mac it's Airport Menu > Turn Airport Off, then Airport Menu > Turn Airport On.
I frequently do this to save power if I know I won't be near a hotspot for a while.
The only easy way I've found to do it is if the PC Laptop has a dedicated wireless on/off switch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shookster
Oh dear.... I can see that backfiring.
You could equally say this:
Quote:
In OS X windows shrink in size and fly around the screen into positions they previously did not occupy in response to pressing F11, assuming that's what you had in mind.
The big advantage the ?peek? feature over exposé is that Windows never move from their position.
Exposé is approaching 6 years old and hasn't been updated at all in that time. You should at least be able to close windows quickly to reduce clutter, Apple could even use the close icon used on the dashboard widgets.
They could also (either by default or as an option) allow for grouping by Application in ?All Window Mode? so the windows for each application all shrink congregate in a similar area of the screen. Or they could badge each window with the application icon, or both. Basically you need some way of telling which Window belongs to which app.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgiovanni
False. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
You can launch a new app without going to the taskbar.
You can't launch a saved document.
So half false.
Quote:
Apple Data Detectors (which Microsoft calls "Accelerators")
NO! NO! NO!
C'mon Prince, do a bit more research.
Apple's data detectors (originally from the 90's and a wonderful example of Apple innovation) are smart. They know the difference between a person's name and phone number, a date and an address etc. and provide the appropriate options accordingly.
Microsoft's Accelerators (2009) will offer a translate a telephone number into Greek, look up your pet's name on Windows® Live Maps and Blog on Windows® Live Spaces about your Gran's address.
One it context sensitive and provides timely, relevant options.
The other gets in your way when trying to select text on a webpage.
So what if its basically a service pack, thats all snow leopard is. Not only that but how can you complain there version of iPhoto is a free download. Its probably a download so they don't get sued for forcing users to have it. Plus how is it being free worse than Apple charging £69. I only want iPhoto but Apple don't sell it on its own and I aint paying £69 for what is actually not a huge amount of extra features.
Also half the time people complain about IE6 especially people who still have to develop sites to use it as people don't upgrade and don't get anything else either. So what is wrong with MS forcing a new browser on people, that way the web can go forward. Not only that but what have you got against silverlight. Its quite possibly the best thing thats been made for the web. Capability of Flash without the overhead and a lot lot easier to program. Who else has come out with a platform for developing client based programs, web based programs, web based rich enhanced programs all in the same language. Not to mention the amount of free support they give developers is unchallenged.
But this way, they can charge users yet another upgrade fee for making the software work like it should have worked the first time. Evil, despicable, and BRILLIANT!
It's only brilliant in the context that people are that ignorant to believe it's a new operating system.
False. The new taskbar is both for launching and managing active windows. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
Indeed false. An application can be "pinned" to the task bar by:
1. Running it then right-clicking its icon in the task bar and choosing "Pin this application to the task bar". The same as OS X's "Keep in dock" option.
2. Finding the app in the start menu, right clicking it and choosing "Pin this application to the task bar"
3. Dragging a shortcut or the actual app to the task bar (this option works for documents as well).
I have been testing W 7 in a virtual environment (with 1GB RAM set) on a Core 2 Duo Vista machine and comparing it with XP in the same environment. While XP is snappy enough to work with (and I do) W 7 is too sluggish to be usable. Given that the VM doesn't have vide hardware acceleration I guess this is to be expected but many operations that I wouldn't have thought should be affected are unusably slow too. I will test it on hardware though...
Initial thoughts: many nice features (many aping OS X) but withhoding judgement on performance at this stage. I wouldn't leave OS X for it but would certainly prefer it over Vista, but perhaps not over XP.
Both. Running apps do have a glass-like border/gradient around them just like the Dock do have that little glow spot under an icon. If there are multiple windows of an app, there are multiple borders.
Thanks.
So, just curious, when you click a running app's icon with multiple windows in that app already open, does it open a new window (as XP's Quick Launch menu did), or does it go to the most recently "interacted with" window of that app (as Mac OS X's Dock does)?
So what if its basically a service pack, thats all snow leopard is. Not only that but how can you complain there version of iPhoto is a free download.
The author already addressed this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince
Regarding the "Snow Leopard is Leopard SP1 !!!" comment, Apple has already released six free "service pack" updates to Leopard, and will likely pop out another one or two before SL appears. So no.
Additionally, Snow Leopard has a number of significant kernel updates that warrant a new major version number update (as Vista did), as the next segment will indicate. And of course, it wasn't the 6.0 numbering scheme for Vista that cause compatibility problems, it was changes to the driver model and other upheavals that did. So Microsoft is lying about having its hands tied at 6.x.
Also, your argument was in two parts and each part kind of contradicts the other part a bit. The first part argued that, (paraphrased) "They had to call it '7' because they believed it was the seventh OS they made," (as dumb as that is). The second part argued that (paraphrased) "they had to call it '6.1' internally, because it actually is 6.1." ???
Microsoft actually tried this baffle-gab with Windows 95. I remember reading an article back then where the reviewer kept pointing out that it wasn't actually 1995 when the OS came out for the most part, and were they going to put out windows 96 next year etc.? The MS guy he phoned replied that although it was called "Windows 95" and it *did* come out at least partially in that year, that the "95" did not necessarily refer to "1995" and was instead "just a name."
MS just wants to have it's cake and eat it too when it comes to their marketing names.
I absolutely agree with you about their marketing strategy behinde that name. But I do not see the nonsense. They have to give it a name and 7 as a name does make sense. Like 10.6 is the 7th version of OSX, 6.1 is the 7th version of Windows. I prefer this instead of a nother silly name like "Vista" or years as names.
And yes there is some confusion about how MS is counting the versions, as I said. But this all shouldn't be so important.
So, just curious, when you click a running app's icon with multiple windows in that app already open, does it open a new window (as XP's Quick Launch menu did), or does it go to the most recently "interacted with" window of that app (as Mac OS X's Dock does)?
It does open the thumnail previews where you can click the window you want to go. To open another instance, middle click or use the Jump List by right clicking.
If you don't like it (because you have to click twice sometimes) you can disable the grouping if icons. This will also give you the labels for each opened window like it was in Vista.
But this way, they can charge users yet another upgrade fee for making the software work like it should have worked the first time. Evil, despicable, and BRILLIANT!
Comments
Does Vista 7 still need antivirus? If so then it's unfit for purpose.
They do not call it 7.0. They call it 7 because it is the 7th version of the OS (as they count it). The kernel does get the number 6.1 because of compatibility concerns. A lot of apps look for the main version number (6) before installation. Becasue Windows 7 does use the same driver models as Vista, this does make a lot of sense.
The problem with this rationale is that Windows XP was also 5.1, because of compatibilities issues with Windows 5.0 (Win2000, great OS btw), but it didn't got to be "OS number 6". That went to Vista. So the logic is entirely different. The only reason why Windows Seven is 7, although it is "6.1", is from a pure marketing point of view. They want to market it as being different than Vista, and Seven is a good marketing cool number.
Other way to see it is by asking what will be the number of next OS. Will it be 6.2? Or will it be 7.0, despite it not being "Seven"? Or will it pass "7.0" to "7.1" (which would be ridiculous) or "8.0"?
Let's call it Vista 7 just to annoy Microsoft marketing.
I think I see a "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ad coming out of this.....
- MS never attempted to tie Vista's desktop search to Live Search! Google complained because they want to use their search technology inside of Vista. Can you change the desktop search provider for Spotlight in OSX? You can with Vista SP1.
- MS did not jumped on the multitouch bandwagon. You may know that they have invested long ago in research projects (like PlayAnywhere) and that Windows is fully controllable with touch since the introduction of the Tablet PC Edition years ago.
Thanks for posting that. I was sure that Microsoft introduced the touch interface long before Apple did.
Not sure changing the desktop search provider is that big of a deal: it's the OS' built-in search function! I don't see anything nefarious with Apple in this.
Wow.
How Microsoft obsessed do you have to be to try and defend this? And people talk about Mac users "drinking the Kool-Aid."
It seems some Windows fans have problems with reality also.
It's no obsession, just the truth.
If you really believe that the world's most ubiquitous platform can't handle a version number increment without failure, then sure, Windows 7 needed to be numbered as 6.1 internally while beta testers are told it is version 7000.0 and it is marketed as version 7 of the NT kernel OS (a system which never had a version prior to 3.1, but whatev).
.
I don't want to sound like a MS employee here but you make it really too easy:
- "7" is the name (!) of the OS, not the version number, nor the build string or something different.
- It's not the problem of the OS but the third party developers. I'm not a developer but I do know that the Windows logo program does not allow applications to look for the version number of the OS. But a lot of developers do it regardless.
Touchscreens could become far more popular if the netbook builders keep imitating Asus and do "TabletNetbooks". Asus finally has greenlighted the one it had been showing around: it looks like being just perfect (and a great candidate to go Hackintosh
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/01...us_eee_tablet/
Am I missing something? Doesn't that look like every other tablet/notebook hybrid?
I like the tablet/notebook hybrid concept, but I have yet to see one well executed. They always seem flimsy and cheap.
To disassociate Windows 7 from the Vista brand, the new release will sport a subdued, simplified, more conservative appearance. One example of this is the new Taskbar, which sheds layers of complicated and inconsistent cruft accumulated since Windows 95 and now simply presents one icon per running application, similar to the Mac OS X Dock (below). When selected, the Taskbar application icon displays previews of each of the application's open windows, similar to using Mac OS X's Exposé, albeit with much smaller views of the app's open windows. Like the Mac OS X Dock, app icons can now be reordered in whatever position you want, although there's no obvious mechanism for resizing the Taskbar.
The Taskbar handles half of the features of the Mac OS X Dock; actually launching an app or document still requires navigating the Start Menu. To speed things up, Windows 7 now gives users a recent and frequently used "Jump List" for each application (below). Jump Lists also appear when you right click on a running app's icon in the Taskbar, just like the Mac OS X Dock.
versus
False. The new taskbar is both for launching and managing active windows. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
Now I'm confused. Are the screen shots we've seen of Win7's new Taskbar showing only running apps, or both running and non-running apps!?
Thanks for posting that. I was sure that Microsoft introduced the touch interface long before Apple did.
Not sure changing the desktop search provider is that big of a deal: it's the OS' built-in search function! I don't see anything nefarious with Apple in this.
Nor see I. But I ask myself when Google will go against Spotlight integration in OSX.
versus
Now I'm confused. Are the screen shots we've seen of Win7's new Taskbar showing only running apps, or both running and non-running apps!?
Both. Running apps do have a glass-like border/gradient around them just like the Dock do have that little glow spot under an icon. If there are multiple windows of an app, there are multiple borders.
It's no obsession, just the truth.
Nah, what you posted is patent nonsense as many have pointed out now. Also, it's word for word what Microsoft uses as it's explanation for the "7" so I think me saying you have been drinking MS's Kool-Aid is pretty much on the money.
Also, your argument was in two parts and each part kind of contradicts the other part a bit. The first part argued that, (paraphrased) "They had to call it '7' because they believed it was the seventh OS they made," (as dumb as that is). The second part argued that (paraphrased) "they had to call it '6.1' internally, because it actually is 6.1." ???
The internal version number argument has some logic to it but the first part is total nonsense. It essentially argues that they called it 7 because they felt like it and that despite it's strong resemblance to a version number, it isn't actually meant to imply a version number.
Microsoft actually tried this baffle-gab with Windows 95. I remember reading an article back then where the reviewer kept pointing out that it wasn't actually 1995 when the OS came out for the most part, and were they going to put out windows 96 next year etc.? The MS guy he phoned replied that although it was called "Windows 95" and it *did* come out at least partially in that year, that the "95" did not necessarily refer to "1995" and was instead "just a name."
MS just wants to have it's cake and eat it too when it comes to their marketing names.
Try and turn Wireless off use Windows 7.
I'm not talking about disconnecting from a network.
On the Mac it's Airport Menu > Turn Airport Off, then Airport Menu > Turn Airport On.
I frequently do this to save power if I know I won't be near a hotspot for a while.
The only easy way I've found to do it is if the PC Laptop has a dedicated wireless on/off switch.
Oh dear.... I can see that backfiring.
You could equally say this:
In OS X windows shrink in size and fly around the screen into positions they previously did not occupy in response to pressing F11, assuming that's what you had in mind.
The big advantage the ?peek? feature over exposé is that Windows never move from their position.
Exposé is approaching 6 years old and hasn't been updated at all in that time. You should at least be able to close windows quickly to reduce clutter, Apple could even use the close icon used on the dashboard widgets.
They could also (either by default or as an option) allow for grouping by Application in ?All Window Mode? so the windows for each application all shrink congregate in a similar area of the screen. Or they could badge each window with the application icon, or both. Basically you need some way of telling which Window belongs to which app.
False. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
You can launch a new app without going to the taskbar.
You can't launch a saved document.
So half false.
Apple Data Detectors (which Microsoft calls "Accelerators")
NO! NO! NO!
C'mon Prince, do a bit more research.
Apple's data detectors (originally from the 90's and a wonderful example of Apple innovation) are smart. They know the difference between a person's name and phone number, a date and an address etc. and provide the appropriate options accordingly.
Microsoft's Accelerators (2009) will offer a translate a telephone number into Greek, look up your pet's name on Windows® Live Maps and Blog on Windows® Live Spaces about your Gran's address.
One it context sensitive and provides timely, relevant options.
The other gets in your way when trying to select text on a webpage.
So what if its basically a service pack, thats all snow leopard is. Not only that but how can you complain there version of iPhoto is a free download. Its probably a download so they don't get sued for forcing users to have it. Plus how is it being free worse than Apple charging £69. I only want iPhoto but Apple don't sell it on its own and I aint paying £69 for what is actually not a huge amount of extra features.
Also half the time people complain about IE6 especially people who still have to develop sites to use it as people don't upgrade and don't get anything else either. So what is wrong with MS forcing a new browser on people, that way the web can go forward. Not only that but what have you got against silverlight. Its quite possibly the best thing thats been made for the web. Capability of Flash without the overhead and a lot lot easier to program. Who else has come out with a platform for developing client based programs, web based programs, web based rich enhanced programs all in the same language. Not to mention the amount of free support they give developers is unchallenged.
But this way, they can charge users yet another upgrade fee for making the software work like it should have worked the first time. Evil, despicable, and BRILLIANT!
It's only brilliant in the context that people are that ignorant to believe it's a new operating system.
False. The new taskbar is both for launching and managing active windows. Glad to see he's even tried Windows 7 before writing the article...
Indeed false. An application can be "pinned" to the task bar by:
1. Running it then right-clicking its icon in the task bar and choosing "Pin this application to the task bar". The same as OS X's "Keep in dock" option.
2. Finding the app in the start menu, right clicking it and choosing "Pin this application to the task bar"
3. Dragging a shortcut or the actual app to the task bar (this option works for documents as well).
I have been testing W 7 in a virtual environment (with 1GB RAM set) on a Core 2 Duo Vista machine and comparing it with XP in the same environment. While XP is snappy enough to work with (and I do) W 7 is too sluggish to be usable. Given that the VM doesn't have vide hardware acceleration I guess this is to be expected but many operations that I wouldn't have thought should be affected are unusably slow too. I will test it on hardware though...
Initial thoughts: many nice features (many aping OS X) but withhoding judgement on performance at this stage. I wouldn't leave OS X for it but would certainly prefer it over Vista, but perhaps not over XP.
Both. Running apps do have a glass-like border/gradient around them just like the Dock do have that little glow spot under an icon. If there are multiple windows of an app, there are multiple borders.
Thanks.
So, just curious, when you click a running app's icon with multiple windows in that app already open, does it open a new window (as XP's Quick Launch menu did), or does it go to the most recently "interacted with" window of that app (as Mac OS X's Dock does)?
Well that wasn't biased in the slightest was it.
So what if its basically a service pack, thats all snow leopard is. Not only that but how can you complain there version of iPhoto is a free download.
The author already addressed this:
Regarding the "Snow Leopard is Leopard SP1 !!!" comment, Apple has already released six free "service pack" updates to Leopard, and will likely pop out another one or two before SL appears. So no.
Additionally, Snow Leopard has a number of significant kernel updates that warrant a new major version number update (as Vista did), as the next segment will indicate. And of course, it wasn't the 6.0 numbering scheme for Vista that cause compatibility problems, it was changes to the driver model and other upheavals that did. So Microsoft is lying about having its hands tied at 6.x.
Originally Posted by jdawg
You could be a little less bias in this article. Using your logic Snow Leopard should be called Leopard SP1.
Welcome to AI, jdawg. I actually like the tongue-in-cheek tone of Prince's articles.
Don't feed the trolls!
Jim
Also, your argument was in two parts and each part kind of contradicts the other part a bit. The first part argued that, (paraphrased) "They had to call it '7' because they believed it was the seventh OS they made," (as dumb as that is). The second part argued that (paraphrased) "they had to call it '6.1' internally, because it actually is 6.1." ???
Microsoft actually tried this baffle-gab with Windows 95. I remember reading an article back then where the reviewer kept pointing out that it wasn't actually 1995 when the OS came out for the most part, and were they going to put out windows 96 next year etc.? The MS guy he phoned replied that although it was called "Windows 95" and it *did* come out at least partially in that year, that the "95" did not necessarily refer to "1995" and was instead "just a name."
MS just wants to have it's cake and eat it too when it comes to their marketing names.
I absolutely agree with you about their marketing strategy behinde that name. But I do not see the nonsense. They have to give it a name and 7 as a name does make sense. Like 10.6 is the 7th version of OSX, 6.1 is the 7th version of Windows. I prefer this instead of a nother silly name like "Vista" or years as names.
And yes there is some confusion about how MS is counting the versions, as I said. But this all shouldn't be so important.
Thanks.
So, just curious, when you click a running app's icon with multiple windows in that app already open, does it open a new window (as XP's Quick Launch menu did), or does it go to the most recently "interacted with" window of that app (as Mac OS X's Dock does)?
It does open the thumnail previews where you can click the window you want to go. To open another instance, middle click or use the Jump List by right clicking.
If you don't like it (because you have to click twice sometimes) you can disable the grouping if icons. This will also give you the labels for each opened window like it was in Vista.
But this way, they can charge users yet another upgrade fee for making the software work like it should have worked the first time. Evil, despicable, and BRILLIANT!
...Snow Leopard?