Windows 7 FAQ and Questions - Page 7

Mak213 · 06-11-2008, 11:34 AM

No. DOS itself fully was less than 6MB. That was with all its commands. The Command line we use now have about 1/3 of those commands.

forrestcupp · 06-11-2008, 02:35 PM

But when they were talking about using MinWin, I thought one of the features they were touting was the ability to run a command line only with more functionality, like Linux.

Mak213 · 06-11-2008, 04:14 PM

Yes that would be a added feature to using MinWin. But MinWin itself is the Kernel. Just like the Linux Kernel. It isnt specifically based toward the command line. They may be thinking of adding extra features but that wouldnt be the only boost to using MinWin as the Kernel.

The kernel itself is very slim and very functional. It would allow Windows to be taken to the next level. To work with all the Office Live, Windows Live and XBOX Live things flawlessly. Along with the ability to use more Command line.

Saxon · 06-11-2008, 05:40 PM

Right time for the linux boy to make a standpoint on Vista.... again.

One thing some people seem to miss is that the average end user (who seem to be making most of the noise) is they are set in there ways an a little pig ignorant. I use vista, XP pro, XP tablet edition, Ubuntu, OpenSuSe, an at the moment FreeBSD on a nearly daily basis. I hate XP it's old, insecure, lacking in visual style I have always felt this from the first time is used it, I am glad we have vista. Vista on the other hand is more secure, it's the current OS an has visual appeal.

It's time MS stopped offering OEM an Retail XP keys or as mak pointed out we will have a endless cycle of XP getting compared to the new OS, we will always have people who will say I liked the old version over the new one but in the real world of computing things move on an improve you might not like it but that is what happens deal with it.

Also I have Vista is the last OS from Microsoft that has a 32bit version, X64 is hear an now not many if any new processors are not x64 compatible it's time to ditch old tech an start working again towards the future.

Mak213 · 06-11-2008, 09:13 PM

Just for information purposes Windows 7 Milestone 1 build 6519 has hit the internet. But sadly a little to late to hit it in force. It expires June 2008. So you get roughly 2 hours of use out of it before the timebomb goes off. Not worth the wasted bandwidth.

LeftEyeBlind · 07-30-2008, 04:03 PM

I installed Vista on a seperate partition, and it has so much junk thrown into it.. theres hundreds of apps thrown into the start menu, its impossible to have a lean/clean machine... I understand some of these apps might be of use to people, but a lot of them could just be offered as downloads at Microsoft.com.

I hope with Windows 7 they really cut the crap, I dont need every app in the universe installed on my FRESH machine. I also don't need 4GB of security patches, this shows the core OS is unsafe and needs work (like Apple did from OS9 to OSX, new, modern and safe, still vulnerable, but definitely more secure).

mikee · 08-04-2008, 11:28 PM

I keep hearing that windows 7 could possibly be released next year yet we have not seen a single build since around may........ i think. does anyone know when they plan to release a new beta of windows 7?

Mak213 · 08-04-2008, 11:37 PM

Windows 7 is still in Milestone. It is not in Beta yet and not up for download anytime soon. Once it is opened up for Beta testers we will make sure to update and let everyone know.

We will not be giving links to the leaks if the Betas do happen to leak.

Wildside · 08-17-2008, 07:12 PM

hey all, do u mind adding details about DX11 to the list? I found another source with better info about it:

Microsoft details DirectX 11: shader model 5, hardware tessellation, multithreaded computing at Source Code | Free Indo Source Code ~ Technology, Programming, Articles, Windows News, Tutorials, Downloads...

Schecters · 08-26-2008, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trotter

7 needs a smaller footprint than Vista and maybe even XP.

That is a ridiculous statement. You can't have everything you want running as fast as you can click them, while having the hardware requirements of windows 98. Yeah, the big hitters of Linux don't have much of a requirement. But have you ran one with all the desktop pretties up on a machine with a terrible processor and 512mb of ram? It doesn't run very fast. It sucks. But that's because it is on 8 year-old hardware, not that the OS isn't lightweight.

Member Login