Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 
Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Is Windows 7 really Vista SP2 in disguise?

If you're hoping that Windows 7 will bring dramatic changes to Windows, you may well be disappointed. More and more evidence shows that Windows 7 may only be the equivalent of a Vista SP2.

Microsoft is largely remaining silent about what will be in Windows 7, but it looks as if no major changes are in the offing. As I wrote in my blog yesterday, Microsoft has said that it's not developing a new kernel for Windows 7, and it has said that the hardware, software, and peripherals that work with Vista will also work with Windows 7.

Microsoft has said that Windows 7 will include something called pervasive multi-touch. That's a fancy way of saying that you'll be able to run the operating sytem and its underlying applets via a touch screen.

That certainly doesn't get me excited. Microsoft has been touting touch screens and pen computing for as far back as I can remember, and no one seems to care. Sure, it will help with specialized applications, but for most business and home users, it simply doesn't matter.

Windows 7 will also ship with a new version of Internet Explorer, but that's on the drawing board anyway, and isn't necessarily tied to the operating system.

No doubt, there will be other changes as well. But if the kernel isn't being rewritten, and if all existing Vista hardware and software will work with Windows 7, there's a good chance you won't see any major changes to Windows.

Windows XP SP2, you may recall, added considerable new features to XP. It finally gave a firewall to Windows, introduced a pop-up blocker, introduced better wireless access and security, and more.

Those are all very significant changes --- and it's not clear that Windows 7 will offer as many new features as even SP2 did for XP.

So why bother giving the new version of Windows a new name, instead of calling it a Service Pack? Because Vista has gotten a tremendous amount of bad press, and this will be a way for Microsoft to put that behind it.

I hope that I'm wrong, and that we'll see plenty of new features in Windows 7. After all, we're still about a year-and-a-half away from shipping. But the signs right now don't look good.

Like this blog? Subscribe to the RSS feed!

What People Are Saying

How could a responsible

How could a responsible journalist write an article about a service pack, that at the time of writing, was barely being coded? Or compare it to an OS that was still in its infancy. There was also so little information about either of these, to barely even begin to try and draw any comparison. Please stop trying to stir up crap before there is anything to stir. I am not a huge supporter of Microsoft, but can recognize progress when I see it.

If Windows 7 is Vista SP2,

If Windows 7 is Vista SP2, then what's Vista SP2?

BTW, comparing XP SP2 to any other SP2 is pointless. XP SP2 was a one time thing unlikely to ever be repeated. MS realised they had a major problem (whether PR or a real problem we'll never know) because of security and needed to fix it so they dropped basically everything to fix it. Don't expect that to be repeated

Thank you for a great

Thank you for a great article, you express my sentiments exactly. I am furious to think Microsoft is going to ask me to pay another $200 bucks for a renamed copy of Vista. I loaded Windows 7 and really could not find any difference from a user experience; Windows 7 was slightly, slightly faster, but not appreciably. Vista has gotten a bad reputation because of the driver issues in the initial releases. Microsoft has obviously decided to bury Vista by renaming it Windows 7. It's enough of an insult to make me seriously consider going to Apple's OS, I wish Apple would license their OS for the Intel platform and give the public a choice and give Microsoft some honest competition. I used AT&T’s System V Unix in the 80s, when you look at operating systems you would think we would have progressed further than this for all of the man hours and millions spent.

Don't write any more

Don't write any more articles.Seriously.You have absolutely no idea what you're writting about.

Nice

Just wondering if you could be any more obtuse or make a larger broad sweeping statement. Could you perhaps take the time to qualify your opinion?
thanks

Hmm

It's really not all that difficult to look in detail at what MS is offering in Windows 7. Anyone with an internet connection and half a brain is capable of that.

As someone else mentioned, the article was written a year ago, but even back then there was more detail about the features in Windows 7 than the writer purports in his article.

Many of the changes are not 'in your face' GUI changes or bells and whistles though so perhaps they escaped the slow wit of the writer?

Perhaps, a year on, and with more information available he has reconsidered his opinion. Or then again, perhaps he's just a Mac user.

Vista and Windows 7

Just thought i would add my comments on this as i am quite amazed by the article written.
Windows 7 is the way forward. Until you have tried it and tested it i dont think you can comment. It is certainly not vista sp2 in disguise. I am currently running a home network all on 7 and its brilliant. Very stable. Automatic upscaling to HD. Media streaming. Bare in mind this is still a beta edition. Vista was a stop gap between Vista and 7 much the way ME was between 2000 and XP.
As for unbuntu and linux they are good systems but certainly not for the home user with no it experience.
Like it or not Windows 7 is the way forward!!!!

To be fair to the author of

To be fair to the author of the artical, this was written over a year ago ;)

Okay. The comment below me

Okay. The comment below me is biased. A site that is pro-Linux can't be used in testing. They could have made some minor adjustments that we weren't aware of.
Now, I am no way defending Windows, but uh...
1. Windows Vista sucks
2. Ubuntu is worse than ME
So really, www.tuxradar.com is pro-ubuntu, when it's worse than Vista. Dont' go blasting other people because they made "insufficient" comments. They may not be able to make such strong opinions on something that they really haven't investigated, but you shouldn't be getting information from people whose facts are probably 80% false.

I am not going to even attempt to try out Windows 7, so I think I'm going to stick with XP until Microsoft gets their act together.

Have you ever thought of

Have you ever thought of trying Ubuntu before you claim that it is worse than ME? You have proved your own bias to anyone that didn't already know. Assuming that Tuxradar is 80% false also requires that you have at least some legitimacy yourself. If you had tried Ubuntu before making your comment, you would realize why I am saying what I am saying. Ubuntu is an extremely stable, intuitive and convenient operating system. I started using it prior to vista's release merely to keep from being shoveled the drm filled operating system. I beta tested vista and decided it was time to learn something new.. I tried ubuntu and haven't turned back. Ubuntu is No windows, but it also doesn't cost anything, and isn't laced with DRM and License agreements.. Ever read the license agreement in vista? didn't think so..