Windows 7, worth It?
Business Today tries out an advance beta version of what will probably be the biggest software launch of the year—Windows 7—and gives its verdict.
Let us cut to the chase. Will the next iteration of Microsoft’s dominant operating system be any good? After spending a couple of weeks playing around with the beta version of the software, our verdict is that yes, it will be. But why? Windows Vista was a marketing and public relations disaster. Vista, which was code-named “Longhorn”, was delayed by over a year and many people who bought machines with the “Vista Capable” logo on it were horrified to see that Windows Vista barely managed to work on their hardware when they upgraded from Windows XP.
It must be understood that Vista was the first operating system the Redmond-based behemoth launched after the advent of social media—blogs, MySpace, Twitter, Facebook, Digg and the like. Technology blogs and websites took no time in shredding Vista. But the fact is, if you have a new computer (with dual-core processor and at least two gigabytes of memory), and not a Netbook, Vista works quite well. The integrated search function on Vista is brilliant if you, like most people, have files spread all across your computer.
So what is the really pathbreaking, most awesome feature of Windows 7? We looked for it but didn’t find any over-riding visible feature that was out of the ordinary. Surely, there are some subtle changes to the interface from Vista, but Windows 7 looks a lot like the version it has replaced. Yes, the software integrates with what is known as the “cloud” a lot better—Windows Live “SkyDrive” and Microsoft’s photo sharing service. This will in all likelihood lead to howls of protest from the Europeans and Google.
The main change, therefore, is under the hood. The biggest complaint about Vista was that the software was a piece of bloatware (useless software) that gobbled up system resources. Also, given that most computer makers also install their “media” software and other random pieces of pointless software, Vista crippled many machines early on before the hardware managed to catch up. From all indications, Windows 7 seems a lot lighter on the hardware and comes with a lot of the cool graphical stuff turned off when you fire it up.
But Windows 7 is probably still far from perfect, and that the best hardware to run it is yet to be made by Intel, AMD or Nvidia. So much so that the Windows Experience Index that judges how good your machine is for Vista has been only rated till 7.9 (since the processor/memory/video card combination that can score 10 is still far from being made). We tried Windows 7 on two machines: a standard HP Office Desktop, which scored 3.9, and a Sony Vaio laptop, which did better with 4.5. In fact, some benchmark software tests conducted by technology trade journals on Windows 7 showed it to be actually slower than Vista on high-end rigs.
The fact is that when Seven does get launched—late this year, according to the Microsofties we know—hardware will be far more capable. Four core processors will be mainstream and eight core processors should be coming in. Standard memory on a decent machine will go up by 4 to 8 gigabytes. Seven seems primed for that sort of hardware and may avoid the disaster that had accompanied the Vista launch.
But the first post-Bill Gates operating system launched by Microsoft might have another ace up its sleeve. The success of little machines such as the Eee PC from Asus has given birth to the light Netbook category, which is exploding. Most Netbooks run Windows XP because Vista will cripple them. But Netbooks are going to get bigger, beefier processors in the coming months, even from cellphone processor specialist ARM. Windows Seven has actually been tested on some of these machines and seems to work— slow, but it works, which is more than can be said for Vista.
Facing competition from a rising Apple, which has been making inroads with machines running their OSX, and the surprisingly good Ubuntu distributed by South African entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth, Vista has had a tough time. But Seven might just change Microsoft’s luck. They may have laid-off 5,000 people, but when it comes to operating systems they have managed to improve their public relations efforts compared to the Vista days. Oh, and hopefully, they are on their way to creating a decent OS as well.
It must be understood that Vista was the first operating system the Redmond-based behemoth launched after the advent of social media—blogs, MySpace, Twitter, Facebook, Digg and the like. Technology blogs and websites took no time in shredding Vista. But the fact is, if you have a new computer (with dual-core processor and at least two gigabytes of memory), and not a Netbook, Vista works quite well. The integrated search function on Vista is brilliant if you, like most people, have files spread all across your computer.
Features of Window 7      |
The main change, therefore, is under the hood. The biggest complaint about Vista was that the software was a piece of bloatware (useless software) that gobbled up system resources. Also, given that most computer makers also install their “media” software and other random pieces of pointless software, Vista crippled many machines early on before the hardware managed to catch up. From all indications, Windows 7 seems a lot lighter on the hardware and comes with a lot of the cool graphical stuff turned off when you fire it up.
But Windows 7 is probably still far from perfect, and that the best hardware to run it is yet to be made by Intel, AMD or Nvidia. So much so that the Windows Experience Index that judges how good your machine is for Vista has been only rated till 7.9 (since the processor/memory/video card combination that can score 10 is still far from being made). We tried Windows 7 on two machines: a standard HP Office Desktop, which scored 3.9, and a Sony Vaio laptop, which did better with 4.5. In fact, some benchmark software tests conducted by technology trade journals on Windows 7 showed it to be actually slower than Vista on high-end rigs.
The fact is that when Seven does get launched—late this year, according to the Microsofties we know—hardware will be far more capable. Four core processors will be mainstream and eight core processors should be coming in. Standard memory on a decent machine will go up by 4 to 8 gigabytes. Seven seems primed for that sort of hardware and may avoid the disaster that had accompanied the Vista launch.
But the first post-Bill Gates operating system launched by Microsoft might have another ace up its sleeve. The success of little machines such as the Eee PC from Asus has given birth to the light Netbook category, which is exploding. Most Netbooks run Windows XP because Vista will cripple them. But Netbooks are going to get bigger, beefier processors in the coming months, even from cellphone processor specialist ARM. Windows Seven has actually been tested on some of these machines and seems to work— slow, but it works, which is more than can be said for Vista.
Facing competition from a rising Apple, which has been making inroads with machines running their OSX, and the surprisingly good Ubuntu distributed by South African entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth, Vista has had a tough time. But Seven might just change Microsoft’s luck. They may have laid-off 5,000 people, but when it comes to operating systems they have managed to improve their public relations efforts compared to the Vista days. Oh, and hopefully, they are on their way to creating a decent OS as well.
Quick takes |
