I'm disappointed to hear that my quadcore packs more juice than software today can squeeze out of, but now this might be reason enough for me to upgrade to Vienna.

I'm disappointed aswell, Vista and XP can do better in pulling out the full performence of a processor. I had a zd8000 a few years ago with Windows XP MCE 2005 on it. i decided to beta test Windows Vista on it. When I did, Vista took its Hyperthreading processor and took more advantage of it than XP did. now that i'm running a PC with a dual-cure processor, Vista is not doing as well with it and this new notebook PC is like 10 times better than that one. I also ran Vista with a single-core processor laptop from back in the day and vista used its processor resources better than my dual-core processor tc4400. how can vista run better on a zd8000 and a armada e700 than on a modern day PC? can someone answer that for me. of course when i ran vista on the armada e700 it was running on minimum specs, except for that the hard drive and the video card was upgraded, plus it was using an external wireless card.

Alot of that has to do with the fact that alot ot the retail Vista's out there(i mean like from Hp Dell and so forth) Are pack full of so much junk it's best to wipe everything and reinstall from scratch... I thought the same thing on my New Compaq laptop untill i did a freash install of vista and found out that it it like 10 times faster that what Hp put on it

and HP is especially well known for the useless software that they shove down your throat with any desktop or laptop... when I got my tx2500z tablet pc, I asked geeksquad to clear all that useless software, and it was so much better in terms of performance...

Nice.

Good news.

so it's not gonna be like Vista?

having useless squad, i mean geek squad, do anything to a computer is just as good as walking down the street and handing someone money and saying, hey take this for no reason. save money and do it yourself rather than giving money to people that have, at most, A certification and couldn't tell you what Linux was if their lives depended on it.

Excellent
very very Good

My.No.09909100001
Vipul Parmar
Morbi (INDIA )

Still need to wait further windows to really utilize parallel processing.

This release could be done sooo much faster if MS wasn't so worried about future revenue stream and endless licensing.

I have been using XP-64 Pro for about a year now Quad core Intel Q6600, ASUS MB, 1GB Asus Video, 8GB Ram etc. etc. and it is still a dog except for select apps. (games primarilly).

Drivers remain unavailable for 64-bit (Canon printers especially) and software is abysmal. Try to find a good 64-bit browser! Yahoo is going broke, Google doesn't support it and MS is screwing you down with new windowed ad pages! They really need the money!

Too bad Linux is such a geek portal but it looks like the only hope for the future of 64-bit OS's.

I can actually confirm that Windows 7 includes parallel-procesing enhancements - they break Prime95's torture test! Apparently Windows 7 tries to "break up" CPU utilization between the different cores (I have a Q6600), and this interferes with Prime95's ability to explicitly target each core with its own thread. As a result, the load on the different cores is uneven. Hope that they will short this out in the final version.

How about MACH ? We need a true parallel O.S. and parallel language with parallel algorithm.

Windows 7 works well on a Virtual machine with 1 GB of RAM. So ya... it is doing good so far. I also feel they need to change the GUI a bit, to much Vista.

Yes, is vista with more marketing pack...

Great! annother Inoperating (and expensive) System, i had vista, but my linux erase the partition intentionally... I enjoyed that. The best products that microsoft did are: w2000 (wormable) and xp. Please, re read the source code of this, or copy a MACH kernel, or work!

RICKROLLED!

give me my windows

I am disappointed in this costly turn of events.
Yet another OS needed to take full advantage of Quad Core technology I have been using for over a year.

Make no mistake Vista-64 has been a real improvement over XP-64.
Better driver support and more seamless interface with better large memory support.
But I feel sort of used; needing to purchase "7" to take full advantage of Quad-Core technology that has been available for some time now. Why not "patch" better Quad-Core support to Vista 64 or offer existing users a discounted upgrade for loyalty sake. I'm just saying...

It's the economy ******! That really frosts me.

Where can I learn more about Linux development in Parallel ? Anybody heard Linux-128 ?

Fucke ME!!!!

Tim Heller, have you ever though of why it is like that?

Vista 32/64 was the best for quad core support at the time you bought it. Okay? So just because they release a new OS that's improved (all OS'es are improved when they are newer). Why the heck would they give you any discount or so for a new OS?
With time grows technology, and so it gets better. That's pretty crystal clear to me.

Just because there will be a new and better quad core CPU out there for example they will not give you it for free or give it for a lower cost everytime they release a new one, that would be stupid, lol.

You can't just throw away stuf for free when someone has taken their time to make something better of something that was already good you know. This is the circle of life as you will see when you grow up and get your own place to live at etc.

Nice to knowing that Quad Processor are Full Supported by Win7.
Awesome!

I hope that with vienna have success not like vista

I worked for Geek Squad, and I know a lot about Linux, besides, why would you want someone working on your WINDOWS PC to know anything about Linux? People need their facts before they post.

all i can say is that windows xp is sucks and vista rocks everyone's asses... or if still not enough, then windows 7 will take over the reign! =D

My system:
AMD Phenom x4 @ 2.6Ghz
4 GB of DDR2 1066Mhz RAM
Radeon 3870 1024MB GPU
1TB Maxtor HDD @ 7200rpm

I have been a windows user for years, but unlike most people have also extensively used Linux (Fedora, Ubuntu, DSL). I am currently using Windows 7 build 7000, and the performance increase over Vista is very noticable. Evertything runs smoothly, infact I would go as far as saying its faster than both XP and Vista - and every single Linux distro I have tried out so far. One thing i find annoying is how (the majority of) the linux community seems to shun any new M$ release - yes it costs money, yes its from one of the worlds most capatalist companies, BUT its undeniable that they make amazing products. Yes vista was a flop as far as I'm concerned, apart from the GUI. Windows 7 makes up for this - It takes the beauty of Vista, the stability of XP and provides something I personally find a joy to work with. As a developer I will continue dual booting my Linux distros and my Windows, but its safe to say I know what i will be using for the main part of my time :] Hats off to M$

Here's what I posted to Ed Bott of ZDNet, and it still holds:

"My Pentium 4 system runs and feels a bit snappier on Windows 7 than my 2.66 GHz Core2Duo with 2GB RAM ever did running Vista Ultimate 64 bit, and it feels about as snappy as my Lenovo T61 ThinkPad 2.0 GHz Core2 running XP Pro SP3.

But then, to be fair, my P4-based system is pretty much loaded and maxed out.

Specs: Pentium 4 3.4 Ghz Northwood 800 MHz FSB, HTT (Hyperthreading, and yes, HTT does indeed help multitask Win7 and big apps run and switch very smoothly).

4 GB PC3200 DDR dual channel RAM, (3.3 GB usable/visible to the OS

WINDOWS 7 INTEL CORE i7 = COOL

My system:

intel core i7 965 CPU
6GB corsair dominator (3x2GB)
GiGabyte ex58 extreme M/B
2 ati radeon hd 4870 x2 GPU crossfire
4TB samsung spinpoint (4x1TB) in Raid0

Also a great rig for HD video work, though I would definitely put GTX 295s in place of those 4870x2s for that purpose (much better for GPGPU apps).

hmmm... "managed" Core (kernel? - GUI? what is a OS core?)... well I imagine that will take "better" advantage of more CPU's... but will the end result be better performance or more features utilizing those cores on the CPUs... or will it just be that all of my cores are now employed to run the less efficient "managed" version of the OS Core.

hi this is pradeep from india
i need a help regarding with windows 7
how to connect internet in windows 7?
how to find network animation details?
please reply me if you know how to connect
mail me at
pradeepgani2007@hotmail.com

windows 7 is good..All the year is fill with 7 > Core i7, windows 7, and much waiting

hi to all
i need a help (waht is windows seven , oblectives of windows seven,

Please unsubscribe me from this annoying list.
Thank You

sho tut? aa?

sho tut? aa?

shi citeshti? ti-am dat voie??? aa?
ti pochinaesh ek neznachinii chlen misikogo...komitetu.
miskii arhitektor...poka !!!

I found Windows xp 64 on my dual core AMD to be quite quick and stable. I had a canon printer and a scanner for which there were no drivers though. Driver support was abysmal. I just installed Windows 7 on a newly built computer and it has many bugs. It wouldn't sleep with a Logitech wireless keyboard and mouse. Its windows change size or maximize with just a quick move of the mouse over them. It also hangs at times and every boot up is an adventure to see if it will require another windows check on whether its legitimate. I think it is buggier than pre-release Win 2000 and XP. I think they sped up the interface but from what I've read it doesn't benchmark much better (if at all) better than Vista (which I never used. There is a lot of marketing hype right now.

Theresa

HELP! How do I get off of this idiot mailing list.
Youi have apparently lost all of my user records except the one that generates this ridiculous list.
HELP ME ESCAPE FROM MICROSOFT HELL PLEASE!