Linked by on Tue 27th May 2008 15:00 UTC
Permalink for comment 315814
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-05-27
So... just to clarify...
- Same Kernel, but cleaned up and bugfixed
- Same driver model, but with extra support
- Same DirectX
- Same APIs (Net 3.0+)
- Short release schedule
- New Internet Explorer
- Performance tweaks
- Networking improvements
Seriously... It's the equivalent of Win98 SE. Don't get me wrong - Win98 SE and Win95 SE were far better than their predecessors, more stable and more performant; they sold me on that product line. I didn't like 95 (due to stability), but SE really helped, and I used it even when 98 was out. Then I upgraded to 98SE when that sorted out the faults in 98.
Windows 7 looks like Vista SE to me... And maybe that isn't such a bad thing. Certainly, for ISVs, corporate types and game developers, stability in the APIs and expectations would be nice, otherwise they are throwing away any Vista/DirectX 10 investments that they have made.
Not revolutionary, but maybe it will make the Vista codebase stable and usable for at least the next five years after windows 7 release.