Windows 8 Release Target Accidentally Leaked

[deecrutch]

Meh...

If I do like I did in going from XP to 7, they'll be on Windows 9 before I upgrade again! It seems every other new version is the way to go when it comes to Windows.

 

[nick8191]

I'm looking forward to Windows 8. I want to see where they go with the cloud, especially after the recent Balmer interview. I'd be expecting 8 to be pretty ambitious (which could be a really good or really bad thing).

 

[Guest]

Great, then I can skip Windows Vista, and 7 altogether!
going straight from XP to Win8!

 

[dEAne]

Windows 8 will be more on SSD drive.

 

[jgv115]

Nothing wrong with Windows 7.

Microsoft, take your time with Windows 8 and make sure it actually adds something new to the PC experience (Vista was a complete redesign of Windows compared to XP. Windows 7 will last a while so you got time up your sleeves

 

[iamtheking123]

So Windows 8 = Windows 7 SP2?

 

[iam2thecrowe]

I would like to see 64 bit only. Time to phase out 32 bit!

 

[aaron88_7]

This may be a stupid idea, but wouldn't it make a lot more sense to simply work on a new service pack rather than an entirely new OS? I know, I know, service packs are free and Microsoft doesn't like giving away free stuff....but seriously most businesses haven't even upgraded away from XP...this quick move to Windows 8 to me seems like it would just keep businesses away.

 

[back_by_demand]

Windows 8 will likely be 64 bit native, get rid of crappy legacy support, all SSD optimised, tablet optimised, etc

 

[noblerabbit]

I like windows 7 so much, that I decided to buy it, 6 months after trying it. I even sacrificed a USB stick to make a bootable install image from it.

 

[TEAMSWITCHER]

Steven Sinofsky is Microsoft's head of Windows development, and he is very good at making release dates. He does this by keeping the changes to a minimum, so don't expect to be blown away. Windows 7 is not that different from Vista. Ballmer's statement about Windows 8 is nothing more than warming up the hype engine.

Windows isn't the biggest problem facing the PC anymore. It's the Microsoft hardware partners that without decent profit margins like Apple, cannot spend the R&D dollars to deliver exciting new products, like Apple. Apple hardware/software/cloud services are insanely awesome and is making converts out of nearly everyone these days.

And, Apple is patenting it's innovations vigorously. Do you want a mag-safe power connector on a PC? You have to wait 11 more years for Apple's patent to expire. Do you want an aluminum unibody thin and rigid laptop? You have to wait 13 years.

Dell just launched another line of plastic XPS laptops that look like every other plastic laptop they ever shipped. I can't believe they expect me to buy their crap, when Apple is selling awesome laptops like the MacBook Pro. And I didn't.

Congratulations Microsoft! You saved Windows, but the PC is still dead. Software is a commodity, and hardware is where the action is once again. Too bad your partners can't figure this out. Apple did.

 

[deletemach_kernel]

i still use xp..... but thats becuase my hardware is ancient...at work its w7 x64....and i love it...

 

[f-gomes]

Hey, Tom's, did ANYBODY out there read the freaking article before posting? Please do so, as there is not ONE SINGLE SENTENCE that's does'n look like it has been translated at google.

Geez, I'm portuguese and even I get the shivers from this kind of disregard for grammar and spelling errors.

 

[zak_mckraken]

@f-gomes : Did YOU read the article?

Windows8beta.com ran it through a translator and this is what it read:

 

[gm0n3y]

Windows Live Essentials made my computer frequently unresponsive. It would lockup every half hour or so for 5 minutes at a time. After trying many fixes, I ended up uninstalling WLE and the problem was solved.

 

[Shuge1]

I thought they'd have waited for 2 or 3 service packs...thats atleast 5yrs...
Wonder if they can comeup with something as good a win7

 

[Gin Fushicho]

You know what would be nice after Windows 8? an operating system built from scratch again like DOS. Start with nothing, and make a 64-bit only OS. New Kernal and everything. I want efficiency. I want my hardware to run like it is supposed to. I don't want to deal with hardware companies always worrying about backwards compatibility, they can't make the best that way.

Hardware companies and retail places can still sell the best of the old stuff for people who want to go backwards. and then there is also software emulation as well.

 

[Goro]

[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]and because they took so long to make an OS after XP is why Vista flopped. people expected Windows Vista to work smoothly on there 800Mhz computers with 128MB of ram like XP did[/citation]
Thank you, thank you, thank you... excelent point..

I've been runing Vista Ultimate 64 for over three years now on the same machine and it has not crashed once. Yea, I know it sounds bs but its not and the real reason is mentioned already above. Its old hardware that killed vista.

 

[eddieroolz]

I think it was well known that it would hit sometime in 2012. I'm interested in knowning when the beta testing begins, though!

 

[SteelCity1981]

Vista was the lab rat for Windows 7. If there was no Vista and only 7 after XP we would hear how incompatible 7 is today from consumors and vendors making the jump to XP. Vista took a lot of heat for that, so by the time 7 came out the transition was a lot easier due to the fact by then many software vendors have became compatible with Vista which were also compatible with 7.

 

[cloudNINE]

I'm pretty happy with Win 7 64bit overall but it does have some issues. I used the p55 EVGA classified 200 MB, i5 750 CPU, 8 gigs of dual channel memory (2x 4 gig G-Skill Ripsaw sticks) and a 2nd gen Corsair performance series SSD as the boot drive. All I can say, it runs Win 7 so fast and smooth, it would be hard to improve on this within the next year or so. With TRIM enabled, I haven't seen any performance loss with the SSD since I first loaded Windows on it. I used a budget Quadro FX 1800 for the graphics card and that seems to be plenty for what I use it for. The more expensive workstation cards would be a waste of money since I'm not running, or plan on running, CAD or similar software anytime soon.

I use this system as graphics system that runs Adobe CS5. It pulls up that huge application in a mere 2-3 seconds flat. I use 2x 2nd gen 3.5" 150 gig raptors as back up and storage/scratch disk drives.

It would be nice if MS focused more on seamless virtualization rather than more bells and whistles on Windows 8. There are still some less than desirable performance issues with virtualization on 7 64bit. I'm not sure about the 32bit version on how its performance is with VMware.

I've noticed, even with VT enabled on the MB, choppy performance with virtualization with VMware workstation 7 (haven't tried VMware 7.1 yet). There are a few other issues regarding unresolved networks as well. Win 7 doesn't resolve a virtualized unidentified networks in VMware without going into the registry and changing some things. I'd rather not do this just for the reason, if I pay for such a program like VMware, they should have this resolved without me digging through their forums to find a back door registry fix.

Anyway, I'd like to see Win 8 have 3 incarnations. Home version for the basic home user, maybe dumbed down a bit so the people who don't know anything about computers can use it and not become victims of mal-ware or a virus without having to manually configure their router's or firewall software to filter that garbage out.

A professional version that has its roots set for power users. After all, why have a Pro version that is essentially nothing more than the home version with a few more bells and whistles? I have Win 7 Pro and its not much different than the home version. The networking is cumbersome at best. Especially the way MS has done this home group crap. Why bother with that in the professional version when the person buying it will more than likely manually configure their networks to begin with. Just a simple domain or non domain network system would be really nice. I can't stand this one click fits all method when it comes to networking.

And an enterprise version for complex business network environments. But I'm sure MS won't do this in favor of 15 versions, most of which will be dumbed down versions of the same thing, while (ofc) the most expensive version will come with everything from voice chatting with God to Apple talk.

Unless Windows 8 is something out of this world, I doubt I'll switch since 7 is so stable and somewhat friendly. Why MS keeps dumbing down everything is beyond me. Isn't that what the home version is for? Or have I missed something?

 

[Hatecrime69]

[citation][nom]rsud[/nom]Windows 8 will suck based on the history of Micro$oft OS releases.I'll be waiting for Windows 9 !![/citation]
so microsoft os releases have turned into star trek movie releases?

 

[tripperdude]

2 GHZ cpu's and 512 ram was normal in 2001-02! Vista failed because it sucked, MS did a very poor job of engineering and implementing all the features they wanted on it. I'm running win7 pro x64 and it's pretty smooth, I was running win7 32-bit, the RC1 release and MCE before that. I hope MS won't rush win8, I want my investment in win7 to last a while. Here's why: IMO the RC1 release ran better and was more stable than win7. Unless MS makes a serious effort to bring stability to the desktop then why should I invest in compatibility anymore than I have to?

 

[Guest]

Windows 7 is fine, No reason to change so fast...