Windows Seven (Vienna)

[MulletRobZ]

My bet is that Microsoft will not make separate 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows for three reasons.

1. Virtually all computers sold today (except for the ultra-cheap ones) are 64-bit, as some have already pointed.

2. Apple plans to provide only ONE version of Leopard for both 32-bit and 64-bit Macs and a demo from the WWDC keynote indicated that Leopard will be able to provide 32-bit compatibility AND 64-bit performance at the same time, for those with 64-bit Macs (duh). Thus, I cannot see why Microsoft would not be able to do the same.

3. It just does not make business sense for Microsoft to incur unnecessary costs with such duplication.

[Glowstick]

64-bit might become the norm in USA, but Windows is used worldwide, even in third world countries, and they won't be moving to 64-bit for at least another five to six years.

Extrapolating the trend on how bloated Windows is getting in regards to gobbling away system resources for idle operation, I doubt that any remaining 32bit machines will be able to run the system reasonably well.

Also, SQL Server 2008 will apparently go RTM in Feb '08, and interestingly enough, it finally carries that goddamned filestream functionality required for WinFS. So it might be possible, as rumored, that it appears in Vienna and may just be made mandatory and gobble up way more resources (sqlsrv does have quite a footprint).

[russellc]

I don't agree with that at all. I mean think about it.... Pretty much every PC sold now has a 64-bit processor, and 64-bit processors have been the mainstream for quite some time, ever since the Athlon 64 was released a couple of years ago. If you are running a non-64 bit processor now, you have a fairly old machine or a budget machine.. both of which would probably not be powerful enough for an operating system to be released in 2-3 years time.

No. My Macbook Pro runs on 32 bit (Core Duo) and it runs perfectly fine. In 2-3 years when you actually see the operating system's requirements and actual demonstrated performance, make your argument about my machine being "fairly old" or "budget", both of which my Macbook Pro is most definitely not.

I very much doubt a PC with a 32bit only CPU would even meet the minimum specs for Vienna when it comes out, i'm not too sure about the Core Duo's (1) but i think the best 32bit only CPU available is what, a 3200 Athlon XP? and i wouldn't fancy running vista on one of them.

Vista ran perfectly fine on my Macbook Pro. I don't understand why everyone makes 32-bit out to be the worst thing ever when a large number of people who use computers won't and don't even need a 64-bit processor (simple word processing and email, anyone?).

[Glowstick]

The industry is probably going to draw a simple line in the sand soon, and the easiest to do to define a performance baseline would be saying that stuff's going to be x64 only. No matter how good a Core Duo is or not. Microsoft may do the same.

Not to mention that this would allow Microsoft to stop dealing with a lot of freakin' quirks and bugs in older processor generations. Some that may even have hindered implementing various kernel features (no matter how minor they may be), that were either hindered by quirks or could be implemented properly without hacks.

[Guest jgrodri]

that is ridiculous. 64 bit is actually slower for simple tasks (like playing an mp3 file or writing a text document. There is no point in transitioning to 64 bits until common applications gain from it or the power of processors is enough to make up for the slowdown. Technology should be adopted when it improves something, not because someone says "It's time".

[spacer]

BTW, what do you guys think of the new taskbar replacement in Windows 7 - "Clippings"

The concept described in that link is kinda cool. But even though I know it's an early "prototype" interface, I'm not a fan of the way it looks. The boxes, buttons, and color scheme look too cheesy. Clean it up a bit, make it look more polished and sophisticated and I'd like it.

[Glowstick]

that is ridiculous. 64 bit is actually slower for simple tasks (like playing an mp3 file or writing a text document. There is no point in transitioning to 64 bits until common applications gain from it or the power of processors is enough to make up for the slowdown. Technology should be adopted when it improves something, not because someone says "It's time".

You're right. Now that you say it, I notice that my system running on a 64bit kernel is only a third as fast as on the 32bit kernel. (Note: Sarcasm, in case you're impaired)

It's an unnoticable loss, that would be more than made up if people would compile their applications as 64bit applications, to avoid switching to 32bit mode all the time for old apps, aswell as making use of the additional registers to run loops, calculations and other operations on.

[DDStriker]

wow i just moved to 32 bit from 16 bit and theres another change already? ;) :D

i donno about this 64 bit business just doesn't seem like its worth wasting on money just yet

my p4 does what i want it to and i have no intentions of using vista (the graphic ######?) anytime soon

but as for future designs i don't understand why they can't support 32 bit and 64 bit

i mean how long did they support 16 bit systems for? why not give 32 bit the same ride

even if they don't implement hardware compatibility to handle the old programs atleast do software emulation

theres millions of programs designed with 32-bit in mind they can't just eradicate them all :p

im probly way off here XD

anyway im happy with my computer and i probly will be in the next 10 years aswell im not much of a gamer so my games are like several years old (Total annihilation anyone?) so i don't see the need for the jump so soon other then for servers? can someone shine some light on this matter? is everyone here a full obssessed like gamer?

is there something you can do on this new shiny 64 bit architecture that you could never do on the 32 bit architecture? is it really even noticable? (serious questions im on a 32 bit pc for crying out loud :D)

thanks :p/just my 2 cents :D

Edited July 17, 2007 by DDStriker

[Sammyinnit]

I don't agree with that at all. I mean think about it.... Pretty much every PC sold now has a 64-bit processor, and 64-bit processors have been the mainstream for quite some time, ever since the Athlon 64 was released a couple of years ago. If you are running a non-64 bit processor now, you have a fairly old machine or a budget machine.. both of which would probably not be powerful enough for an operating system to be released in 2-3 years time.

I find this to be quite biased and some might argue uneducated.

You must not forget that there are millions for 32 bit users (Pentium 4 +), a majority of which would be capable of running the next windows milestone.

[Quillz]

Hey, Welcome to Neowin and thanks for the heads up.

Plus, I love this author, he's expecting Microsoft to copy Apple with Spaces and Time Machine. Good call!

Copy Time Machine? You mean, Time Machine, the feature in Leopard that was a clear rip-off of Vista's Previous Versions (aka shadow copies?)

[EduardValencia]

Updated:

[irratioпalgээk]

Interesting read.

I'm satisfied with Vista. Sure, this next version sounds a little interesting, I'm even curious. So how long before screenshots?

[dr.bisho]

Hopefully Seven is the Vista we didn't get ;)

lol...i hope so...

[*RedBull*]

....since Windows Vista was largely a disappointing release, ....

I don't find Vista dissapointing at all. Just like any typical windows release, drivers are an issue initially until vendors get on board with things. More and More I'm liking Vista. It clearly has several features I've noticed that make it better than XP. But a large disapointment is a lie. Not a very crediable source, IMO.

[George P Global Moderator]

Everyone is missing the whole part about the hypervisor. That little bit of tech should let MS run 32bit apps just fine on a 64bit OS. So the core OS and it's modules/services could be fully 64bit, and any 32bit needed will load up on the hyperviser. The same could be done when it comes to 32bit hardware drivers, maybe. I don't know all the details about the hyperviser at this point.

Anyways, if it works how I think it will, then this whole 32bit/64bit argument is pointless.

[Sammyinnit]

I don't find Vista dissapointing at all. Just like any typical windows release, drivers are an issue initially until vendors get on board with things. More and More I'm liking Vista. It clearly has several features I've noticed that make it better than XP. But a large disapointment is a lie. Not a very crediable source, IMO.

Face it, it is a disapointment. I recall, 4074, 5048 and 5219 being quite brilliant.

[y_notm]

Face it, it is a disapointment. I recall, 4074, 5048 and 5219 being quite brilliant.

5048 and 5219 were horrible builds.

[Sammyinnit]

5048 and 5219 were horrible builds.

5048 Looked ugly yes, but I liked it becuase it was a build with alot of the new GUI stuff. Scaling and DWM and all that. And 5219 Gave me less problems then the final build.

[y_notm]

5048 Looked ugly yes, but I liked it becuase it was a build with alot of the new GUI stuff. Scaling and DWM and all that. And 5219 Gave me less problems then the final build.

Just about everything in those two builds except for PC to PC sync is in Vista today, except slower and buggier and missing a bunch of other stuff. They were terrible and a huge step back if you were a fan of the 4000 series.

[Impact]

I think vienna will definitely be 64 bit, because with what it will require hardware-wise, you'll pretty much have a 64 bit processor if you meet the requirements. By 2009, all the 32 bit processors will be considered old (P4 in 2009? That's gonna be a dinosaur). Most people's systems are 3-4 years old or newer, and by 2009, that will mean 64 bit.

[darthblader]

I think vista is really good. I have not had one problem with it since i installed it.

The next release sounds interesting though. I will probably get it just because but I dont like the fact that there might not be a start menu. Wont be windows.

I am all 64bit now, i think it is the way to go, advancements in technology and all that jazz :D

[Quillz]

I think vista is really good. I have not had one problem with it since i installed it.

The next release sounds interesting though. I will probably get it just because but I dont like the fact that there might not be a start menu. Wont be windows.

I am all 64bit now, i think it is the way to go, advancements in technology and all that jazz :D

So all the releases up to Windows 95 weren't Windows, as they didn't feature the Start menu?

[tracy lords army]

So all the releases up to Windows 95 weren't Windows, as they didn't feature the Start menu?

Nope. Them were ProDos / MacOS clones.

[Quillz]

Nope. Them were ProDos / MacOS clones.

My point was that just because a future release of Windows may not feature the Start menu doesn't mean it's "not Windows." The fact is, there are many new ways of interacting with computers that are far superior to this whole two-dimensional concept of a taskbar. Things like BumpTop or Microsoft Surface are 3d extensions of real life interactions with objects. And this is how we should really be working with operating systems in the future.

[Xerxes]

My point was that just because a future release of Windows may not feature the Start menu doesn't mean it's "not Windows." The fact is, there are many new ways of interacting with computers that are far superior to this whole two-dimensional concept of a taskbar. Things like BumpTop or Microsoft Surface are 3d extensions of real life interactions with objects. And this is how we should really be working with operating systems in the future.

You are correct, however, I think darthblader might of been referring to the rumor that MS is planning to ditch the Windows name completely and call the new OS something different. The reasoning behind that rumor was cause Windows Seven is rumored to be a brand new OS from the ground up and would not support software from previous versions of Windows (i.e. no legacy support) however, it may supply some limited form of legacy support through virtualization. Of cause these are purely rumors that have been floating around for sometime and probally hold no truth to them, but we will see in time.