Windows 7 Coming in June 2009?

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/15/windows-7-coming-june-3rd-2009/' target='_blank'>http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/15/...-june-3rd-2009/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"As you may recall, Bill Gates himself mentioned a little ways back that Windows 7 could possibly be arriving as soon as next year, which prompted some quick backtracking on Microsoft's part, but that earlier-than-expected date has now cropped up yet again, this time supposedly in Microsoft's internal calendar. According to InternetNews.com, that calendar pegs the planned release date as June 3rd, 2009, which is a good deal sooner than the "early 2010" date we've been hearing all along, and quite a significant cut into Vista's planned three-year lifespan. What's more, the site also says that Microsoft will take advantage of its Professional Developer's Conference on October 27th to launch the first public beta of Windows 7, although that doesn't quite match up with earlier word that it'd only be revealing some "in-depth technical information" about the OS."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1221500674.usr1.jpg" /></p><p>There's not a lot to go on here, but this <a href="http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3771391/Windows+7+Looking+Like+a+June+2009+Delivery.htm" target="_blank">Internetnews.com</a> article that Engadget has linked to has a fairly logical trail of bread crumbs that leads to the June 2009 launch date. There's a certain amount of logic in Microsoft pushing hard to get Windows 7 out the door faster than they'd originally planned: they get a chance to fix the issues with Windows Vista, they get to re-position the product with new marketing campaigns, and they force Apple to re-shoot all their smart-ass commercials. ;-) I just hope Microsoft is working on a configuration of Windows 7 that's optimized for small and light devices such as UMPCs and netbooks. Vista is just too big and heavy for small devices.</p><p>I'm exceedingly disappointed to see the word "Ultimate" in the above screen shots. I really hope Microsoft doesn't repeat the same mistake they made with Windows Vista by having four different versions available at retail. I distinctly remember having rather heated discussions with Microsoft people about how bad it was going to be that they were fragmenting the product line and making it more confusing for users, but those complaints fell on deaf ears. I was cautiously optimistic about Windows Vista Ultimate when I first heard about it, but seeing as how the "Ultimate Extras" turned out to be a huge disappointment, the words "Windows Vista Ultimate" are now synonymous with wasted money.</p>

[Felix Torres]

Sorry, but all indications are that multiple Windows editions is not something that is going away soon. From their perspective it has actually been very successful. Indeed, by your own logic, the need for four versions, which until now has been mostly marketing-driven, is now becoming market-driven.

In other words, expect Vista home basic to be tweaked into something that will run nicely on Atom processors, Home Premium into a high-end home OS optimized for Core, while Vista Business and Ultimate focus on extensive laptop and corporate LAN and multiuser support, respectively. I could easily see ultimate incorporating a chunk of Sharepoint functionality.

If anything, I wouldn't be shocked to see a *fifth* version marketed, as I expect the next version of Home Server to get branded with whatever name they cook up for Windows 7.

Realistically, there is simply too much PC hardware diversity for an Apple-like one-size-its-all OS strategy to be effective. They do need to more effectively define what hardware each specific version is aimed at to avoidconfusion, but there really is a need for multiple Windows in the Microsoft house. :-)

[Damion Chaplin]

I don't know... I think Microsoft's shooting themselves in the foot with this one. I was just speaking with a friend of mine last week and I just mentioned in passing that I was using Vista. He cringed and said "I hate Vista. I wish my new computer hadn't come with it". He's a 3D graphic artist like myself and he's used Windows his entire career. And I actually hear this from people all the time. Mostly from people who've never used Vista, but nevertheless it's rather telling...

If, almost two years after its launch, there are still tech-savvy people who are unwilling to make the switch from XP (or who regret their switch to Vista), what makes MS think the world's ready for a new version of Windows?

As for myself... I've been using Vista since 2 weeks after its release. I love it. I'm not ready for a new version of Windows either...

[Stinger]

Would it be exaggerating to say that this is Microsoft's most important product ever? It's make or break time for Microsoft, in my opinion.

What Vista needs is focus and consistency. It's got to feel like an integrated and well thought out product - not a collection of bits and pieces developed in isolation.

I'd like to see: Only one version. One disc, one price, one product. On installation, allow users to select their intended use (business, home, netbook, etc.) and allow Windows to install the right components for that use. 64-bit only. Perhaps controversial but I'm using Vista 64 and it feels like the bastard child. There's too many pieces of hardware without decent 64-bit drivers and there's too many programs that have issues on Vista 64-bit. Force the issue on developers and manufacturers. Group licensing. Most families have more than one PC these days. Why can't I buy a family pack for Vista at a sensible price. Microsoft is only encouraging piracy.I honestly believe that Microsoft have the people to make a decent OS. What's missing is direction and management.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

64 bit is definitely a good idea. It's time to move to that generation already!

[Jason Dunn]

If anything, I wouldn't be shocked to see a *fifth* version marketed, as I expect the next version of Home Server to get branded with whatever name they cook up for Windows 7.

We'll have to see about that...but I highly doubt it will happen. The Windows Home Server group has never given any indication that they want to see home-brewed servers take off in a big way. They offer an OEM license for the hard-core users, but they really want their hardware partners to sell the servers.

Why? One reason is that during the WHS beta I was all sorts of messages from people who were freaking out when installing WHS wiped their entire hard drive - even though there are two very easy to understand warnings that explicitly state that the install procedure will wipe the entire drive, including all partitions. These people thought that they could dual-boot WHS or something....

WHS is designed to be a no-brainer backup solution for Joe Consumer, and I'd be surprised to see that change in the Windows 7 timeframe. I guess we'll see. :D

[onlydarksets]

Why? One reason is that during the WHS beta I was all sorts of messages from people who were freaking out when installing WHS wiped their entire hard drive - even though there are two very easy to understand warnings that explicitly state that the install procedure will wipe the entire drive, including all partitions. These people thought that they could dual-boot WHS or something....
Wow - I never knew that! Good to know if I ever do take a look at it.

[Jason Dunn]

Group licensing. Most families have more than one PC these days. Why can't I buy a family pack for Vista at a sensible price. Microsoft is only encouraging piracy.

Great point on this one - this was one of the points I kept bringing up over and over with Microsoft, and now it's going to be an even bigger deal because Vista-era computers should be quite capable of running Windows 7. With XP to Vista, many XP computers couldn't run Vista properly.

Hopefully I'll have an opportunity to bring this up to the right people at Microsoft again...

[onlydarksets]

Great point on this one - this was one of the points I kept bringing up over and over with Microsoft, and now it's going to be an even bigger deal because Vista-era computers should be quite capable of running Windows 7. With XP to Vista, many XP computers couldn't run Vista properly.

Hopefully I'll have an opportunity to bring this up to the right people at Microsoft again...
Microsoft did offer something like this for Vista. If you bought Ultimate, you could buy 2 additional licenses of Home Premium at $50/each. Still way more than the Apple approach, but better than nothing.

[Jason Dunn]

Microsoft did offer something like this for Vista. If you bought Ultimate, you could buy 2 additional licenses of Home Premium at $50/each. Still way more than the Apple approach, but better than nothing.

I know. And believe it or not, I think I (along with some of the other Featured Communities) managed to help make that happen - we met with the SKU team and hammered them over and over on this issue...and I even emailed Steve Ballmer to bring up this issue (he says he likes hearing from MVPs, so I took him up on it). I'm certainly not saying "I made this happen", but I think I may have helped move the needle a bit.

But...

The Microsoft proposed solution sucked - they didn't really listen to what we were saying. Buying the way overpriced Vista Ultimate to save money on Home Premium licensing? Compared to Apple's offering, that's a really crappy solution. I don't know of anyone that took Microsoft up on their offer, and it's a shame because Microsoft might use that as ammunition for why they wouldn't try it again.

[onlydarksets]

I did it, because it saved about $50 over buying two copies of Home Premium. I definitely hear what you are saying, though - $350 for 2 upgrade copies is a far cry from $199 for 5 full install copies.

(Yes, I know you can install the upgrade as a full version, but we're talking about licensing, here)

[Jason Dunn]

I did it, because it saved about $50 over buying two copies of Home Premium. I definitely hear what you are saying, though - $350 for 2 upgrade copies is a far cry from $199 for 5 full install copies.

Interesting, you're the first person I knew of that did it. Glad it saved you $50. :)

[onlydarksets]

Interesting, you're the first person I knew of that did it. Glad it saved you $50. :)
It was far from a perfect experience, though - they initially sent invalid product keys to everyone, and it took them a few days to get it sorted out.