Home » News » Software News » Windows 7 RC Released to the Masses » Comments

Comments for Windows 7 RC Released to the Masses

Comments

Please wait while we process your request

Please wait while we retrieve the user's information

Bio

Your bio is currently empty. Now is a great time to fill in your profile.

This profile is private.

This profile is only shared with friends.

This profile is under review.

We were unable to request friendship with this user.

We were unable to request friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

Your friendship request has been sent to this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

You are no longer friends with this user.

We were unable to ignore this user.

We were unable to ignore this user. Are you logged in?

This user is now ignored.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user. Are you logged in?

This user is no longer ignored.

pluck_user_mp-abuse_too_long_err

Name withheld

Ohmz

2:15 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ohmz. Show Details Hide Details

I'm downloading it now, time to see what all the fuss is about. I'll come back later and put my thoughts down if I get it running.

Score:

Name withheld

Peter

3:51 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Peter. Show Details Hide Details

This is exciting :) From the FAQ.

Quote. The RC is a full-featured edition, similar to Windows Vista Ultimate. This is important to keep in mind, because the Windows 7 you eventually buy or use at work may be a different edition with different features than what you find in the RC. /Quote

Score:

Name withheld

Steve32

4:12 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Steve32. Show Details Hide Details

Out of interest I started downloading this from Firefox (and it didn't install any download manager) and was only getting about 40Kbps! Restarted the download from IE, using the download manager it installs and now getting approx 500Kbps. Make of that what you will :-)

Score:

Name withheld

Mark Horton

4:33 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Mark Horton. Show Details Hide Details

I've downloaded it. Just burning it to a DVD, then a quick back up and then i'll be installing it.

Score:

Name withheld

Pbryanw

4:44 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Pbryanw. Show Details Hide Details

@Steve32 - Downloading via Firefox, and getting 500-700Kbps using a java app the site loaded onto my computer. Maybe you were just connected to a different server second time round?

Score:

Name withheld

jopey

5:09 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore jopey. Show Details Hide Details

Fine with firefox for me too.. 600KB+ and saturating the connection.

Score:

Name withheld

Ohmz

5:49 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ohmz. Show Details Hide Details

Damn all of you and your fast Internet! 300 Kbps IF I'm lucky. :(

Score:

Name withheld

pragfest

5:54 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore pragfest. Show Details Hide Details

@ohmz

Mine came down at 2 Meg, typing this from 7 now :p

Score:

Name withheld

Gordon394

6:24 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Gordon394. Show Details Hide Details

*cough* 50Mbit *cough* 5.2MB per second ;)

Score:

Name withheld

pragfest

6:39 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore pragfest. Show Details Hide Details

@ gordon

Quality, I was able to be smug for 30 mins at least.

Score:

Name withheld

gingerbreadman85

6:39 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore gingerbreadman85. Show Details Hide Details

5.8 to 5.9 MB/s :)

tasty!

Score:

Name withheld

Jay4d0

7:00 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Jay4d0. Show Details Hide Details

1.2mb/s took 35mins

Score:

Name withheld

Steve32

7:14 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Steve32. Show Details Hide Details

Ahh, I was in the Windows 7 beta and haven't installed Java on it - may explain why Firefox was so slow. Didn't mean to turn it into a willy jousting contest on broadband speeds though ;-) lol.

Score:

Name withheld

smc8788

7:14 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore smc8788. Show Details Hide Details

Got it last week...

Score:

Name withheld

LinguisticPedant

7:39 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore LinguisticPedant. Show Details Hide Details

Comparing download speeds. Did I just go back to second grade where my dad is bigger than your dad? ;)

Score:

Name withheld

scotw

8:06 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore scotw. Show Details Hide Details

@gordon, we could go off you, you know.

Score:

Name withheld

Gordon394

10:39 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Gordon394. Show Details Hide Details

LOL all - funnily enough it was mentioned more to 'stop' the speed comparisons ;) Btw took me just under 10 mins

PS scotw, nice to know there's something from which to go off ;)

Score:

Name withheld

Ohmz

11:30 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ohmz. Show Details Hide Details

@ Everyone with faster Internet than mine, I hate you all!

Whoa! Deja vu.

Score:

Name withheld

lifethroughalens

11:46 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore lifethroughalens. Show Details Hide Details

Even though this rumour was dismissed last week, it does appear that the RC 2 hour shut-down will eventually happen from March next year.

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/05/05/windows_7_rc_broad_availability/

"Starting on March 1, 2010, your PC will begin shutting down every two hours. Windows will notify you two weeks before the bi-hourly shutdowns start. To avoid interruption, you'll need to install a non-expired version of Windows before March 1, 2010. You'll also need to install the programs and data that you want to use."

@Gordon - 5MB/s+ That's grotesquely fast!

Score:

Name withheld

lifethroughalens

11:52 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore lifethroughalens. Show Details Hide Details

Ah, I see you noted that in the original article now.

I am loving W7- it doesn't feel anything like Vista did, and coming from a hardened XP pro fan, I have already migrated everything over to W7 RC1 within 24 hours of use! Everything just works, great driver support for so many peripherals and it's quick as hell booting up. Very impressed.

Score:

Name withheld

Gordon394

11:54 PM on 5 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Gordon394. Show Details Hide Details

@lifethroughalens "I am loving W7- it doesn't feel anything like Vista did, and coming from a hardened XP pro fan, I have already migrated everything over to W7 RC1 within 24 hours of use!"

I've been telling you this since January ;)

Score:

Name withheld

lifethroughalens

12:07 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore lifethroughalens. Show Details Hide Details

Yeah, yeah...you were spot on! I was too nervous to ever fully commit to the early, torrent sourced beta versions for obvious reasons. As soon as I read that Windows will allow a 1 year test run on this RC I was right in there.

I think that's a really smart move, especially since a lot of their customers (like me) will be very sceptical about W7 after Vista proved to be such a pain in the proverbial and XP continued to be officially supported and very competent.

I certainly agree with you. No turning back now :)

Score:

Name withheld

Zeus

12:26 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Zeus. Show Details Hide Details

Loving the comments...2.4mb/s just to add...@Gordan I want my 50 mb, its not supported in my area yet DAM. Been using the beta since February and installed the RC on my Samsung NC10 netbook and work laptop. So far feels even more polished than the beta did. Will post more impressions as I use it.

Score:

Name withheld

Pbryanw

12:33 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Pbryanw. Show Details Hide Details

Just from a couple hour's use, I can't really see anything too wrong with the RC1. I wonder if there will be any changes between now and the final, gold version - it certainly seems polished enough already? The only slight niggle I have is that control panel seems to only take up a fraction of the screen space when first opened - at least on my 1080p monitor.

Score:

Name withheld

rav

3:10 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore rav. Show Details Hide Details

mine took about 4 hours. no rush tough. need to partition my drive first before installing. had the beta on the other laptop since it was released but now want it on my main machine.

Score:

Name withheld

Chocoa

4:44 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Chocoa. Show Details Hide Details

Iquote from a DEVICE article...

"Windows 7 release candidate Microsoft is giving away to everyone today has a nasty time bomb ticking inside it. Beginning on March 1, 2010, the operating system will begin shutting down every two hours. If you're using one of the beta versions of Windows 7, the hourly shutdown game starts much sooner, on July 1, 2009."

Take care guys.

Score:

Name withheld

Gordon394

5:48 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Gordon394. Show Details Hide Details

@Chocoa - you do realise I SPELL THIS OUT in this very story? You just restated something that's already there ;)

Score:

Name withheld

purephase

9:14 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore purephase. Show Details Hide Details

@ all the people with links to obscure tech sites warning of the hidden time bomb from March...

It's not exactly hidden. As Gordon says - he's got it in his article, and if you scroll down the RC frontpage on the MS site it explains exactly how and why it works like that.

I'm sure everyone's read it really - I mean it would be stupid to install a whole new experimental OS without reading the T&Cs... wouldn't it?

Score:

Name withheld

Alexa08

9:37 AM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alexa08. Show Details Hide Details

While it's true you did say it, you confusingly used the phrase "bi-hourly shutdowns will being on "

Score:

Name withheld

lifethroughalens

12:59 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore lifethroughalens. Show Details Hide Details

Must admit, I do feel irked that I won't be able to just buy a serial number from MS and convert the RC to a full retail version come 2010.

Having to download 30+ specific programs (and find all their activation keys), migrate outlook emails & contacts, codecs, AV/Firewall, network settings, photoshop plugins, browsers + favourites, themes, extensions & plugins and the tons of system updates, security updates, etc...all over again, takes days! Very inconsiderate!

@purephase "I'm sure everyone's read it really - I mean it would be stupid to install a whole new experimental OS without reading the T&Cs... wouldn't it?"

- Funny! ;)

Score:

Name withheld

Jesper

5:59 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Jesper. Show Details Hide Details

Once again I hear this praise of 64-bit, and every time I catch myself wondering why. I tried to use the 64-bit beta for a month or so and found it less then satisfactory. Especially since there are no programs at all that is 64-bit, well except 7-zip.

Instead of the benefits I found that updates came later to the 64-bit edition, often up to a week later, and some things worked not as well. As I recall there were problems with flash.

I have 4GB of ram on my computer, so technically it should be good idea to go 64-bit, I just find too many caveats, usually due to a lacking 64-bit adoption by users.

So, before I decide on making the jump. Give me some pros and cons of 64-bit. How does it help you in your day to day work.

I will download both anyway - just because they are free :D

Score:

Name withheld

Chris

6:45 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Chris. Show Details Hide Details

@Jesper - I couldn't argue that are many advantages to 64-bit, but the ability to address 4GB of RAM is a big one, particularly if you want to add more RAM months or years from now.

I've just installed Windows 7 7100 64-bit and a load of software without any major issues. I'm not sure the 64-bit version helps me 'in my day to day work', but it's certainly no hinderance either. I haven't had any problems with updates or compatibility with Flash and I managed to find all my drivers after some digging.

If you're still not sure, install the 32-bit version of 7100 and wait until release to install the 64-bit version. By that time, 64-bit support for Windows 7 should be in full swing.

Score:

Name withheld

smc8788

6:55 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore smc8788. Show Details Hide Details

@ Jesper

I've only been using the 64-bit version since the beta has been available. I don't really know why you're so displeased with it as I've found it fine. The 32-bit and 64-bit versions are exactly the same piece of software, just with different architectures, so a 64-bit OS doesn't offer you any new features that would 'help in day to day work'. Obviously the most fundamental difference you would notice would be the amount of memory your computer would be able to address, but other than you shouldn't be able to tell any difference between the two versions. There used to be an argument that games ran faster on a 32-bit OS, but they are more or less equal really. You are, however, wrong when you state that 'there are no programs at all that is 64-bit', as a number of applications, such as Photoshop CS4, have 64-bit versions.

It's been well documented that the 64-bit versions of XP were dogged by a number of software compatibility issues, but that was Microsoft's fault, not the fault of the 64-bit architecture. Now, the situation is much different. If you are purchasing a new OS in today's world and intend on using it for at least the next few years, you would be absolutely crazy not to opt for the 64-bit version. Ten, or even 5 years from now, no one will be using a 32-bit OS due to its technical limitations.

Score:

Name withheld

Jesper

8:37 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Jesper. Show Details Hide Details

Thanks for the feedback!

On second thought I believe the problems I experienced using the 64-bit beta was related to Google Chrome, which didn't work in Windows 7. This may have brought about a certain amount of scepticism as to the compatibility issues with software I use.

Anyway, colour me convinced, I will go with the 64-bit edition. At least it is better to know how it works when you can get it for free. Rather then shelling out €700 for the retail copy just to find it doesn't quite work with your preferred applications.

Score:

Name withheld

smc8788

11:18 PM on 6 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore smc8788. Show Details Hide Details

@ Jesper

You're dead right about Chrome being the problem. I've been using it (or at least trying to use it) in Windows 7 64-bit and I had so many problems with it that I had to switch to Firefox. It just seems to be completely incompatible with Windows 7 for some reason as I had the same problem in some of the earlier beta builds, and needs a workaround to get it to do anything at all. It's rather strange considering every single other piece of software that worked perfectly fine in Vista works just as well in Windows 7.

Score:

Name withheld

darkspark88

2:01 AM on 7 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore darkspark88. Show Details Hide Details

Slow connection here, took 4 hours to download. Went to sleep downloading, woke up and it's finished. However no DVD's on hand. :(

Score:

Name withheld

Ohmz

3:06 PM on 7 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ohmz. Show Details Hide Details

I'm running it in Virtualbox (32-bit) and for some reason I can only use 800x600 resolution as the next step up 1024x768 gets "pushed" down and I can't see the taskbar (my laptop is 1280x800 so who knows).

First off, it looks very similar to Vista, which is no bad thing. I like the look of Vista a lot it's just that I could never use all the effects because of my crappy PC.

I really like the new taskbar it's about time we can pin things to it and move things around! Took you long enough Microsoft! And the previews are realy nice this time around. Much more useful than the ones in Vista.

I didn't spend much time browsing the web, I looked around the os and really liked what I saw. Hopefully Microsoft doesn't bungle this one like they did with Vista. It seems snappier than Vista so maybe...

If it shapes up nicely, I may get off Ubuntu and back onto Windows. Although I'm going to wait a while and see what people think of the final version before I take the plunge. And no, I won't be taking the TR review very seriously after this disaster http://u.nu/9xk4

Score:

Name withheld

basicasic

6:06 PM on 7 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore basicasic. Show Details Hide Details

Not only will I not be taking the TR review of Windows 7 very seriously I won't be taking any review seriously. After the fawning hyperbole and hype gushed out by most review sites before and after the launch of Vista none of them have any credibility left. And its started again already.

A reality check from this website : http://www.pcworld.com/article/164485/windows_7_rc_benchmarks.html

Score:

Name withheld

Ohmz

3:05 AM on 8 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ohmz. Show Details Hide Details

@ basicasic, I agree with you a hundred percent. Although I would check out the comments on that PC World article. :)

Score:

Name withheld

Chris

3:35 PM on 8 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Chris. Show Details Hide Details

@basicasic: That PCWorld article is restricted to application performance, and there's more to using a computer than how fast your software works. It doesn't touch on the speed of disk access, network speed, boot up, shut down or hibernate times. Also, I don't think anyone expects 7 to be faster than XP, but this is the first OS I can remember from Microsoft that is actually faster than its predecessor, despite carrying additional features. No small feat.

Also, I don't think you can say that any reviewer that rated Vista highly now lacks credibility. Vista is better than XP in so many ways, with the major exception being performance. However, if your PC is up to scratch then performance is not really an issue, since it will easily run fast enough for all but the most pedantic users. After that, you're into a debate about mostly subjective issues. In so many quantifiable measures, Vista is a massive step up from XP, so why wouldn't reviewers rate it highly?

Having said that, there was a fair amount of hype and hyperbole surrounding the launch. That's just bad journalism.

Score:

Name withheld

Pbryanw

11:43 PM on 9 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Pbryanw. Show Details Hide Details

@Jesper - If you're still checking this thread, the Chrome 2 beta runs fine in Windows 7 x64 edition. Had the same problems as you with Chrome 1 but all working now with 2.

Score:

Name withheld

Frazoire

11:34 AM on 11 May, 2009

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Frazoire. Show Details Hide Details

Running it on a Dell XPS M1330 laptop - it does seem a bit more responsive and more stable than Vista but apart from that it doesn't seem much different, hard to justify asking existing Vista users to pay for just a bit of stability and better task bar. One downside is they've removed Inkball which my kids love and (after eventually finding a zip of it and downloading it) it doesn't seem to run very well in compatibility mode for either XP or Vista!

One annoying glitch I always had with Vista was that after users have logged in and out over 1 or 2 days it would eventually report an 'out of memory' error (I have 2GB) when trying to login, this problem still exists with Windows 7 the only fix is to reboot. I used to use OS X on a Macbook and I could login and out for weeks without ever rebooting, I had hoped Windows 7 would have fixed these memory leaks or whatever is causing it.

Score:

Please wait while we file your abuse report.

We're sorry. We were unable to report abuse at this time.

We limit the number of reactions an individual user can submit over a given period for quality reasons. You have currently reached that limit. Please try resubmitting your abuse report again later.

Comment is too long. Enter 500 characters or less.