Joe;

I for one, won't. Not that I am a Linux Fanboy or something. Like I said elsewhere, I am a Network Administrator, I deal with nothing but servers in my responsibility, primarily IIS, SQL 2008, .Net, SourceSafe, and the like.

For me, least since 2001-02, I went with the MS OS Server operating systems even for my own personal workstations since I am primarily dealing with only servers all the time. It made sense for me to go the "Super Workstation" route.

Started out with W2K Advanced Server, W2K3, and finally to the W2K8 x64 route and never looked back. Since I do not work directly with the client workstations, or support them directly, my world revolves around the Server OS extensively.

Even my own PC at home is W2K8 Enterprise x64 that I use even for gaming, music, office productivity, design and development applications, plus the heavy duty admin chores (remoting from home to my server farm)the MS Server path has been perfect for me. Even my laptop is W2K8 Enterprise for those times that I am on the road.

So no, I don't have the time or inclenation to beta-test Windows 7.

Does the Windows 7 beta come in a live CD or live USB variety? I'm guessing no, but please correct me if I'm wrong. I wouldn't mind taking a half hour or so to try out Windows 7, but it isn't worth trashing a perfectly good Ubuntu installation for that.

I did and had it installed on vmware fusion on top of my new MacBook. Windows 7 seems pretty good. The font rendering is indeed better than OSX's. I think Windows 7 somewhat blurred the difference between quicklaunch and your opened applications, which is a good thing because we don't really need both.

However, my installed crashed and the infamous BSOD flashed itself after approximately 15 minutes of usage. It's definitely not the best way to impress or rescue a Mac convert to be... I hope this doesn't happen too often

I have been using Windows 7 for 2 days and so far its been really good. Its a lot faster then Vista and a seems faster then windows xp. Haven't had any incompatibility problems or crashing problems.

Wait until you try recording TV shows (like last nights 24 premiere and W7 says you can only play it back on the computer you recorded it on. (Imagine what the VCR industry would have been like if that was the case?) You're going to love WTV files!

I was able to get W7 downloaded (both x86 and 64 bit) on Wednesday with no issues. I was not able to get my two install keys until Friday. But that was no show stopper. I installed the x86 first, on an older Toshiba laptop (P35-S629) I had. Only a P4 with 1gb ram. The clean install went without any issues, despite all the rumors about it only installing as an upgrade to Vista. I did/do have a video card issue though. Being the Toshiba is too old, the ATI 9700 in it is not supported with the ATI provided W7 beta drivers. But I did get the XP drivers to install. No 3D, and it locks hard on the perf. test during the graphics testing. But other than that, and even on sub-par hardware, I am pleased with the overall performance. It runs as well as XP Pro x86 did on this unit. I have Office installed and have worked in several doc and spreadsheets without issue.

As for the 64 bit version I have very little to report. I did get it clean installed on a desktop with an Intel Q9450 running at 2.66gh and 4 GB ram. The install and all drivers (after a hit or two on Windows Update) went smooth. I have only done some web browsing and played some tunes with media player. Of course on this box the performance is excellent. As fast or faster than the Vista Prem 64 I was running on it.

Upgrading to Win 7 didn't work for me, but a clean install worked fine. So far no issues. I have used Office 2007, Firefox, Warhammer online and Steam.

I was most impressed when after the install there was a new video driver available on Windows Update and it installed without a reboot.

Still deciding if I like the new taskbar in icon mode or classic mode. I really like that you can pin apps to it.

Seems about the same speed as Vista, but I have a pretty fast machine. E8500 8GB Ram. 64bit os.

I was able to download Win 7 32bit. Most of my hardware worked without drivers. My wireless card did not work, or my sound. Unable to get vista drivers to load. So far, my first impressions are, If you are familiar with Vista, you won't have many problems learning Windows 7. The install process seems longer, there is a period of a blank screen when you may think it's frozen, but I finally got to the desktop. With my quad core, it ran very good,and fast with 4mb of ram. Hopefully, by the time Win 7 is released to the public, their will be drivers available for most hardware. Most of my 32 bit software installed without problems including my firewall and antivirus programs.

Joe,

I was really hoping to see a report about windows 7 rather than listen to someone cry about how they picked up a virus through Gmail.
If you really knew how to use a computer then you would be using a email program that views emails in text before they are downloaded and lets you know if they have attachments or for that matter at least know if you were getting something you didn't want.

Please try to stick to the story you are writing.

Google Junky

was on the vista beta team, refused to use it, still use xp. i'm on the 7 beta team, too, and i think this is much better. 7 is much faster than vista.

there are some things i don't like, don't know if they’re bugs or a design changes:

folders all open sized as the last one re-sized. i like to have each folder open sized the last time i opened it..

Can’t put the ie icon on the desktop, even with registry hack

but i think the lack of a bundled mail client is going to cause an uproar.
windows live mail is ok, but there are still issues.
i don't like each mail account having individual set of folders.
don't like that it only the from column is bold for new messages, instead of all columns.
it doesn't bold the folder in the folder pane, either.
there's no “views bar”
only pastel color schemes

there are some improvements over windows mail:
spell check checks the subject
autocorrect with spelling error notifications as you type
auto-complete addressing from your address book rather than just the last 25 from the registry

but, i could use it, that's more than i could say for vista.

I downloaded the 32-bit beta and have had no trouble using it on my aluminum MacBook with Boot Camp.

As a dedicated Mac user, I nevertheless have to agree that the new taskbar/dock thingy is better than not only the old Windows taskbar, but even better than the original Dock

This is what worries me and has so far kept me from installing the beta- everything looks shiny at first. Early Vista betas? Looked great. People were saying that it was as fast as or faster than XP. Great compatibility. No issues. Then Microsoft "fixed" it, like they always seem to do with things that work. Added things, removed things, basically making something that looked very different from the early version.

I'm not saying that this doesn't look polished and very promising, but I think that we need to see some more betas and even a release candidate before we get hopeful.

I know, I'm a "glass half empty" kind of person.

It's ironic <http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3317> that Microsoft is distributing its new software in a format that Windows doesn't actually know how to handle. You have to buy or download some third-party utility or other before you can make a DVD out of it.

And the sheer size of the download just seems unnecessary. Linux distros long ago figured out how to offer much more full-featured installers in just a few hundred megabytes. How? Because all the rest remains in official repositories on the Internet, to be pulled down only as users ask for it.

This is something Microsoft desperately needs to learn how to do: create a modular, agile, extensible operating system. The days of gargantuan, lumbering monoliths are past; the fact that Windows 7 seems to be just another one of these does not bode well.

I downloaded the 64-bit beta and have been using it as my main PC for two days. I installed it clean. I've got to say I've been using Microsoft products since Win 3.1. This is without a doubt the best that has come from them. I've been using Vista 64 and it was simply a nightmare, it was like when Win 95 first came out, maybe it'd crash, maybe it wouldn't.

7 faster, much more stable and the new taskbar is much more intuitive. Minor issues with Media Center I'm sure will get ironed out. Thumbs up for this one, it's a keeper.

I'm running AMD FX 60 (socket 939) w/ATI's X1950 video card, 3GB of RAM.

The whole system is running as smooth as silk. I'm very pleasantly suprised.

I'm an old dude, I'd actually read the Popular Science article about the Altair back in the 60's when it came out and I've been evaluating software for many years. I predict this one will put Microsoft a few notches ahead again. Kudos to Ballmer and the developers.

Installed Windows 7 32bit on a Dell Latidute
D620 with 2gb of RAM, and the system is smoking. Installation took under 30 minutes.

The startup and shutdown is the most impressive since Windows 3.1 of yesteryear.

Sleep mode is so responsive that I am @ shock.

The new Action Center is well thought out, and I like the small tweaks like sorting Wifi connection by strongest signal. Simple but so effective.
The freek downloads of Anti Virus Trials is a great move, using Norton 360 on the laptop.

The new taskbar takes a day or two to get used to it, but now it feells like and old friend.

Search is working great, and the new Library feature just works.

The new Device Manager is worthy addition.

Homegroups made it easy to share with other computers in my house.

And I love to stream music or video to my Xbox 360 using the media player.

So far so good.

I have no interest in downloading it especially after hearing Bill's comments on being only play back video files on the computer that you recorded it on.

Is that the norm for Windows 7 now? Or is it a glitch? What are WTV files? Or is it WTF files?

If that is true, that alone will be a deal killer for some media fans. Didn't MSFT learn its mistakes from Vista and the mass rejection of DRM by the public?

Good Luck Microsoft, you are going to need it.

"If you're one of the lucky downloaders."

We're talking about participating in a marketing scheme for crying out loud. I bet the marketeers are real happy that they have fanboys going gaga over what is a service pack to Vista that basically strips things out of the predecessor. That's some innovation they got going on there.

AMD 64 3500 with 2GB memory and 2 x 350GB disks and an ATI x1600 Pro 256MB memory

Did a clean install of 64 bit OS
Install ran fine no problems
Boots reasonably fast
Installed ATI Vista video drivers and they run fine
AVG under 64 bit has major problems de-installed and put in Kasperkey AV which runs fine

General Opinions:
================

Interface is clunky does not seem intuitive to me
Machine feels slightly slow compared to XP
UAC seems to be better than VISTA
Aero interface is slow and clunky compared to my Mac
Most software so far seems to work OK

Using 7 since Saturday morning and not the least bit impressed since it took all of the things I don't like about Vista and made them worse. I would like to thank MS for the download saving me the money I would otherwise waste buying this abortion later. How come it reminds me of Mr. Creosote?

I installed the 32-bit version on an old AJP laptop (rebadged Asus M6NE, 1.7MHz Pentium M, 2GB RAM, ATI 9700 64MB graphics).
Install was quick & easy, and Office 2007 installed without a problem. It feels quicker than Vista did - subjectively it feels quick as a new ASUS M50 in general use (ie surfing, email, Excel & Word)

However SQL Server 2008 caused a few issues. Half way through the first install, I changed the power management from Balanced to High Performance. The installation just stopped. The next attempt got through to the end before complaining about the WMI service. I eventually googled this to needing IIS set up for one of the SQL Server components. 3rd time lucky.

I still need to try Visual Studio and a few other tools before I can try testing any of my applications. But so far I'm pretty happy.

I installed Windows 7 on my main desktop. The upgrade was long (i had heard the installation was fast?) but otherwise fine.

After installing I noticed that my creative suite 3 no longer worked, I needed to reactivate it. I haven't yet (can't find the serial :) but when I do I hope it works, or I am dead! Office works fine.

IE has crashed a few times, specially when using blacboard software from my school (it is java or javascript heavy).

Media Center crashes everytime when trying to play old recorded shows but other than that i really like it. the free tv shows are useless and the ad that comes with every play is super annoying, but I installed my digital antenna and I am very happy with the high def tv (i have no cable).

My computer is fairly old but I have never had this happen before... the DVD drive does not work... this just cracked me up... i mean dvd drive? I am not mad though, because I realized how few times I actually use it. Also, it has been a strong enough reason to finally get the SATA blueray drive! Hope that works with 7.

I also installed 7 on my sister's laptop (used as desktop). It had xp no i needed to do a clean install. My sister hates it but I love it. I have set it so she cant use the computer after 11 till 4 :) I think she actually slept at 11:30 yesterday and not at 2 or 3 like everyday before that.

Wow has been long. So far I have had many hits... but weirdly enough I have come to just accept it and a part of OS life! But I have to say the GUI just makes me happy and so I am overall positive.

I installed Windows 7 on my main desktop. The upgrade was long (i had heard the installation was fast?) but otherwise fine.

After installing I noticed that my creative suite 3 no longer worked, I needed to reactivate it. I haven't yet (can't find the serial :) but when I do I hope it works, or I am dead! Office works fine.

IE has crashed a few times, specially when using blacboard software from my school (it is java or javascript heavy).

Media Center crashes everytime when trying to play old recorded shows but other than that i really like it. the free tv shows are useless and the ad that comes with every play is super annoying, but I installed my digital antenna and I am very happy with the high def tv (i have no cable).

My computer is fairly old but I have never had this happen before... the DVD drive does not work... this just cracked me up... i mean dvd drive? I am not mad though, because I realized how few times I actually use it. Also, it has been a strong enough reason to finally get the SATA blueray drive! Hope that works with 7.

I also installed 7 on my sister's laptop (used as desktop). It had xp no i needed to do a clean install. My sister hates it but I love it. I have set it so she cant use the computer after 11 till 4 :) I think she actually slept at 11:30 yesterday and not at 2 or 3 like everyday before that.

Wow has been long. So far I have had many hits... but weirdly enough I have come to just accept it and a part of OS life! But I have to say the GUI just makes me happy and so I am overall positive.

Oh and I forgot to say... not sure if any one noted this... but the fonts folder has been improved... the icons actually give the previews of the fonts! I think linux already does it... but I was really happy to see it. Simple but very helpful!

They claim to have fixed it on the blog, yet.This is the message I get when I attempt to download the Beta.

"An unknown error occurred while processing your request. This is most likely due to a connection failure. Please try again."

I know Bit Torrent represents OSS, However it was invented for this scenario exactly.

Works fine on my old laptop (4+ years?) - 1Ghz and 1GB of ram (upgraded a year ago).

No Aero due to the old video card but otherwise everything works really well.

Nice that wordpad now supports opening & saving DOCX and ODT (OpenOffice!) files.

Trying to get the beta on friday was kinda fustrating. Downloaded it from an alternate site Friday night and got an activation code Saturady when they resumed downloads.

Installation was a snap. It would have been nice if they had the new free security suite they're releasing this summer on it. I got AVG and it worked fine. I installed acronis home image backup solution and made a restore image in case I break this thing.

Notes: Posting this from a Windows 7 loaded fujitsu life book. 1.5 GB Ram with a 1.83 ghz duo core centrino processor.

Boot time very fast. And overall the system is very responsive. All of my hardware was recognized. My wireless Lan card works flawlessly.

Internet explorer 8 beta works better on this machine now than when it had vista ultimate loaded. They must have optimized the code. Or maybe something I'd installed earlier caused it to dork up.

I like the new toolbar and Aero Snap features.
I think some long time windows users will hate it though. People hate change.

Office performance is nice. No real problems there.

Problem areas: playing some videos from a network location causes BSOD. Playing them locally works fine. (weird)Networking just works. No muss no fuss setup. One weird thing is that I have to re-enter my credentials for access to mapped drives whenever I log in even though I told the system to remember them.

I still have a few applications to try out but overall I'm impressed.

Final notes: If you have vista and like it. Save your money. The improved interface and tamer customizable UAC are nice but not worth the upgrade hassle or money. You may get improved performance and boot times though.

If you hate vista and are tired of XP and aren't quite ready to buy a Mac in fustration, then I think this OS will go along way in addressing some of the things you hated in vista.

If you have an older machine do yourself a favor and leave it be. Sure 7 will perform nicely on it. But the driver model is the vista model. In other words there may not be a compatible driver for some of your gear.

For myself I will be buying a 7 loaded laptop when it's released. And I'm testing 7 today at work in a VMWare guest system. If it works well there I'll probably start rolling it out to my business users. (Vista runs dog slow in VM)

Windows 7 is not much different than Vista. If you like Windows 7 but not Vista then you're one of those people who dislikes Vista solely on the name. The performance of Windows 7 may be better than that of Vista under benchmarking but the general feel of the two are indistinguishable on my test system (a Pentimu 4 3GHz with 1GB RAM...an older system).

To "Google Junky":

I am going way "off topic", as you accuse Joe of doing but then do yourself:

You are suggesting that Gmail users are not safe using the service as it is presented in a Web window, but should use an "email program that views emails in text before they are downloaded and lets you know if they have attachments or for that matter at least know if you were getting something you didn't want."

So Gmail, as we see it in a Web window, is not a safe e-mail program? Shouldn't Google share this fact with us, Google Junky? I would really like to know, as a Gmail user.

I guess it's good for Google's PR that Joe only mentioned this in passing and not in a separate, more focused blog post, isn't it?

Candy

I have 7 installed on an old MacBook running under VMWare.

The response is as expected but it appears like a slightly altered Vista...

I notice that M$oft isn't bragging about anything specific, so my first reaction was "Oh! thats it?"

I guess this is the future of desktop PC's wether we like it or not.

Not impressed at first, but we'll see.

I got it downloaded ok. I installed it as a new Windows install rather than upgrading what was already on the machine (previously my Win2008 test server). Installed fine. When it came up and running I was rather disappointed because it looks exactly like Vista! From running its a bit better than Vista, in that I tend to only get one UAC message when something happens (like I ask it to install a program) rather than several. Seems like a number of gratuitous UI changes to annoy experienced users as usual. Don't like the removal of titles from the task bar icons, now its not clear what's running, and what is a quick start icon. Added odds and ends utilities like a post it notes thingy. Removed the rather pointless side bar. Otherwise when running programs the look and act like this did on Vista. I'm running on a very plain Dell, so no fancy hardware to test, so no driver problems. Has run for a couple of days without crashing so far (Vista would crash about every 2 days on this machine, Win2008 never crashed).

I guess we should expect this to be a very minor upgrade, since this is really just a product name change to try and shed some of the (deserved) negative stigma around Vista. I don't think this will win over any XP lovers, and might even annoy Vista users due to the minor interface changes.

I must admit I was nervously excited about Windows 7, hoping that it would be what Vista was supposed to be.
And yet, it seems ... well ... fine.
I'm scouring the web and most reviews are about the same. Sigh.
Also unfortunately I'm seeing that there are a number of bloggers having troubles (some are noted in this comment section).
I was hoping for a home run, but it seems Windows 7 is merely a base hit.
Bummer.

Oh and on a side note. They did away with the gimped backup and defrag utilities in vista. Customizable backup and scheduling Defrag is back.

I installed Windows 7 last night x64 on a Gigabyte ep45 ds3r motherboard - 4gb RAM - Nvidia 8800 GT. Went very smoothly, I did have to change my user control setting from all the way off to on in order to get Gadgets to to work and install a patch for MP3s to go. Networking with a Mac seems to be a bit of a nightmare, and I can't see my Mac shares via W7 yet and there is no easy way to do this, unless I missed something. This was a piece of cake in Vista.

Overall impression? Aside from the share issue, this is where Vista should have been. This is more of a sideways step for MS than a forward step...

Downloaded it, burned the DVD, ran the installation....but it refused to go past the selection of the installation partition. It said it could not locate a system drive or partition.

I was loading it, or trying to, onto a new 500GB SATA drive.

I have given up!!

At least the Vista beta installed; this one is a dead loss!!

You can read my review at the following link:
www.activewin.com/reviews/previews/windows7beta/

Microsoft has done a really good job with this release.

OT: I bought a 13.3 inch Vaio laptop in June of 2005. Joe, if your experience is anything like mine, you'll be loving that machine years after you've forgotten the pain of its high price. I usually replace computers after 2 years, 3 at most, but I can't bring myself to replace that old lappy - I don't know what a new machine could offer me that I'd like any better.

I guess if I have to comment about 7, I'd say it's the best install experience ever. A complete install into a VM with only 1 GB of RAM took about a half hour. I'm sure I'll have more to say after I've played with it a little.

Where is the dual pane Windows Explorer? Explorer in XP looks better and is easier to view. Safe removal of hardware still not up to scratch (got to use 'unlocker'), what used to take 1 or 2 clicks in XP now takes 3-5 in Windows 7 (eg LAN connection status), prefetch still grabs MY RAM rather than letting the user choose what apps to cache (turn it off!!), too many control panel icons!!!, I keep reverting back to 'classic skin' because the 'aero skin' makes the screen hard too view (too much eye candy), classic skin is terrible (give us XP classic skin or W2k pro), that's all so far!

@Andre.

Very good review and pretty much on the money with my experiences

Oh and by the way 7 works very well in VM. Looks like my company finally has an upgrade path.

Now let's hope they clear up that WMP Bsod thingee. That's a deal breaker.

Be cautious about the W7 download. It doesn't accept my motherboard drivers or my Sound Blaster Xfi drivers. So, it is running slow and without sound. It is nice to see what is up their sleeves. Once these problems are fixed, I think it will be a nice OS.

@Andre Da Costa :

1. It's a beta not a release
2. Are you implying that Microsoft doesn't always do a really good job.

As always with an OS I'll delay installing until it's retail and SP1 has been bedded down. I understand why a business might want to do beta testing on an OS - deployment planning, understanding the support, user training and development implications, impact assessment on installed hardware base etc etc. But I don't understand why an individual would bother, at least prior to the release candidate stage of "beta testing" - there is only so much that you can do with an OS.

@ Andre

Enjoyed reading your review.

I downloaded using Mepis 8 Linux and Seamonkey, but I had to show the code on the page and paint the url and paste it into the browser and then download because the download button would not work.

I see chairs flying now:)

The download ran at 280 mbs on DSL once it started.

i got the blue screen of after about 5 hours and havnt had it since :P

@Andre Da Costa;

"We have finally reached that critical mile stone in the development of Microsoft’s next major desktop release of Windows, BETA 1!"

I am wondering, sir, what precisely do you do at Microsoft, with the creation of Windows 7?

The reason I asked, is that I went to your (extremely) unedited article and read through it. I certainly appreciated the time and energy that you put into the article. I must say that I did not completely read everything you wrote, and I would suggest that you take an hour or two and polish up your research and comments to make it a an easier read in which, everyone would benefit from.

Personally, what I have read and understood, it seems that many folks out here may benefit greatly from the new rendition. As for me, as I stated earlier in this article's comments, I do not plan to ever migrate down to a Windows Desktop OS. However, I hope that those seeking a better desktop OS finds satisfaction with Windows 7.

What a Windows 7 BSOD Looks Like
http://i.gizmodo.com/5129919/our-first-windows-7-bsod
We've been fiddling around with the Windows 7 Beta for a few days, but just now finally run into that old friend of Windows users: the blue screen of death. It looks the same.

--------
Well, we could wait to MS improve it.

But seriously, I do not see why I could change XP or ubuntu for it.

Been using the beta for several days now. The whole BSOD issue with WMP 12 mysteriously stopped. (WTF?) Watched several hour long videos in xvid, mpeg, and WMV formats with no crash.

Using the interface is sort of addictive. I lovvvvvvvvvvvvvve aero snap. I don't think I can say that enough. Working with open apps is much improved. Hibernation works well too. And the battery last longer due to the screen dimming feature.

As a primary windows user maybe I have low standards but I'm sold. If microsoft had released this instead of vista they wouldn't be LOL'ed at so hard.

Now one thing still get's me. You can easily function at user level. You only get asked for the admins password when installing apps. So why in god's name does Microsoft still make the first user account you create Admin? Boggle. Sometimes I wonder If they'll ever get it.

Joe Wilcox the MS Watch manager says:
"I would have upgraded on Wednesday night or sometime Thursday, but my main test machine caught a nasty virus."

WOW! (the wow starts now) What does this mean when the guy that writes MS Watch gets a virus, and with Vista updated, most likely running OneCare and Windows Defender? Joe, was UAC turned off? If so, that tells us something, that UAC was even too painful or not good enough to protect the computer from a virus. Instead of blaming the virus on google Joe, why not place the blame where it belongs, on Microsoft.

What can you say when even Joe can't seem to get away from viruses even on the so called "most secure windows ever."

So here is the question, is there any more security in Windows Seven than Vista, and would it have prevented Joe's virus?

After reading this I saw that it seemed a little harsh to Joe. What I meant Joe, was that if you who as a Windows user, have lots more knowledge than the average user, cannot protect your Vista computer from viruses, what are we to expect for others? Also, if for some reason you turned off UAC in Vista, then what does this say about UAC in Vista being too much trouble?

UAC won't do Jack even if it's on if you run as administrator and blindly click on every notification.

I run vista protected by one care and i run at user level. I've had my system for several years now and haven't gotten even so much as piece of spyware.

You guys assume Joe knows what he's doing because he writes a blog?

Funny.

UAC won't do Jack even if it's on if you run as administrator and blindly click on every notification.

I run vista protected by one care and i run at user level. I've had my system for several years now and haven't gotten even so much as piece of spyware.

You guys assume Joe knows what he's doing because he writes a blog?

Funny.

Oh and in Joe's defense.

I don't use any of Google's perpetually beta cloud apps. Maybe if I did I'd be ate up with crudware too.

at NKnow :
Thanks for explaining that "UAC won't do Jack even if it's on if you run as administrator." But in Joe's defense, isn't this how we would expect him to run it? After all, Joe is in the business of reviewing software, Microsoft software, and this is how its going come setup by default, am I correct?

Nknow, I never thought of GMail as being the cloud, but guess you right. Wonder what kind of mail application by Microsoft comes with Vista, and if Joe used that to get his email (virus).

So after all this, Windows is still not secure.

@Repugnant.

No.... Joe ISN'T supposed to run as Admin. No one should. Mac and Linux users don't run as admin by default. Even with UAC toned way down most morons will still run as admin because they don't want to be prompted for a password to make an admin level change (Like Mac users do.)These same people don't perform regular backups. Won't even think to install anti-malware, and wouldn't know a phishing filter from their own butts. No OS can prevent people from being uninformed dumbasses.

And NO computer that connects to the internet is secure. You simply have differing degrees of risk. Security is a matter of process and practice. I wonder how many people encrypt their mobile computing devices or Laptops when they contain sensitive info? (most don't. I do.) Operating at user level severely limits what malware can do once it infects a computer. In fact it absolutely stumps some malware from installing itself in the first place. And seriously did you REALLY expect some major security break through with 7? No one else did. If 7 isn't secure enough to meet you needs don't use it. I'm thinking you won't be using it. "After all this time windows is still not secure"

DUHHHHHHHHR. NO shit Mr. Holmes.

to Know :
"No.... Joe ISN'T supposed to run as Admin. No one should. Mac and Linux users don't run as admin by default."

But if this is so, then why did Microsoft set up these computers as Admin by default? Got you there, didn't I? That is how everyone is running it as I have seen. So I do not see where Joe is doing anything wrong by testing it out as it comes, do you?

And yes, I probably will not get a windows seven computer, if I can prevent that.

Joe should know better.

He's been around the Internet as long as any of us. And any dummy with a Google search bar can find "Best Practices" for operating a computer. Why does Microsoft not make the initial user User by default. Well I don't know. You'll have to ask them. Maybe it's so the initial system admin can go in and create users that operate at USER level and then USE them without a lot of hassle.

Or maybe it's because the mouth breathing morons out there who still think windows 98 was the best os EVAR will complain about having to take a few extra steps to protect themselves on the internet.

UAC, Anti-Malware, File system protection,..... yadda yadda. There is no protection from WILLFUL ignorance. I'm betting that half those people would pitch a bitch if they had to enter a password to change system properties. (Something I do on Mac from time to time.) And a lot of them probably use a blank password on their admin level account.

If someone get's a nasty virus and they took precautions I really do feel sorry for them. But I support PCs and Macs for a living and 99% of the people who bring me infected machines don't even have Anti-Malware software loaded or don't keep it updated. And oh yeah.... After I CREATE them a user level account, copy their profiles over to the new account and give them best practices operating advice? They ignore me.... So nertz to em.

@NKnow :
I read your comments with great interest. Finially somebody who know how to setup a windows computer properly it seems. Thank you for that brief bit of sanity here on MS Watch.

But I would say, that there are many reasons that MS does not setup their windows with limited users accounts, as you probably know. A great many programs will not run as a limited user, and the interface to run those apps as administrator is clunky to say the least, if not dysfunctional. MS would have been better off fixing, improving, this user interface to get the limited user account working easier, not to be confused with User Account control. That would have been something if they had done that.

NKnow, the fact is, 99% of windows users use windows as it is setup by default, with that administrator account. And most of them like the previous commenter, do not have a clue as why its wrong. Only in corporations or large businesses do I see the limited user accounts being used. Sadly windows Seven is not fixing this, and is just mostly more eye candy, who really wanted a new taskbar.

But Repugnant does sort of have one point, Joe is only reviewing MS software, the same way everyone (almost, except its seems you and I) runs it.

Dear Joe,

I downloaded Windows 7 about mid day Saturday. I had no problems at all downloading. I put it on my test machine (A 2.0 gig Celeron with 750 MB of ram). I am quite pleased with Windows 7 to this point. I haven't used it a great deal, but it seems to work just fine for getting on the internet getting around in the control panel settings, etc. I haven't seen any problems yet, like I did when Vista first came out. Obviously it will take more memory than I have on that machine to make it work well, but as for now, I am very happy with Windows 7!

@Chips.

Really can't defend Microsoft with any of this. But it's not just their fault. In this day and age Application developers should know better. You can't simply lay the blame at Microsoft's door. I run most of my apps at user level and have no problems running in that mode. Applications that don't run at that level quickly find themselves discarded.

As for those 99% of people who run with default settings god bless em.... but You pays your ticket you takes your ride.

MS should just bite the bullet and lock the next version of windows down. They have to rush 7 out the door, and it simply has to work. They're playing catch-up after that Vista debacle. The next version really needs to take into consideration that people just aren't security savvy. They new to work with application designers to get into the modern (I&*@&(&*)ing age and be honest with people about what will or won't work. Until they do they'll always be at a loss when it comes to matters of security.

@ NKnow :
"Really can't defend Microsoft with any of this. But it's not just their fault.
MS should just bite the bullet and lock the next version of windows down. They have to rush 7 out the door, and it simply has to work. They're playing catch-up after that Vista debacle. The next version really needs to take into consideration that people just aren't security savvy."
----------------------------------------------------
How can I disagree with you, I can't, as you have nailed it.

There is an old guy here in this town who does a lot of the malware cleaning and repairs (as well as me). While we are competitors, we also get along. But he is a bit set in his ways. And even he, runs his Windows machines in Administrator Mode. He refuses to run or type passwords as a limited user. Even though he knows its safer.

I find its actually easier, to convert users to Linux, than to get Windows users to run as a limited user, even if I offer to show them how, for free. There seems to be a mindset out there with windows user, (at least the ones I know) that running as Administrator is the way to go, and is correct way. Sadly, as you and I know, that is not the case. So yes, its not all completely MS fault, just about 99% of it is MS fault. This is the company that when you install it sets itself up as Administrator right out of the box. Also, the number of windows users, that have any knowledge of running as a limited user, is tiny. Just like asking how many install anti-malware in addition to anti-virus, not the majority, is my guess.

Windows Seven will not be a great improvement in security over previous versions of Windows, so it seems so far. And as far as the "next" version of windows, locking down the limited user account and offering better malware/virus protection, don't count on it. This malware problem in windows has been ongoing now since Windows 95 came out, and Micro$oft has failed, to do anything meaningful about it. Its always going be fixed in the next version if you listen to the ravings of this company.

One things for sure. M$ won't do much about it until their market share takes a serious hit.

Windows Defender is a step in the right direction, and I hear that a free-variant of one care was going to be released. (Obvious ploy to get people to subscribe to windows live)

On the coporate side APP locker is coming. A sort of application white listing system. Apps and processes that aren't white listed simply will not run.

But none of that will matter if Micrsoft doesn't lock down their platform. The default Admin-User crap has to go.

@ All of you people. Who are off topic.

Stop attacking Joe for his use of Windows. First "Google Happy" or whatever accuses him of not running Gmail in another program and getting a virus, then you all accuse him of running it in another program, then he's supposed to change his administrative stuff.

Yes, I am just an ordinary Gmail user, on an ordinary Windows, like most people. So what you're saying is that Gmail isn't safe unless you're a guru. Or if you are a Guru. Not safe for millions of Windows users.

Also, I am an ordinary tech watcher and I know that people get paid big money to "monitor company's brand identity" online and defend that company against all else. It's obvious people are attacking Microsoft and defending Google, and despite how you reply to this post, I am sure you have more than a little vested interest in doing just that, even if it's not money, for some reason.

But if you don't want to make people afraid of Gmail, unfortunately, you've done so. Now stop attacking Joe. I have no vested interest in him or Microsoft, but I am annoyed by this nonsense and may drop Gmail. Thank you.

Bill says :

"Wait until you try recording TV shows (like last nights 24 premiere and W7 says you can only play it back on the computer you recorded it on. (Imagine what the VCR industry would have been like if that was the case?) You're going to love WTV files!".........

Ugh! So it sounds like Microsoft has turned up the DRM in Seven if this is correct. Not surprising, as most TV cards flat out would not even work with Vista, and you had to buy new ones. This is reason enough to just say not to microsoft and never use their crud again. The older tv cards will still work with XP and some alternative systems, but unless you hooked up to a satellite box, you will most likely need a digital converter soon.

@Candice L :
I don't think anybody was off topic here, they were discussing microsoft, after all. The only post that I seen that was maybe a little harshly worded towards Joe, was the one where he should be using a text based program to get his email. Actually, that was good advice, for any web based email, even others than Gmail. Most likely you going have the same viri problems that Joe did, with the other services as well.

Joe, however, as some pointed out, reviews software, and its usually Microsoft software. So we would expect Joe to review it in a way that it comes by default, and the way that the average user is going use it too. And that is, exactly what Joe did, and is also the reason that he got that virus. Its not the fault of Gmail as he might think, or others would like to blame it on, its the fault of Microsoft for having defaults that are not save to use on the internet, and never fixing it.

Now, here is a 100% solution for you to get 100% safe email, use a Linux live cd, and boot up with that and get your web based email with that. Viruses cannot write to a closed CD, and they are targeted towards Windows anyway secondly.

@Candice.

Lady you crack me up. You defend G-Mail and tell us to lay off Joe.... when it's Joe who crapped on G-Mail in the first place.

I like it having installed it on a Shuttle K45 barebones it is very fast. My trouble has been with the lack of a mail program. I tried Windows Live Mail and on two of my Vista computers it crashes Vista when I leave Live Mail open.
I did not have the same problem with Windows 7 but am troubled that Microsoft is still having trouble with this Live stuff.

I really like this version of windows. So far it seems quicker and cleaner than Vista. My only issue is that my Lexmark wireless printer will not work, even when plugged to a USB port. Windows 7 says that the document is sent to the printer but it just stays in the que with no error or anything. If anyone have sugestions for a work around or anything let me know please.

I downloaded 32 bit version and installed on a home PC with Core II, 4Gigs, ATI x1300, Intel DG965WH MoBo First time I tried installing a vista version of Symantec AV 10.2 and machine repeatedly BSOD'd. Could not get rid of it. Wiped partition and re-installed it and used AVG AV free edition and now it works very reliably.

I am pleased with performance and drivers, did not need any even for my Hauppauge HVR-1600 TV card. Media center found all HD and regular channels, downloaded guides and works flawlessly. Remote server maintenance software still works. Everything I didn't like about Vista is gone.

I also installed on an older PC, P4-3.0, Intel D865PERL MoBo, 1 gig ram, Nvidia FX5200 128M, and it runs in fast full aero mode. This PC was so slow when I tried vista.

I thing MS has a winner here.