Windows 7 7004; compatibility worries; performance beats Vista

completely agree with Nigel and Dzomlija

to me most programmers are getting lazier and lazier...

MS codes their OS with certain features enabled if your (DEP for one....)
and that makes some programs not work....
in the ideal world DEP would be running for every app...
that would almost thwart every malware (almost i say about 95% the rest would be web based/social engineered...)

this leads me to believe the that this is the only reason why we havent run our apps and most installations ala linux style (you know what i mean...lol)

i would think that if MS enforced this earlier the would have avoided the backlash that happened with vista...

me thinks that this backlash would have been better off early since mac's were insanely uneconomical even at those standards ( it was cheaper to build a comparable pc [well then again you cant compare since there different archictures but its still valid you can do much more with a comparibly priced pc] and it was compatible with 80% of most programs out there...)

but then again its not only the programmers fault...
its also MS's fault for not strictly enforcing these guidlines
also its the users fault for buying software that forces you to be admin (or make the program run with admin status) for some reason or another


just my 2 cents (now i have 8 cents...)

"

The only clue that Windows 7 beta 1 build 7000 is indeed a beta comes from About dialog of Windows Media Center, where the Windows 7 has the version build 6.1.7000.0 (winmain.win7beta.081212-1400). The build will expire on 02.07.2009.

Windows 7 beta 1 Build 7000 About Windows Media Player

http://www.blogsdna.com/1763/windows...creenshots.htm

NormCameron said:

"The only clue that Windows 7 beta 1 build 7000 is indeed a beta comes from About dialog of Windows Media Center, where the Windows 7 has the version build 6.1.7000.0 (winmain.win7beta.081212-1400). The build will expire on 02.07.2009.

Hello all.

I wonder if there's a small clue of the release date in this. If it's released on 7 January as some have said; that would put the expiration/re-arm date at (or before) 7 February.







Later Ted

correct it is july not feb.


@diamond i always try to delete the spaces before finishing posts that quote BFK

A fast way to not have to worry about it is to hit [CTRL] + [END] to get to the absolute end of the quotation - then you can start replying.

It's what I have to do when quoting BFK as well, along with a couple of others at other forums - it's not a big deal.

Seems to me that these dates are designed to be well past the release of the public beta and nothing else.

Gary

Yes, you're right. I can't keep the Int. date difference straight; even though I know better.

As far as the bottom "Later Ted" goes; I started doing it because that's how much space the post will take up anyway and now I'm too old to change.......Sorry for any inconvenience.















Later Ted

might as well make use of the extra space huh Barefoot??

as for the use of the builds and build dates...
i think this is a branch of the beta as the the build # has not changed that much..