Posted on 04/23/2009 12:25:37 PM PDT by aft_lizard
New build hasn't been leaked to torrents -- yet
Microsoft's Windows 7 is perhaps one of the most hotly anticipated tech products of the year. Its beta builds have thus far showcased both polish and Microsoft's willingness to improve and take constructive criticism. Microsoft has over 2,000 planned bug fixes for the Release Candidate phase, and recent builds have given users just a taste of the promising new OS's potential.
Hot on the heels of the leak of RC build 7077 to the torrent world earlier this month, Microsoft has delivered a major milestone build to OEM partners and TAP gold customers. Microsoft reportedly compiled the new build, 7100.0.winmain_win7rc.090421-1700 (build 7100, for short), on Tuesday, and has already began distribution.
While some are likely eagerly awaiting the build to hit torrents, for home testing, Microsoft may actually beat leakers to the punch. Microsoft announced via its Partners page plans to launch a semi-public distribution of the release candidate by May 5th to MSDN/TechNet customers. The official release will invariably also be shared by these customers over torrent. The 7100 build seems a likely target for the release.
There's potential, though, that the posting could be a mistake, as a Microsoft Online Chat Concierge spokesperson commented, "Currently the Windows 7 RC has not been available through the TechNet subscription yet, only the Microsoft OEM partners such as Dell, Siemens are taking part in the RC's this period of test."
Regardless, whenever DailyTech get its hands on release candidate 7100, a features update piece can be expected. Until then, like the rest of community, we have to wait and see.
You do know that runs on top of the NT kernel - don’t you?
*Recent versions of Windows NT for 64-bit architectures, including Windows XP Professional x64 Edition (x86-64), Windows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64), Windows Server 2003 (x64) and Windows Vista (x64), no longer include the NTVDM; so they are unable to run 16-bit DOS or Windows applications. This is because an x64 CPU in its full 64 bit mode cannot go to virtual mode without a hard reset; Virtual mode is not part of the x64 specification, the CPU needs to be running in x86 mode.*
BUMP.
All of my non-profits are converted to Linux, and more would like to come on with me to get a similar conversion. It is my unfortunate circumstance to be a one-horse tech shop, and I do tech work for non-profits that I support free of charge... So demand is always very high, and I cannot serve them all.
But free OS and free tech seems to suit non-profits best of all.
3. They blew it in the early 90s by telling Dave Cutler to redesign his OS around a 32-bit version of the Windows 3.0 API.
They could have had a great OS if they’d let Cutler do his genius, but Bill wanted to leverage the popularity of Windows 3.x into NT. It worked insanely great from a business standpoint, but it sucked from a technical standpoint, and Microsoft products are suffering for it to this day.
What is a good source for low cost memory?
I got them from CDW.com. I normally don’t order from them but newegg didn’t carry this product at the time I ordered it.
http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT25672AA800
DDR2 PC2-6400 • CL=6 • Unbuffered • ECC • DDR2-800 • 1.8V • 256Meg x 72
4 Crucial memory - 2 GB - DIMM 240-pin - DDR2 1451518 $25.99 $103.96
I used cmd.exe as one of many pieces of evidence that there’s still tons of DOS under the covers (and not so under the covers) of Windows.
In some ways the entire system is still running on DOS. Obviously there’s been a lot of stuff added, but a lot of the core logic (and core problems) come straight from DOS. Most of the security and memory management issues Windows has stem straight from its DOS roots. Yeah they kludges stuff on to handle 8 gigs of RAM and 4 cores, but that’s all superglued bells and whistles, the heart is still DOS. Whether you can admit it or not.
For normal memory newegg.com is a good place. I like the crucial ram - it have been very reliable for me and comes with a lifetime warranty.
Do you understand that has nothing to do with what I’m saying? Do you understand what’s under the covers of the NT Kernel is antique DOS code? The only bubble bursting is the one of people that think NT was completely new from the ground up. MS advertised it that way, but they lied like rugs, and everything that’s been added to the NT kernel is just adding more stuff to that original DOS and VMS core.
But cmd.exe isn’t a dos application and DOS had no security model, no memory protection, and very limited memory management.
You really need to read this book - http://www.alibris.com/search/books/qwork/3245424/used/Inside%20Windows%20NT
Because you are simply making yourself look foolish.
I didn’t say it’s a DOS application. i said it’s part of the ongoing evidence of DOS’s continued existence and influence in Windows. You really need to read what I write and stop responding to stuff I didn’t because it’s making you look like a person who just can’t admit simple reality. If you think Windows isn’t carrying DOS baggage you’re simply delusional.
How is a 32/64 bid application - written from the ground up - evidence of a dos heritage?
Do you think that sh/bash/zsh show that Unix/linux has a dos heritage too?
I really am surprised that you haven’t brought up c: d: e:f: yet.
Certainly adds to the confusion though... Windows "7" is actually Windows version 6.1
Do you have any sources that state that DOS is a part of the NT Kernal? I’ve shown you a couple entries that show that DOS is not resident on WinNT forward, and that DOS runs in emulation from NT forward. NT *is* completely new from the ground up. Maybe you want to look into the terms “Protected” (aka Virtual) and “Real” modes.
Where are your sources?
I opened my desktop and have this:
4 bays
2 filled with 1GB board each
2 bays open
I removed 1 memory module and noted this description:
DDR2, PC2-6400
Appears I can add either 2 (1GB) boards or 1 (2GB) board to have a total of 4GB.
Correct?
Absolutely!! I should have been a little more complete in my answer. .... see, we can agree on something!
I was hoping that Win7 would be a new kernal development effort. To the best of my knowledge, this will (allegedly) be the last major OS release on the NT kernal.
Thanks for the driver, but my laser is the P1000, not the P1100. The P1000 is discontinued and not supported - hence my irritation. I expected to be able to load the obsoleted driver, and lose some control, but still maintain some amount of base functionality. As is, my laptop with Vista-64 cannot use the laser at all. I’ve tried some 3rd party drivers but they don’t work either. With XP, I could use the 2K driver, or the XP driver (maybe they were the same, I didn’t check).
You may want to Google ‘super prefetch vista’ and take a look at what you find. Its not getting very favorable reviews from the links I checked out. Slower performance, Disk thrashing are reported many times.
In the hardware world, Pre-fetch has little or no performance degradation when it’s used. When you read address x, you go ahead and grab the next 2-4 Quadwords and just stick them away. If you see a JMP, you dump the prefetch buffer, and use a predictive handler to preload the abolute address range. If the address is calculated, prefetch does a NOOP. Simple.
From the engineering perspective, a good disk utility should be able to monitor frequently used applications, the OS, and other frequently accessed data - then stick that all in a fast access area on the disk (commonly found in the inside sectors on the disk itself). With consequtive sectors loading in a higher density area of the disk - you should see some performance gain, over loading the same data from other physical regions on the disk.
But, if it works for you - it works. It’s just not something that I have found useful in my line of work. The review sites I have read don’t seem to place a whole lot of credence in the claims either. Judging from the sites that I do frequent (Slashdot, Tomshardware, ect); Win7 is getting a very positive review. But, sitting with a laptop with Vista-64 on it at home; and having difficulty getting it to play well with my home network (2 XP boxes, XBox360 and PS3), I have to say that I’m pretty disgusted with it overall. If the disk crashes, I’ll reformat and just install XP on it. I do wish I could trade my OS that’s on it now for Win7, but as I have no CD to re-load the Vista-64 OS back on it (they gave me a restore partition to bring my laptop back to factory-new condition - ie lose all my data that is on it), I’m hesitant to mess with it too much.
But, if you are happy with Vista - go on being happy. The rest of the world apparently vigorously disagrees with you, but you are free to use whatever works best for you.
That should be correct.
Did you buy your computer from a retail store, build it yourself or have someone else build it for you?
You can verify exactly what memory you need & the max your system will support by using the memory configuration helper at crucial.com. You don’t have to order from them but it will tell you exactly what part you need.
I already gave you a list of half a dozen points of clear DOS heritage. You ignore them and instead obsess on one thing which you blatantly mischaracterize. Then you keep bringing up the drive letters as some sort of pathetic attempt at an insult. all you’ve got is red herrings, insults, and lies about what I said. We’re done, you’re wrong, you KNOW you’re wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.