http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/62012_updates.jpg“ rel=”nofollow”>http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads…

Windows 7 has been relatively trouble free since launch so far.

I will give Apple three things: Great design, Mouse Pad, and Battery Life.

I will still stick to Windows!

So, it will sell by the truck load but not actually do anything genuinly new, such is the level of plagerism.

Good luck to W7, MS know it will do well, so well, they have already anounced W8 !

Windows 7 32-bit works fine with 4 gigs of RAM. It sees it fine in my rig.

You're complaining that microsoft isn't doing anything to bridge the 64/32 bit divide? How ignorant can you possibly be? Other major OS's have dealt with 64 bit applications by either going fully 64 bit (OSX) and axing compatibility entirely; or by basically installing a second copy of the OS in 32 bit (Linux/Unix). Microsoft has WOW (Windows on windows) which runs 32 bit only applications in a compatible environment similar to a JVM.

Why aren't they fixing the 3gb memory issue? Well why aren't they building supercomputers out of fudge candy? Why aren't they building computers that run on flatulence? The 32 bit OS has 4gb of addressable space, All system devices require a slice of that as well as all ram for system and video, sometimes your system has enough addresses left for 3.5gb, sometimes 2.7gb, it all depends. So is M$ fixing this? It's called Vista 64 bit, and building a 64 bit OS is the way every OS has to deal with this.

Confusing the parallel to Cocoa on win32 as being .net instead of WPF is telling of your ignorance on the subject. WPF has been out for a long time, people use it. It's like complaining that ford cars don't have seatbelts because you've never used yours.

“Core fundamentality security flaw system blah blah blah” Obviously you don't keep up on security or you would know that Vista has the best track record of any modern OS. Your apple OS is a far cry from being a proper unix in terms of security. BSD, linux and Solaris can be tightened down to best Vista, but offer little of the user experience people expect in consumer computing.

NTFS should get an update when any other modern FS manages to get filesystem level encryption. Sun should have this implemented in ZFS soon and then Apple can take it, act like they made it, and use it to peddle more hardware at ridiculous markups.

And, spoken like someone who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

The O/S, at a hardware interaction level, doesn't *care* that the disk is regular platter, solid state or made of Swiss cheese! Vista didn't work that well with SSDs? What are you basing this on?

As far as the 3GB limit that is a 32 bit addressing problem, it goes away with 64 bit code and, if you've been paying attention, the OEMs started sneaking in 64 bit additions of Vista as defaults earlier this year. Windows 7 is really expected to be Microsoft's big 64 bit push, Vista was supposed to be but, well I could probably write a book on what happened there. On drivers any certified driver now, to be certified, must work in both 64 bit and 32 bit modes. I've been running two 64 bit Vista systems myself and while I've had some interesting application issues, so far (knock on wood) no real driver problems.

Good question on NTFS, it was supposed to be replaced in Vista but that project ran late and was pulled before Vista launched and created a cascading problem with a lot of the parts that depended on it. (Bet they don't do that again).

As far as the OEMS, right now they like Windows 7 a lot because it is being architected to meet their needs like never before. But they have been burned in the past so they are kind of expecting to be burned again. We'll see, there are a whole bunch of us trying to make sure the kinds of mistakes that were made with Vista don't happen with Windows 7.

It's a bold step, but I think it's a step that is required.

Sure, it will be an inconvenience at first, but they can build an emulator for old applications like Apple did for OS X.

The 3GB memory limit is the most ridiculous in my opinion and it shows how archaic the code really is.

My guess is that the OS is so unrefined because of all the 3rd party system manufacturers out there. If there were new system architecture guidelines, it would be impossible for all of these companies to comply.

1) You can optimize the hell out of the OS… but its still a 32-bit OS. How is Microsoft going to bridge the 32/64 bridge so that applications (and drivers) built for the 64-bit version will work well for the 32-bit and vice-versa.

2) What has Microsoft done to address the 3gb memory limit?

3) How is the “improved” Ux going to transition through 3rd party applications. On the Mac, there is the Cocoa Framework with ever so lovely Apple User Guidelines. Is Microsoft going to finally introduce and equivalent so when 3rd party developers create applications, the Ux is cohesive between these various applications and the OS environment. (if you even think about saying that .NET is already there.. then you are simply and sadly clueless.)

4) The core architecture of Windows is by its very definition a can of worms for security issues. Will Microsoft be able to change the core architecture in order to alleviate the fundamental security flaws?

5) Will NTFS get a much needed update in order to address everything from path limitations to UTF-8 acceptance.

Closing: I would love nothing more then to see Microsoft finally “get it”. However there are so many areas of the OS that need to be addressed that it would be better for Microsoft to scratch the OS for a new modern version that is not shackled by legacy and dependency. However, this would be too much of a risk factor since as recent releases have shown… they are not capable of managing the releases.

I would like to see the system vendors put their foot down and tell MS to piss off.

Microsoft should also give Vista users a free upgrade to Windows 7, there is no way we should have to pay for the OS.