meh.

I'd wager it's at least partly a reaction to the widespread gripe about Vista. I mean, even by next October that's still not nearly enough time for Vista to become mainstream and "settle in" as it were. They probably want to push something new on the market and hope its reception is better. The arstechnica article pretty much says the same thing, they're keeping quiet-er about it and want to make sure it delivers on expectations

They better do it right this time, and get the bugs out of it before they release it.

Indeed. Hope this ones an upgrade. Vista is pretty good os, but not not as good as it could have.

microsoft operating systems are like star trek movies: only every other one is good.

/joke

i do hope to see an OS with the (few, small) advantages Vista offers but none of the bloat. i've been holding on to my XP keys until then. it's not so much that i'm opposed to a higher memory footprint. that's inevitable. i just don't need or want Aero. i'll get products from Stardock to make my desktop look prettier, if i decide i want that.

Well, they're due a good desktop operationg system...

• Windows 3.1: good.
• Windows 95: bad
• Windows 98: good
• Windows Millenium: bad
• Windows XP: good
• Windows Vista: bad
• Windows 7: good??????????
  

I'd make a bet that it will be another "Wait for SP1 or its suicide" affair, but its so foregone I doubt anyone would take me up on it.

Given the track record of Microsoft I tend to think Windows 7 will be much better out of the gate then Vista was.  So I guess I'll take the bet. 

Actually, it's supposed to be "worst"   

This is Microsoft.  When have they ever done that?  I think that goes against their corporate mission statement.

Hm. I reserve that honor for 98, the buggiest piece of crap I ever ran. I had way fewer problems with 95.

Windows XP  

Hence the three service packs?

98 wasn't too bad.  And Me could have been good if more HW companies had put out drivers for it.  Stupid OF MS of couse to put it out *requiering* new drivers when 98 worked and XP was on the horizon.

Both XP and Vista have been solid for me.  Vista more than XP truth-be-told.  It rarely if ever has crashed after the 2nd week of install.

Vista is fine once you get over your fear of upgrading. (in my opinion as always)

Windows 7 is not supposedly being released early. It's on the scheduled timetable. Vista was supposed to be released much earlier but got postponed and people got comfy with XP. Microsoft has always been releasing operating systems every 3 years (or around there); the only discrepancy was between XP and Vista (however, SP2 was a major Service Pack akin to what Apple does for their OS X when the next version is out. Also there have been some reworkings of XP such as Media Center, and let's not forget their Windows Mobile OS).

In general I think Microsoft gets a lot of flak unjustifiably, because of their negative mega-corporation image. I mean, Vista launched with compatibility support far greater than XP (if my sources as correct) yet it was hailed as a disaster. XP on its launch date had been utterly terrible!

Oh and on a side-note Microsoft provides training videos for free on their website while Apple charges for them! Who's nasty now?

And so the flame war he didn't want to start....begins

Sorry Philly

Why flame war? Nobody is accusing anybody. Everybody's stating facts as best as they know them.

I read on a MS web site that a blind study was done( Vista renamed to "Mohave") and had 100 users compare it with XP.The overwhelming majority liked the the "new" OS they assumed was Windows 7.What they were actually using was a much better running,finely tuned version of Vista.This study was done in Cal about one and 1/2 months ago.Most said they would switch to the "new" OS but thought Vista was junk. If I can find the link I will post it.as I beleive it was a genuine article.

From Wikipedia's Windows 7 article:

After the 2003 "Summer of Worms", where three major viruses − Blaster, Sobig, and Welchia − exploited flaws in Windows operating systems within a short time period, Microsoft changed its development priorities, putting some of Longhorn's major development work on hold in order to develop new service packs for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 that included a number of new security and safety features

The service packs were to improve security. It wasn't their fault that some people created viruses right after XP's release. 

Yeah, the Mojave Experiment, I saw that.

I believe there was a skeptic guy who, when told the truth that it was Vista, said, "Then why is it fast?"

Got a great laugh from it, but it proved how little people actually knew Vista