I my self believe thatwe should update our hardware to follow newoperating systems instead of trying to make new OS works fine on our 2,3,4 years old computers...One of the reasons i built a new system is to be able to runup-to-date windows systems. Will not go farwith that but luckly my windows 7 working like charm and IE8 is working also perfect since i installed the os on c drive as main os. I would like to know if bugs are 100% system failer or it has to do more with hardware issues as well! How can some body be sure about! I my self can amost tell but shouldnt microsoft offer users a very clear notice about the compatible hardware they built windows 7 on-for example..Thanx

Since this discussion is about personal opinion. Ill go head and give mine :)I believe Microsoft is going a great route, to allow windows 7 to work on older hardware in ways that none of their previous OS's were able to do, and to bring out such great performance at the same time. I believe that If Microsoft can make the OS to take advantage Of Next Gen hardware as well as work "well enough" with older hardware then its a win win situation for 2 different types of people. The Hard core computer user and the Average/below average computer user (ok maybe 3 types).To the 2nd part of your post: I don't think that Microsoft has yet released what the System REQ's are. I also don't believe they have released any kind of upgrade Adivser utility like they did for Vista. I am sure they will do so however, so people can get a understanding on what might be a issue if they want to upgrade to Windows7.

the main reason why M$ is trying hard with Win7 to work on older hardware is because of netbooks which are dominated by WinXP and Linux. And M$ wants Win7 to be used on netbooks so he can retire WinXP forever

In the present usage, a bug would be software related. However, Are all crashes and failures a result of bugs? is a better question. In my experience, I would say a heavy majority of system crashes and lockups are related to bad hardware. Just this week outside of my professional IT position, I fixed four separate computers systems for friends and family. Three were Vista and one was XP. The first Vista machine was running very slow. This was due to the fact the system was a lower end Acer with 1GB of RAM that had 256MB of it shared to the video, thus leaving only 768MB for the OS. Upgraded the memory to 2GB, installed a lower-end discreet graphics card and bam! Instant rejuvenation. The second Vista computer had a PCI sound card that was crooked in the slot (the rear portion of the card was about 1/3 up from the fully seated position). Reseated the card; no more lockups. The third Vista and XP machines had bad memory causing BSOD issues. In each of these four cases, none of the problems were OS related, although the end users did not necessarily know that. Actually, Microsoft does have some specific recommendation about compatible hardware. For a list of Certified for Windows Vista devices and systems, see the Windows Logod Products List.

In other words, it will be a usefull idea if microsoft add a task in the operating system which can urge the user to follow the right direction when facing a problem. That will "also"save" a lot of researching and development busgt money. for example when a user computer hangs after 2 minutes from boot up. I just want to say that some users do not aware of that problems and its cause. Simply when windows cant find a sloution for a specific problem, it should say..this is not a software issue, instead check your hardware installation, for example. Microsoft compatibility website is not 100% helpfull because some times you can bypass what listed there. Smart windows is really what every body needs.....and 7 is almost a smart!

Work pc (For running Sony Vegas Pro, Particle Illusion 3, DVD Architect 5.0 and Camtasia Studio 6)I only use this for work.AMD 4800+ OC'd to 3.1GHz from a stock of 2.4 M2N32-SLi Deluxe Mobo Jeantech Aqua Case Zalman 9500ALED CPU fan Nvidia EVGA 8800GT Creative X-fi Gamer Soundcard 2GB's of Corsair RAM @ 667Mhz, messed with the timings but cant remember exactly 1 X 180GB HDD SATA, With a 120GB Partition for Windows XP Pro and 60GB's for Windows 7 1 X 320GB HDD Full Video footage (well, not completely full) Samsung HD Screen 3 X Coolermaster 80mm Fans 2 X 120mm Fans 750W Power Supply Creative 5.1 surround system*Overclocking done with an older version of nTune and coolbits 2.0 registry tweak*E-mail/Web Surf pc (across the room from my work pc)Stock Dell Dimension E310 I bought for $75 at a garage saleP4 (single core) 2.8ghzwhatever mobo Dell used for thisgeforce 8500GT--the older PCI ones2GB of generic RAM from crucial80 GB hard drive 50GB's for XP Pro and 25 GB's for Windows 7generic $3 PCI slot fan from newegg600W Silencer Power SupplyBoth pc's are running Windows 7 absolutely perfectly. And I mean PERFECTLY. Zero hardware compatability issues on either machine. Windows 7 kept trying to update the driver for the integrated graphics (disabled) on the Dell, then, stopped. After reporting the problem once W7 now knows not to try that anymore.If all I do is read e-mails and surf the net here, why should upgrading my os force me to upgrade my hardware? Nah... In my case it doesn't fit.The fact that W7 runs so well on this machine shows Microsoft is on the right track: slim, fast and powerful.If I could get Windows 7 to run on my PS3... wow. Right now only Linux fits on there. texan4u

Again this is my personal opinion only. MS has finally got it right, so far i have created hardware crashes and software crashes (with old and new). The ultimate test was preformed last night--motherboard swap. Went from a asus P4T-E(2.56g P4,underclocked to 2.0; 1 gig rd ram) to a asus P4XP-X (same p4 cpu and 2 gig of pc3200 ram) all hardware the same. From fire up to operational state lit took about 15 minutes,was able to watch the os find all new hardware(nice feature) restatred only once at the end. Only had one unknown-onboard nic. System is runnling without a glitch The next test is to take the hdd from this system and put into a dual corel brand new machine and see what transpires. If MS has got it right , it will be intresting to see where and when I can get it to crash and have to reinstall the OS. Until then keep up the good work--It Looks like a keeper--can not wait until final release; will be needing 4 copies of win 7 ultimate

I am about to install Win7 on T7400 (quad) and R5400 (two quads) both by Dell. I have a very vague idea about new features with Win7 but my gut feeling is that it will be able to take advantage of multicore whereas Vista Ult I run now does not seem to care. I cannot see much difference between a two quad machine and one quad machine when executing file downloads from MSDN for instance or transferring files within my LAN. When I try to run file transfers in parallel it seems just one thread is working and only one processor not many. When I check Task Manager I see wavy line son all processors but it is hard to tell when they are doing.Could anybody post a link for me to find out more about the system?AlexB

Hi AlexIt will take more than one link. :)) Windows 7 Beta | Springboard Series Windows 7 Beta | Springboard | Discover and Explore Engineering Windows 7 What's New in Windows 7 Beta for IT Pros (Beta) Windows 7 Beta Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Release Notes for Windows 7 Beta Things to Know About This Beta Release of Windows 7Answers to common questions about Windows 7 BetaOne of the best review websites is HERE.Hope this helps.Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta Ronnie Vernon MVP

Thank you Ronnie, you've helped me a number of times in the past. I will read the links but in the meantime could you simply confirm my expectation that Win7 will improve my multicore performance? AlexB

Hi Alex Sorry, butI really cannot. I do know that the beta teamsbeen focusing on makingmany new optimizations in this area, but to say that one particular system will see a big improvement is difficult to determine? This is what the public beta program is all about. Just install it and start testing the components that are most important to you. You can also focus on these 2 articles. Approach to system performance Continuing our discussion on performance Hope this helps. Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta Ronnie Vernon MVP

I'm having trouble grasping a concept for an OS which will require 75% of the machines now being used to upgrade their memory capacity just to load the system.

@ Hamp ster:?? Explain?Minimum install requirement is 256MB available to the OS. Most computers running XP have at least that much; most have more (even XP isn't the greatest on 256MB RAM, after all.)Now, if you're running onboard memory, there is a portion of RAM that's reserved for the video processor. So, if you:1- have only 256MB RAM installed, and2- are running onboard video, then, yes, you'l need to buy more RAM. But, as stated above: even if you're running XP, you should still do so anyways - the performance improvement is very much worth the money.And, with RAM prices as low as they are now (I just spec'ed a build for someone: 2GB (2x1GB) DDR2 800 for $24, free shipping), why wouldn't you?Just my $0.02,Chris[If this post helps to resolve your issue, please click the "Mark as Answer" or "Helpful" button at the top of this message. By marking a post as Answered, or Helpful you help others find the answer faster.]

Hi Chris That really is an amazing price. I remember back in 1990, I owneda 286 clone that could take up to 5MB of RAM. It came with 2MB installed and cost me $150.00 for the other 3MB. :) Regards,Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta Ronnie Vernon MVP

Ronnie, one of the things that continually amazes me about computers (and, consumer tech in general):As time goes on, everything gets physically smaller, more capacity, faster, and less expensive.Taking inflation into account, things are wayless expensivethan they were even 10(much less 19) years ago.But, you knew that already. ;)Also, NewEgg rocks. :)-Chris[If this post helps to resolve your issue, please click the "Mark as Answer" or "Helpful" button at the top of this message. By marking a post as Answered, or Helpful you help others find the answer faster.]

Hi M22472 Even though new developments in hardware technology drives the development of new operating systems and other software, we must not forget backward compatibility. Even though some older hardware cannot take advantage of allthe newer technology, it is still an important part of the industry. The really tough job is trying to strike a good balance between backward compatibility and an overly bloated product. There are a lot of people out there who cannot buy a new system every 2 or 4 years. Backward compatibility allows them to take advantage of at least part of the new capabilities. A bug can be described as anerror, or flaw that prevents the softwarefromworking the way it was intended to work. Any unexpected result can be considered a bug. There are different levels. The lowest type cansimply be a slowdown in the process that the user is trying to complete or a displayed image that looks a bit fuzzy and the highest type can be a complete lockup of the system where all data is completely lost and requiringa complete reinstall of the OS. The user decides what is a bug and what is not. When a user reports a bug, they may be told by the developers that the behavior is 'by design', which simply means that this is the way the software was intended to work. They may also be told that the bug is already fixed in a more recent version of the software, that has not been distributed yet. Or they may be told that the bug will be fixed in a later version of the product. One of the most important steps in developing the software is the beta testing process. No matter how large a company is, they cannot have a big enough departmentto hold the enormous amount of different hardware configurations that are available. There are, literally millions of possible combinations. And that's why we are here! :)) Regards, Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta Ronnie Vernon MVP

Hello Ronnie I think you have given a complete explination which can be very useful to every body. And i would like if you move your comment to the top of this page. I know that when windows vista tried to ignore the backward compatibility in some way, sells went also backward. But hardware getting really low in prices and that means getting a pretty new hardware is not a big problem, Also too much hardware is not needed. I my self thought the much RAM the better but that is not true because at the end windows will use the avarege hardware needs and not more. I am running 6GB 1066 corsair dual memory but actually you dont feel it as there is a limit in the operating system response time. On the other hand developers can establish a new windows feature which can be updated automaticly through microsoft telling the users about all compatible/ bug/ issues recorded and their solutions. This service is exist but its hidden and not clear for users. my wish is to develope this service and make it a clear windows feature and can be also adjustable by users as well. Thank you again for your information

We shouldn't expectWindows 7 to run on anything and everything but it should definitely run on what's in the market now.The expectation is that the operating systemwill run on current hardwareas well asrecent hardware, and nowthe low end on the marketis systems with 1GHz single-core processors and 512MB of memory. So we should expect Windows 7 to run on that.