Yes, I think I will. I think it's a good move to offset the negative press Vista got. If it's all it's hyped to be, hopefully for the company many people will go ahead and pay for it. I think a full year to try it is a good idea, too, because with shorter time periods, users might not use their computers in enough different ways to really give it a fair shot, or use enough different programs to uncover what works for them and what doesn't. For example, I might not use certain functions for a month or two at a time, or even longer, but then suddenly have a need for those functions.

My only worry is that if for some reason I don't want to go back to XP at the end of the period that some of my settings will be messed up.
Permalink | Report

Absolutely. I have run the beta and am looking forward to the release candidate. It is basically Vista, but with significantly improved performance and some nice user interface improvements. I think that in general, 7 will be well received.

What will ultimately determine its success is how well it runs on netbooks, as that is the only growing segment of the PC market, and Vista is simply too slow to run on that class of machine. My experience is that 7 runs a lot faster than Vista, somewhat slower than XP or other OSs (Linux, OS X) on the same hardware, but performs well enough on netbooks. Having 2GB of RAM really helps.

The other issue is if Microsoft will really release a crippled version for netbooks which allows running only three simultaneous apps. If they do this, the reaction will make the press for Vista look kind.
Permalink | Report

No. I have switched to Linux as my sole OS on two laptops. I have XP on my storage server, but only because magic jack and Irfanview (the best free image handler) don't work on Linux.

I found Vista to be a decent OS with some cool features. For some reason, enough people were dissatisfied that Microsoft had to retreat and regroup, extending XP's service life while they rushed to get W7 out. This means it will be even buggier and more exploitable than previous offers, when MS missed its self-decreed release dates and rushed to play catchup. With W7, they will be even more rushed.

Shareware is a poor marketing strategy and is only mildly profitable because you can nag enough people into ponying up for the full-feature license. Offering an essentially beta version of W7 for free and hoping it's fabulous enough to get people hooked just makes Windows shareware in its entirety.

Windows has always relied on its massive ubiquity to maintain its marketing momentum. Microsoft hasn't been forced to tighten up their software, make it leaner and less buggy, because most people lazily assume Windows is all there is. With the way Microsoft buys up competitors which they then let stagnate, Windows is 85% of all there is.

So far, that's been a good enough substitute for quality software. By keeping a free version on all those PC's for a year while they code, compile and debug W7, Microsoft is hoping to maintain that ubiquity. Whether they can finally come up with an OS that deserves 85% of the market share is problematic. I'm certainly not going to be an unpaid beta tester while they try.
Source(s):
Twelve years of Windows experience.

Permalink | Report

YES!

Beta was good. RC will be great! I have Windows 7 running on an old Pentium 4, Asus Netbook, Macmini, Quad core, and my new i7 machine. All have various motherboards, audio cards, network cards, graphics cards...While I have seen very small GUI bugs. The latest release I have run build 7077 fixed ALL OF THEM! No complaints! No joke. So I am assuming RC will be about golden.
Permalink | Report

I don't know yet. I want to, but I do not currently have a PC capable of running Windows 7. (I'm rockin' a Pentium III). If I can find a computer soon, then I definitely will, but with my current rig, it just isn't possible. I'm disappointed to have missed the Beta phase and I hope that I can test the RC.
Permalink | Report

I'll test the 32-Bit version
Permalink | Report