Windows 7 box cover art is revealed

[TheGodBen]

Nah, MS is going to make Win7 version 7.0 at the RTM, they said so a few months back. The reason why is clear; Vista was a failure in the eyes of the general public and MS want to put it completely behind them. They don't want the public to think that Windows 7 is in any way related to Vista even though it is just an incremental improvement over Vista.

It's a pity because Vista really isn't a bad OS, like XP it had a very buggy launch but unlike XP its image was unable to recover. Some have suggested that 7 could have been Vista SP2 if MS wanted, but there's no money in doing that.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Well, that makes me feel better--sanity prevails at Microsoft, for once.

 

[Marc]

Nah, MS is going to make Win7 version 7.0 at the RTM, they said so a few months back. The reason why is clear; Vista was a failure in the eyes of the general public and MS want to put it completely behind them. They don't want the public to think that Windows 7 is in any way related to Vista even though it is just an incremental improvement over Vista.

It's a pity because Vista really isn't a bad OS, like XP it had a very buggy launch but unlike XP its image was unable to recover. Some have suggested that 7 could have been Vista SP2 if MS wanted, but there's no money in doing that.

Nah - following Microsoft's recent trend it would of be Vista R2 (following in the lines of Server 2003/2008R2).

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

From a designer's perspective, there are still some things wrong with the packaging. Like the logo, it's on there twice. A text-less logo at the top, and a logo with text at the bottom. Both are competing for your attention. I'd either remove the bottom graphic, so the text will stick to the large logo, or remove the bottom part all together. Put a big 7 on it if you really need to and the type, that's all that matters; people will recognize it as Windows.

 

[USS KG5]

It's a pity because Vista really isn't a bad OS, like XP it had a very buggy launch but unlike XP its image was unable to recover. Some have suggested that 7 could have been Vista SP2 if MS wanted, but there's no money in doing that.

Well, the other issue is that XP took years to become a standard, in 2005 I worked for a hospital where Win 2k was still the standard. This was probably a mistake as a migration to XP after SP2 was wise, but still XP offers large organisations and businesses very little over Win 2k. The same applies, but even more so to Vista vs XP. Sure it is pretty, but pretty does not help get work done.

Vista did OK in the home market, installed OEM on PCs, but of course the other problem is the fact that PCs are now so fast that a PC that is 4 years old is still fast enough for most purposes (heck, netbooks are not even that fast and sell like hotcakes) so fewer people have to buy new PCs.

So it is all, as you say, not just "Vista Sucks". Windows 7 is incredibly important to MS as their biggest competitors like Google are really really pushing the idea that the OS as we know it is obsolete and should get into merely allowing cross-platform web apps to control hardware while we all can access all our programs and files from whatever platform we like.

Basically, the PC as we know it might well be on the way out for many applications, we live in interesting times.

 

[Meredith]

I like the one suggestion in the comments in the article that the box for windows 7 should have Master Chief installing it on his warthog, maybe for the server version you could have Cortana on the box.

 

[BolianAuthor]

Nah, MS is going to make Win7 version 7.0 at the RTM, they said so a few months back. The reason why is clear; Vista was a failure in the eyes of the general public and MS want to put it completely behind them. They don't want the public to think that Windows 7 is in any way related to Vista even though it is just an incremental improvement over Vista.

It's a pity because Vista really isn't a bad OS, like XP it had a very buggy launch but unlike XP its image was unable to recover. Some have suggested that 7 could have been Vista SP2 if MS wanted, but there's no money in doing that.

I think it's funny that MS resorted to the XP box color scheme for the home and pro versions, as if trying to fool us into thinking that this new version will be any better than XP, lol.

XP recovered, unlike Vista, because XP doesn't have the annoying habit of asking the user for permission for every minute little thing it does, where Vista has to ask the user permission to ask the user permission.

 

[Marc]

Nah, MS is going to make Win7 version 7.0 at the RTM, they said so a few months back. The reason why is clear; Vista was a failure in the eyes of the general public and MS want to put it completely behind them. They don't want the public to think that Windows 7 is in any way related to Vista even though it is just an incremental improvement over Vista.

It's a pity because Vista really isn't a bad OS, like XP it had a very buggy launch but unlike XP its image was unable to recover. Some have suggested that 7 could have been Vista SP2 if MS wanted, but there's no money in doing that.

I think it's funny that MS resorted to the XP box color scheme for the home and pro versions, as if trying to fool us into thinking that this new version will be any better than XP, lol.

XP recovered, unlike Vista, because XP doesn't have the annoying habit of asking the user for permission for every minute little thing it does, where Vista has to ask the user permission to ask the user permission.

We should be be grateful though. A number of the reviews of Vista at release said the UAC was far less intrusive in the final version than what it had been in the betas.

Though probably the worse thing about UAC was Micrsoft put in into Server 2008 and according to one book I've got, turning of UAC in S2008 turns off a lot of security features.