Windows Vista is GOLD

[Joe Gronlund]

The long wait, finally, is over. On Wednesday, November 8, 2006, at 11:00 am PST, Microsoft announced that it had released Windows Vista to manufacturing, ending five years of waiting, and one of the longest development times in Windows history. For Microsoft, its partners, and customers, the lengthy ramp-up to Windows Vista finally concludes with Microsoft shipping the so-called "golden master" version of the product off to manufacturing and its closed partners.

"We've really refreshed the user experience for the first time in a while with Windows Vista," Microsoft lead product manager Greg Sullivan told me in a recent briefing. "The performance, fit, and finish are going to surprise people. We've also worked a lot on the overall aesthetics, from the packaging, to the new icons, to the new system sounds."

Microsoft says it will not repeat Windows Vista's lengthy development time. "Integration and innovation are hard to deliver at the same time," Sullivan said. "We will be more regular [with future Windows version releases] going forward."

Windows Vista will launch in two separate events, one for businesses, and one for consumers, in November and January. Microsoft will rollout Windows Vista alongside a set of other products in this time period, including the 2007 Office System, .NET Framework 3.0, and Exchange 2007. In 2007, Microsoft will also ship a new Visual Studio version and the long-awaited Longhorn Server product line. "It's the largest launch wave that we've had in the history of the company," said Microsoft vice president Ron Markezich.

I've been covering Windows Vista extensively for over five years, and the SuperSite for Windows has evolved into the number one Web site on the Internet for Vista-related content. Not surprisingly, I have a wealth of RTM content available now, with more coming in the near future:

Source

[Greps]

is Service Pack 1 ready yet?

[Vile]

is Service Pack 1 ready yet?

Very amusing. Typical comment from the Anti-MS bandwaggon.

I'm also going to take a wild shot in the dark and say that you never tried the beta/RC version of Vista. Had you actually used it, then you would know that even RC2 was pretty solid and was a huge improvement from the buggy beta version, hence the standard development cycle....

[Greps]

Very amusing. Typical comment from the Anti-MS bandwaggon.

I'm also going to take a wild shot in the dark and say that you never tried the beta/RC version of Vista. Had you actually used it, then you would know that even RC2 was pretty solid and was a huge improvement from the buggy beta version, hence the standard development cycle....

actually, I was being serious. I remember this was the case with Windows XP - Service Pack 1 was prepared even before XP went gold.

[Dream]

What? I thought the official release date was 2007 or 2008.

I heard Vista will *require* 1gb ram, and more ram if you want to run programs on it.

[Yves R.]

Thanks for this thread (I saw this in a french annouce). Office 2007 is gold too (since some days)

[WurkAnimal]

Oh.. cool I guess.

[slappy]

Hey Joe:

Just a small point, but Wednesday [today] is November the 8th. the 11th is Friday.

Regards,

[filburt1]

What? I thought the official release date was 2007 or 2008.

I heard Vista will *require* 1gb ram, and more ram if you want to run programs on it.

If you want to use a computer for anything, you need 1 GB of RAM anyway. Did you expect an operating system made years after the previous one to have the exact same system requirements?

[Matthew Gordon]

What? I thought the official release date was 2007 or 2008.

I heard Vista will *require* 1gb ram, and more ram if you want to run programs on it.

Currently, my task manager has explorer.exe taking 15,792k of memory, and it's taking the most (excluding Firefox, since that's a given). I don't see Vista requiring 1GB of RAM unless you feel like running Firefox and a few games at once on top of it.

This is using Vista RC1, so unless they muсked it up in the final...

[Joe Gronlund]

What? I thought the official release date was 2007 or 2008.

I heard Vista will *require* 1gb ram, and more ram if you want to run programs on it.

Retail Mid-January 2007

[Joe Gronlund]

Hey Joe:

Just a small point, but Wednesday [today] is November the 8th. the 11th is Friday.

Regards,

Friday is the rumoured date that the RTM release is to appear on MSDN..

[Rob B]

I won't be getting it, I am happy with XP.

We have two desktops and a laptop. One desktop and the laptop aren't powerful enough, and the other PC only has the minimum spec for Vista. I can't afford to upgrade my computers at the moment, so sorry Bill, I won't be in the rush.

I'll wait until I can afford a new high spec PC with Vista already on it and Vista has settled. XP is nice and stable, and the virus writers will of moved on

[Dream]

Currently, my task manager has explorer.exe taking 15,792k of memory, and it's taking the most (excluding Firefox, since that's a given). I don't see Vista requiring 1GB of RAM unless you feel like running Firefox and a few games at once on top of it.

This is using Vista RC1, so unless they muсked it up in the final...

My friend that reviewed Vista did something wrong then. He said it used 1024mb memory and did 400mb swap, using RC2.

If you want to use a computer for anything, you need 1 GB of RAM anyway. Did you expect an operating system made years after the previous one to have the exact same system requirements?

No, but needing 2gb ram for it seems a little steep.

[Wayne Luke]

No, but needing 2gb ram for it seems a little steep.

Most games today require 2 GBs of ram to run as smoothly as possible. Sure it will run with less but it does better with more. With memory at about $100 per gigabyte, this is a minor concern for most people.