According to an article at CNet there's a possibility Windows 7 will be released 2009: Windows Watch Starts To Point To 7.

There's also a link there to a blog by someone claiming to be on the Windows 7 team, with some fairly interesting info about the new operating system: Shipping Seven

Quote:

APC Magazine claims to have seen a roadmap which puts M2 in an April/May timeframe, and a M3 in the third quarter of this year... Microsoft’s own history shows that its roadmaps and predictions are not to be trusted...A more interesting question is: should Microsoft be aiming for late 2009? Should the company be aiming at a date, or should it be aiming at an experience? To be sure, a software company can’t develop without some kind of general timeframe. The question is what’s most important: the date or the product?

Quotes from THIS article.


Hopefully MS has learned a lesson or three with the fiasco that Vista turned out to be.

Quite honestly, I think the haste with which Windows 7 is being prepared will lead to serious issues if some basics are not adhered to, such as maintaining the current Vista driver models (can't believe I said that!). What I mean is that driver and software developers have barely come to terms with Vista and hopefully they won't now have to start readying a totally new driver and presentation foundation.

64-Bit has born the brunt of that and I wonder if there's going to be any quicker adoption of 64-Bit within two years. Somehow I doubt it will be the standard by then.

Will Windows 7 be 32-compatible or 64-bit only OS?

jaelanicu wrote:

Will Windows 7 be 32-compatible or 64-bit only OS?

I believe it will be available in both versions

I say that they should release it as 64-bit only with 32-bit compatibility (via the WOW64 system) as all computers anymore have 64 bit processors. If they really want to push ahead and make it that much different from Vista, that's what they'll have to do. As well as drop support for XP and earlier era programs. While they should just drop support for things that are from the 9x/ME line and things from back in the day of NT4, getting rid of software support for all but the next to last operating system will speed up program updates as there is little use for releasing an update when the current version mostly works, which is why I think people have such a negative view on Vista and running programs that are older. For as long as most companies/developers have access to the pre-release builds, there really isn't a reason why they can't make updates available sooner than several months after the release

There are still some fundamental problems with 64-bit Windows, drivers especially. and I've actually come around to start thinking that the 32-bit version of Windows 7 is probably a good idea.

---

Many people have compared Vista to Win ME, pretty unfairly IMO because ME was a dead end whereas Vista is a starting point ; but having played around a little today with the Server 2008, which already has WinMin at its core, and especially has an extra year's worth of codebase refinement and optimisation built in, I'm starting to think that one comparison between Me and Vista might be a valid one --- that both Windows versions were originally built around forward-looking features instead of being built upon slim and rock-solid foundations, unlike for example XP x64 built upon the 2k3, or to a lesser extent XP upon the 2k. And the problem with just bundling new features together will always be that you can lose stability...

WinMin and the Server 2k8 are the slim and new rock-solid foundations, and a Windows 7 built upon these instead of directly upon Vista, but WITHOUT the compromise that led to the abandonment of Neptune and the sudden precipitous shift to Whistler, and to a lesser extent the abandonment of the original promise of Longhorn 40xx to Vista, is actually a great idea --- PROVIDED it didn't require yet another generational shift in the hardware requirements, nor the codebase, nor the drivers model.

No verify link but...

Windows 7 isn't headed for 2009, says Microsoft. More like 2011
Posted Jan 28th 2008 11:55AM by Paul Miller



Hey, it's not Microsoft's fault that 2011 sounds like the realm of jet pack VR massage cars, but it's certainly a long ways away any way you slice it. Contrary to previous rumors of Microsoft planning a Windows 7 release sometime in 2009, Microsoft has apparently gotten in touch with WinVistaClub and set the record straight: Windows 7 is in "planning stages," and development will take approximately three years. Microsoft wouldn't comment on that supposed leak we spotted last week, and of course denied any implications that development was being accelerated to make up for Vista shortcomings. We can't help but wonder how different the OS landscape will look three years from now, with Linux rapidly reaching feature and usability parity, while Apple plugs away at OS X and cloud computing lands everywhere, but we're sure Vista SP1 won't be the last bid Microsoft makes at this generation.

engadget

WinVistaClub

Well, this build number looks slightly more realistic anyway, and would help explain why Vista SP1 and 2k8 are stuck in this 6001 build number rut (except --- what is the .1. after the 6519 for )

There's some very good info on what we can possibly expect from Windows 7 here: Why Windows 7 Might Go To Pieces

Grav!ty wrote:

There's some very good info on what we can possibly expect from Windows 7 here: Why Windows 7 Might Go To Pieces

Yeah --- I have speculated exactly the same thing in some thread or other here at PRO