Talk:Development of Windows 7

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Development of Windows 7 redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Microsoft Windows: Computing

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Computing

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing

Beta

According to [1] the beta releases to the public already on January 7 (download). --Oli (talk) 14:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong. That link goes nowhere.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? "nowhere"? - I can see the website winfuture.de saying the beta releases January 7 for download. --Oli (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This site is not in English, which is the only language availible on Windows 7 currently. That download is most likely bogus because Microsoft has not enabled such downloads, not until Jan. 13.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The language of the site has no importance to the language used by the OS. By the way: Windows 7 is already available in multiple languages. And that means Build 7000 (Beta) which has already been given to a small amount of testers. I also don't know what downloads you are talking about - currently there are non for the public, so if there's nothing nothing can be bogus. It seems to me you don't really know what I'm talking about. So I'll give you a review: Windows 7 Beta (Build 7000) is currently available for testers only. It is new that Microsoft already started the translation into several languages. The Beta releases to the public on January 7, alright? --Oli (talk) 15:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The live download links keeps crashing for everyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.217.231 (talk) 16:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday Season 2009

When is "Holiday Season 2009"? Summer, winter? --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7 build 7022

A new build has been leaked.

Source: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/02/08/windows-7-build-7022-leaks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.110.76.139 (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leaker of build 7022

Build 7022 was leaked by a Microsoft Ukraine employee, there are many news sources that confirm this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thlump (talk • contribs) 01:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7 build 7032 screenshots leak

Source: [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.110.76.139 (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Windows 7 build 7000.png

The image File:Windows 7 build 7000.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Planned builds are builds

Why does "Planned builds" keep getting a seperate section from (not a subsection of) "Builds"? - Josh (talk | contribs) 16:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Build 7106

Why does the information on build 7106 keep getting removed? - Josh (talk | contribs) 20:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Release Candidate

Some unsourced info is in the article e.g. the build number of the RC, 7100. There is no attached source for that build number, even though it it widely rumoured that 7100 will be the RC. I'm going to remove that until it is sourced. The RC also doesn't appear to be on TechNet or MSDN even though the Microsoft article says so.

194.80.32.9 (talk) 23:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Planned builds

We do not need a "Planned builds" section heading anymore. We currently only document one planned build (the final build), which has its own section heading. The "Planned builds" section is also going to get in the way, as it has in the past, if there are plans for pre-RTM builds to document. - Josh (talk | contribs) 18:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formal names of RC and RTM?

Someone keeps changing "release candidate" and "release to manufacturing" to "Release Candidate" and "Release to Manufacturing". Is there a source saying these are their formal names? If not, we should use the informal names, which are uncapitalized. - Josh (talk | contribs) 20:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Release Candidate" will be the official name of the upcoming build, but "release to manufacturing" won't be the official name of the final release. These terms do suffer from the same sort of problem that "DRM" does: It turns out that "digital rights management" isn't an actual proper name that justifies all-caps, but when we turn it into an acronym for brevity, we use capital letters. The same thing happens with "RTM"; like "DRM", it's a lot easier to type and say out loud. But, the full expansion should never be capitalized. Isn't English fun? :) Warren -talk- 22:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Builds" section

This section should probably be more accurately titled "History of builds getting leaked". It is simply inundated with "build xxx was leaked" statements in all sorts of flavors. I suppose this section is devoted to delineating how Windows 7 evolved through the milestones. News of build leaks adds little to that, and, if it is of any interest at all, deserves much briefer and cleaner coverage.Kxx (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Service Pack 1

In response to the comment that was added to the SP1 section just before its latest removal, the fact that Windows 7 hasn't RTM'd in no way makes it too early to talk about the SP1 builds in existence. The section shall remain. - Josh (talk | contribs) 20:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite of the whole article?

This article is a mess. Look at the "Development of Windows Vista" article. It's full of pictures, and more descriptions of the builds and whatnot. This is just a basic list of build numbers, and there's 3 pictures. Jimmy422 (talk) 00:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone miss the details of the torrent leaks? I would really like to delete all that extraneous information. It merely clutters the article and adds no real information. With regard to the rest of the article, I think it's looking pretty decent now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence has some wrong use of present,past and future. It should be rephrased... "Microsoft has also announced that companies which have a contract with Software Assurance may acquire Windows 7 became available for volume licensing on September 1, 2009" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.69.95.31 (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]