Microsoft Windows 7 has arrived...to mixed reviews

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


As Microsoft unleashes Windows 7 on the world Thursday, the consensus among those who have already taken the new operating system out for a spin is that while it's no PC panacea, at least it's not a repeat of the mistakes Microsoft made with Vista, which was launched in January 2007.

InfoWorld has characterized Windows 7's much-heralded support for multi-touch capabilities (which allow users to manipulate some objects on their monitor using their fingers) as a "disappointment" and "underwhelming" in different articles while pointing out that the new task bar located at the bottom of the main screen is something Mac OS X has offered for years. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The capacity to operate a PC using a touch screen—a feature that both Windows 7 and Mac OS X Snow Leopard offer—is a hit-or-miss proposition. While it's certainly useful if you're browsing the Web or otherwise engaging the interface for only a few minutes at a time, InfoWorld makes the point that users will not likely want to use the touch capability while working for hours at a time. Setting aside the need to keep one's arm extended and elevated when touching the PC screen, InfoWorldnotes, "the finger rarely makes a better mouse than a mouse." This could turn out to be an interesting dilemma for the PC industry in the near term, particularly because many of the biggest PC makers, including HP with TouchSmart and Dell with Studio One, have introduced lineups of touch-enabled PCs.

The New York Timesis more optimistic about Windows 7, pointing out that even though upgrading from much-beloved Windows XP to the new operating system isn't easy, Microsoft has kept "what's good about Windows Vista, like security, stability and generous eye candy, and addresses much of what people disliked," such as Vista's sluggish responsiveness, slavish demand for PC memory, and persistent, alarmist popup boxes.

Regardless of whether Windows 7 is an immediate success, CNET.comreports that the new operating system puts Microsoft on the right track after the Vista detour: "Windows 7 is more than what Vista should have been, it's where Microsoft needed to go." Success with its newest iteration of Windows is particularly important to Microsoft as Apple continues to pick up steam as a PC (and operating system) maker and IBM pushes an open-source Linux-based PC operating system, created in conjunction with Canonical Ltd., called IBM Client for Smart Work.

Image ©iStockphoto.com/ Sawayasu Tsuji

Larry Greenemeier is the associate editor of technology for Scientific American, covering a variety of tech-related topics, including biotech, computers, military tech, nanotech and robots.

More by Larry Greenemeier

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe