Topic: Windows 7 (Read 5262 times)

Doof · « **on:** January 10, 2009, 09:10:17 pm »

Just wanted to report, for anybody interested, that MC13 appears to run under Windows 7 without any hiccups. I've only been able to do preliminary testing so far, though, and I don't do any TV recording at all, so I can't comment on that either.

I gotta say... Windows 7 is really nice. It installed without a single hitch, and other than one very minor compatibility problem with my HP printer software (which was easily fixed using Windows built in Compatibility mode - basically the HP installer checks for specific Windows version numbers so Windows 7 has to lie to it about what version it is - other than that it works perfectly), it's running beautifully with all of my hardware. I'm still installing software but so far haven't had anything fail. Which makes sense, since Windows 7 is basically Vista with a lot of nice new enhancements.

Anybody else give it a try? If you decide to try it just know that there is a bug in WMP12 that will truncate MP3 files, but there is already a Windows Update that fixes this. So just be sure to install all updates (there's only like 3 of them I think) before using WMP to access any MP3 files. Although I'm sure most people on here will just use MC.

Matt · « **Reply #1 on:** January 10, 2009, 09:24:52 pm »

Good to know things are working well.

Will there be an easy way to prolong the expiration, or upgrade to a release version without starting over? It's hard to run Windows 7 as anything but a test if you know it's going to tank in a few months.

Doof · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2009, 09:35:13 pm »

That I don't know. It expires August 1, 2009, so we got it for 6 1/2 months. Although I don't, I know a lot of people are in the habit of rebuilding their PCs that often anyway. I'm really not worried about it.

The FAQ I read only said that you should be prepared to either reinstall an older version of Windows or a subsequent release. It doesn't really go into detail about whether or not an in-place upgrade would be suitable or if they'd recommend a fresh install. I always recommend a fresh install, though.

jmone · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2009, 10:55:28 pm »

Doof is there anything over Vista that makes it better (or different) for dedicated HTPC use - eg changes in Video / Audio handling / Blu ray / DLNA support etc?
Thanks
Nathan

Doof · « **Reply #4 on:** January 10, 2009, 11:22:48 pm »

Quote from: jmone on January 10, 2009, 10:55:28 pm

Doof is there anything over Vista that makes it better (or different) for dedicated HTPC use - eg changes in Video / Audio handling / Blu ray / DLNA support etc?
Thanks
Nathan

Couldn't really say at this point. I'm still getting my main PC squared away and haven't decided yet if I'm going to install it on my HTPC.

The touch features might come in handy for stuff like that if you have a touch enabled monitor, but I'm sure hardly anybody does yet.

I did notice one thing that was kinda cool, that might not be directly related to HTPC use. I was playing music through my speakers and then realized I'd never tested my USB headset. So I plugged them in and audio playback seamlessly switched from my speakers to my headset. In previous versions of Windows you had to stop playback, then go into the control panel and switch the default audio device in order to switch where your audio went.

I've also read, although I haven't figured out how to do it yet, that you can set certain apps to always output their audio through specified audio devices. That could actually be of benefit for HTPC use.

Also, Windows 7 differentiates between audio playback and communication playback. So you can have your speakers set as your default audio device and a headset as your default communications device. If you're listening to music and a call comes through (like through Skype), then Windows can automatically lower the volume of your music playback during the call.

wilfredjg · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2009, 11:30:50 am »

Downloaded 7. I use Windows Home Server for all my music and photos. Media Center 130104 installed no problem, and also connected to my Home Server and the playback of photos and music works for me.

imugli · « **Reply #6 on:** January 12, 2009, 03:17:59 pm »

Perhaps a little early to report possible Windows 7 bugs

but this crashes when I try and scan for TV channels.

The card works fine in W7MC and with the standard Dvico FusionHDTV software.

gappie · « **Reply #7 on:** January 12, 2009, 04:10:56 pm »

indeed, everything mc seems to be working fine.. for me too, that is. and cccp until now also no problems.

wait how it develops, but it looks good up to now..

gab

ie 8 is a bit buggy though.....

imugli · « **Reply #8 on:** January 12, 2009, 04:28:25 pm »

Crashes when I try to scan TV Channels - DVB-T using DVICO Dual Digital 4. W7MC and FusionHDTV both work OK.

Other than than, all good so far.

Have to say, W7 is pretty impressive. Looks like they've done their homework this time around...

benn600 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 12, 2009, 04:56:59 pm »

A friend of mine installed it and said it looks like a very nice improvement over Vista all around.

newsposter · « **Reply #10 on:** January 13, 2009, 07:36:09 pm »

Even though it's not officially supported, I'm running Win7 build 7000/7004 on VmWare, VirtualBox, and (on a mac) Parallels. My whole XP 'suite' of programs is running in these virtual environments except for 2 or 3 third (fourth??) party utility progs that are designed to reach deep into the XP internals.

I have NOT yet tried to load up MC in any of the virtual machines. Yet.

glynor · « **Reply #11 on:** January 13, 2009, 10:24:40 pm »

I'm getting there... Thats the project for this weekend.

JimH · « **Reply #12 on:** January 14, 2009, 01:17:36 pm »

Windows 7 may corrupt MP3 files:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?board=15.0

glynor · « **Reply #13 on:** January 14, 2009, 01:23:42 pm »

Yeah... Paul Thurrott mentioned it in his recent Windows Weekly podcast, commenting that he was quite surprised that Microsoft released the beta without this (fairly major) bug corrected beforehand. Apparently the bug has been kicking around for a while. This is a better link to the issue (the link Jim posted before is directly to the hotfix for Windows 7 64-bit, but the issue applies to both 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows 7 beta): http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/961367

It isn't clear if this hotfix has been deployed in the auto-updates yet... Has anyone checked?

JimH · « **Reply #14 on:** January 14, 2009, 01:37:17 pm »

Quote from: glynor on January 14, 2009, 01:23:42 pm

It isn't clear if this hotfix has been deployed in the auto-updates yet... Has anyone checked?

I read that it had just been added to the automated updates.

gappie · « **Reply #15 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:22:15 pm »

doof did mention the mp3 problem already in his first post. today i saw some update comming by that repaired some mp3 problem. that was the second time. the first time was just after installing W7. but i did not read the update message to close. so cant remember what was in it. nothing that alarmed me for sure. but then again i dont have mp3 to worry about.

Alex B · « **Reply #16 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:25:50 pm »

I read a few articles about the MP3 issue. I think this explains it well (emphasis added):

From: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Update-Windows-7-Beta-and-Fix-MP3-File-Corruption-Issues-101723.shtml

Quote

... As far as the corruption issue is concerned, the Redmond company informed that it was associated with the process of editing the metadata of MP3 files. However, because of the fact that Windows Media Player is designed to add metadata by default when it is missing, via a feature that is turned on also by default, all MP3 files with large headers in the Windows Media Player and Windows Media Center libraries will become corrupt. Microsoft informed that corrupt MP3 files would lose audio.

“Every time that metadata is edited in an MP3 file that already contains lots of metadata in the file header, some audio at the beginning of the track may be lost permanently. Up to several seconds of audio may be lost,” the software giant informed. “Large headers are common in music files that are purchased from commercial services, because the files usually have large album art. Use of tools to add large album art to existing MP3 files may also cause this audio loss. Specifically, any information that causes the header size to exceed 16 kilobytes will trigger the loss. Each edit will increase the total loss.”

There are two workarounds to prevent MP3 files from being corrupted by Windows 7, in addition to applying the actual update. Microsoft advises users to either set all their MP3 files to Read-only via their properties, or to disable metadata automatic updates in Windows Media Player, through the Tools menu, Options, Library tab, and then un-check the Retrieve additional information from the Internet check box and the Maintain my star ratings as global ratings in files check box.

The company headquartered in Redmond, Washington, also delivered a “Possible solution to the MP3 file corruption issue – if some of your MP3 files have already been affected, you might be able to restore the corrupted MP3 files to their pre-edit status. To do this, follow these steps: in Windows Explorer, right-click a corrupted MP3 file, and then click Properties. On the Previous Version tab, select an earlier version in the File Versions list, and then click Restore. If multiple edits were performed, you may have to revert to the oldest version that is available.”

It is a rather serious mistake from MS. I too am surprised that the problem was not detected and fixed before the beta launch.

The other interesting thing is the possibility to revert to a previous version. I wonder how big the old version cache can be. Would it try to preserve hundreds of gigabytes of old data when a complete media library is tagged? Did Vista already have a feature like this? (I have only used Vista briefly on other people's PCs.)

JimH · « **Reply #17 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:28:53 pm »

Quote from: gappie on January 14, 2009, 02:22:15 pm

doof did mention the mp3 problem already in his first post.

I missed that, thanks. But it is more than just WMP. It appears to be related to any MS change to an MP3 file that has a large header (contains album art, for instance). I just found this in glynor's link:

Quote

Note The metadata for an MP3 file can be edited by Windows Explorer, Windows Media Center, and Windows Media Player. Such metadata includes album art (also known as a thumbnail), artist, album name, track, and several other tags. In Windows 7 Beta, Media Foundation programming interfaces perform metadata editing of MP3 files.

For example, the following actions may cause metadata to be edited:
Automatically or manually importing MP3 files into Windows Media Center or Windows Media Player.
Manually editing ratings or other information on MP3 files by opening the file properties in Windows Explorer, or by using user interfaces in Windows Media Center or Windows Media Player.

glynor · « **Reply #18 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:41:39 pm »

Quote from: Alex B on January 14, 2009, 02:25:50 pm

It is a rather serious mistake from MS. I too am surprised that the problem was not detected and fixed before the beta launch.

According to Paul Thurrott, it was certainly detected and well known in developer builds that have been available for "quite some time". He even implied (but didn't state directly) that there had been a patch available (but not yet public) for the bug before the Beta build went up.

EDIT: That said... Beta is what beta is. It is important to always be aware that it could delete your files, cook your CPU, reformat your drive, and kill your dog.

It isn't like they said it was final or "release candidate" quality. It is the first public beta. We'll see on the whole "only one beta"... Though I wouldn't be surprised since it looks like this really should have been called "Vista SP2" if not for the whole "Vista == Crap" marketing problem.

ZoFreX · « **Reply #19 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:48:33 pm »

Quote from: jmone on January 10, 2009, 10:55:28 pm

Doof is there anything over Vista that makes it better (or different) for dedicated HTPC use - eg changes in Video / Audio handling / Blu ray / DLNA support etc?
Thanks
Nathan

Yes: It comes with a boatload of video codecs already installed! It plays MPEG 4 Part 2 (DivX / XviD etc) and MPEG4 Part 10 (H.264 / x264) out of the box, which is super handy. The codecs seem fairly decent too, although I haven't looked into who made them. The things it can't do out of the box are playing DVDs, as usual (boo) and playing basically any open format (OGG / FLAC / Matroska are all not supported).

Edit: More comprehensive list stolen from Wikipedia:
Containers: MP4, MOV, 3GP, AVCHD, ADTS, M4A, WTV
Codecs: H.264, MPEG4-SP, ASP/DivX/Xvid, MJPEG, DV, AAC-LC, LPCM, AAC-HE
Video encoder: H.264 1-pass CBR Baseline profile up to 1.5 Mbit/s, 640x480pixels at 30 frame/s
Audio encoder: Low complexity AAC stereo at 44.1 or 48 kHz sample rate and 96, 128, 160 or 192 kbit/s bit rate

gappie · « **Reply #20 on:** January 14, 2009, 02:52:37 pm »

Quote from: JimH on January 14, 2009, 02:28:53 pm

I missed that, thanks. But it is more than just WMP. It appears to be related to any MS change to an MP3 file that has a large header (contains album art, for instance). I just found this in glynor's link:

rereading my answer i think it could be read as a 'pfff i knew that because i read the first post'. but that was not what i intended.

. just wanted to say that it was already a problem way back then when the beta became public, about a week ago. i for myself, i hope ape will get all the honours it deserves, but that it will stay underneath the windows radar, so that it gets out of the sight of wmp's smartness tagging etc, even when it would be done right...

gab

gappie · « **Reply #21 on:** January 14, 2009, 03:03:02 pm »

Quote from: ZoFreX on January 14, 2009, 02:48:33 pm

The things it can't do out of the box are playing DVDs, as usual (boo) and playing basically any open format (OGG / FLAC / Matroska are all not supported).

i do think that that makes me feel more secure..

Quote from: glynor on January 14, 2009, 02:41:39 pm

Though I wouldn't be surprised since it looks like this really should have been called "Vista SP2" if not for the whole "Vista == Crap" marketing problem.

maybe true, but i never liked vista, and intalled it on enough machines. seeing only the installation procedure and time and how it reacts to old software and drivers, i would rather say it is what vista should have been.

gab

glynor · « **Reply #22 on:** January 14, 2009, 03:09:22 pm »

Quote from: gappie on January 14, 2009, 03:03:02 pm

i do think that that makes me feel more secure..maybe true, but i never liked vista, and intalled it on enough machines. seeing only the installation procedure and time and how it reacts to old software and drivers, i would rather say it is what vista should have been.

Oh, I agree completely. Reminds me a lot of Windows XP, actually. People forget now, but Windows XP was, at the time, well known as "What Windows 2000 should have been."

EDIT: I think that for the future, Microsoft should seriously consider adopting a "tick, tock" style development cycle for Windows, similar to what Intel is doing with their CPUs. Meaning: concentrate nearly exclusively on alternating goals with each successive release. For example, in the "tick" cycle concentrate on redesigning underlying technology, introducing large new features to the kernel and codebase, and other "infrastructure" and "future targeted" changes, while leaving everything else alone (no major UI changes, don't worry about making new kernel features have a wiz-bang interface, etc). Then, with the subsequent "tock" cycle, concentrate on UI, polish, speed, and making those new features more accessible and usable to non-technical users.

It seems like that's what ends up happening anyway, and making it official and not trying to "do everything at once" might make future releases go a lot more smoothly. Of course, it then becomes more difficult to sell the "tick" versions of the release cycles to the general public, but you sell those to the tech crowd and IT pros (to prep for the next major consumer release).

And, you avoid the public marketing disaster that happened with Vista. Vista just tried to be too much, do too much, and incorporate too much. Plus, Microsoft blabbed way too much and way overpromised. It just seems like the only lesson they learned is the last one.

(PS: If you're interested, the most recent episode of Leo Laporte's TWiT show has some very fascinating insight on the Vista debacle from Robert Scoble who was working at Microsoft throughout much of the process.)

ZoFreX · « **Reply #23 on:** January 14, 2009, 03:22:18 pm »

They actually have something similar in place now, but rather than "tick / tock" their cycle is "minor / major". According to this cycle, Windows 7 is minor... but for marketing purposes they are insisting that it is very much a major release. Obviously, technically, it isn't. But Vista has such a bad image (mostly, I have to say, unfairly) that they are really emphasizing the "Vista done right" aspect. Steve Ballmer has even said that "[Windows 7 is] Vista, but a lot better".

JimH · « **Reply #24 on:** January 14, 2009, 03:30:47 pm »

Quote from: glynor on January 14, 2009, 03:09:22 pm

EDIT: I think that for the future, Microsoft should seriously consider adopting a "tick, tock" style development cycle for Windows, similar to what Intel is doing with their CPUs. ...

We're big fans of the Hickory Dickory Dock method here.

gappie · « **Reply #25 on:** January 14, 2009, 03:43:13 pm »

Quote from: glynor on January 14, 2009, 03:09:22 pm

Oh, I agree completely. Reminds me a lot of Windows XP, actually. People forget now, but Windows XP was, at the time, well known as "What Windows 2000 should have been."

EDIT: I think that for the future, Microsoft should seriously consider adopting a "tick, tock" style development cycle for Windows, similar to what Intel is doing with their CPUs. Meaning: concentrate nearly exclusively on alternating goals with each successive release. For example, in the "tick" cycle concentrate on redesigning underlying technology, introducing large new features to the kernel and codebase, and other "infrastructure" and "future targeted" changes, while leaving everything else alone (no major UI changes, don't worry about making new kernel features have a wiz-bang interface, etc). Then, with the subsequent "tock" cycle, concentrate on UI, polish, speed, and making those new features more accessible and usable to non-technical users.

It seems like that's what ends up happening anyway, and making it official and not trying to "do everything at once" might make future releases go a lot more smoothly. Of course, it then becomes more difficult to sell the "tick" versions of the release cycles to the general public, but you sell those to the tech crowd and IT pros (to prep for the next major consumer release).

And, you avoid the public marketing disaster that happened with Vista. Vista just tried to be too much, do too much, and incorporate too much. Plus, Microsoft blabbed way too much and way overpromised. It just seems like the only lesson they learned is the last one.

(PS: If you're interested, the most recent episode of Leo Laporte's TWiT show has some very fascinating insight on the Vista debacle from Robert Scoble who was working at Microsoft throughout much of the process.)

really interesting thought, glynor.

but when i understand you right, W7 could be seen as a 'tick' release. but then again, maybe that is because they are now in 'tock, tick' sequence.

. i made, and still do a bit, databases for small companies, and one thing i learned is that you could make enough internaL changes and stuff, but it are the easy changes in ui that make the client the most happy. but it could (should!!) be that for a operating system it is the other way around.

gab

Alex B · « **Reply #26 on:** January 14, 2009, 05:11:07 pm »

Maybe it is between the tick and the tock like the guy in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CpGGNQ0Irs

gappie · « **Reply #27 on:** January 14, 2009, 05:16:39 pm »

Quote from: Alex B on January 14, 2009, 05:11:07 pm

Maybe it is between the tick and the tock like the guy in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CpGGNQ0Irs

lol

ozmael · « **Reply #28 on:** January 14, 2009, 09:36:34 pm »

With one exception, I too have found MC 13.0.104 quite reliable on Win 7 Beta. The one exception is that I can't sync audio to my HTC Touch HD running WinMo Pro 6.1. The device is detected appropriately in MC but when I click on Sync, it runs through the conversions, shows '100% Uploading' and then quickly shows 'Error' in the Status column. All of my files are MP3 files and this happens to all my files. It also happens whether I try synching to the internal RAM or to the memory card. When I check the device, nothing has synched. I've tried this on two computers (one running 32 bit Win7 and one running 64 bit Win7) and I get the same result on both.

Ozmael..

JimH · « **Reply #29 on:** January 15, 2009, 07:05:41 am »

Quote from: ozmael on January 14, 2009, 09:36:34 pm

With one exception, I too have found MC 13.0.104 quite reliable on Win 7 Beta. The one exception is that I can't sync audio to my HTC Touch HD running WinMo Pro 6.1. The device is detected appropriately in MC but when I click on Sync, it runs through the conversions, shows '100% Uploading' and then quickly shows 'Error' in the Status column. All of my files are MP3 files and this happens to all my files. It also happens whether I try synching to the internal RAM or to the memory card. When I check the device, nothing has synched. I've tried this on two computers (one running 32 bit Win7 and one running 64 bit Win7) and I get the same result on both.

Could be related to the MP3 bug noted above. Anything that re-writes the tag could be a problem. Inserting or removing cover art, for instance. Possible at least. Try a few without any conversion.

Alex B · « **Reply #30 on:** January 15, 2009, 07:16:44 am »

Quote from: ozmael on January 14, 2009, 09:36:34 pm

... one running 32 bit Win7 and one running 64 bit Win7 ...

I hope you are using dedicated test PCs that do not contain or modify (through LAN) any valuable files.

I am going to install W7 soon, but I'll use a newly formatted and dedicated system drive for testing it. I have a bunch of old bulk drives that I can use.

Doof · « **Reply #31 on:** January 15, 2009, 04:30:18 pm »

I've noticed that Media Editor is kicking off a UAC prompt in 7. Did it do this in Vista? I can't remember.

ZoFreX · « **Reply #32 on:** January 15, 2009, 06:31:46 pm »

I only get the UAC prompt if I switch between versions. So, if I launch 12, close it, launch 13, I get the UAC prompt. If I give it superpowers, then the next time I launch 13, I don't get the UAC prompt. If I then launch 12, prompt again. Etc.

The prompt is:
"Unable to register controls. Please run as a power user."

It doesn't seem to me like it should be necessary to ever run my media player as a power user :S

ozmael · « **Reply #33 on:** January 16, 2009, 04:30:33 pm »

Quote from: JimH on January 15, 2009, 07:05:41 am

Could be related to the MP3 bug noted above. Anything that re-writes the tag could be a problem. Inserting or removing cover art, for instance. Possible at least. Try a few without any conversion.

Sorry, I should have mentioned that I had applied the patch for the MP3 bug on both PCs. I've also tried without conversion and no luck there either.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Windows 7 (Read 5262 times)