Personal Technology » Movie Maker

Even in Test Form, Windows 7 Leaves Vista in the Dust

Walter S. Mossberg — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 02:02:03 +0000

This will be a big year for new operating systems. Apple (AAPL) plans a new version of its Macintosh operating system, to be called Snow Leopard. Palm (PALM) plans an all-new smart phone operating system called Palm WebOS. But the new release that will affect more users than any other will be Windows 7, the latest major edition of Microsoft’s dominant platform.

Microsoft (MSFT) hasn’t announced an official release date for Windows 7, but I would be surprised if it wasn’t available to consumers by this fall. The company has just released the first public beta, or test, version of the software, and I’ve been trying it out on two laptops. One is a Lenovo ThinkPad lent me by Microsoft with Windows 7 already installed, and the other is my own Sony Vaio, which I upgraded to Windows 7 from Windows Vista.

[ See post to watch video ]

I won’t be doing a full, detailed review of Windows 7 until it is released in final form, but here’s a preview of some of the main features of this new operating system and some of my initial impressions.

In general, I have found Windows 7 a pleasure to use. There are a few drawbacks, but my preliminary verdict on Windows 7 is positive.

Even in beta form, with some features incomplete or imperfect, Windows 7 is, in my view, much better than Vista, whose sluggishness, annoying nag screens, and incompatibilities have caused many users to shun it. It’s also a serious competitor, in features and ease of use, for Apple’s current Leopard operating system. (I can’t say yet how it will compare with Apple’s planned new release, as I haven’t tried the latter.)

In many respects, Windows 7 isn’t a radical shift from Vista, but is more of an attempt to fix Vista’s main flaws. It shares the same underlying architecture, and retains graphical touches like translucent Window borders. But it introduces some key new navigation and ease-of-use features, plus scores of small usability and performance improvements — too many to list here.

The flashiest departure in Windows 7, and one that may eventually redefine how people use computers, is its multitouch screen navigation. Best known on Apple’s iPhone, this system allows you to use your fingers to directly reposition, resize, and flip through objects on a screen, such as windows and photos. It is smart enough to distinguish between various gestures and combinations of fingers. I haven’t been able to test this feature extensively yet, because it requires a new kind of touch-sensitive screen that my laptops lack.

But even if your current or future PC lacks a touch screen, Windows 7 will have plenty of other benefits. The most important may be speed. In my tests, even the beta version of Windows 7 was dramatically faster than Vista at such tasks as starting up the computer, waking it from sleep and launching programs.

And this speed boost wasn’t only apparent in the preconfigured machine from Microsoft, but on my own Sony (SNE), which had been a dog using Vista, even after I tried to streamline its software. Of course, these speed gains may be compromised by the computer makers, if they add lots of junky software to the machines. Windows 7 is also likely to run well on much more modest hardware configurations than Vista needed.

The familiar Windows taskbar is more customizable and useful in Windows 7. The program icons are larger, and can be “pinned” anywhere along the taskbar for easy, repeated use. There are also “jump lists” that pop out from the icons in the taskbar and start menu, showing frequently used or recent actions.

A screenshot shows several application windows on the desktop of the Beta version of the Microsoft Windows 7 software.

Windows 7 also cuts down on annoying warnings and nag screens. Microsoft notifications have been consolidated in a single icon at the right of the taskbar, and you can now decide under what circumstances Windows will warn you before taking certain actions.

Compatibility with hardware and software, which was a problem in Vista, seems far better in Windows 7 — even in the beta. I tried a wide variety of hardware, including printers, Web cams, external hard disks and cameras, and nearly all worked fine.

I also successfully installed and used popular programs from Microsoft’s rivals, such as Mozilla Firefox, Adobe Reader, Apple’s iTunes, and Google’s (GOOG) Picasa. All worked properly, even though none was designed for Windows 7.

But there are some downsides to Windows 7. First, you will only be able to directly upgrade Vista computers to the new version. People still using Windows XP will need to perform a more cumbersome multistep process. Microsoft is working on a method to help XP owners preserve all their data during this process.

Second, Windows 7 will eliminate some familiar bundled programs from Windows. Vista’s Mail, Calendar, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker, and Address Book programs are being removed. To get similar basic, free, programs, you’ll have to download them from Microsoft’s Windows Live service, or use alternatives from other companies. Microsoft defends this move as supporting consumer choice and better coordination with Web services, but it does remove out-of-the-box functionality from Windows.

Still, even in its preliminary form, Windows 7 looks very promising, and could well help expunge the bad reputation of Vista.

Find all of Walt Mossberg’s columns and videos online, free, at the All Things Digital Web site, walt.allthingsd.com. Email him at mossberg@wsj.com.

Anyone Can Produce, And Star, in a Video -- Just like Mine

Walter S. Mossberg — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:01:00 +0000

Everyone can now be a video producer. YouTube and other Web sites are filled with short amateur videos created on typical home computers. Even print journalists like me have joined the trend. For the past couple of months, I’ve been recording brief video commentaries to post along with my columns on The Wall Street Journal’s Web site, WSJ.com.

But how, exactly, does one make such a video? I’ve had multiple readers ask me about how I do mine, so I thought I’d explain the process. Because the Journal employs professional producers who help me, the method I use isn’t a purely amateur experience. But most of it is the same as what anyone could do at home. One look at my (ahem) production values confirms that. You can see for yourself at wsj.com/mossbergvideo.

Walt Mossberg gives a lesson on producing your own video for the Web, and lets you off the hook for amateur production values.

My method is pretty simple. Shortly after writing the columns each week, I sit down in front of a computer with a built-in video camera and record the commentary using the free software that comes with the computer. Then, using the same software, I convert the movie into a format our Web producers can use and upload it to them. They add titles and insert footage of any products I’m discussing.

I have recorded most of these videos in my home office in Maryland, using a desktop computer. But when I am on the road, I have used a laptop in hotel rooms from Las Vegas to New York City to Munich. At home, I use a professional microphone supplied by our producers, but on the road, I just use the laptop’s built-in mic. And I don’t use any special lighting.

In both settings, but especially in hotel rooms, I make sure the parts of the room that get in the shot aren’t too messy or distracting. Nobody wants to see a used room-service tray in one of these videos.

So far, I have done all my videos on a Macintosh, either an iMac desktop or a MacBook Pro laptop, and I’ve used Apple’s built-in iMovie software — mostly because it is simple and reliable, and produces good videos despite unpredictable conditions. It also easily exports the videos into QuickTime files, an Apple format that our producers — who also use Macs — can easily use. YouTube can use this format, too, along with other formats.

Such videos could also be created on a Windows computer that has a camera and accompanying video software. I have tested this on a Hewlett-Packard Pavilion dv6000 laptop with a built-in camera, using the free Windows Movie Maker program in Windows XP. The videos recorded fine, and I was able to save them in Microsoft’s Windows Media Video format, which the Journal producers — or sites like YouTube — can use.

Unfortunately, on this particular H-P computer, I’ve had problems with the video and audio being out of sync, an obstacle I’ve never encountered on the Macs. But I assume that doesn’t happen on all, or even most, Windows machines.

My videos are very basic: It’s just me talking into the camera and occasionally holding up a product. I’m not moving around much, or including other people. I don’t usually record multiple takes, and I don’t have time to do editing. Because I don’t care much about production values, there are shadows and the sound is hardly perfect. But you could use the same hardware and software to make more elaborate videos with better lighting and sound. Both iMovie and Windows Movie Maker allow extensive editing, the use of video effects and the addition of titles and transitions.

You could also buy better video software. For instance, our producers in New York edit my videos using off-the-shelf Macs running a high-end Apple video program called Final Cut Studio, which costs $1,299. A simpler version, Final Cut Express, costs $299. On Windows, there are video programs like Adobe Premiere Pro, for $849, or the simpler Premiere Elements, for $99.

What if you want to use a digital camcorder or the video function of a digital still camera, to shoot your videos? Well, you can easily do that and just import your videos from the camera into your Mac or Windows computer using a cable and most video software.

After you’ve imported the video and saved it to your hard disk, you can either directly upload it to YouTube or another Web site or edit it first before uploading.

While my computers have built-in cameras, if yours don’t you can buy an add-on, such as the external iSight camera made by Apple. For Windows computers, Logitech and others make a variety of external cameras. If you use a Mac, I also recommend a small program called iGlasses, a terrific $8 utility that can tweak Apple cameras to compensate for poor lighting or to enhance images. It is available at www.ecamm.com.

Two other tips: Remember to look into the camera, not at the screen, so you don’t appear to be looking away from the viewer. And if you wear glasses, as I do, turn off the screen, so it doesn’t reflect in your glasses.

If I can make videos, so can you.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. See video versions of my reviews at wsj.com/mossbergvideo.