| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/12/2009 3:26:51 PM | I do. To be honest, it's only minimally faster but still slow as Vista. It still takes a few minutes just to start it & it still takes up a lot of memory to run. 7's interface almost looks the same as Vista. I'm pretty sure it's slow because of my hardware & my laptop, 7 needs at least 1 GB to run.
I hear XP is still going strong, hell I might even give Linux a shot. What do you all think? | |
|
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/12/2009 5:08:59 PM | Win 7 is what Vista should have been IMO. I have been using one build or another since the public beta was released and haven't gone to anything else since. There are plenty of people I've talked to who are actually looking forward to spending money and buying a legot copy because it actually works.
I haven't noticed this "slow as Vista" you speak of jon6357. Its faster in everything I've done with it. Everything from defragging to installing devices. The "check windows update" for drivers actually works too.
I still have Vista on my C drive as its how this laptop came as a backup, but as I said, I haven't booted to that partition in months. | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/12/2009 9:10:07 PM | Windows 7 will be like the second coming of XP, IMO. Vista had some bad press out of the gate and to my mind was a lot like ME if you remember that version of Windows. By not stating the hardware you are trying to run 7 on, it does make one question what kind of comparison are you trying to make and what kinds of benchmark experiments have you done to justify that it is "still slow as Vista" and what else did you use for comparison?
Vista was kind of doomed from the start by not having a killer application to use and so many people are content with XP. 2 out of my 3 machines still run XP and it'll likely stay that way. My XP boxes both have 2 GB of RAM so there is lots of memory for them with slightly different processors, one being an Intel Pentium M @ 2.13 GHz the other an AMD Athlon FX-60 @ 2.6 GHz. | |
|
- don
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 5 | |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 12:43:33 AM |
Win 7 is what Vista should have been
I agree,
Vista was just an expensive in-betweener
(helping to make people feel like they are getting something really special with Win 7 b/c now they have something really shitty to compare it to)
I upgraded my Vista Ultimate to Win 7RC1 but Fedora 11 is still my main OS.
I think Win 7, XP or Linux *buntu would be fine. I guess it comes down to personal preference & cost | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 1:11:54 AM |
Vista was just an expensive in-betweener
Bing translated:
Vista was just a weener
:)
Windows 7,,,, the 7 stands for 2009 minus 2002.... Aka, how long it has taken Microsoft to realize they haven't made a decent product since Windows XP (AKA Version 2002)
PS: I'm still sitting here by my dead monitor, caused by Windows 7 R.I.P CRT Monitor! | |
|
- don
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 7 | |
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 12:40:19 PM | i don't truly understand why Microsoft doesn't just fix the issues that vista had instead of developing a vista-clone (from what i've seen, i could be wrong, W-7 is a Vista redux)
vista's main issue was press related anyways. ive been running it since RTM. never a hiccup, never crashes. | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 1:16:27 PM |
i don't truly understand why Microsoft doesn't just fix the issues that vista had instead of developing a vista-clone (from what i've seen, i could be wrong, W-7 is a Vista redux)
vista's main issue was press related anyways. ive been running it since RTM. never a hiccup, never crashes.
Press the main issue? No, not by far.
- User Access Control
- Windows Defender
- Windows Vista READY sticker (Vista couldn't run on half of these machines)
- Compatibility with current Business Deployments.
- Instability and constant crashing before installing service pack 1.
- Driver and hardware incompatibility.
- Software incompatibility.
There is a bigger list, but that is the biggest areas of problems. | |
|
- don
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 10 | |
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 1:40:09 PM |
i don't truly understand why Microsoft doesn't just fix the issues that vista had instead of developing a vista-clone
More money, Charge twice, Fix Once (maybe)
Same reason why there was 3 versions of Windows 95, A, B, and C (C which actually had Windows 98 labels on your boot disk created diskette)
and Windows 98, which has Windows 98 SE released only a few months later.
Small changes, big bucks | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/13/2009 2:56:49 PM | XP is to Windows ME what Windows 7 is to Vista...what each OS "should have been but never was".
XP is just what ME was supposed to have been but they couldn't pull it off. Windows 7 is no different in that it's what Vista was supposed to be but they couldn't pull it off.
It's no surprise to me at least to see Windows 7 is just a "Vista Reloaded".
Waste of money if you ask me. They had a good thing with XP once the first SP came out. Vista and now Windows 7 will be epic fails in my eyes. | |
|
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/15/2009 7:57:07 PM | | Windows 7 will actually utilise Dual and Quad Core Processoers better than all the previous windows to, for a high spec computer im putting my money on W7 giving better performance than XP or Vista just any of the old OS's. But for medium/low spec computers stick with XP :P | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/16/2009 5:35:35 AM | everyone please keep in mind
Windows 7 is NOT a whole new operating system, more like a bug fixed version / crap removed (at least so I have read) version of Windows Vista, that is why it looks/feels the same. | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/16/2009 5:50:56 AM | The thing to remember is when MS starts a new OS....there's genearally teams working on entirely different ideas...one team came up with the base kernal that Vista and 7 uses....Vista and Win7 only look alike because they were worked on in parallel. Microsoft doesn't like changing the GUI too quickly. Some people had used Vista and would somewhat be expecting it...some haven't and have no idea.
In reality, while Vista and 7 merely look alike...7 has a LOT more tweaks under the hood than you're giving it credit for. Vista, if anything, seems like a stepping stone from XP. Get used to how XP works...ok, here's Vista..it's fundamentally different..ok..here's Windows 7, it looks like Vista but is different.
It's the same basic kernel...but there is a lot of stuff that was done right...Vista was rushed out anyway. 7 will run better on lower resource hardware than Vista...and Win7 ran faster than Vista on the same hardware from personal expierence.
It's not a Vista upgrade unless you wasted money on Vista...I'm not counting OEM copies you get with a new machine...but I mean you went out and purcahsed a copy of it. I haven't purchased a MS os since a Win XP Upgrade back in 2002. | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/16/2009 9:22:24 PM | In my experience most of the complaints about Windows Vista centered around performance and driver support. Microsoft has a really good article on tweaking Windows Vista to increase performance.
http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/details.aspx?familyid=AB377598-A637-432C-A3C8-1607AB629201&displaylang=en
In my opinion, Windows 7 feels like a polished version of Windows Vista. It loads faster, runs better and has a smaller overall "footprint" than Windows Vista.
On the other hand Windows XP is in the extended support part of its product life cycle. I really wouldn't recommend using it anymore unless you have older hardware that is not capable of adequately running Windows Vista or Windows 7.
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/Default.aspx?LN=en-gb&C2=1173 | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/16/2009 9:37:05 PM | "Windows 7 will actually utilise Dual and Quad Core Processoers better than all the previous windows to, for a high spec computer im putting my money on W7 giving better performance than XP or Vista just any of the old OS's."
Yeah, I'd also have to agree with that statement. I'd also go with a 64-bit version of Windows 7 on either a dual or quad core Intel processor.
32-bit computing has finally reached the end of its usefulness. I predict the next consumer version of Windows will be 64-bit only. | |
|
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/16/2009 10:02:22 PM | | I'm not sure 32-bit is dieing yet, I still find myself having to compile two copies of a program and then a third which does the branching from 32-bit to 64-bit depending on what's supported. It's split evenly though so maybe 2 or 3 more versions of windows before 32-bit dies down enough to not be worth the development. I do find it aggravating though that 32-bit is still so widely used, things which perform great in 64-bit architecture require a few hoops of fire to pull off well in 32-bit. I use the appearance of 64-bit render targets on DirectX video cards as an analog, it's been around for a long while now, but yet you still find newer video cards that don't support them, yet others moved all the way up to 128-bit render targets; the benefits of using those 64-bit render targets are enormous for everything from gaming to computational stuff, but yet it's support is still dodgy at best. | |
|
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/19/2009 8:32:15 AM |
On the other hand Windows XP is in the extended support part of its product life cycle. I really wouldn't recommend using it anymore unless you have older hardware that is not capable of adequately running Windows Vista or Windows 7. You mean like the computers I use? Unless I'm buying a whole new one, I really don't see the point of getting rid of it, just to upgrade. But you are right. If XP is no longer supported, then it might be time to look around for a different OS. Ubuntu seems to look quite good to me at the moment.
32-bit computing has finally reached the end of its usefulness. I predict the next consumer version of Windows will be 64-bit only. I wouldn't quite say that. I know that some companies are still using lots of 32-bit software. They won't want to change to 64-bit Windows, until Windows provides a failsafe way to upgrade all their programmes to 64-bit, with absolutely no problems at all, like IBM AS/400s had in 1997.
That, or they want to change their software entirely, and most companies know that when that happens their revenues drop until they get all the bugs fixed, which can be several months, so they avoid that as much as possible.
The next version of Windows, is going to be whatever OS provides support for 32-bit AND 64-bit programs, under 64-bit CPUs. If Microsoft provides that, then great. If not, then whoever is, will end up taking the lions' share of the market. | |
|
| |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/23/2009 1:46:32 AM | Vista = Finance the big salaries while problems are worked out.
IE let the public beta test Vista and pay again to get the problems fixed (W7)
And if you want a new system that works properly, pay for vista and pay again to downgrade to XP. | |
|
| |
- don
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 25 | |
| Does anyone think that Windows 7 = another Vista upgrade?
Posted: 7/23/2009 11:13:25 PM | A lot of the free Linux distributions are very fast too.
(Because they use less resources & aren't constantly trying to check in with Microsoft on the net so faster net speeds....I think the unix based kernels are just more efficient in general)
& the non-intel mac hardware was designed specifically for mac giving them optimal performance | |
|
Home
login 
