Windows 7 How would you rate Windows 7

awesome windows

PCWORLD.com said:

According to Microsoft, [FONT=arial, verdana, helvetica, sans-serif]Windows 8[/FONT] hardware requirements are no greater than those for Windows 7.

Click to expand...

• 1GHz processor
• 1GB RAM for 32-bit OS, 2GB RAM for 64-bit OS
• DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver
• 16 GB HDD free space for 32-bit, 20GB HDD free space for 64-bit

Mitchell_A said:

• 1GHz processor
• 1GB RAM for 32-bit OS, 2GB RAM for 64-bit OS
• DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver
• 16 GB HDD free space for 32-bit, 20GB HDD free space for 64-bit

Click to expand...

Well, I'm good to go, then. I just hope that Windows 8 runs faster on this desktop with a 1.5GHz CPU (AMD Athlon X2 3250e) than Windows 7 does. 7 runs fine, but the CPU pegs easily.

I found a suitable replacement for the CPU, an AMD Athlon Neo X2 6850e, 1.8GHz, which is compatible with my MB, the wattage is the same (22W), and it's HT capable, whereas mine isn't. It should make a 15 to 20% difference in power alone. Not counting what it's HT capabilities can deliver. That would give it 2 cores & 2 threads. Probably won't set the woods on fire, but a potential 20% difference is just that. Mabye the CPU won't peg as much.

Link Removed

But I'll have to wait until November to replace it, as the desktop is under warranty until then. I'll be on the lookout for a new one by summer.

Cat

It is ok as an operating system, although it does take up alot of memory and is a drag on performance. Is is, of course, far better than Vista. Like all offerings from Microsoft, it has extras I can live without but cannot remove or change. I expect Windows 8 will be alot more of the same.

I have been using Windows 7 on between 1 and 4 computers since the Windows 7 Beta first went public. I currently have 3 windows 7 computers. Windows 7, while considerably more stable than Vista, is basically nothing more than Vista under a thick layer of cheap make-up. I still maintain a Windows 2000 computer for certain operations due to its stability, and maintain 2 Windows XP computers for my important work. Windows 7 has some decent capabilities, but in the end, is only fit for play. Windows 8 (I have downloaded a copy of both Developer Preview and Consumer Preview, but have not installed 8 on any computer yet) is looking to be a return of a Vista level OS. One OS just cannot be optimized for everything from a telephone to a corporate desktop client computer.

Windows 7 is a great OS, the best one that MS has released to date. Has many more features than prior versions, more secure than XP/Vista. On low-spec computers, it can be a drag, but for the time being, I'll deal with it. Windows 8 will improve performance on these computers.

I purchased this desktop with Windows 7 x64 installed, to upgrade from XP. Had Windows 7 been a Vista copycat, I would've been a full time Linux user. It is better than Vista, but that just my opinion, some feels the opposite.

For those who don't want to install a lot of extra software, Windows 7 has most everything that the basic user needs. It's own image burner, Windows Defender for spyware protection, MSE as virus protection (this will disable Defender) through Microsoft Update, plenty of Windows Live options, a great Media player, so much for the money.

What I really like is the option to upgrade from Home Premium to Pro by simply entering a key that can be bought through the Microsoft Store (link to Windows Anytime Upgrade is in the Start Menu), or the user can buy the key elsewhere, such as Newegg at a discount, then entering that key. A 5 to 15 minute upgrade, depending upon the speed of your ISP & whatever additional updates needed. No format is required, and all of your settings remain intact.

Which will then allow for Windows Virtual PC with XP Mode to be downloaded & installed, after successful validation. It's best to use IE for this.

There is no such thing as a "perfect" OS, but Windows 7 is far closer than the ones that preceded it. I have 5 installs of it.

Cat

Two things I hate about windows 7 are 1:No classic menus (solved this by installing the Free CLASSIC SHELL). 2:No Mail Client. (MS gives us Live Mail which does not allow copy paste of photos in e-mails, and it does not forward the pictures in e-mails that contain pictures. Outlook Express was so much better). Basically when Win7 support stops I will go to Linux as Win 8 is the worst ever OS to hit the market.

Maybe this is just a matter of IT Pros grow to have a different take on things than others do...

For myself & my colleagues (& interestingly enough, even the manufacture) Outlook Express came to be viewed as a piece of junk and not @ all the greatest thing since sliced bread. There's a (good) reason Outlook Express no longer exists.

And, also, from the perspective of IT Pros... there have, indeed, been some Operating Systems that better or worse than others. And admittedly, Win8 is a departure, in some aspects, from what people have become accustomed but, one would be hard pressed to find an IT Pro (myself included) who would ever say Windows8 is or will be the worst OS ever. From an IT Pro standpoint, many are saying good things about Windows8. For & from an IT Pro, Windows8 is too impressive to be the worst OS ever.

Like many things in life Windows8 is different things to different people.

Cheers,
Drew

This thread seems to be edging toward Windows 8, pro or con, so I would like to add a comment. IT Pros fail to realize that there are hundreds - probably thousands - of non-IT Pro computer users for each IT Pro user. The developers, as well as the "street Pros", fail to realize that they are in the significant minority - probably could say vast minority. IT Pros tinker, and configure, and adjust and know what to do to make their computer do exactly as they wish. The masses have to have a computer "that just works". An OS for the non-Pro and another for the Pro has never been sufficiently developed and now Windows 8 is a huge step the other direction. I just don't believe one OS can be optimized for everything from a cell phone to a corporate desktop client. Early Windows 8 reports are confirming my thoughts. I believe it will prove to be another Vista.

edit: spelling

I've been using Windows 7 since it came out. I'm just an ordinary home PC user with middle skills. I've got used to Windows 7 although I don't think that I could say that I love it. I can also say that I've used all the versions of Windows since Windows 95 except for Vista. It was quite a jump from XP to Windows 7. Worst thing, it seemed to me, was the "extra security"; when I started using Windows 7 I was forever getting warnings that I "needed permissions" to do this and that. I still get the odd warning but not so much now.

Windows 8 .... well I don't know anything about it. I've looked up about it on the web and thought "All those tiles to services/applications I don't use and don't want to use." Some say it's skewed towards tablet computers and mobiles but I just want to use my desktop computer. No doubt the finished product will be rather different from the development versions but I'll just have to wait and see. Somehow I don't think that I'll be hurrying to change to it.

"rr',

Just a quick mention... Windows8 works very nicely on a Desktop PC, even non-Touch.

Cheers,
Drew

People just eat whatever is served to them. Perhaps when you say PC you mean Phone Computer?

No, sorry, thought it was clear that I meant desktop (tower) computer.

Drew

An OS designed for smart phones and tablets running on a tower PC? What a waste of processing power.

Drew said:

"rr',

Just a quick mention... Windows8 works very nicely on a Desktop PC, even non-Touch.

Cheers,
Drew

Click to expand...

Glad to hear that Drew. I hadn't even thought of touch screens The last thing I want is a monitor covered with finger prints Well I won't condemn Windows 8 without knowing much more about it. I guess I sometimes feel out of kilter with the modern mobile world out there.
Rachel

'tanzanos',

Try not to let attitude or thinking it's probably the hip thing to bash the next Windows OS that's coming, soon.

The OS is not, designed for mobile devices & & desktop machines just along for the ride... it's the particularly neat thing about Win8 that by intent & by its technology, an achieved goal is that it runs well on all kinds of hardware. Not only is processing power not wasted... the darn thing doesn't need or use much so, lol, there ain't much to get wasted.

Anyway, maybe, in due time you'll be able to have a more accurate & realistic understanding & view of Windows8.

& to Rachel, don't see it as an issue to "feel out of kilter w/ the mobile world" cus, again, Windows8 absolutely not, just for mobile. The is a special pre-loaded version for mobile devices but, the desktop OS is a really fine & exciting piece of work... And we haven't even seen the final, finished product, yet.

Cheers,
Drew

tanzanos said:

An OS designed for smart phones and tablets running on a tower PC? What a waste of processing power.

Click to expand...

Have you used the OS (Windows 8 CP) to determine this yourself, or are going by other's experiences?

I'm running Windows 8 CP on my PC, & it uses far less resources than Windows 7/Vista/XP does. Using Windows 7, my CPU pegs at 100% if I do much multi-tasking, & my 4GB RAM goes up there also. At idle, with just the system services & security running, the CPU shows 60%, minimum.

Since installing Windows 8 CP, my CPU idles at less than 10%, even with ESET Smart Security 5, MBAM Pro & SAS Pro installed & running. At startup, when everything's updating, it goes to 60 to 70% for a minute, then drops sharply afterwards.

The final version will of Windows 8 on tablets won't even be called that. It's going to be Windows R/T (runtime). A whole different OS than the one designed for desktops.

Cat

First of all I want to say that I like win7 with the exception of its horrid start menu. I use classic menus (classic shell) and my PC idles at approx 10%. If MS had given us the option of classic menus then win 7 would be a very good OS indeed. Now for win8; What good is an OS that uses a fraction less processing power when it takes forever to find anything because everything is not only hidden but one is forced to MODIFY the damn thing if one wishes to put his files where he wants and use the PC how he wants. Win XP and Win 7 (with classic menus) does everything I want it to do and there was absolutely NO LEARNING CURVE. I work much faster with classic menus than the new GUI.
I don't want the OS to think for me all the time. Win 8 may be perfect for facebook but it sure as hell will not do for my work. MS got rid of Outlook express and gave us Live Mail which does not forward pictures and you cannot copy paste into messages any pictures. This is a downgrade if ever there was one.
Now before you go screaming "Get with the times man"! Let me remind you that the wheel has been around for about 6,000 years. The basic design is unchanged because it works perfectly and the only changes have been those of refinement. MS is constantly changing the basic design (Ribbon, Win8) and makes life much harder by hiding everything and removing any semblance of "Intuition" from their software. It took me only a few minutes to learn win 95 when it first came out because it was based on intuition and not fancy candy.
I am a products designer and I have many products that were and are successful simply because I pay attention to USER FRIENDLY, FUNCTIONALITY above all.
Win8 will be the new VISTA! I pray it will be a flop simply because ENOUGH is ENOUGH with serving us garbage simply because they (MS) needs to come up with something NEW!
I can think for myself! Here check this out: My dad tries Windows 8 for the first time - YouTube