Windows 7 Windows 7 vs. other versions of Windows

Windows Solution Centre?

Reminds me of the horrible HP Solution Center that ships with HP printers and AIO's..... Couldn't they think of a better name?

I think it's funny that people list "pin and unpin items in the start menu" as a new feature. This is already a feature in XP and Vista -- just right click a shortcut in the Start menu and choose "Pin to Start Menu"

I'm hoping they improve the file copying time, it's still awful and still way off XP standards. Although the vista service pack may improve things..

Let's just hope Windows 7 is the "best" version yet!

Radenight said:

Let's just hope Windows 7 is the "best" version yet!

Click to expand...

If you skip Me and Vista they are! Maybe there is a pattern and Visat was just another Mellinium Edition

I never thought Vista was that bad. A lot of complaints were from people that didn't use it enough to get the tips and tricks down. That said, Windows 7 is much better, performance wise, so far. Hopefully MS won't screw it up between now and RTM.

Jeremy said:

If you skip Me and Vista they are! Maybe there is a pattern and Visat was just another Mellinium Edition

Click to expand...

Could be a pattern, I completely agree with you regarding Windows Me, I shudder everytime I hear that.. lol But I have to admit, I like Vista somewhat now that SP1 has been released for a bit. It's pretty stable overall and SP1 definitly fixed/improved alot of things. Although I still hate the fact that if you turn UAC off and back on more then once it will bugger things up pretty bad.. or at least it did on my system and I was forced to format and start fresh... thank god for partitions! I'll still be sticking with Windows 7 as my main OS though.

blackroseMD1 said:

I never thought Vista was that bad. A lot of complaints were from people that didn't use it enough to get the tips and tricks down. That said, Windows 7 is much better, performance wise, so far. Hopefully MS won't screw it up between now and RTM.

Click to expand...

I agree! Here's hoping!!

I made the step from win xp to win 7 directly without going past vista(lol sounds like monopoly and I just passed go, anyway). And there are not any problems at all, I am exploring to what end programs and utilities can be used and installed. How well the codecs handle and how much of the drivers that work. And so far it's all good. Going to reinstall soon and get the 6801 build for 64 bit win7.

Compared to winxp sp3 win7 breaks win xp by several miles. And it should! because it's a new os and will have the latest coding in it (hopefully).

Can't speak how it compares to vista... Many functions that where "hidden" in xp are shown more easily in win 7.

re

windows 7 is another giant leap for microsoft. They took everything they new that went wrong with VISTA and redid them miraculously. I use windows 7 as my main operating system. My build is 6933. The windows peek feature is incredible considering you just go over the little thumbnail and it brings that window to the front for you to see.

I think it's safe to say after all that's happened with Vista and 7 so far that Vista was one of those OS's that was ultimately "rushed" out in order to have something "new" on the market since XP was ageing quickly. Vista layed down the foundation needed to release that "something new" and 7 is the end result that Vista should have been... So really, comparing 7 to Vista is pointless in my opinion as like I said, Vista was just there to set the foundation for something new and "evolutionary"...

And if I'm completely wrong.. well then we'll have another "Vistastrophy" on our hands then won't we...

I think that Vista was exactly what they planned it to be, and XP was the 'oops'. Microsoft made the mistake of giving XP those "forgiving" hardware requirements (I've seen it run on a P2 233MHz with 128 MB of RAM and a 4 MB Video Card) instead of having it take the specs a step further. That was why Vista was such a huge "upset", was that it was too much of a leap from XP, there was no middle step because XP didn't take that placeholder. If you look at 2000 vs Vista, and XP vs Vista, it's pretty much the same thing. They have almost the same differences. Really, XP should have been brought out about two years later, and should have had a bit more 'weight' as far as hardware, and we wouldn't be whining about Vista now.

There's no doubt in my mind that 7 will be evolutionary, but the question is, would it really be that evolutionary if XP had been a real step towards Vista? I think not, because in that case we'd still be on the same upward track.

Kyle

I completely disagree with what you are saying. I agree that they did make a big jump. But Microsoft wanted to let people know that this is the 21st century and if you are going to keep up you need to go big and powerful and come out with the most high tech OS possible.

iroken.

That makes no sense.
Hold on a sec, lets make a bloated, under-achieving, practically 'XP SP3' with a Facelift OS, and crank up the spec needs, cause we need a 'powerful' OS? That doesn't even make sense.

I dont want to get into a huge argument over this. Im just saying that this was one of the reasoning factors behind the VISTA OS System. They wanted to make it flashy and fast at the same time.

Flashy and Fast?
Considering that when Vista dropped most people were running single core 2 GHz Processors and >1GB of ram, Fast didn't seem to be their aim.

If i remember correctly microsoft doesnt make processors...... Thats right intel and amd do. That is the biggest problem microsoft just gave them a kick in the rear end to get them started

Though I'm staying neutral in this little back and forth, I am going to restate that I think Vista was ultimately rushed out in order to get something new on the market. I mean look at the amount of "updates/upgrades" Mac Os's went through in the 6 years that XP was "mainstream"... people are stupid.. they'll use something new until something else new comes out, and companies like MS know this.. so what did they do.. they rushed out an unfinished OS in order to "keep up" with Mac and have something new on the market.. thus increasing the number of PC sales.

There's no denying that PC sales were falling and rather quickly before Vista came out. Why? Well one reason was because Windows XP was yesterdays news.. It didn't matter that it ran flawlessly and still does to this day.. The fact is people were tired of it and wanted something new...Then once the doomed Vista was released, PC sales once again started to rise.. and why is this? (It doesn't fu%$king matter WHAT Vista is, ie:"XP SP3 with a facelift") it's because it was something new, it was something that made people want to go out and buy a pc. And guess what.. it worked. And the same thing will happen when Windows 7 is released. Though not on such a large scale in my opinion simply because of the huge scar Vista has left on Microsoft. But none the less it will still happen.

Unfortunately we live in a world where the "mainstream" dominates the majority of sales when it comes to things like PC's. And I'm sorry but there's no way empires like Microsoft are gonna sit back and watch sales decline and not "do something" about it. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with either of you on this, I'm simply saying that IMO Vista was a huge marketing ploy and Windows 7 is the "true" next step as far as Microsoft OS's are concerned.