Vista or Windows 7 ? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Vista or Windows 7 ?


rfrf
06-21-2009, 08:11
I am thinking about getting a new laptop computer. Should I get a Vista now or wait for the introduction of Windows 7 in October ? All of your respnses are greatly appreciated.

RF

IndyGunFreak
06-21-2009, 08:21
I just can't warm up to Vista( I did try... briefly), and have no experience w/ 7... I'd probably look at finding a good laptop w/ XP, then do a clean install of 7 when it comes out.

IGF

MavsX
06-21-2009, 09:12
7 duuuude

ARs&AKs
06-21-2009, 10:01
Windows Vista was the technology disaster of the decade.

coq
06-21-2009, 11:45
Mac OSX

RDW
06-21-2009, 13:09
NO problems with VISTA 64B, or Office 07 here.

bchandler
06-21-2009, 13:23
I don't have problems with Vista, but it is harder and less intuitive to use (Office 2007 vs Office 2003, anyone?). The platform itself if stable, though.

crystalphoto
06-21-2009, 14:02
I like Vista, but have Win 7 on two machines and like it more.

Hokie
06-21-2009, 14:05
I don't have problems with Vista, but it is harder and less intuitive to use (Office 2007 vs Office 2003, anyone?). The platform itself if stable, though.

Office does not equal Vista. I have had no problems with ether Office 07 or Vista.

rfrf
06-21-2009, 14:11
Seems like a split decision ? How long would you wait for the bugs to be worked out of Windows 7 ?
I do appreciate all of your input.

RF

gh0st614
06-21-2009, 14:35
windows 7 beta seemed more solid then vista ever did.

bchandler
06-21-2009, 17:38
Office does not equal Vista. I have had no problems with ether Office 07 or Vista.

I don't have a problem with Vista either, per se, it's just that some simple things seem more complicated in Vista. For instance, when needing to change something in the control panel, the icons and nomenclature in XP are such that it's easier to figure out where you need to go to change what you need to change. Also, I needed to change Vista from the "dummy" user format that is it's default to XP analogues to get any functionality out of it. For example, in the dummy default, when going into the control panel, it just asks you what you want to do, without giving you any real options. If your choice isn't on the simpleton list, you don't know what to do. But change the format to list or icons and it is like XP again and simple to use. Not to mention the UAC that was extremely annoying and, in my opinion, insulting.

So once someone has changed all the default new-computer-user options to something more functional, you basically have XP with a pretty face lift and more RAM requirement.

havensal
06-21-2009, 18:59
I like Vista, but have Win 7 on two machines and like it more.

windows 7 beta seemed more solid then vista ever did.

+1 to both!

7 is the bomb. :wavey:

cdemarse
06-21-2009, 19:21
Windows Vista was the technology disaster of the decade.

Agreed. I hate it.

Sgt. Schultz
06-21-2009, 19:56
I have Vista x64 on two machines and Windows 7 x64 on another and while I don't have any complaints about Vista I really like Windows 7 a lot more.

Patrick Graham
06-21-2009, 20:05
I don't have problems with Vista, but it is harder and less intuitive to use (Office 2007 vs Office 2003, anyone?). The platform itself if stable, though.

I agree.

What was microsoft smoking when the did the user interface for Office 2007?

Also, some of the changes in Vista seem to be changes for the sake of change and not for any real technical reason.

Sgt. Schultz
06-21-2009, 20:15
What was microsoft smoking when the did the user interface for Office 2007?I posted this a few minutes ago in another post but since you brought it up ...

Go here … http://in.geocities.com/shahshaileshs/

… for some free Office 2007 add-ins that will replace the new ribbon and give you the "Classic" file menu from older versions of Office.

grokdesigns
06-21-2009, 20:47
I would recommend waiting for 7. Starting next month sometime, you will start seeing computers that are eligible for free upgrades to Windows 7.

quickcanary
06-22-2009, 05:46
Windows 7 RC1 feels faster, more polished, and more stable than Vista. It lacks many of Vista's little annoyances and the changes that have been made seem to actually make sense.

In short, I would skip Vista since 7's improved performance should be noticeable on a laptop where performance is usually neutered a bit compared to desktops. But performance isn't the only reason I prefer 7; it really is more well thought out than Vista was.

Linux3
06-22-2009, 06:28
Either is something less.

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?CS=19&kc=6VAFF&oc=dncwzl1&dgc=CJ&cid=24471&lid=566643&acd=10495476-1260291-

Pierre!
06-22-2009, 09:34
Seems to me that MS offered purchasers of Win Vista an upgrade to Win 7 when it goes to RTM.

I can't recall the dates, but it should be easy to find at MS.

I prefer Win 7, and have been running it since the first Beta was released. Far superior to any other MS OS at this time.

Ah HaH - Found a 'Leaked Memo' reference that will give you some insight to the potential upgrade offer:
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/06/leaked-memo-windows-7-upgrade-program-starts-june-26.ars

HTH

tampashooters
06-25-2009, 17:02
If you want a computer, buy one. If you wait for the next best thing, you'll wait forever. Vista is fine. People going ape over windows 7 are only using a Beta version, i really hate to say it, but it isn't a whole lot different than Vista. Upgrades are only gonna cost $50 to Win 7. As with any MS product, I'd wait for the bugs to be worked out...

Linux3
06-25-2009, 18:20
If you want a computer, buy one. As with any MS product, I'd wait for the bugs to be worked out...

Have they worked any out yet?

Sorry, I just had to say it.

grokdesigns
06-25-2009, 20:00
i really hate to say it, but it isn't a whole lot different than Vista.
You must not have used it very much. The performance is vastly superior to Vista. And even as a beta, it has far fewer bugs than past MS betas. I have been using it exclusively since build 7000 and haven't had any issues.

ronterry
06-26-2009, 02:27
The only real issues I had with Vista, was it would for no reason lose windows settings?
It would be fine for a month, and than just fruit.
Other than that, my Vista system ran 24/7 for weeks at a time without having to reboot. XP ~ hell I had to reboot everyday to every other day!

Testing 7232 right now, and so far so good, and I did an upgrade straight from Vista x64.
MS needs to realize that this is an important function, cause if I have to do a fresh install - man it takes me ten hours to get all the apps and setting on there.
The upgrade took about 1.5 hours or so, and everything migrated, except for the pinned apps on the start menu. It even kept my system part of my domain, and my Personal & computer certs, which was cool.
The only thing I don't care for is the taskbar apps that are pinned take up to much room, and I can't control the height of the start menu. I hate having to scroll down the program list! Vista I could enable recent programs - set list to 10 - apply - the disabled recents - apply, and it made my start menu nice and tall. Appears they killed that in Win7.


On the Office 2007 - boy I agreed 100% when I first started using it. But now, I know where everything is, it grew on me to where I actually like it... It was sort of how IE defaults with the file list turned off ~ Alll no you did-ant, and I still turn that back on:)
It seems in there quest to dumb down the interface for layman's, it makes us power users look like retards trying to find the simplest function!

Hey do you guys remember Microsoft BOB? :rofl: I think there trying to lay that crap on us!

Boy I wish I made this stuff up!
http://i.swebee.com/content/microsoft-bob.jpg

Tennessee Slim
06-26-2009, 06:32
Win7 SP1 ...and not a minute sooner. I'm long since past any urge to pay Microsloth for the privilege of being a beta tester.

ronterry
06-26-2009, 11:12
I tell you what TS, I never seen more builds in my life with an OS.
Win7 builds we're popping up ever week almost!!!
I jumped on 7232 cause I figured they got the engine in it's final state, and the only thing left is what desktop wallpaper will be the default on the RTM...

quickcanary
06-26-2009, 11:22
Win7 SP1 ...and not a minute sooner. I'm long since past any urge to pay Microsloth for the privilege of being a beta tester.

The Win7 beta and RC1 were/are free. I was a bit hesitant at first to make it my primary OS, but Win7 is the best thing to come from MS in quite some time. Very stable and polished. Honestly, it doesn't feel like I'm "testing" anything. I have to use PCs for several hours a day and if Win7 wasn't up to snuff I'd happily go back to XP until I felt that the kinks were ironed out! :)

mapwd1702
06-26-2009, 11:26
I have really liked Vista, I don't know what all the bad press was/is about. It has been perfectly stable for me. I am running Win 7 evaluation copy on an older laptop and it runs really well also and all my hardware worked with it! so that's a plus. I will upgrade to Win 7 when it launches but have no regrets getting a Vista machine.

ronterry
06-27-2009, 13:59
Map! you said it! I have no idea why Vista got a bad rap. Has been rock solid on three machines! Win7 is great, but I don't care for the pricing going from Vista to Win 7!!!
This is more of a super service pack than a new OS. Certainly not like going from XP to Vista?
While we're at it, WTH was the deal with the bad rap with Windows ME vs Windows 98?
ME was solid!!! I guess people can't make there own decisions, and take a bunch of subjective crap on the net as law. Sort of like Obama and the news?

mapwd1702
06-27-2009, 15:13
gotta disagree with ya' on the ME system, I had it and it was OK, but it did crash a lot, I got tired of seeing the Blue Screen of Death. 98 was a far better OS than ME.

sappy13
06-27-2009, 16:19
If i were you i would wait since its so close to october if you are able to. Although i have not had any problems with vista ultimate on my laptop, it works perfectly fine for me.

Sgt. Schultz
06-27-2009, 19:25
While we're at it, WTH was the deal with the bad rap with Windows ME vs Windows 98? So you were one … M$ is looking for you, they had heard rumors about a satisfied ME user but they never could find proof. :supergrin:



There were so many issues with ME that the company I worked for at the time required that all new computers be downgraded to Windows 98 worldwide.

It was slower then 98
It had serious stability issues.
It had no real mode DOS support.
It had shutdown problems.
Upgrades would hang because of incompatible third-party programs, hardware device drivers, and utilities.

… ME was so bad M$ pulled it in less than a year.

Also everything new that Windows ME brought to the table could be downloaded from the Windows update site free. The only thing good about ME is that it introduced the first version of system restore … something ME users needed frequently.

I remember a joke at the time was that if you upgraded to ME from an older version of Windows, you might feel that the term Millennium refers to the length of time it will take to fix the glitches.




.

ronterry
06-28-2009, 13:54
:rofl:

I guess I go lucky? It ran fine on my machine I had at the time, and to be honest I didn't pay for it though :whistling:

Todesengel
06-28-2009, 17:05
Os x ;)

Big Al 24
06-28-2009, 18:27
I think they're both fine, but 7 is leaner and meaner. If I was going to spend money on an OS now, I'd preorder windows 7 while it's still cheap.

lee2
06-28-2009, 20:50
windows 7 is what vista should have been.
:cool:

solomansousana
06-29-2009, 09:11
My new laptops, quadcore pent 4's along with 2 new quad core pent 4 desktops should be arriving from dell this week, I ordered them with Vista Business Ultimate 64bit with a free upgrade to Windows 7. I've heard from the IT department at the hospital that windows 7 shows to be far more stable and dependable than Vista but I will most likely hold off upgrading my new comps to windows 7 until it's first SP1 update disk is produced.

ronterry
06-29-2009, 12:29
I thought Windows 7 SP1 was Vista itself :supergrin:

USC Glocker
06-29-2009, 18:58
Everyone likes to bash Vista, however it is a solid operating system, especially since SP1, and has a greater installed base than OS X and Linux....combined. Also, there is a reason Win7 is being released to manufacturing a full 3 months before its general availability to the public. It’s so companies can get ready for it, something they never did with Vista, hence software incompatibles. After all, all Microsoft does is create the OS, its other software/hardware manufacturers' responsibility to be sure their products work as advertised with it.

With that said, Windows 7 is a refinement on Vista. It is more polished and more finely tuned, so it runs faster and (in my experience with the RC x64) is sold as a rock. At this point, I believe companies are already offering free upgrades to Win7 if you purchase a Vista machine, so go ahead pick up a new computer. You'll be satisfied with Vista, and ecstatic about Windows 7.

Have they worked any out yet?

Sorry, I just had to say it.

KharToon
07-02-2009, 22:03
Windows Vista was the technology disaster of the decade.

Well put. Windows 7 is what XP was to Windows Me. Vista SP1 with at least 2GB of RAM is ok but don't even attempt it with 1GB of RAM. MS Engineer admitted to me that they grossly understated Vista hardware requirements.

Anways, take it from a MS Certified Systems guy, wait for 7.

Devorzhum
07-04-2009, 10:03
Those of you saying Vista 64x runs flawlessly on your system - go buy a lottery ticket because apparently you've dodged the bullet. I use mine for everything from video editing to graphic design and it never makes things easy....

Let's start with the display driver crashes, that problem continually comes up on my 64 bit system. I have 8 gig of Ram, a Quad Core 2 and a Terrabyte drive but the thing still crawls. The OS makes extremely poor use of good hardware, in my opinion.

Service Pack 2 deprived me of the ability to burn CDs and DVDs, along with having to redo all of my settings. I know why Microsoft does Service Packs - it would be more expensive for a MS rep to show up at your house and physcially smash your PC. Much cheaper to wreck your machine on line and give the user the heavy hint that it's time to buy something new!

After every update it refuses to acknowledge the Dell HD monitor exists.

I have solid firewall and antivirus protection.

I've been a windows person since the early 1990s, but what I want to know now is this -

Can a person run Adobe Creative Suit 3 Master Collection on a Linux Platform?

If the answer is yes, then next time Vista pulls one of it's cute jokes I'm reformatting my PC and installing Ubuntu or something similar.

I won't go Mac Pro, I'm not looking to downgrade and spend 10 times the money, but Vista has soured me on Windows from here on in.

grokdesigns
07-04-2009, 11:51
Can a person run Adobe Creative Suit 3 Master Collection on a Linux Platform?
Nope. Since you're looking into reformatting anyway, I would HIGHLY recommend downloading the Windows 7 64-bit RC. It doesn't expire until June 2010, so you'll have plenty of time to evaluate it. It runs SO much better than Vista, I especially notice the difference in things like loading Photoshop CS4.

ronterry
07-04-2009, 14:57
I would wait personally. My Vista machine ran flawless, but there still a few annoying bugs with Win7 post RC (Build 7232) mainly involving my NForce 680i Raid, and networking is a bit fruity probably also dealing with the NForce drivers. When I use MS drivers, it kills the system to the point I have to use System restore.
Those annoying Video failed to respond messages have pretty much cleared up for me about six months ago. I have reason to believe those where mainly Nvidia's driver issues, and possibly some heat issue I addressed a while back.

Probably the main reason my Vista system ran flawless is because I did keep the board the video all Nvidia. However I'm probably the craziest dude out there to run five drives in a Raid 0 setup! I backup my important stuff often, and most programs I set to automatically create backups across the network on a Raid 5.
...and this is where Windows 7 is just not optimized yet. There's been a couple times where I loose access to my explorer, meaning no access what so ever to my system drives or any storage for that matter, until I rebooted. Sometimes it hangs for a few seconds on mundane apps for no reason that would normally pop up instantly with Vista.
So Windows 7 still needs some work...

Had a chance to play with Virtual XP on Windows 7 which works, but slow as heck!!! Even pinball is slower than snot! I like that MS is providing this at no cost, but right now your better off dual booting.

I have complete and utter faith that Windows 7 is going to set new benchmarks, but these big name Hardware providers should not drag there feet on x64 drivers like they did with Vista, and we should see commercials trashing Macs by September :)

One more thing that Windows 7 did NOT address with Vista which is annoying! If for any reason you don't so a polite shutdown, you have to log-on to your favorite websites again! I guess it kills the cookie or what not ~ I can stand the S***!!!


BTW: I do a little blu-ray authoring on my system, and I can tell you Win7 works fine with VideoStudio 12, AnyDVD-HD, and NERO. My Elaborate Bytes Virtual ISO drives work flawlessly also.

Tennessee Slim
07-04-2009, 15:42
Microsloth never Never NEVER has released a polished v1.0 OS. They go to market when 90% of the bugs are fixed and the people who buy that initial release become beta testers to help fix the remaining 10%. Plus they help offset some of MS's costs for the final debugging. That's Bill's interpretation of the 90/10 rule.

If you really depend on your OS, unless Win7 promises to do something you need to do and can't live without, I'd wait on SP1. Otherwise, you're paying for the privilege of being a volunteer beta tester.

Sgt. Schultz
07-04-2009, 16:15
Microsloth never Never NEVER has released a polished v1.0 OS. They go to market when 90% of the bugs are fixed and the people who buy that initial release become beta testers to help fix the remaining 10%. Plus they help offset some of MS's costs for the debugging. That's Bill's interpretation of the 90/10 rule.

If you really depend on your OS, unless Win7 promises to do something you need to do and can't live without, I'd wait on SP1. Otherwise, you're paying for the privilege of being a volunteer beta tester.I was just flipping channels when I can across "Tomorrow Never Dies" and they where discussing new software ...

Carver: Mr. Jones, are we ready to release our new software?
Jones: Yes, sir. As requested, it's full of bugs, which means people will be forced to upgrade for years.
Carver: Outstanding.

... that's probably how a meeting goes at M$ headquarters :rofl:

PeterJasonMN
07-04-2009, 16:15
NO problems with VISTA 64B, or Office 07 here.


Same. My ONLY complaint is the old file search feature was better.

archeryislife
08-19-2009, 09:56
Wait for 7. I just put 7 RTM on my laptop from technet and it runs MUCH better. So far I'm quite impressed with the results. The only problem I had was video drivers, which was solved after some research and modded INF file.

inthefrey
08-19-2009, 10:38
It depends greatly on your machine. Vista is a memory hog. I have 30 computers in my office. I administer all of them. They all run XP Pro.

I would say, if your laptop, desktop or tower comes with Vista, it has probably been tweeked to run it just fine. However, I WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND a person upgrade to Vista on a system more than 2 years old. You are just asking for problems. Very soon, a computer bought 3 years ago will not be able to run the simplest applications. (oh yeah, I wish I had Office 2003 back - I hate 2007)


Technology Rule #1: Buy the fastest rig you can afford - then it'll last 4-5 years.
Technology Rule #2: Always wait for serivice pack 2

BigSexy
08-19-2009, 12:16
I picked up a laptop for the folks here a couple of months ago, they had busted the hinges for the lid on their dell. Turns out I was able to fix the dell, and I have this extra mid-range HP laptop.

It came with Vista on it. It was very sluggish, unresponsive and just felt bloated. I threw XP on there but the modem (shut up, they live in the sticks) and sound drivers died after it came out of suspend. I installed windows 7 here a week ago and I've been fairly impressed with it. I wouldn't rush out to pay to upgrade an XP box, but I wouldn't be looking to "downgrade" a Windows 7 box to XP like I did with the Vista pre-installs I've received.

It seemed as quick as XP to do basic functions. Beyond that.../shrug it's windows. If you want to really use a PC install Linux.

martyj
08-20-2009, 23:37
Vista is a joke for an operating system for all kinds of reasons. Boot loader is very poor on vista and highly coroptable. Think of how it is designed. The thing microcrap has the biggest problem with is exploader and vista explorer checks in six places before it goes out of the computer. So if explorer is infected you now have a home made worm virus. Uses more power to do nothing 700mg of ram to run the desktop.
Windows 7 is based on server 2008 which wont work as a server program unless you load 2003 server into it as a virtual machine. That alone makes you wonder if they are not selling you a second hand operating system right there.
It doesnt work for what they designed it for so lets sell it to the public and make money from them.
Go back to XP if you have to run microsoft and you will never regret it. I have set up virtual computer to run xp inside of vista which is better than running vista all the time.
Its just a bad deal all the way around if someone sold you a car that ran like vista they would of been sued.


If you do like vista and like all the bells and wistles than switch to linux sabayon.
It has everything vista thought they had plus more. Rotating desktops with the scroll of the mouse.

JohnBT
08-21-2009, 07:10
"700mg of ram"

I don't have any of that kind. Where can I get some? :)

grokdesigns
08-21-2009, 09:45
Vista is a joke for an operating system for all kinds of reasons. Boot loader is very poor on vista and highly coroptable. Think of how it is designed. The thing microcrap has the biggest problem with is exploader and vista explorer checks in six places before it goes out of the computer. So if explorer is infected you now have a home made worm virus. Uses more power to do nothing 700mg of ram to run the desktop.
Windows 7 is based on server 2008 which wont work as a server program unless you load 2003 server into it as a virtual machine. That alone makes you wonder if they are not selling you a second hand operating system right there.
It doesnt work for what they designed it for so lets sell it to the public and make money from them.
Go back to XP if you have to run microsoft and you will never regret it. I have set up virtual computer to run xp inside of vista which is better than running vista all the time.
Its just a bad deal all the way around if someone sold you a car that ran like vista they would of been sued.


If you do like vista and like all the bells and wistles than switch to linux sabayon.
It has everything vista thought they had plus more. Rotating desktops with the scroll of the mouse.
I understand you're dissatisfied with Vista, but you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The home-made worm virus comment makes so little sense I can't even address it.

Windows has shared kernels between consumer and server operating systems since XP/2003. Vista/2008, 7/2008R2 share kernels, there's nothing wrong with this. You're not getting a "second-hand" operating system. Of course Windows 7 won't work as a "server program", it's a consumer desktop operating system (although you actually can run a lightweight server for just about anything-HTTP, FTP, file/print). I'm having trouble reading your sentences, so maybe you were saying 2008 won't run as a server program unless you run 2003 as a VM. This is absolutely, unquestionably incorrect. Server 2008 is Microsoft's current server operating system and can do anything Server 2003 can do and more.

"700mg of ram"

I don't have any of that kind. Where can I get some? :)

700mg RAM requires a prescription from your doctor.

Boxerglocker
08-21-2009, 11:29
You wife works at Microsoft and I'm using the disc downloaded BETA version of Windows 7 she got me, it's definately a truly more refined vista. IMHO well worth the wait.

glock19_fan
08-21-2009, 11:44
I tried out the very first beta of W7 and it was vastly better than Vista.

JohnBT
08-21-2009, 19:49
I'm not paying $120 for an upgrade from Vista. Forget it. The tech guys at work love W7. Forget it anyway. No money for MS. Vista has worked for me for a year or so and MS doesn't need any more of my money. I'll wait for W8 or W9 or something. You know there will be one.

If I can make Vista work, anybody can. Even my 87-year-old father can.

OTOH, only I can unhook a functioning 50-foot cable; run it down through the floor, across the basement ceiling and back up through the floor to the FiOS router and not get a connection. It's a new $10 cable and worked for a week across the chair tops, tables and such. :) It was unplugged for all of 30 minutes. Good thing it's just draped across the pipe hangers and joist supports in the basement because it'll be easy to take down. All this foolishness because my wireless connection wouldn't support the entire 20Mbps I'm paying for and I wanted to wring the last couple out of it. Got 20.147 last Sunday morning.

John

Drjones
08-22-2009, 13:00
I don't have problems with Vista, but it is harder and less intuitive to use (Office 2007 vs Office 2003, anyone?). The platform itself if stable, though.


Like anything new, it takes a little getting used to. I felt the same way when I first tried Office 2007 on my new work computer and still had 2003 on my home unit; 2007 felt awkward, but I definitely got used to it pretty quick.

I'm not going to say that the layout of either one is better than the other, they are just different.

As far as Vista vs. I guess you are talking XP, they are pretty much identical as far as how they function, except Vista has a lot more annoying garbage to get in your way, such as the User Account Control that pops up just about every time you hit a key ("You just hit the letter "H" - are you sure you want to do this?") and the network stuff - Vista asks you to set a location each time you connect to a new network - home, public, office, etc.

Just leave me alone & let me connect. :upeyes:


Anyhow, as far as Vista vs. 7, if you have a very powerful machine with a very fast processor, graphics card, and at least 3GB+ of RAM, Vista is OK.

I just installed 7 on an old machine I've got laying around and am not really thrilled with it. They basically took the Vista/XP interface we have been using since forever and made it so that you no longer have bars on the taskbar showing you which programs you have open - everything is "pinned" to what used to be the "quick launch" bar.

Imagine looking at your quick launch toolbar, and that's all you have to show you what programs you have open - no text labels.

Example, if you have Firefox "pinned" to the taskbar because you use it a lot, when you click on the FF button in 7, it opens FF, of course. But then if you want to open another FF window (not a tab - sometimes I want a new window open) you have to right-click to open a new window - left-clicking on the button when you already have the program open simply brings up one of the open windows.

My initial impression is that with Win7, Microsoft took away one of the greatest features of windows - the ability to instantly see what programs are open with a glance at your taskbar.


Anyhow, I don't want to type forever about this.....at the end of the day, I'm not impressed with Win7, and really didn't care much for Vista. IMO, neither offer significant improvements in UI or useability over XP.

Vista really requires a very powerful machine to run properly, and even then, it sure isn't any improvement over XP.

Honestly, I'd buy XP and just keep using that.

On the other hand, we're probably going to have to migrate to 7 at some point, so you may want to just get used to it now.

I can't really make a final judgement on 7 since I haven't played with it enough, but my first impressions are not favorable.

Way to go, Microsoft. :upeyes:

Sgt. Schultz
08-22-2009, 15:32
I just installed 7 on an old machine I've got laying around and am not really thrilled with it. They basically took the Vista/XP interface we have been using since forever and made it so that you no longer have bars on the taskbar showing you which programs you have open - everything is "pinned" to what used to be the "quick launch" bar.

Imagine looking at your quick launch toolbar, and that's all you have to show you what programs you have open - no text labels.

Example, if you have Firefox "pinned" to the taskbar because you use it a lot, when you click on the FF button in 7, it opens FF, of course. But then if you want to open another FF window (not a tab - sometimes I want a new window open) you have to right-click to open a new window - left-clicking on the button when you already have the program open simply brings up one of the open windows.

Here’s how to add the XP/Vista Quick Launch toolbar to Windows 7 …

First unlock the taskbar, then right-click on an open area of the taskbar and choose Toolbars - New Toolbar from the menu. Now copy and paste %appdata%\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch into the location bar. Make sure that the location bar shows the full path then click the Select Folder button. That's it ... Windows 7 has added the Quick Launch toolbar on the taskbar. Finally turn off the Show Text & Show Title from the menu and move it where you want it.



BTW: the Vista User Account Control is easily disabled.

JohnBT
08-22-2009, 17:32
I fixed my uncooperative 50-foot cable to the router. I unplugged both ends, spit on them and wiped them off on my t-shirt. :) Must have picked up some cobwebs in the the basement.

"if you have a very powerful machine"

All I have a year-old Q9450 on a basic Intel board and a middling video card. It just putts along and drags Vista with it. Actually, it's probably shoving Vista down the highway and kicking it as it goes. "Hurry up, hurry up."

John

TuxthePenguin
08-24-2009, 20:16
Windows 7 hands down, and get the 64bit version (no compatibility issues either). Might as well make the jump now.

valroadieG17
08-25-2009, 10:34
i agree with the majority, windows 7 is amazing, ive installed it over 30 times and EVERY time there was no compatibility issues. It works with virtually every PC(given its up to date with technology wise :P ex. 1 gig of ram, good CPU.)
personally i use linux, but to each his own! i would recommend windows 7 over anything in the MS world.

Patrick Graham
08-25-2009, 11:21
I hate Microsoft but I'll be paying full price for a ligit download of Win 7 because it's that good.

Isaiah1412
08-25-2009, 13:14
Don't know why there are so many people who want to "skip" Vista and jump straight to 7...apparently they aren't aware of the proper translation regarding Microsoft release levels:

Alpha, Preview, etc = "proof of concept".
Beta, RC = "Internal QA build accidentally leaked, call it public beta to avoid bad press about our security".
RTM, Release 1 = "Actual public beta".
SP1 = "Stable Release 1.0"
SP2 = "Updated version adding all the stuff we wanted to include back in testing, but had to cut because we were too busy fixing bugs found when some jack*** in QA accidentally leaked one of our internal builds onto the net forcing us to move up our RC phase by 9 months!"

This is why I've consistently followed a policy of not running MS releases in production until SP1, and its worked almost flawlessly since Windows 2000. Vista was no different than any other release before it (ok, maybe it was worse than some of the ones before it) but once SP1 hit it became a very stable, very usable OS. I've no doubt Win7 will follow the same pattern.

glock19_fan
08-25-2009, 16:14
W7 is essentially Vista sp 2

grokdesigns
08-26-2009, 07:46
Don't know why there are so many people who want to "skip" Vista and jump straight to 7...apparently they aren't aware of the proper translation regarding Microsoft release levels:

Alpha, Preview, etc = "proof of concept".
Beta, RC = "Internal QA build accidentally leaked, call it public beta to avoid bad press about our security".
RTM, Release 1 = "Actual public beta".
SP1 = "Stable Release 1.0"
SP2 = "Updated version adding all the stuff we wanted to include back in testing, but had to cut because we were too busy fixing bugs found when some jack*** in QA accidentally leaked one of our internal builds onto the net forcing us to move up our RC phase by 9 months!"

This is why I've consistently followed a policy of not running MS releases in production until SP1, and its worked almost flawlessly since Windows 2000. Vista was no different than any other release before it (ok, maybe it was worse than some of the ones before it) but once SP1 hit it became a very stable, very usable OS. I've no doubt Win7 will follow the same pattern.

That's all fine and dandy, but Win7 has been stable and usable since the earliest leaked betas. I'm running the RTM on 2 laptops and haven't had a single issue, even a minor one. This is the best OS Microsoft has ever released.

Drjones
08-26-2009, 11:09
Here’s how to add the XP/Vista Quick Launch toolbar to Windows 7 …

First unlock the taskbar, then right-click on an open area of the taskbar and choose Toolbars - New Toolbar from the menu. Now copy and paste %appdata%\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch into the location bar. Make sure that the location bar shows the full path then click the Select Folder button. That's it ... Windows 7 has added the Quick Launch toolbar on the taskbar. Finally turn off the Show Text & Show Title from the menu and move it where you want it.



BTW: the Vista User Account Control is easily disabled.


Very cool, thanks! As I said, I really have not played around with it enough to make a judgement on it..... need to spend more time on it!

JohnBT
08-26-2009, 17:22
"This is the best OS Microsoft has ever released. "

I think DOS 3.1 was the last good one. :crying: I'm old.

John

JeepinOverU
08-26-2009, 19:22
Windows 7

Isaiah1412
08-28-2009, 11:18
That's all fine and dandy, but Win7 has been stable and usable since the earliest leaked betas. I'm running the RTM on 2 laptops and haven't had a single issue, even a minor one. This is the best OS Microsoft has ever released.
Well that's really cool, maybe they're finally turning around and doing solid QA on OS releases before they go out the door. Of course as several people pointed out Win7 is basically just Vista with several years of updates and a new name, so its not surprising that its much better. I still personally wouldn't roll it out production until I'd seen it run through the ringer for a while, but it doesn't look like something I'll need to be worrying about anyway (since I no longer manage desktops and almost all my servers are *nix based, the Windows servers we do have the OS is dictated by application support requirements, so will mostly be 2003 for the foreseeable future).

hardlined
08-28-2009, 14:03
I've been using windows 7 for a while now, I like it. It's fast as stable as a windows install can get, and once you learn where everything is, I wouldn't regret giving up XP.

Linux3
08-28-2009, 16:20
I could go on and on about Vista vs. XP but just read this.
http://www.itworld.com/security/75601/why-windows-security-awful

Reef Diver
08-29-2009, 10:11
7 won't be any good for several months and a couple service packs. I would go with XP until Service Pack 2 for 7 comes out.