bit-tech.net

First Look: Windows 7 Beta Performance

Comments 1 to 25 of 138

Reply
naokaji 16th January 2009, 12:53 Quote
Quote:
Support for Virtual Workspaces with Workspaces Centre - another option borrowed from some Linux distros that will create more desktop space.

and
Quote:
Better start button search the splits the results between programs, the control panel (if applicable), documents and files.

= me wants.

Shame about the mixed performance, but it's a beta, so there is still hope.
Matticus 16th January 2009, 13:02 Quote
Looks a bit like KDE to me.

I am unsure about trying the beta, because I might get too used to it and when it is gone I might cry :p

I have been using my PC for gaming less and less so I am not sure if the slightly slower gaming at these very early stages even matters to me. And if it will even be a problem, with better drivers and a finalised OS I imagine it will at least be on par with vista, maybe even better judging by how close it is at the minute.
UncertainGod 16th January 2009, 13:12 Quote
Every windows pc in my house is now running this OS including my EEE, there are very definate performance increases but they are mainly only noticable at the low end.

At the end of the day I hated Vista and this beta changes almost everything I hated about it so I am one happy chappy.
Leitchy 16th January 2009, 13:14 Quote
Would it of been hard for them to have an native solution for Multi-Monitor task bars? Although Ultramon does the job most of the time, it's still classed as a beta and a little buggy since the VIsta versions came out.

Overall though I'm enjoying Windows 7!
Goty 16th January 2009, 13:19 Quote
I personally don't like 7 at all and think I'll be sticking with Vista until I can get a free copy of 7 through school. My biggest complaint so far, Win+E no longer takes you to the root directory. Why couldn't they have cannibalized a shortcut I never used rather than the one I use four or five times a day to great effect?
azrael- 16th January 2009, 13:30 Quote
Looks promising. I guess it's as DRM-infested as Vista, though, which is one of my main gripes with Vista...
Andy Mc 16th January 2009, 13:43 Quote
I will proberbly jinx this, but under Win7Beta L4D runs faultlessly, it hasn't crashed once. Vista however is another story, It constantly dies with that OS.
phuzz 16th January 2009, 13:47 Quote
It would have been interesting to see comparisons to XP on the same hardware as well (but I realise what a pain in the arse that would be for you guys).
Personally, I've had a little play with 7 and, yeah, it's basically Vista. In fact, your comparison to the upgrade between versions of OSX is about right, there's been changes, but it's closer to a really big service pack rather than the usual big jumps we see from M$.

The main thing I noticed was the lack of the old school "Classic" theme, I like my OS to look like Win2000 damnit! I'm sure I'll get used to it after a while though.
Also, love the fact that changing desktop resolution is only one click away again.

Didn't get a chance to play with multiple monitors (like I'm daft enough to test on my main rig), but as Leitchy says, why don't they do the old school M$ tactic and go out and buy up UltraMon and just integrate it with Windows, seriously, that would be be perfect for everyone.
Sark.inc 16th January 2009, 14:11 Quote
this is just plain stupid.
Icy EyeG 16th January 2009, 14:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by phuzz
It would have been interesting to see comparisons to XP on the same hardware as well (but I realize what a pain in the arse that would be for you guys).

I'd like to see that too... Since many people is considering a transition between XP and 7 (skipping Vista).

Regarding Windows 7: How possible is it to config the taskbar to be Vista-like? I don't like to see such thick taskbar with text-less icons only...
Kúsař 16th January 2009, 14:13 Quote
Why is MS still developing 32 bit OS? Everyone has 64bit capable PC and those who don't won't be able to run it anyway. They are adding more work to themselves, HW manufacturers(now they'll have to write 6 drivers for - XP, Vista, 7; 32/64) as well as other software developers. Moreover some programs runs significantly faster in 64bit mode.
Arkanrais 16th January 2009, 14:15 Quote
shame about it getting rid of quick launch icons. I have ~12 that I use a lot, and auto bunching the task bar folders/icons will get to be a pain in the ass for me, sometimes having up to 7 folders open while transferring between my main HDD other HDD's, and external devices, and having 3 VLC windows (playlist, media player & hardware YUV overlay DirectX output) will infuriate me trying to cycle through the task bar pop-up lists.
aside from those 2 things, it does look like a winner and is tempting me to upgrade when it gets its retail release.

edit: is it possible with vista/7 to customize window colours so instead of the blue/white look, you could get red/black?
perplekks45 16th January 2009, 14:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sark.inc
this is just plain stupid.

Wow... you have a point there. If only I knew what you're talking about? What exactly is 'plain stupid'?

Anyways, having finally found the time to install Win7 on my main machine I ran into some driver issues with my graphics card (though it's going to die soon anyways I suppose, so the problems might be related to that) other than that everything is fine. Way faster than Vista for me and pretty stable.

One thing I noticed though is AV software. According to MS there are 3 supported ones and I decided to go with Kaspersky for now. During install I saw this:

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/4914/kasperskybd9.png

So what exactly does the Russian Federation own now? :|
Phil Rhodes 16th January 2009, 14:25 Quote
All I need to know is how much RAM does it use, how fast does it boot, and what crap does it run by default.

This is a new version of Windows, so the fact that these figures will all be worse than previous versions is almost inevitable, but I can't help but agree with Mr. Swinburne's opinion:
Quote:
We still think Microsoft needs to stop heading down the "one size fits all" road when it's making the next Windows operating system.

I work largely as a video editor at the moment and so I have one machine that's very tweaked up for that one task. You could say that isn't a general usage scenario, but then, my second machine is effectively a set top box, so I have it tweaked up for that. My third is the low power web server/email machine, so that's also set up quite specifically. Microsoft need to realise that specificity isn't actually unusual.

I'd like to see a "Pro" version of windows that does actually show some signs of being aimed at professionals - mainly by not having every damn thing in the world run at startup.
liratheal 16th January 2009, 14:27 Quote
Agreed, pretty much.

One game you should have mentioned, though, is that RA2 works!
Quote:
Originally Posted by aon`aTv.gsus666
So what exactly does the Russian Federation own now? :|

They own the UK too, didn't you know?
ChaosDefinesOrder 16th January 2009, 14:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
Looks promising. I guess it's as DRM-infested as Vista, though, which is one of my main gripes with Vista...

could someone explain to me specific examples of how Vista is infected with DRM? Not seen a single thing that could suggest this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kúsař
Why is MS still developing 32 bit OS? Everyone has 64bit capable PC and those who don't won't be able to run it anyway. They are adding more work to themselves, HW manufacturers(now they'll have to write 6 drivers for - XP, Vista, 7; 32/64) as well as other software developers. Moreover some programs runs significantly faster in 64bit mode.

Because some people still have 32-bit PCs lying around that they want to give a speed boost to.
perplekks45 16th January 2009, 14:33 Quote
One more thing:

I haven't tried it yet but apparently the 'problem' you mention with just one icon in the start bar for X open windows of an application can be 'fixed':

Go to the task bar preferences, there is a simple drop down for that with 3 settings:
  • Always combine, hide labels
  • Combine when taskbar is full
  • Never combine
legoman666 16th January 2009, 14:33 Quote
How about adding WinXP into the benchmark mix? Most of us are still using it and comparing Windows 7 to something we've never used (Vista) is kind of a useless comparison...
DougEdey 16th January 2009, 14:36 Quote
I can't find the "Workspaces Center" anywhere on my install...
steveo_mcg 16th January 2009, 14:39 Quote
Its still a bit fluffy for my likeing (so is xp) but it looks like its been much better designed than Vista. I'll probably upgrade to it when its launched xp is getting a bit long in the tooth but i'm not pouring money for two upgrades in a year.
Paradigm Shifter 16th January 2009, 14:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes
I'd like to see a "Pro" version of windows that does actually show some signs of being aimed at professionals - mainly by not having every damn thing in the world run at startup.

Yes, seconded - a Windows that allows the power user to choose exactly what to install, from stuff like Windows Media Player to Internet Explorer to Themes to BITS to Remote Registry to... hell, even the GUI itself, for some specific 'headless' scenarios.

And stripping out the raft of drivers... I mean, it's great to have USB devices plug in and work, but besides basic USB mouse and keyboard support, and memory stick support, everything else I use pretty much requires installation of seperate dedicated drivers anyway to get full use of any of them. And I have experienced issues with getting Vista to take Intel provided chipset drivers rather than it's included ones.

'Pro' should not mean 'everything and the kitchen sink'. ;)
Phil Rhodes 16th January 2009, 15:25 Quote
To some extent, what you're describing is XP Embedded, although most of what that does can be emulated using tools like nwiz. I wonder what will replace XPe - surely there can't be a Vista Embedded!? Argh!
TurtlePerson2 16th January 2009, 15:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kúsař
Why is MS still developing 32 bit OS? Everyone has 64bit capable PC and those who don't won't be able to run it anyway. They are adding more work to themselves, HW manufacturers(now they'll have to write 6 drivers for - XP, Vista, 7; 32/64) as well as other software developers. Moreover some programs runs significantly faster in 64bit mode.

There used to be problems with 32 bit applications not being compatible in 64 bit OS, but Windows 7 does that perfectly as far as I can tell. You're absolutely right, we ought to just throw 32 bit out the window, but I don't think it will happen. If I remember correctly, Pentium 4 chips were 32-bit only and a lot of people still use those. Microsoft wants absolutely everyone to be able to buy Windows 7, so they won't force 64 bit quite yet.
djDEATH 16th January 2009, 15:42 Quote
slightly slower gaming is a myth. i installled windows 7, and then used the SAME 185.20 exe off my vista desktop to install into Windows 7, and i'm seeing a significant increase in perfomance compared to vista (dual boot).

GTAIV for example now runs into the 30fps+ making it finally playable at the same settings i got 20-25+ in vista. GRID runs now well above 60fps, giving me V Sync when i could only muster 40-45 in vista on same settings, and crysis runs like a dream, IQ is same overall, but feels smoother and alt-tabs back to desktop with less hassle and less time spent showing things in Aero basic before it flicks back to full aero.

all in all, a win for microsoft, and actually don't want to go back to vista again, and thats after just a week with the new OS
Kúsař 16th January 2009, 15:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosDefinesOrder
Because some people still have 32-bit PCs lying around that they want to give a speed boost to.

But these are ancient relics without driver support(chipsets) for Vista, let alone Win #7; and cannot even run MS Office 2007 fluently(under XP!). Last 32 bit AMD CPUs are using socket A, intel - 478 Prescott(E series) - 4 / 5 years old platforms. Compared to XP there wouldn't be any speed boost at all.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums