i got a question, so far i've been suprised by windows 7 and it's good reception, as soon as i used vista i thought i'd never be interested in any new ms operating systems and just stuck to xp and linux but i'm interested in giving this a try now and see if i prefer it to xp for when i build a lynnfield machine. Thing is i'm currently using a sempron 2400 with 1gb of ram and a X1300 pro, would it be worth trying out windows 7 on my current machine or just leave xp on for when i'm not using windows 7? Reason i'm not confident about trying it out is cause the last driver to support my gpu was catalyst 9.3 :(
Originally Posted by storm20200 i got a question, so far i've been suprised by windows 7 and it's good reception, as soon as i used vista i thought i'd never be interested in any new ms operating systems and just stuck to xp and linux but i'm interested in giving this a try now and see if i prefer it to xp for when i build a lynnfield machine. Thing is i'm currently using a sempron 2400 with 1gb of ram and a X1300 pro, would it be worth trying out windows 7 on my current machine or just leave xp on for when i'm not using windows 7? Reason i'm not confident about trying it out is cause the last driver to support my gpu was catalyst 9.3 :(
The GPU should be supported out of the box (Windows 7 is pretty good at just finding drivers for stuff)... first time I installed the RTM was on my X301, which isn't the speediest machine around. I was online and downloading Firefox within 15 minutes of pressing the on button before starting the installation.... via USB key of course.
I had a couple of drivers to install for OSDs, the 3G modem and the fingerprint reader, but for the most part, there wasn't a lot for me to do - the machine was completely usable and I was only installing drivers for more obscure stuff.
Essentially, as long as there are Vista drivers of some description, you'll be able to get it working in one way or another. I was using Vista drivers for a bunch of stuff on my ThinkPad X60 when I was running the beta on that particular machine, because Lenovo didn't release proper Windows 7 certified drivers until recently.
One thing that often confusses me is why people get all worked up that a new OS isn't as fast, as compatible or as small as a former OS. I mean where do you draw the line? Win 7 isn't as small or fast as Win 95! it isn't as small as Win 3.1! It isn't as small as MSDOS!
We focus on XP so much and that's probably because most of us have used it for so long thanks to a delayed and then poor vista launch but i seem to remember alot of grumblling about lack of drivers, support, compatability, speed etc when XP first came out compaired to Win 2000 or 98. XP was a pretty big resource hogger back then as well, i mean it needed a fair percentage of avalible processor speed, ram and HDD space from an adverage 2001 PC. Windows 7 is the same today. At the end of the day we want to get the most out of the hardware we have paid a lot of hard earned cash for. I want to be able to play the latest games, use the lastest software and get the new effects but if i was so paranoid about speed performance instead of watching my Bluray's, my DX10 games or my other multimedia and internet options then i would still use win 98! XP was a great operating system in the end no one denies that, but in order to get the most out of todays hardware we need up to date software and XP has appeared to have reached a limit.
In 8 years time i'm sure there will be lots of people saying how fast windows 7 runs on their computers too! It's time to move on people otherwise why keep upgrading these computers of ours?
Originally Posted by Jaguar_Infinity One thing that often confusses me is why people get all worked up that a new OS isn't as fast, as compatible or as small as a former OS. I mean where do you draw the line? Win 7 isn't as small or fast as Win 95! it isn't as small as Win 3.1! It isn't as small as MSDOS!
We focus on XP so much and that's probably because most of us have used it for so long thanks to a delayed and then poor vista launch but i seem to remember alot of grumblling about lack of drivers, support, compatability, speed etc when XP first came out compaired to Win 2000 or 98. XP was a pretty big resource hogger back then as well, i mean it needed a fair percentage of avalible processor speed, ram and HDD space from an adverage 2001 PC. Windows 7 is the same today. At the end of the day we want to get the most out of the hardware we have paid a lot of hard earned cash for. I want to be able to play the latest games, use the lastest software and get the new effects but if i was so paranoid about speed performance instead of watching my Bluray's, my DX10 games or my other multimedia and internet options then i would still use win 98! XP was a great operating system in the end no one denies that, but in order to get the most out of todays hardware we need up to date software and XP has appeared to have reached a limit.
In 8 years time i'm sure there will be lots of people saying how fast windows 7 runs on their computers too! It's time to move on people otherwise why keep upgrading these computers of ours?
Originally Posted by Tim S Essentially, as long as there are Vista drivers of some description, you'll be able to get it working in one way or another. I was using Vista drivers for a bunch of stuff on my ThinkPad X60 when I was running the beta on that particular machine, because Lenovo didn't release proper Windows 7 certified drivers until recently.
If i remember right the only chipset driver i install on xp is my lan as everything else is disabled because i have a sound card and wireless card so i guess i could just disable the lan and stick to wireless, my motherboard has no vista anything cause asrock don't care for socket a anymore, i'll download a copy of home premium after i've backed up all my crap so i can make some space for a partition on my linux drive when i get home :)
Originally Posted by docodine On page seven, it seemed like you could do GPU transcoding to a Zune, but not when it was mentioned again..
Argh, my bad - it's the latter at the moment. It's more likely to get support than the iPod though (we all know what Apple is like), but we could see it in a later version of iTunes I guess. :)
I doubt we'll see transcoding video in iTunes as it could reduce sales of videos from iTunes store, but who knows, they've surprised me in the past. That is, unless they lock it down to iTunes purchases only or something.
Flip3D is pointless, I still yearn for exposé on my windows 7 machine.
There's always switcher for windows 7 that brings in expose functionality.
you can Win+Shift+Left/Right to move the active window from a monitor to the next.
It'll keep the same window position but on the next monitor, also works with fullscreened apps or flash videos etc...
Just got this today and installed it (32-Bit) on my old Clevo D900T using a 7800 GTX Go, And i was amazed that almost everything worked with the xp drivers with some fiddling around. Even the wireless card which the upgrade advisor said would be a problem.
The reason i'm running it on my old laptop is because my desktop's half died so i've put it in boxes for when i got some spare cash to rebuild it.
When XP came out I staunchly refused to switch and stuck with 98SE until hardware changes forced me to move on to XP.
I quickly got used to XP, and while 98SE holds a special place, XP was simply better.
I was a die-hard XP-user for years then, and refused to switch to Vista when that came out. Rightly so, I felt then and still feel today.
Then I tried the Windows 7 Beta and it was great but I stuck with XP as my main OS for obvious reasons.
RC1 was even better and I gradually shifted towards it as my main OS over a few weeks.
When the RTM came out I switched over completely and I haven't used XP on my main rig since then. Not even once.
At this stage I'm only keeping an XP partition on the off-chance that some app or game I want to use/play doesn't work in 7, though that hasn't happened yet since I've found workarounds for what few problems I've encountered in 7 and I play a lot of old games.
Anyone on the fence about it and still using XP, just go for 7 - You won't regret it.
To those of you raging about it.. Just go try it out instead of ranting, I can almost guarantee you'll feel embarrassed about your nerdrage when you do.
Lastly, for the love all that is good, don't waste your time with 32-bit if your hardware supports 64-bit (and it probably does, these days) no matter whether you think you 'need' 64-bit or not - You do.
The sooner we move away from that painful holdover the better.
What's all this noise about? It's just another Windows, it's not even a real OS, just a multimedia gimmick used to play games. And it's not even good at it when compared to XP - I tried to use 7 for a month on a gaming rig and I don't see any way it's better than XP x64. It's slower, runs far more bloat and uses far more resources. Framerates are 5-15% worse than on XP.
So why should I sacrifice performance (even if it's just 5% on a fast machine) just for Windows? Why should Windows eat half a gig of RAM, even if I have 16 gigs, when XP does the same, only faster and using less resources?
Being an engineer I feel the natural push towards newer and better technologies, but "newer" isn't always "better", and windows 7 is a perfect example. For several years of development and 8 years since XP started, Microsoft didn't move very far. You still get the same thing, just with more marketing jibberish, more bloat, almost no new features (Everything Vista and 7 introduced was already done by third-party software long ago, and was done better), LOWER performance and some arguably useful UI changes. Not really impressive.
Oh, and before someone says I'm bashing Windows - no, I'm not. I don't really care about it, Windows was never my main system. I try to be objective, and Windows 7 failed to impress me, especially when you consider how long it was developed. Windows 2000 was impressive, it brought stability, an advanced kernel and some important core functionality to Windows family. Windows 7 just corrects some some of the major flaws of Vista.
I still use XP but not saying I will not get window's 7. I will get windows7 when SP1 comes out for sure. I have used on the laptops we sell at work . I do like it though
i cannot believe so many people are whining about "performance". there's so much of these things why argue over a few frames? simply grab a new card and off you go.
with added feature, performance will take a small dip for sure. windows 7 and vista are both fantastic OS for the end user. i challenge anyone who've used to windows 7 to switch back and still work as efficient as before.
i cannot live without:
-the start menu quick search (started on vista, great OS)
-the new task bar
-the progress bar in task bar when copying files
-a stack-like program for the task bar
-quick wireless connection without having to open a connections window
-multi-monitor toggle switch
im sure many of those are available though third party software such as UltraMon for the last one. but windows 7 includes them into one clean package, and native software is always better than third party.
so stop whining about insignificant things and install windows 7 64bit.
MS should have a counter in the center of the screen for XP users, in 72 pt type. 128 hours until this operating system is deleted, and then direct them to their local store, newegg or whatever to get with the show and buy Win7.
I am tired of having to play dx9 games because of cyber-luddites who refuse to upgrade. I understand that vista required expert knowledge to get running half effectively, that era is over, go buy Win7.
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger MS should have a counter in the center of the screen for XP users, in 72 pt type. 128 hours until this operating system is deleted, and then direct them to their local store, newegg or whatever to get with the show and buy Win7.
I am tired of having to play dx9 games because of cyber-luddites who refuse to upgrade. I understand that vista required expert knowledge to get running half effectively, that era is over, go buy Win7.
Yea, let's totally shaft the corporate world that still runs on XP and have applications built specifically for XP and IE6. Sounds like a great idea, I'm sure Microsoft won't mind losing that entire market.
I'm absolutely loving Win7. Was fiddling around with it for a few hours before I went off to the pub, installing programs, getting round to sorting out my files, etc.
I installed it and everything worked beautifully, no problems at all, just full of all these little improvements that just make things better and easier.
Big thumbs up from me so far, not played any games on it yet though.
anyone have a list of CPU's that support virtualization. I'm gonna be making the switch to windows 7, BUT, I ran a decent amount of old music creation software and drivers and some of them never worked in vista making me keep an xp partition around.
it would be great to no longer have an xp partition and be able to run those clients in inside of windows 7.
I run Windows 7 Ultimate on my Netbook and it runs it fine even with Aero. Media center is pretty smooth too considering the hardware in the netbook which mine is a ASUS 1000HE.
Comments 51 to 75 of 111
ReplyThe GPU should be supported out of the box (Windows 7 is pretty good at just finding drivers for stuff)... first time I installed the RTM was on my X301, which isn't the speediest machine around. I was online and downloading Firefox within 15 minutes of pressing the on button before starting the installation.... via USB key of course.
I had a couple of drivers to install for OSDs, the 3G modem and the fingerprint reader, but for the most part, there wasn't a lot for me to do - the machine was completely usable and I was only installing drivers for more obscure stuff.
Essentially, as long as there are Vista drivers of some description, you'll be able to get it working in one way or another. I was using Vista drivers for a bunch of stuff on my ThinkPad X60 when I was running the beta on that particular machine, because Lenovo didn't release proper Windows 7 certified drivers until recently.
We focus on XP so much and that's probably because most of us have used it for so long thanks to a delayed and then poor vista launch but i seem to remember alot of grumblling about lack of drivers, support, compatability, speed etc when XP first came out compaired to Win 2000 or 98. XP was a pretty big resource hogger back then as well, i mean it needed a fair percentage of avalible processor speed, ram and HDD space from an adverage 2001 PC. Windows 7 is the same today. At the end of the day we want to get the most out of the hardware we have paid a lot of hard earned cash for. I want to be able to play the latest games, use the lastest software and get the new effects but if i was so paranoid about speed performance instead of watching my Bluray's, my DX10 games or my other multimedia and internet options then i would still use win 98! XP was a great operating system in the end no one denies that, but in order to get the most out of todays hardware we need up to date software and XP has appeared to have reached a limit.
In 8 years time i'm sure there will be lots of people saying how fast windows 7 runs on their computers too! It's time to move on people otherwise why keep upgrading these computers of ours?
Read your sig
yeah i kind of forgot i even had that there! i havn't updated that in years. oh well looks like im the hypercriticle one!
Actually it seems like a marked improvement as far as responsiveness goes for XP as well.
There's always switcher for windows 7 that brings in expose functionality.
you can Win+Shift+Left/Right to move the active window from a monitor to the next.
It'll keep the same window position but on the next monitor, also works with fullscreened apps or flash videos etc...
That's not really a great image if you want to further the idea that it isn't just Windows 95 with knobs on :)
P
The reason i'm running it on my old laptop is because my desktop's half died so i've put it in boxes for when i got some spare cash to rebuild it.
I quickly got used to XP, and while 98SE holds a special place, XP was simply better.
I was a die-hard XP-user for years then, and refused to switch to Vista when that came out. Rightly so, I felt then and still feel today.
Then I tried the Windows 7 Beta and it was great but I stuck with XP as my main OS for obvious reasons.
RC1 was even better and I gradually shifted towards it as my main OS over a few weeks.
When the RTM came out I switched over completely and I haven't used XP on my main rig since then. Not even once.
At this stage I'm only keeping an XP partition on the off-chance that some app or game I want to use/play doesn't work in 7, though that hasn't happened yet since I've found workarounds for what few problems I've encountered in 7 and I play a lot of old games.
Anyone on the fence about it and still using XP, just go for 7 - You won't regret it.
To those of you raging about it.. Just go try it out instead of ranting, I can almost guarantee you'll feel embarrassed about your nerdrage when you do.
Lastly, for the love all that is good, don't waste your time with 32-bit if your hardware supports 64-bit (and it probably does, these days) no matter whether you think you 'need' 64-bit or not - You do.
The sooner we move away from that painful holdover the better.
So why should I sacrifice performance (even if it's just 5% on a fast machine) just for Windows? Why should Windows eat half a gig of RAM, even if I have 16 gigs, when XP does the same, only faster and using less resources?
Being an engineer I feel the natural push towards newer and better technologies, but "newer" isn't always "better", and windows 7 is a perfect example. For several years of development and 8 years since XP started, Microsoft didn't move very far. You still get the same thing, just with more marketing jibberish, more bloat, almost no new features (Everything Vista and 7 introduced was already done by third-party software long ago, and was done better), LOWER performance and some arguably useful UI changes. Not really impressive.
Oh, and before someone says I'm bashing Windows - no, I'm not. I don't really care about it, Windows was never my main system. I try to be objective, and Windows 7 failed to impress me, especially when you consider how long it was developed. Windows 2000 was impressive, it brought stability, an advanced kernel and some important core functionality to Windows family. Windows 7 just corrects some some of the major flaws of Vista.
with added feature, performance will take a small dip for sure. windows 7 and vista are both fantastic OS for the end user. i challenge anyone who've used to windows 7 to switch back and still work as efficient as before.
i cannot live without:
-the start menu quick search (started on vista, great OS)
-the new task bar
-the progress bar in task bar when copying files
-a stack-like program for the task bar
-quick wireless connection without having to open a connections window
-multi-monitor toggle switch
im sure many of those are available though third party software such as UltraMon for the last one. but windows 7 includes them into one clean package, and native software is always better than third party.
so stop whining about insignificant things and install windows 7 64bit.
I am tired of having to play dx9 games because of cyber-luddites who refuse to upgrade. I understand that vista required expert knowledge to get running half effectively, that era is over, go buy Win7.
Yea, let's totally shaft the corporate world that still runs on XP and have applications built specifically for XP and IE6. Sounds like a great idea, I'm sure Microsoft won't mind losing that entire market.
I installed it and everything worked beautifully, no problems at all, just full of all these little improvements that just make things better and easier.
Big thumbs up from me so far, not played any games on it yet though.
it would be great to no longer have an xp partition and be able to run those clients in inside of windows 7.
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums