It's just getting as much hyped as Vista got smashed back then (my impression). Windows 7 has no really outstanding advantages that clearly make it superior by a lot. If you don't care about DirectX 10/11 ,64Bit and don't move shitloads of data around your hard drive 24/7 (as the HDD management really was optimized) then there's nothing left that would really make you want to switch...SpliFF wrote:I know nobody cares whether I install it or not, I was just hoping somebody here could use their big words to tell me what all the fuss is about.
Windows 7
Moderator: Moderators
-
Master-Athmos
- Posts: 916
- Joined: 27 Jun 2009, 01:32
Re: Windows 7
Re: Windows 7
The smexyiness.Master-Athmos wrote:It's just getting as much hyped as Vista got smashed back then (my impression). Windows 7 has no really outstanding advantages that clearly make it superior by a lot. If you don't care about DirectX 10/11 ,64Bit and don't move shitloads of data around your hard drive 24/7 (as the HDD management really was optimized) then there's nothing left that would really make you want to switch...SpliFF wrote:I know nobody cares whether I install it or not, I was just hoping somebody here could use their big words to tell me what all the fuss is about.
Re: Windows 7
JAZCASH wrote:
The smexyiness.
(couldnt resist) : compiz
Re: Windows 7
Does nobody remember the bugs where alt tabbing out of spring during the loading stage would result in skyboxes and trees with start menu logos and bits of other windows? Peewees looking at the sky watching mspaint doodles while walking through trees with title bars and taskbar spritemaps hanging off them?
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Re: Windows 7
I do.
@troy
Compiz is a neat gimmick, but at the end of the day that's all it is. It doesn't help you get work done faster, nor speed up productivity (This in comparison with the win7 gui).
Imo win7 has struck a nice balance between gui gimmick and productivity.
Tbh, my only gripe about win7 is the4 fact that I don't have an automatically favorite-ed location in winexplorer to public users folders, but that is easily fixed by just making a library for it. 5 seconds out of my day that I won't miss.
@troy
Compiz is a neat gimmick, but at the end of the day that's all it is. It doesn't help you get work done faster, nor speed up productivity (This in comparison with the win7 gui).
Imo win7 has struck a nice balance between gui gimmick and productivity.
Tbh, my only gripe about win7 is the4 fact that I don't have an automatically favorite-ed location in winexplorer to public users folders, but that is easily fixed by just making a library for it. 5 seconds out of my day that I won't miss.
Re: Windows 7
So what your saying is we should just keep using xp?
gotcha.
gotcha.
Re: Windows 7
Forboding Angel wrote:I do.
@troy
Compiz is a neat gimmick, but at the end of the day that's all it is. It doesn't help you get work done faster, nor speed up productivity (This in comparison with the win7 gui).
Imo win7 has struck a nice balance between gui gimmick and productivity.
Tbh, my only gripe about win7 is the4 fact that I don't have an automatically favorite-ed location in winexplorer to public users folders, but that is easily fixed by just making a library for it. 5 seconds out of my day that I won't miss.
Even such a simple thing as multiple desktops allow me to code + browse + write up proposals without having to minimize 20 windows.
Windows, on the other hand, for me, looks like as it has just added gimmikness to look a bit on the par with mac...
Re: Windows 7
Oh please, multiple desktops is hardly unique to compiz. In fact I'm not sure there is a window manager that doesn't support them. I love linux but i'd be the first to say compiz is just silly bling. I mean how much productivity can you can gain from wobbly windows and rain on your desktop? Or more. accurately, how much do you LOSE?
I think it's just part of a larger trend. I haven't seen productivity improvements in a major product for nearly 10 years. Office is bloated wank, even Word 5 could embed video which is nonsense in a "word" processor. Excel has been a complex programmable calculator since version 4. Flash 4 had basically everything you ever needed in vector graphics and Photoshop 4 covered pretty much everything on the raster side.
Windows 98 did everything I ever needed in an "operating system". It copied files and launched software. I only ever upgraded because games stopped supporting it. The same thing happened with Win2k, it was stable and worked, then Supreme Commander came along and I couldn't force it to run (I tried). Now I'm on XP and sure as shit games will stop supporting it the minute MS do.
This time though there's a difference... I just don't like new PC games. They're dumbed down for console, buggy, or simply not much fun. If the OS has no redeeming features of its own I won't be upgrading.
Truth is if I sat down and played - end to end - the games I already own I would have over 10,000 hours of gameplay. The appeal to run out and buy more games is practically nil. If new games don't run on XP I'll be the last to care.
I think it's just part of a larger trend. I haven't seen productivity improvements in a major product for nearly 10 years. Office is bloated wank, even Word 5 could embed video which is nonsense in a "word" processor. Excel has been a complex programmable calculator since version 4. Flash 4 had basically everything you ever needed in vector graphics and Photoshop 4 covered pretty much everything on the raster side.
Windows 98 did everything I ever needed in an "operating system". It copied files and launched software. I only ever upgraded because games stopped supporting it. The same thing happened with Win2k, it was stable and worked, then Supreme Commander came along and I couldn't force it to run (I tried). Now I'm on XP and sure as shit games will stop supporting it the minute MS do.
This time though there's a difference... I just don't like new PC games. They're dumbed down for console, buggy, or simply not much fun. If the OS has no redeeming features of its own I won't be upgrading.
Truth is if I sat down and played - end to end - the games I already own I would have over 10,000 hours of gameplay. The appeal to run out and buy more games is practically nil. If new games don't run on XP I'll be the last to care.
Last edited by SpliFF on 10 Nov 2009, 10:16, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Windows 7
I like how windows 7 finally updated notepad, the calculator and wordpad.
Windows XP is sooooo 1998Gota wrote:So what your saying is we should just keep using xp?
gotcha.
Re: Windows 7
I never understood why windows had notepad AND wordpad.
Re: Windows 7
Because retard users kept formatting config files in 12pt hot pink and then failed to comprehend why they no longer worked?
Re: Windows 7
Windows 98 and 2000 are not enough. They launched files and programs yes, but they where insecure and fundamentally flawed from a security and development point of view.
But wait couldnt they just have fixed those? What do you think Windows XP and Windows ME are?
ME is an example of just how much fail the windows 98 codebase is, they extended it and tried to work with and what did they get? Horrific pile of stinking gunk. At least Vista is stable, ME didnt even boot half the time.
XP is a half decent OS, but its out of date, and its got some holes in it. Its well rounded enough to have lasted though, so it deserves merit, but this doesnt mean its best.
Windows 7 would still be a better OS than windows 2000 or 98 or XP, simply because its got rock solid internals that are fundamentally more secure in design than its predecessors. Its harder to hack and harder to break, though this shouldn't be taken as a claim its unhackable or unbreakable.
A lot of the drivers and base level things we enjoy now simply aren't possible due to architecture constraints and bad design decisions and implementations in earlier versions of windows. Especially where graphics are concerned, implementations on older windows require kludges and hacks that have problems and side effects, or changes in the OS.
No pre-win 2000 machine should even be connected to the internet, as there are hundreds of bugs and exploits that are either unpatched, or are fixed in versions of programs that refuse to run/install on those platforms.
But wait couldnt they just have fixed those? What do you think Windows XP and Windows ME are?
ME is an example of just how much fail the windows 98 codebase is, they extended it and tried to work with and what did they get? Horrific pile of stinking gunk. At least Vista is stable, ME didnt even boot half the time.
XP is a half decent OS, but its out of date, and its got some holes in it. Its well rounded enough to have lasted though, so it deserves merit, but this doesnt mean its best.
Windows 7 would still be a better OS than windows 2000 or 98 or XP, simply because its got rock solid internals that are fundamentally more secure in design than its predecessors. Its harder to hack and harder to break, though this shouldn't be taken as a claim its unhackable or unbreakable.
A lot of the drivers and base level things we enjoy now simply aren't possible due to architecture constraints and bad design decisions and implementations in earlier versions of windows. Especially where graphics are concerned, implementations on older windows require kludges and hacks that have problems and side effects, or changes in the OS.
No pre-win 2000 machine should even be connected to the internet, as there are hundreds of bugs and exploits that are either unpatched, or are fixed in versions of programs that refuse to run/install on those platforms.
Re: Windows 7
Just installed Win7 on friends laptop today. Vista was previously installed.
- Flawless installation from files on HD (no need in CD/USB drive, just torrent and install)
- it put everything Vista-related (Windows, Users, Program Files folders) in separate directory. Later, shift-del on this dir just worked fine, and Win7 just kept on working
- upon boot, no drivers were needed - every single part of laptop (bought about 3 months ago) had its driver and was working (still, I installed official drivers from HP site)
Overall experience - 100/100
Writing this post shows I have no life
- Flawless installation from files on HD (no need in CD/USB drive, just torrent and install)
- it put everything Vista-related (Windows, Users, Program Files folders) in separate directory. Later, shift-del on this dir just worked fine, and Win7 just kept on working
- upon boot, no drivers were needed - every single part of laptop (bought about 3 months ago) had its driver and was working (still, I installed official drivers from HP site)
Overall experience - 100/100
Writing this post shows I have no life
Re: Windows 7
My experiences of the Win 7 are such.
I work as an admin, and I just had to setup the first Win 7 machine for work. Windows+Office came pre-installed with it, so no trouble with them. Our printer drivers refused to install (since the new machine runs Win7 64bit and driver CDs had nothing for 64bit systems at all), luckily 2 out of 3 printers were found among standard Microsoft drivers (had to dl 64bit drivers for the third). Now when it came to installing our database-related apps, the real fun started.
First, ODBC Administrator applet from Control Panel just plainly doesn't do anything (it just pops errors when trying to add data sources). I had to run the one from Windows\SysWOW64, that one worked. Second, registering custom control ocx files required Run-As-Admin cmd AND regsvr32 from the same SysWOW64 folder (one from system32 doesn't work!). Of course that may be caused by our apps being 32bit, but that's what we use and we need those. At least looks like they work normally on Win7 once the install phase is completed.
I work as an admin, and I just had to setup the first Win 7 machine for work. Windows+Office came pre-installed with it, so no trouble with them. Our printer drivers refused to install (since the new machine runs Win7 64bit and driver CDs had nothing for 64bit systems at all), luckily 2 out of 3 printers were found among standard Microsoft drivers (had to dl 64bit drivers for the third). Now when it came to installing our database-related apps, the real fun started.
First, ODBC Administrator applet from Control Panel just plainly doesn't do anything (it just pops errors when trying to add data sources). I had to run the one from Windows\SysWOW64, that one worked. Second, registering custom control ocx files required Run-As-Admin cmd AND regsvr32 from the same SysWOW64 folder (one from system32 doesn't work!). Of course that may be caused by our apps being 32bit, but that's what we use and we need those. At least looks like they work normally on Win7 once the install phase is completed.
Re: Windows 7
your problems all sound like 64/32-bit issues
Re: Windows 7
Surprising they do not have 32 bit runtime to fix those issues. (even under ubuntu you can run 32-bit programs without a hitch)
That reminds me, I will have to test all of the development environment of mine on the Win7 machine...
@ AF
Win7 still integrated IE into the system as harshy as it does before. So no-no for any sort of security here. Even WinXP will be relatively safe if you unplug the numerous services which are blatantly not needed, but always run on it, and present very nice attack vectors.
That reminds me, I will have to test all of the development environment of mine on the Win7 machine...
@ AF
Win7 still integrated IE into the system as harshy as it does before. So no-no for any sort of security here. Even WinXP will be relatively safe if you unplug the numerous services which are blatantly not needed, but always run on it, and present very nice attack vectors.
Re: Windows 7
You can make XP moderatley secure, but it will always be beaten hands down by an install of vista or windows 7 with basic security, simply because its fundamentally more secure, and a lot of security by design stuff has been added in.
And of course you would have to run as an admin to use regsvr since that would be a HUGE security hole if anybody could run it.
There are 32bit runtimes under windows 7, its more a case of things that were deprecated when XP was new being removed. After all its been almost a decade since it was announced the libraries and components where to be replaced, and their replacements have replacements too. Cutting out the cruft basically
And of course you would have to run as an admin to use regsvr since that would be a HUGE security hole if anybody could run it.
There are 32bit runtimes under windows 7, its more a case of things that were deprecated when XP was new being removed. After all its been almost a decade since it was announced the libraries and components where to be replaced, and their replacements have replacements too. Cutting out the cruft basically
Re: Windows 7
Code: Select all
Mem: 1555500k total, 1452632k used, 102868k free, 134600k buffers
Swap: 1510068k total, 3664k used, 1506404k free, 514320k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
6585 marts 20 0 363m 173m 30m S 47 11.4 156:06.09 firefox
6490 marts 20 0 1899m 100m 28m S 8 6.6 48:59.20 IEXPLORE.EXE
5537 root 20 0 410m 109m 24m S 7 7.2 71:22.64 Xorg
6494 marts 20 0 7984 5296 636 S 3 0.3 23:20.77 wineserver
6518 marts 20 0 65964 19m 10m S 1 1.3 1:20.86 gnome-terminal
5981 marts 20 0 15464 4916 3796 S 1 0.3 2:25.23 gnome-screensav
6056 marts 20 0 190m 45m 17m S 1 3.0 13:18.60 skype
6651 marts 20 0 21044 12m 7832 S 1 0.8 2:48.57 metacity
7460 marts 20 0 139m 40m 20m S 1 2.6 0:11.13 thunderbird-THANK GOD I have Windows at home where something like this doesn't happen! I can't remember when I last had a BSOD...
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Re: Windows 7
Spring is 32 bit and runs fine on win7x64, what does that tell you?==Troy== wrote:Surprising they do not have 32 bit runtime to fix those issues. (even under ubuntu you can run 32-bit programs without a hitch)
That reminds me, I will have to test all of the development environment of mine on the Win7 machine...
@ AF
Win7 still integrated IE into the system as harshy as it does before. So no-no for any sort of security here. Even WinXP will be relatively safe if you unplug the numerous services which are blatantly not needed, but always run on it, and present very nice attack vectors.
The biggest issues for old programs is that they don't invoke UAC when needed (uac wasn't around for xp ya know), so those programs have issues (easily solved by installing them to a non uac protected directory).
...
IE can be completely removed from the system, apparently you missed that memo. I'll make sure you get another copy of that memo.
Removing IE completely doesn't harm anything except for programs that use the IE rendering engine (Tasclient, steam, etc... there is actually a pretty impressive list).
However, completely removing IE is stupid. Too many 3rd party programs use the IE rendering Engine and removing IE breaks those programs. If you don't like IE, just delete all the shortcuts and replace with firefox/chrome/opera/seaflunky/etc.
Re: Windows 7
Pendrokar wrote:Is it me or does Ubuntu linux eat 1 GB RAM for breakfast? When it gets to the swap file it loads for an hour and then crashes.Code: Select all
Mem: 1555500k total, 1452632k used, 102868k free, 134600k buffers Swap: 1510068k total, 3664k used, 1506404k free, 514320k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 6585 marts 20 0 363m 173m 30m S 47 11.4 156:06.09 firefox 6490 marts 20 0 1899m 100m 28m S 8 6.6 48:59.20 IEXPLORE.EXE 5537 root 20 0 410m 109m 24m S 7 7.2 71:22.64 Xorg 6494 marts 20 0 7984 5296 636 S 3 0.3 23:20.77 wineserver 6518 marts 20 0 65964 19m 10m S 1 1.3 1:20.86 gnome-terminal 5981 marts 20 0 15464 4916 3796 S 1 0.3 2:25.23 gnome-screensav 6056 marts 20 0 190m 45m 17m S 1 3.0 13:18.60 skype 6651 marts 20 0 21044 12m 7832 S 1 0.8 2:48.57 metacity 7460 marts 20 0 139m 40m 20m S 1 2.6 0:11.13 thunderbird-
THANK GOD I have Windows at home where something like this doesn't happen! I can't remember when I last had a BSOD...
Weird, mine uses only 250MB of RAM on a desktop install with firefox running and having 10 tabs open. Maybe some leaky services you installed?
@ FA : I must have missed that point, but this isnt about deletion of the IE. Its about the integration of it into the system. MS still does not comply with EU anti-trust laws. (where the problem was with integration and default distribution of the IE).