Installed Windows 7... My review after a few hours of use...

[Ar878]

Is that stolen? That looks DAMN near the same as it always has, the only difference is now you have the option to turnicate the text from it (and that is enabled by defualt)

BUT IT HAS THE ICONS AND STUFF AND IT LOOKS THE SAME AND STUFF SO IT MUST BE STOLEN.

[Dattebayo]

It's like I said earlier...

He's a sucker.

[Ar878]

what?

[Red coupe]

When windows matches the ease of use like a Mac then Mac will be no more but until then Mac will be superior to Windows in that aspect. And Microsoft copied the dock and it went as far back as the Alpha build: No whether that image is fake or not is unknown but I remmber that from years ago when windows 7's name was called Blackcomb.

But not much was changed on Windows 7, Microsoft gave it a some what new UI, Never finished the new filesystem which was supposed to be in this build, And put it in the same box as Vista but only changed the paper on the box slightly. Microsoft could have done a better job under the hood because if you search you will see after 6 months Windows 7 becomes slower than Windows Vista.

I hope Windows 8? will be better, But I am staying with Windows Vista AKA Longhorn.

As was said, you have no idea what your talking about.

I will agree that windows 7 is basically a SP3 for vista.... but guess what? Vista worked great. It had some problems when it first came out, but almost all of that was fixed in SP1. Its now in SP2, it has very very few problems... If you know of any list them please. Windows 7 addressees the major flaws of Vista (marketing) and adds some nice touches.

[Dattebayo]

The only really annoying thing I ever had with Vista was the stupid password it asked you for whenever you changed anything.

[Red coupe]

The only really annoying thing I ever had with Vista was the stupid password it asked you for whenever you changed anything.

Still in windows 7, though they made it easier to turn off.

And It doesn't ask for a password does it? Just verification.... (Maybe thats cause I didn't have a password, or am always using the admin account)

Either way, you just go control panel -> User Account Control -> Disable.

And paul.... I knew YOU weren't even paying attention to you, cause you sure as hell weren't only saying that windows 7 is basically an improved vista.

[MinisterofDOOM]

[Dattebayo]

probably because you don't have a administrator account on your computer. UAC only asks Yes or No, Never for a password.

Paul, please STFU.

We understand you like it because you don't have to actually do anything important with your computer.We understand you think that Mac is the solution to everything.You are wrong in every sense, and it is quite silly hearing the defensive position you are taking while "not being a mac supporter".

Plain and simple, you don't know what you are talking about. You are taking what people learned from an early beta and applying it to a finished product? Ignorance!

You talk about ease and simplicity when you fail to realize how mac programming really works. If you would realize how damn easy it is to break into a mac and steal info, maybe you would shut up. If I would tell you exactly how easy it is to leave a virus provided I spend the time developing one, would that make you shut up too?

The reason no one makes viruses for macs is because they don't and can't do anything important enough to ruin the data on them.

[Dattebayo]

Annoyed, yes, but not rude yet. I get much worse when I'm rude.

If that's true then how is Apple still in business???

High retail prices maybe?

I know Mac isn't used everywhere but its not as vulnerable as you make it out to be. Windows has to be secure because its used everywhere but Mac OS is okay too.

Yes they are. It's no more or less vulnerable than windows is, but the hackers like to pick on software that businesses use. And don't think for one second that there aren't ways to break into any kind of computer, no matter the OS.
Modified by Dattebayo at 3:28 AM 11/2/2009

[Jesda]

Vista is f***ing trash. If it worked well for you, it was by ACCIDENT. Microsoft failed to work with hardware manufacturers and threw Vista at the market without any forethought. The disappointment was exacerbated by their "THIS IS AMAZING WE FINALLY DID IT RIGHT OMG PUPPIES!" marketing campaign.

Manufacturers were expected to force it to somehow run with existing hardware, user experience be damned. Microsoft was "humbled" by the public response and reluctance to upgrade.

[Red coupe]

Vista is f***ing trash. If it worked well for you, it was by ACCIDENT. Microsoft failed to work with hardware manufacturers and threw Vista at the market without any forethought. The disappointment was exacerbated by their "THIS IS AMAZING WE FINALLY DID IT RIGHT OMG PUPPIES!" marketing campaign.

Manufacturers were expected to force it to somehow run with existing hardware, user experience be damned. Microsoft was "humbled" by the public response and reluctance to upgrade.

ehhh, they should have done more beta and worked more on having it good from the start...

But like I said, as of SP1 (before that really....) It worked fine, and had all the hardware support it needed. Almost everything I ever plugged into my vista laptop worked automatically... and the few things that didn't just took going to the manufacturers website and downloading the right driver.

If your vista DIDN'T work, you were either one of the first to use it, or you fail at basic computing.

[Jesda]

ehhh, they should have done more beta and worked more on having it good from the start...

But like I said, as of SP1 (before that really....) It worked fine, and had all the hardware support it needed. Almost everything I ever plugged into my vista laptop worked automatically... and the few things that didn't just took going to the manufacturers website and downloading the right driver.

If your vista DIDN'T work, you were either one of the first to use it, or you fail at basic computing.

Vista was never actually broken in the on-off functionality sense. The issue is with its god-awful resource consumption, power management, sloppy code, and all-around lazy engineering. A proper modern operating system needs to justify its heft with a feature set that extends beyond eye candy. The massive speed and efficiency upgrade that comes with Windows 7 is clear evidence of how horrible Vista was.

With Windows 7, Microsoft listened to users and coordinated with major manufacturers, recognizing that hardware and software have to work together for a desktop computer to work properly. Its something Apple had been doing for decades, exclusively pairing its software with its simultaneously developed hardware, ensuring fewer problems and issues.

Apple gets a lot of credit for forcing Microsoft to change its product development process.

Garbage like Vista will never happen again.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Microsoft did make some big mistakes in taking the "gimmick" approach to Vista rather than the functionality approach. A lot of that had to do with early tester feedback, though. There was a lot of negative response to an OS that "felt like" and looked like XP even if it wasn't that way under the hood in the early stages of Vista.

The thing that made me most angry about Vista was DirectX10. What a joke. DirectX10 did not do any of the magical things it was supposed to do. And now MS is already moving ahead with DX11. Well, geniuses, there AREN'T ANY DIRECTX 11 VIDEO CARDS YET. That's not actually true, but there are only a handful of cards that support the API at this point. WTF is the point of plowing ahead with DirectX if the hardware isn't ready for it yet? Especially when you haven't even adequately exploited DX10 to justify the pressure you put on everyone to upgrade. Stop outrunning hardware. Or at least give hardware a chance to be prepared for your changes. It would have been nice to see a market full of DX10/11 cards BEFORE the move to DX11, you jackasses. I'm NOT going to buy a new video card every year just because MS feels the need to put bigger numbers on their marketing image.

How long did DirectX9 last. And how long did DX10 last? Something's not right here.

[Red coupe]

Vista was never actually broken in the on-off functionality sense. The issue is with its god-awful resource consumption, power management, sloppy code, and all-around lazy engineering. A proper modern operating system needs to justify its heft with a feature set that extends beyond eye candy. The massive speed and efficiency upgrade that comes with Windows 7 is clear evidence of how horrible Vista was.

With Windows 7, Microsoft listened to users and coordinated with major manufacturers, recognizing that hardware and software have to work together for a desktop computer to work properly. Its something Apple had been doing for decades, exclusively pairing its software with its simultaneously developed hardware, ensuring fewer problems and issues.

Apple gets a lot of credit for forcing Microsoft to change its product development process.

Garbage like Vista will never happen again.

in fairness Vistas resource hogging was way over blown. One big thing, for what ever reason that f***ing side bar seemed to at least originally require a super computer to display your weather.... But with that off and a 1.6 c2d w/ 2 gig of s***ty ram I used my laptop just fine. My desktop is fairly quick so I am used to not having to wait on things and the laptop was never painful. I used it for 3d cad work, for games like BF2, for photoshop.... reasonably demanding programs.

One of the reasons it seemed so bad was because the OS automatically adjusted to how much it could take. While I don't see why it needed to use what it did, so many people like Noah would fire up task manager and "OMG ITS USING A GIG OF RAM AT IDLE!" (actually, for people with even better computers it could appear even worse)

But the fact is... YOUR COMPUTER IS IDLING! Who cars how much of your ram the OS is using? Your not using it...When you gave the computer something to do it would calm down and not take up so much.

As far as DX 9 and DX10 lifetimes... Ehhh... New OS gives the the opportunity to roll something out... Same thing with games I don't mind if they outpace hardware, Hardware moves fast and its not like anyone is losing anything. You DC 10 card will work just as well as if they stuck with DX10. It IS a little stupid that they roll out DX10 for such a short amount of time.... but really vista was out for a short amount of time.... it was killed by mistakes early on, and MS felt they had to do something to get away from the vista name. I really believe that above everything else 7 is just a way to shut all all the people who refused to use vista because they had it stuck in their heads it was the worst thing ever. Windows 7 is SO MUCH like vista I really think it could damn near just be a service pack, but its better to just give it a new name, and write off the whole "vista" thing as one big f*** up. So vista gets killed early, and things like DX10 go with it.

[Beancooker]

Wow, I wish I could ban certain members from a thread.

Oh well, I just edited the stupidity from it.

If you want to discuss Apple vs. PC, (or how simply awesome and spectacular that you think Apple is, even though you don't support them) start a new thread.

Try to keep this on topic about Windows 7. Thanks.

[RCA]

Some facts:I ran Windows XP for 6 years. I saw the BSOD ONCE.I have run vista for 5 months. I have never had a single crash.

I haven't seen a BSOD ever on my laptop with XP and I have had it for almost 6 years. My laptop hasn't once froze in the last 3 years and my Specs are 1.3Ghz Celeron + 2 GB Ram

Next summer, Intel will release the hexacore i9...

Any word from Intel about how much the i9 will cost?

[Jesda]

Most of the BSODs I've endured lately were from bad ram or failing hard drives, errors that are justified. So glad the days of GPFs and IPFs are over. Its amazing how much trash we consumers will endure before we finally demand quality.

Win2k is on my list of all-time favorite operating systems.

[initial_jc]

I installed windows 7 on my MACBOOK PRO its been good so far. It runs fast on it I haven't compared it to it with a PC, but i still find myself preferring MAC OS X over windows 7.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Any word from Intel about how much the i9 will cost?

I don't know about anything official. But all the whispers indicate the $1000+ mark.

But the awesome part is that it'll use the same socket 1366 that the core i7 900 series processors use (which I have). That's really awesome for those of us already running lga 1366 mobos. I'll probably wait for the price to drop (maybe give it a year) and then slap one in my computer.

There's a new tier of i7 (800 series) that'll share a socket/chipset with the i5. The only difference between the two will be the lack of Hyperthreading on the i5. The i3 will be yet another chipset, but same lga1156 socket as the i5 and i7 800.

[Razi]

Hyperthreading on a quad-core... technically having 8 cores?

[MinisterofDOOM]

Not really 8 cores, although Windows sees it that way to an extent. My computer shows 8 cores in the task manager.

Hyperthreading really just allows a processor to handle two separate process THREADS simultaneously. There's no benefit with software not designed to operate as separate threads. That's why Windows7's optimizations for task scheduling are so critical: the i7 and i9 are designed to switch "strengths" depending on the needs of the software being run. If it's a multithreaded application, the hyperthreading yields benefits. But if it's NOT multithreaded, the CPU is smart enough to overclock (using "TurboBoost") the core(s) doing all the work for benefits there, too. With windows treating threads and processors the same, it needs to be able to to identify those situations where TurboBoost is beneficial versus those situations where spreading out the load is most beneficial and shift the task load accordingly. TurboBoost can ONLY come into play when there are idle cores. Vista is too "stupid" to set aside those idle cores as off limits in order to optimize the benefits of TurboBoost. In fact, it intentionally shifts tasks around for other reasons.

[Razi]

Ahh I see.This TurboBoost function seems like a neat idea once it is allowed to do it's job.

Neat idea to use Hyperthreading to optimize things.I remember it being used on single-cores a few years ago, before duo-core processors.

[Dattebayo]

The i5 uses TurboBoost as well, but just not with the Hyperthreading. I will never use anything with that kind of awesomeness anyway, so that's why I bought an i5.

[Dattebayo]

Win2k is on my list of all-time favorite operating systems.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Yeah, all the Nehalem (core iX) chips use turbo boost. The i5 and i3, by my understanding, actually have a "stronger" version of it to make up for their shortcomings in other areas.

The i5 is a REALLY REALLY good chip, especially considering the pricetag. I would be very happy with one. The i5 outperforms the still-crazy expensive Core2 Extreme.

It's not the best chip for building a monster gaming machine, since it has only 2 memory channels and significantly fewer PCIE pipelines than the i7 900 series. But up to that point it's fantastic.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Chris, can you get on AIM or are you at work?

[MinisterofDOOM]

I'm at work but I can still get on AIM...gimme a second.

[Jesda]

Tidy and out of the way. The way an operating system ought to be.

1. BOOT2. LAUNCH APPS3. GO ON WITH LIFE

[MinisterofDOOM]

Tidy and out of the way. The way an operating system ought to be.

1. BOOT2. LAUNCH APPS3. GO ON WITH LIFE

[Jesda]

LOAD*