Windows 7 vs XP

[QUOTE=AlienDev;4539946]So what if XP has still got a decent market share? It is old. Microsoft have no reason to support it. Actually, not making new software for old crap will help kill the old crap. Down with XP!

If there was a genie who gave me three wishes, one would IE using WebKit (or Steve Balmer deciding to give up on the browser and ship with Firefox/Chrome only).

The second wish would be for libraries like jQuery to be built in so they don’t need downloaded.

Third wish = ???[/QUOTE]

lolz what ever u say crap or rubbish or what ever, still the truth is that most of the world is using XP, instead.

While I must accept one thing that there are many security vulnarities in XP.

And I must point out one thing here that windows platform is mainly for ease of access and use. But this is what all the user wants today. Every thing should be cooked and serve to them w/o much complication and delay.

I am using windows xp which is best operating system. but know windows 7 is most demanding operating system.

Windows 7 is a great and stable OS. No reason not to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP unless your PC only has 1GB of ram and a slow processor.

Then again I didn’t have a problem with windows vista other than the annoying security popups which is gone with windows 7.

In Vista, you have several security-related icons in the system tray, and you might have notifications popping up from each one. To make changes to security settings, you may have to open several applications. In Windows 7, all the security messages have been consolidated into one icon.

tell me about an OS that makes you impressed, please :smiley:

anyway, so far i haven’t a thing to complain about. it meets my expectations and needs. can i ask for more? :cool:

nothing is out of the ordinary, i still like xp and have it on most of my computers, *nix i walked away from when i stopped using slackware.

what do you find annoying with it?

I can’t say i find anything annoying with it, but then it’ll take more than a computer to annoy me :stuck_out_tongue:

Only “almost impressed”? :lol: I have to say that I’m not impressed at all. It’s fine but nothing out of the ordinary. Very nice looking though. Maybe it is because I’m very comfortable with my XP and my Ubuntu enviroments… I have Win 7 on my laptop and I use it quite often but it does have one or two things that slightly annoy me.

when i buld this new computer i went from XP to win7 ultimate, and i love it so far. i’m running this computer as my main workstation where i do video work, graphix and photo work, programming and audio work.

I was kinda sceptic to move away from my trusted and beloved xp environment, but it went so smooth and everything works so well that I’m almost impressed :smiley:

No, no problems.

Windows7 is faster, I agree.

I’m not really buying it, you should try harder if you work by commission. :cool:

What is hard: to make different flavors of a browsers for different OS’s you’ve put in the market you’re self? How 'bout a Acrobat Reader 9 just for W7. Otherwise, use Acrobat Reader 5 for XP.:eye:

It’s still :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:.

Acrobat Reader 9 only supports Win2K and above… that’s the same as IE9 only supporting Vista and above… it’s called minimum system requirements. All apps have them! In respect to the new version of Internet Explorer, I’m pleased with the progress it’s making (though it breaks my design slightly - which is possibly an issue with it’s implementation of overflow). As for Windows XP… They should stop supporting it, it’s old and being used beyond it’s natural lifespan, since Windows 7 appeared it makes sense to ditch Windows XP entirely as a decent upgrade is available (Vista had it’s problems so I can understand why people held on for longer)… It’s time to let go people, there’s a SERIOUS improvement if you make the transition from XP to a clean install of Win7… I’ve seen serious performance improvements, it’s much more secure and many of the apps have had a decent work-over. As for Windows XP’s age, the default installation (pre service packs) had IE6 as it’s default browser. :slight_smile:

I’m using Win7/Vista, I can honestly say that Windows7 is a solid OS. We all know that there are many who are on WindowsXP and won’t upgrade until 2-3 years from now.

Maaan, I see you don’t get my point, and that is making me happy(:.

Let’s roll back.

First, I need to buy a new computer, preferably with “Designed for W7” sticker on it.:rofl: As you forgot to mention, not all today-in-function PC’s have hardware compatible with W7, or meet the requirements.

Then, if it’s not in the price range of my new toy, a W7 licence.:rofl:

Then, to put aside all my business-bread-making-software that “no run” in W7. :rofl:

And finally I’m able to enjoy Aero “pest” theme, and a so called new security (not proven by time yet).:rofl:

All that, and a shiny, incomplete, non-standard-proven browser, just 'coz it’s doing nice marketing.:rofl:

I still give it :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

And I see a lot of businesses just rushing into it, as history tell them to be 100% confident in Microsoft products. Never mind 95, 98, ME, Vista. Oh, and IE6.

Vista was the new 95. What that says about 7?

I don’t mind upgrading and updating, just I’m not too happy buying “bling” instead of “stone-cold reliable”.

Is Microsoft trying to start an Ivy club? Let’s look at the competition.

Google OS and not-so-pricy PC’s. That’s one way to go. Especially for business.

Kaspersky is opening the market for hardware antiviral protection. Still wanna rely on Microsoft for security? That’s another way to go. Especially since MS did not even try and make a really good anti-malware available for W7.

And finally, it’s so nice when they cut backward compatibility with each new OS that it makes me worm and fuzzy inside, just like when they hardcoded 10 maximum TCP/IP connection into XP SP3.

Oh, yeah, I’m going for the 7 Enterprise, as it’s offering what XP has, just with more money.

Make XP better, that should be their goal, for those poor *******s buying their OS’s, not lunch Vista and rip us off.:nono:

When you buy a stinky wormy salami do you eat it? Or do you ask for a refund and sue?

Run this on their new IE9 !

Yeah, sorry for the flames, but I thought ppl would be more “en-garde” regarding MS products, after all this years.

How 'bout we stop getting sidetracked before this becomes a flame war about Windows.

So will not IE9.:lol:

I’m sorry, I’m not trying to offend you, and I respect your title and position here, at SitePoint. :cool:

But why are you defending MS: XP was the only OS that saved us from hardware drivers hell. W7 is putting us all back in.

IE6, and 7, and 8, however good, still require own personal code to behave.

You believe IE9 will bring salvation. I see it it doesn’t. Others browsers don’t rely for their features, on a 16GB+ free HDD, 2GB RAM OS, to run properly.:nono: (And they stole that swap space idea from Linux: “Shame, shame, shame/Shame on you”)

They (other browsers, of course) achieve more with less. This is good for everybody.:wink:

Have you actually used Windows 7? And I mean on a real PC, and not a VM?

I (and I believe everyone who isn’t against dropping XP support) have used it. In fact, I’ve used it and have installed it on many computers, both old and new ones. While Vista rerquires 1GB RAM, 2.0GHz Celeron CPU and 40GBs HDD to run acceptably well, Windows 7 works on that kind of configuration in the fashion that Vista would work on a 3GB RAM, 2.8GHz DualCore CPU and 100GBs HDD. In other words - superbly.

What Microsoft basically did to improve the performance is the same thing they’re doing for IE9 - they shifted the bottleneck from the CPU to the GPU. Since any new motherboard on the market (“new” as “in stock”; could be last year’s model…) includes a sophisticated enough GPU, they could do that without any serious implications. And this is exactly why I’m explicitly asking you about the VM… (Most?) VMs can’t access the GPU directly, GPU related work must be done by the host’s CPU, which obviously gives a false impression on performance.

And about the drivers hell… how many times have you installed Windows 7 and not have a driver either found automatically, or be available from the manufacturer’s site? I’ve installed Windows 7 on about 50 computers now (maybe more… I haven’t exactly kept count), and so far, I have only 2 such cases - #1 was the printer part of a Xerox all-in-one device that has no 64 bit drivers for Windows 7 (it does have 32 bit ones). It did have 64 bit scanner ones, and besides, the client wanted to buy a new all-in-one device anyway. #2 was Realtek AC97 soundcard drivers. You’d think any motherboard old enough to have that would not run Windows 7, but it does. At the time, there were no drivers. I found some from somewhere (don’t remember where), and now I just checked and saw Realtek actually have official drivers on their site… that leaves us with only 1 still valid case (and if I remembered the model, I wouldn’t be surprised if now there is such a driver).

How is a large amount of bundled drivers and Vista driver compatibility a driver hell? Sure, your 10 year old unsupported device will not work, but if it’s “unsupported”, then by definition, you’ll never upgrade to anything, even if it was superb in every way, and there is not a single other device in the last 5 years without a driver for it… which is pretty much the case for Windows 7.

As for other browsers not reliying on hardware - yes, they aren’t taking full advantage of your PC… and look how well they are doing on massive stress tests like having two HD videos on one page, large amounts of SVG shapes and/or moving PNGs… your PC hardware isn’t suppose to just sit there. It should be utilized as much as needed, and everything needs to free up resources when something else requires resources from the PC.

Oh, BTW, I also don’t see how not supporting unfinished specs makes them not compliant with standards. Complain about lack of SVG Animations, Filters and Fonts, sure… complain about DOM 2 Traversal and Views, sure… complain about Animated PNGs and MathML even… but don’t complain about HTML 5 and Canvas… those are a “wild west” currently… you can’t expect anyone to implement anything consistently, as “consistently” is still a moving target.

Hi boen_robot.

I have actually used all of W7, for al least two months trial time: Home Basic, Home, Professional, Ultimate, Enterprise. Installed on fresh HDD, bought specially for this purpose.

Upgraded my specs to 3GB RAM, new 1GB RAM nVidia based PCI 16x graphic card, and a new 7.1 sound card, for my Intel dual core PC.

And gone back to XP. An advice: don’t compare benefits of W7 speed against Vista. That’s just sad. And so did a lot of individuals that did not take my advice: W7 not good enough yet. As a professional, I don’t know about you, but I try to test ahead new technology related to my work, and that includes testing OS’s for their opportunities. W7 did not raise to the businesses level of need. It’s relying on a home consumer to raise the bar, and that’s bad.

If you want gadgets, that’s nice. But if you do real work on a PC (I have a second HDD for Ubuntu), W7 it’s missing speed. It’s missing responsiveness.

It’s separate thread for Windows Explorer shell it’s a lie, as when it hangs, eventually ends up blocking everything.

Using specific software gives you the nerve wrecking dialog box with choises for “did it run well”?

As for driver support, you are naive. Beta version for drivers that make you hardware behave abnormal, not to mention hardware that it’s no longer supported, like ATI graphic cards, not older then 3 years. These are systems that many have, and ppl don’t need new ones just to be trendy. They have real jobs cut out for them, and expect OS’s to respect that.

If you depend on crucial pieces of software, and not loosing time just playing latest games on your computer, THEN you understand the real implication of XP not being properly updated just to make room for new business. New business, hell yes, but what about the old one?

A new toy? Yeah, you can say that about W7. Do I take it seriously? Not yet, it needs to grow. Do you benefit from it? Good for you, you’re among few happy ones.

I really really believe it’s time for Ubuntu, Google OS and likes, and rely on other browsers then IE, if you take computing seriously.

And a little lesson to you. Do you want real computing power? Then you can use very well old PC as little as Pentium II to build clusters and use parallel programming with 32 Mb versions of Linux, for very little money, and W7 with nCore or x64 CPU’s will never be able to compete with that, no matter how much you’ll spend on them. Aero it’s just to make you buy, not compute. Sorry.

If you look a little back in time, you’ll see that XP is based on NT stability and comes with multimedia enhancements. That means that before the bling there was real computing. That is what I expect. As for IE9, I don’t want my future 10 years of programming to be governed by repeated mistakes, but focus on fine tuning my programming skills, and not on finding hacks.

Seriously, Windows has gone from 4 megabytes to 4 gigabytes, but what does it offer more? basically, the same stuff…

I know what you mean. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it installs easy. So what?:rolleyes:

You do know eye candy can be disabled, right? It makes even Vista pretty fast and less memory hungry (honestly, I haven’t tried doing the same for Windows 7, because I haven’t needed to). OK, it’s not as much as most Linux distributions, but let’s keep comparrisons to stuff that the majority of people use, even if it’s not “right” or not providing that much great “computing”. That being said, I agree with you on comparing Window 7 to XP as well.

Let’s first define “real work”, shall we? If by “real work”, you mean doing Mathematica calculations, physics simulations, having a server and/or a router and the like, then I completely agree a Linux setup can’t be beaten.

If you mean multimedia processing, then this would usually mean Adobe After Effects and the like. If you mean 3D rendering, this means Maya, Auto CAD and the like. Either way, on a single computer, no computing power is enough to create high quality renderings fast enough. You can always get higher quality faster… on any OS.

If you mean text processing and (web and/or desktop) development, and using MS Office applications, running Windows 7 on the weaker kind of configuration I described is pretty much enough… or at least no office client of mine has complained… my computers are slightly more powerful (2GBs RAM, 2.5 DualCore CPU…), but even so, I can run everything I need (several browser windows, media player, Visual Studio and/or NetBeans, Outlook,…) without any glithes. I’m actually currently using Vista (until recently, I had a game I wanted to complete… it’s not that it won’t run on Windows 7… I just didn’t want to install it again), and it works just as perfectly as XP worked, only it’s prettier (performance wise that is… I’m not saying Windows Vista has nothing new for me).

I guess there may be some 100ms delays somewhere, but considering how many slow computers I have to deal with nowadays (XP SP3 + updates on machines with under 512MBs RAM… if you think Vista is slow, you have to see how THAT feels), I’ve probably reached a point where such things don’t affect me. If a program doesn’t do any disk I/O, it’s hard for me to notice anything on a compuer with more than 1GB RAM and any DualCore CPU.

Who’s talking about beta drivers? I meant bundled with the OS drivers, and official (labeled “stable”… though arguably, they may be less stable) drivers from a manufacturer site. A bundled driver, in the case of video cards, is not enough usually, but you can always get a driver at the site. If the latest drivers exclude support or behave badly with your video card, you can always revert to an older driver. And as for people with “real jobs”… if they can’t do it themselves, that’s what techies like us exist. Well… for me at least (if you haven’t figured out already - my main occupation is an IT errr… consultant… you know, like in “The IT Crowd”).