I was bored after work last night so I went to anandtech and read their write up on the release.
Looks like they took the Vista pig, gave it a fresh coat of paint and a little more lipstick, spend a few hundred million, and they have themselves a thoroughbred.
Other than watering down UAC, adding a bunch of codecs to Media Center and a UI facelift its the same OS. OK, they made it a little leaner for low end machines as well.
Guess I'll stick with Vista. Maybe an upgrade to 64 bit and more ram is in order.
First off, I'm an OSX guy.
I put Win 7 beta on my Macbook and ran it with Virtual Box off of a USB HDD. It was VERY fast, even faster than a T41 Thinkpad.
Then I ran Win 7 on a Dell Mini 9, which also dual booted OSX. Win 7 was VERY impressive on an Atom. Win 7 is a VERY good OS IMHO.
I agree. And since its pretty much the same as Vista, which I was always happy with post sp1...
I just think its funny that Vista was supposed to be such a pile of doo, hence the lipstick on a pig comment. Same OS, new face...
Ah, yes, I understand now. Yes, it does look better than Vista. But it seems to run faster than Vista ever did.
The lipstick must be red to make the pig go faster.
They did do some things in Win7 to make performance better, so it should be a bit faster than Vista was. The laptop I'm sending this from is on Win7...I like it so far, but then I never had a problem with Vista (I must be the only person in the world that can say that from the way it gets bashed)
From the benchmarks I saw on anandtech, Vista and Win7 are about the same. That was their conclusion as well.
CV, Wanna make that pig go a little faster? Just add a coat of grease and a few extra volts. Nothing like an overclocked greased pig...
Nope, I don't have a problem with Vista, either, at least after SP1.
From the benchmarks I saw on anandtech, Vista and Win7 are about the same. That was their conclusion as well.
For actually getting things done, Vista and 7 are about the same, maybe with 7 being slower. But for interactivity 7 "feels" faster because they've make the GUI run with a higher priority. Also the memory foot print has been decreased, so lesser machines can run it without swapping to the hard disk constantly, that really speeds things up in that case.
They mentioned memory management as a minor issue, but heck, just toss another 4 gig at the problem...
I'm not seeing any memory leaks. When I have only my usual background programs running the machine uses 1.4 GB all day every day. Whether it's been running a week, or freshly booted.
I upgraded my HTPC from Vista Ultimate 32 to Win 7 Ultimate 64 recently. I have not seen any compelling reason in windows itself to upgrade, except for Windows Media Center. The version that comes with Win 7 is much improved if you use it to watch/record HDTV.
I don't have cable or any dish services, but I get excellent HDTV with a HDHomerun network tuner. The guide now works properly and displays all program information correctly for my 17 over the air channels. In my opinion Microsoft fixed what should have worked properly in Vista.
It is just like Microsoft to charge me for another operating system to fix what should have worked anyway. It is just like me to fall for this!
It is just like Microsoft to charge me for another operating system to fix what should have worked anyway.
Thats exactly the way I feel. They should be providing me with an upgrade as a matter of course, after all, they were the ones that messed up.
One more here that has run Vista with no problems. Hopefully some of the improvements done on Win7 may make there way as service packs for those of us still running Vista.......I can always dream......
I've been running Vista on three computers for awhile now, and it's never been a problem for me. Though some software availability for 64-bit has been....
If you were a hold out XP user like I was, then it has been a very satisfying upgrade. I wanted the Vista interface when it came out but held off due to it's performance issues at the time.
For an XP user, it's a no brainer. You should upgrade. A Vista user, I could see as not being in such a hurry. Although, moving from 32 bit to 64 bit has already payed for itself with my latest CD rips going twice as fast, as per my post somewhere about dual-core multitasking on music rips and conversions.
The faster ripping is a good point as I think I will be re-ripping my music once I get into my new house. One library in FLAC but ripped with EAC and one with i-tunes for my wife and son's i-pods. Storage is cheap and so is my time.
On a side note one of my Hhard drives died in my NAS last week and I simply swapped in the new and it rebuilt from the second(I was ruinning the NAS mirrored), no hiccups at all, technology is great when it works
