Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Who should judge Win7's success?
Stoic Joker:
No more actual "task" bar, no more classic start menu; two big disadvantages for me. Of course, computer newbies (starting with Vista or sth) won't have these problems.
-Tuxman (October 16, 2009, 07:46 PM)
--- End quote ---
Ya know the "Classic" start menu really only had about a five year run 95-2k ... The Start Panel introduced (to the public e.g. the rest of us had it earlier...) in 2001 when XP was RTM is looking at about a 10 year run at this point. So... Why is it still being treated as some new evil thing?!?
bluesear:
It's said that Vista is somewhat stabler and compatible than Win. 7.
jgpaiva:
It takes as much space as Vista? It takes as much time to boot as Vista?-jgpaiva (October 16, 2009, 07:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
According to the recommendations, it takes at least twice as much of resources. :P
-Tuxman (October 16, 2009, 07:46 PM)
--- End quote ---
Do you mean the computer performs slower than with vista?
I didn't know about that.. I only read a few of the first articles I could find about vista vs win 7 they mentioned improvements in speed when using the system (some of them even mention some stuff faster than XP :-\).
Or do you mean it just uses more resources in general? But I always heard that "unused ram is wasted ram", don't you agree?
No more actual "task" bar, no more classic start menu; two big disadvantages for me. Of course, computer newbies (starting with Vista or sth) won't have these problems.
-Tuxman (October 16, 2009, 07:46 PM)
--- End quote ---
Oh, then you meant that it was unusable for you. I misunderstood, I assumed you meant it was a general thing, and that sort of went against what I read about microsoft having made studies on how it was an improvement in usability for the general public.
jgpaiva:
It's said that Vista is somewhat stabler and compatible than Win. 7.
-bluesear (October 17, 2009, 03:51 AM)
--- End quote ---
Doesn't windows 7 have a small update to WDM? I wouldn't be surprised if vendors still haven't upgraded their drivers to fit it. From what I understand, it isn't such a major leap as it was with XP->Vista, so wouldn't be surprised if it was actually a smoother transition than it was back then.
Tuxman:
Ya know the "Classic" start menu really only had about a five year run 95-2k ... The Start Panel introduced (to the public e.g. the rest of us had it earlier...) in 2001 when XP was RTM is looking at about a 10 year run at this point. So... Why is it still being treated as some new evil thing?!?
-Stoic Joker (October 16, 2009, 11:54 PM)
--- End quote ---
This is the first time that "the public" is forced to use it...
Or do you mean it just uses more resources in general? But I always heard that "unused ram is wasted ram", don't you agree?-jgpaiva (October 17, 2009, 05:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Unused RAM is cache for me. More resource usage = less performance with the same resources, right?
what I read about microsoft having made studies on how it was an improvement in usability for the general public.-jgpaiva (October 17, 2009, 05:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Do you really trust Microsoft's studies? Of course they will never result in "this sucks".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version