Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Windows 7 evaluation

<< < (15/17) > >>

Innuendo:
The problem, Justice, is Microsoft cannot implement change too fast or there is going to be a lot of consumer backlash both from individuals and businesses. In order to move to that next generation of desktop OSes things are going to have to be planned carefully or a lot of people are going to be sitting around with $1,500 worth of Adobe software that won't work with their new OS and something like that would make the rally cries against Vista look tame.

Let's look at the last time Microsoft radically changed Windows. That was when Windows 95 was released and there were a LOT of programs that didn't work with the new OS because they either used outdated Windows API calls or were DOS-based. Yeah, a lot of people still used DOS back then because Windows 3.x wasn't a viable solution for a lot of people.

But I digress...back then there was some outcry and gnashing of teeth, but people made the switch with their apps because there was a lot to gain from doing so. Pre-emptive multi-tasking, improved performance due to software being 32-bit, unified GUI interface, Windows finally being a real full-fledged OS instead of sitting on top of DOS, etc.

If Microsoft wants people to move over/up to The Next Great Thing they are going to need a laundry list of advantages like that or people aren't going to make the move.

And to address your last point, yes you could say that any Windows version after XP are refinements of the same concepts, but only if you are talking about the concept of Windows itself. Once you start talking about the code-base, however, you will find that although Vista and Win7 have very similar GUIs to WinXP a lot of the underlying code under the hood has been rewritten and optimized for performance and security.

Warning: personal anecdote ahead! While the GUIs of Vista and Win7 seem to be very similar to XP on first glance there's a LOT more usability stuffed in nooks and crannies that help you get a lot more out of the user interface than one did with XP. I've been running Win7 since pre-beta builds exclusively and just last week I had to work on a WinXP and it was extremely frustrating. Sure, I could get my tasks done, but I kept looking for the new Win7 shortcuts to doing things and not finding them. It seems like Microsoft is back on track again & I'm really looking forward to seeing what Win8 will bring us in 2 or so years.

f0dder:
Windows finally being a real full-fledged OS instead of sitting on top of DOS, etc.-Innuendo (July 16, 2009, 10:59 AM)
--- End quote ---
Just to nitpick: win9x still sits ontop of DOS (even though it "sucks out the brains" pretty well, and only calls down to DOS very rarely), and while it does implement pre-emptive multitasking, there's still a few "biglocks" in the kernel code that can get the system locked up totally. Oh, and there's a lot of thunks to old 16bit windows code as well. Win9x is... a mess :)

As for Win7, I agree fully - the small usability enhancements and polish might not seem like a lot when looked at individually, but it all adds up to a better experience than XP. And there's some pretty cute kernel enhancements as well; those aren't directly visible to the end-users, but it does make for a smoother ride, and scalability that's going to be important as the number of CPU cores go up.

justice:
Yes having tried Windows 7 RC as my main daily OS fo ever since it became available I have no need to install Windows XP or Vista anymore - and it has the polish of a SP1 release imho. I'm just trying to say - if it was going to revolutionize how you work with a pc then you would have read about it.

Innuendo:
Windows finally being a real full-fledged OS instead of sitting on top of DOS, etc.-f0dder (July 16, 2009, 11:10 AM)
--- End quote ---
Just to nitpick: win9x still sits ontop of DOS (even though it "sucks out the brains" pretty well, and only calls down to DOS very rarely), and while it does implement pre-emptive multitasking, there's still a few "biglocks" in the kernel code that can get the system locked up totally. Oh, and there's a lot of thunks to old 16bit windows code as well. Win9x is... a mess :)[/quote]

I'm glad I have you around f0dder. I don't have as much time to answer things to my full satisfaction these days due to time constraints so I tend to over-simplify a lot of my replies, but I'm confident you will come along and flesh out my general outlines.

I always wanted to have an entourage.  ;D

No, just kidding...I'm glad you are here to expound on my vague mumblings. So much to do and so little time to do it in these days. :: sigh ::

Dormouse:
Interesting to see the variety of opinions on this thread and the one about pre-ordering.

Seems to me that W7 is clearly better than Vista and probably better than XP.
But not enough to 'upgrade' a system that is already working and stable. And not enough for me to have faith in the future with MS. Or faith in always having enough money in the future to meet MS's demands.

So my roll out plan is simple. I have pre-ordered one copy of W7 for each member of the family. However, I won't install it on any system until there is a need for me to do some work on it. (That will be at least 2 systems before next June since they are running the RC). And some systems will probably just keep running as they are for another 5 or 10 years. And the systems beyond the one each will only have Ubuntu (or the Windows they come with or old versions of Windows already installed); and I'll only be willing to support W7 and Ubuntu.

When I do install it, I will also install Ubuntu. On some systems it will be dual boot, on some systems it will be through Virtualbox (ie W7 on Ubuntu) and on one at least it will be through andLinux. I have licenses for Crossover so may install that on some primarily Ubuntu systems too.

My experience so far tells me that the people who have been given Ubuntu prefer it to Windows (any version) unless they already have to use Windows a lot in another environment. (And that group hate mixing XP & Vista and presumably will feel the same about W7. They also detest the ribbon and insist on Office 2003.) The only reason the others have for having Windows installed is games, Powerpoint (preferred to the OO equivalent), Naturally Speaking and Wacom tablets (though Linux compatibility is much improved). But none of them want to use the command line and would rather use Windows than have to do that for themselves.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page