Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Who should judge Win7's success?
Innuendo:
Windows 7 is, basically, Vista with a unusable task bar. So I can't see a sense in "upgrading".
-Tuxman (October 16, 2009, 07:16 PM)
--- End quote ---
Please reserve all judgement on Windows 7's task bar until you have actually used it. While it looks lame and uninspiring in screenshots I have found it to be spectacular in use & I could never go back to the Vista taskbar.
If you have actually used it and still don't like it then that's your right.
Innuendo:
According to the recommendations, it takes at least twice as much of resources. :P-Tuxman (October 16, 2009, 07:46 PM)
--- End quote ---
Real world experiences with me and people I know have shown that Windows 7 takes less resources than Vista and in most cases runs on PCs as well or better than XP did.
I performed studies myself. The one I performed them with was I. You see, if you are keen with a certain way to handle your OS (having been using Windows since 1996), it is a huge loss of productivity if you'll have to change your behavior entirely.
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.
--- End quote ---
So this is more about your reluctance to change & adopt new usability and ergonomics than about Microsoft's new OS then? Things change. User interfaces are refined and usability is improved...if you give them a chance. There's a small amount of time with less productivity until you get used to the new way of doing things, but after you've learned the new way your productivity will have increased.
If you don't want to like Windows 7 then do it for a real reason. Don't knock Windows 7 just because Microsoft didn't include the Windows 95 interface which is near 15 years old.
Innuendo:
However, if MS REALLY wants a hit on its hands, they should do something about their pricing scheme. From what I've seen, Windows 7 will be very expensive. If MS took a page from Apple's playbook and released a single DVD with all flavours of Windows 7 on it and one license key for a flat sum of $100-200, it would sell like hot cakes. Instead this is the price point for lower-end version UPGRADE LICENSES, which will still require clean installs. Not smart marketing in my opinion.
-Darwin (October 17, 2009, 08:36 AM)
--- End quote ---
Darwin, I agree with everything you say in this post in principle, but the reality is that the biggest percentage of Windows users, the great unwashed masses if you will, don't care how much Windows will be selling for on the shelves. They typically buy a machine from Dell, HP, or someone else and use whatever OS is on it till it is time to upgrade the machine. Then they go out and buy a new computer repeating the cycle. They never upgrade the OS on its own, but only when they buy a new computer.
Of the people who do buy OS upgrades, most of them are the techy nerd crowd & they are savvy enough to know that buying an OEM copy is where the smart money is so the on-the-shelf pricing doesn't affect them, either.
In my opinion, the only ones who pay the high prices of retail upgrade copies are those who have more money than sense & like the high prices so they have something to brag about to their friends, i.e. "Yeah, I just bought that new Windows 7. It cost me $499, but I don't care. I just used the money I found in my couch cushions."
Darwin:
but the reality is that the biggest percentage of Windows users, the great unwashed masses if you will, don't care how much Windows will be selling for on the shelves. They typically buy a machine from Dell, HP, or someone else and use whatever OS is on it till it is time to upgrade the machine. Then they go out and buy a new computer repeating the cycle. They never upgrade the OS on its own, but only when they buy a new computer.
-Innuendo (October 17, 2009, 11:22 AM)
--- End quote ---
Can't disagree with that!
I agree with you, too, about resource usage. Also, to add, when I updated to Windows 7 from Vista I first removed temp files and system restore points to free up disk space on the target drive (C). When I started the inplace upgrade to Windows 7, I had 16.5 GB free space on that drive with Vista Ultimate 64 installed. After the upgrade to 7 Ultimate 64 was complete that same drive had 21 GB free. After I deleted the inplace upgrade folders, I wound up with 22.6 GB of free space. Thus, my experience is that 7 has a smaller disk footprint as well.
Real world usage shows that my CPU cores are less taxed than they were under Vista and that ACPI and CPU temperatures are quite a bit cooler under Windows 7. The GPU operating temperature remains unchanged. I haven't tested battery life yet, but will over the coming week.
Tuxman:
If you have actually used it and still don't like it then that's your right.-Innuendo (October 17, 2009, 11:07 AM)
--- End quote ---
I'm glad to tell you that I will make use of this right then...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version