Windows 7

Post by **Leisher** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:23 am

I run both a Pro and Ultimate machine, so I'm not sure I'm the best to say "everything runs good".

I will say that W7 seems to handle legacy programs on its own without user input, which is nice.

Post by **TPRJones** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:41 pm

I poked at W7 with a stick this past weekend. Didn't care for it much.

But then I never saw Vista, so I don't have that to compare it to to see how wonderful it is.

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:23 pm

Yesterday, W7 blue-screened on me.

Just now, it forgot how to alt-tab (kept taking me to wrong windows), and the taskbar preview screen just showed some fuzzy blue window.

Re-started explorer, fixed it.

Bah. Another crappy OS

Post by **Leisher** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:09 pm

I think Catt might be a heavier user than I am in terms of taxing an OS, but in my daily chores dealing with my company's servers and network, and my nightly surfing/gaming, I have yet to experience any problems on the two desktops and one laptop I have running W7.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:27 pm

If W7 is so different from XP that I've got to learn a new OS, maybe it's just time to go full-time Linux.

Post by **Leisher** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:45 pm

I think that's a bit of a stretch in the analogy department.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:47 pm

TPRJones wrote:If W7 is so different from XP that I've got to learn a new OS, maybe it's just time to go full-time Linux.

If I could find a Linux distro w\ rock-solid documentation, I might consider that. But you'll still need Windows of some kind simply because it's got loads, loads, loads more popular softs designed for it than any other OS.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:50 pm

Eh, so far there's been Linux versions of all software I've needed. Often better versions.

The only things holding me back are games and comfortable familiarity with the system. W7 is different enough to remove that second reason.

As to documention, why would you need that? Do you actually read the instructions? Bah.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:06 pm

TPRJones wrote:The only things holding me back are games and comfortable familiarity with the system. W7 is different enough to remove that second reason.

As to documention, why would you need that? Do you actually read the instructions? Bah.

The games are huge. Vid games are a billion dollar per year industry. Most don't get ported to Linux. You'd need to dual boot, at a minimum. I'm trying to think what would entice developers to do that en masse. Nothing springs to mind.

Docs? Uh, yeah. I read them. Every now & again, I find decent docs which save me hours of having to hunt down an explanation myself. I've got shit to do, man.

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:13 pm

Nah, W7 isn't vastly different from XP, took me about a week to get used to it.

I do routinely have about 10-20 programs running from IM to software dev, to custom stuff, browser, etc. The only thing I don't do on this PC is game, really.

Post by **Leisher** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:26 pm

The games are huge. Vid games are a billion dollar per year industry. Most don't get ported to Linux. You'd need to dual boot, at a minimum. I'm trying to think what would entice developers to do that en masse. Nothing springs to mind.

Considering how small Linux's market share is, there is no incentive for manufacturers to go that route.

W7 is different enough to remove that second reason.

Really? You think that?

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:42 pm

Since Windows is free to me, cost has never really been an issue, so the learning curve of *nix has never seemed worth it at all.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:07 pm

Leisher wrote:
W7 is different enough to remove that second reason.
Really? You think that?

I poked at it for about five minutes this past weekend and it was different enough to annoy me. Of course I use XP with the "Classic" options all turned on, so in a way I'm still using W2000 as far as the interface goes.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:28 pm

Leisher wrote:
The games are huge. Vid games are a billion dollar per year industry. Most don't get ported to Linux. You'd need to dual boot, at a minimum. I'm trying to think what would entice developers to do that en masse. Nothing springs to mind.
Considering how small Linux's market share is, there is no incentive for manufacturers to go that route.

Plus, Microsoft spent a lot of money making DirectX an industry-wide standard the way the games interact with the hardware. And I don't think DirectX exists for Linux.

Now why would Microsoft do something like that? That stifles competition.

Post by **Leisher** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:34 am

I poked at it for about five minutes this past weekend and it was different enough to annoy me. Of course I use XP with the "Classic" options all turned on, so in a way I'm still using W2000 as far as the interface goes.

It's funny. The first 5 minutes I poked at it, I found enough familiar things that I wasn't annoyed, and I use a lot of the "Classic" options too. Especially in the control panel.

Now Vista, I hated and thought it was far too different. Again funny, considering W7 is being called "XP with a Vista paint job".

I still don't understand why Microsoft set out to make an OS that mirrors their competitor who has been in business since the 70s and still only had (at the time) less than 10% of the market.

Post by **Cakedaddy** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:46 am

I don't think the market share was determined by the interface, it was determined by the fact the MS OS ran on IBM machines.

Mac has always been considered to be the better interface, but, it didn't run on PCs, so, it didn't matter. Now MS has an OS that runs on IBM machines as well as seeming like the better interface.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:26 pm

Cakedaddy wrote:I don't think the market share was determined by the interface, it was determined by the fact the MS OS ran on IBM machines.

IBM married their machines to Intel's architecture. Back in the day, the OS for Crapintosh only ran on Motorola. Macroshaft made MS-DOS & WinBlows Intel-friendly. Game over. Apple's late-ass move switching their hardware to Intel didn't have near as big an effect as they wanted.