Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tormy]

I've discovered a performance test about Windows 7 recently....I must say that it's pretty interesting. It looks like that Microsoft finally managed to create a decent OS?
http://keznews.com/5202_Windows_7_beta_1_performance_test

[Yanlin]

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude...

That is AWESOME.

This makes Windows 7 the best Microsoft OS ever.

Not to mention far more worthwhile considering how much it's probably going to cost.

Oh and don't forget the main reason for this. It's Steve Ballmer and his DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS.

[Tormy]

Well, as I heard the retail price will be about the same as Vista...if the rumors are true at least. 

[ToonyMan]

Haha, funny how you wait for the arrival of 7 while I already have Windows 8. 

[Yanlin]

Linux?

[ToonyMan]

Linux?

I was just saying that to make my double chin roll.

[Lord Snow]

They say Windows 7 is performing better than Windows Vista, which in turn performs as good or better than Windows XP.

I mean, come on. What did they compare? optimized Windows Vista vs. completly crap-filled XP?

In reality, 7 will likely be about as much worse than vista as vista is worse than xp.

[Mephisto]

My preliminary tests show that I will never run Windows 7. I installed the RC in VirtualBox on my Arch rig. I could barely play solitaire. XP and Tiny Vista run great under the same circumstances.

[Vucar Fikodastesh]

My preliminary tests show that I will never run Windows 7. I installed the RC in VirtualBox on my Arch rig. I could barely play solitaire. XP and Tiny Vista run great under the same circumstances.

Has it occurred to you that 7 has different minimum system requirements than XP and Tiny Vista?

That having higher minimum system requirements does not, so long as they are met, mean it will run slower?

That, to run faster, 7 needs a more capable graphics card?

A graphics card not available in your virtual machine?

[Mephisto]

My preliminary tests show that I will never run Windows 7. I installed the RC in VirtualBox on my Arch rig. I could barely play solitaire. XP and Tiny Vista run great under the same circumstances.

Has it occurred to you that 7 has different minimum system requirements than XP and Tiny Vista?

That having higher minimum system requirements does not, so long as they are met, mean it will run slower?

That, to run faster, 7 needs a more capable graphics card?

A graphics card not available in your virtual machine?

I realize that 7 would run better if it were actually installed, seeing as the Linux ATI drivers are less than perfect.

Not that I ever actually play solitaire, but I do expect something as trivial as that to be playable. Other bits of the system were snappy. The whole thing wasn't slow.

I might be more inclined to install 7 if that particular computer had a DVD drive, also.

[Keiseth]

I'm sure 7 is better than Vista. But I was given Vista with my laptop (to replace my poor old Tetsuya, who served me for many years admirably.)

I'm not paying >$100($200,300...?) for something I expected to get in the first place. It's an absurdity to even consider it, from my perspective. If they offered some discount to current Vista users to replace an operating system they've accepted is sub-par, then I'd feel better about it.

Edit: Heh, it's late. I don't want to sound like I'm branding 7 as evil before I even try it. But I think it's understandable to be upset at Vista for a few things, and also upset that rather than fixing Vista's faults in a series of patches or service packs, it's being abandoned in favor of a whole new operating system. Not in itself a problem if you didn't have to pay for it!

In terms of backward compatibility I've only had two or so issues in Vista. But one made me laugh my ass off. Of all of the games I tried, the only one that didn't work at all was one from Microsoft Game Studios. There was no easy, automatic fix either. The only way to solve it was to use a No CD patch. Crazy...