read a review on Tom's Hardware today that concluded saying there will be about a 7% perceivable difference from Vista to 7. That's a little small, imo.
Windows 7 - A Review by V_RocKs
Collapse
X
-
-
http://store.apple.com/us/reviews/MC...co=MTI2NzQzMzQ
Who say's apple doesn't have it's share of issues.Comment
-
It's a good thing windows 7 doesn't suck cocks like Vista did. I'm still using XP on my work PC. I just took a gamble a couple weeks ago and ordered a custom gaming rig with Win 7 on it, I guess my gamble has payed off?
Need custom blog posts or articles? Hit me up: Blog And Article Writer
Yes, I can do any kind of custom orders, too!
ICQ: 641204000Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Selective memory is an amazing thing. Apple hobbled along badly for many years until finally using bsd to get stable.. Just like they hobbled along grunt-wise until finally using intel. Also yes please, let me switch to whatever system Lord Jobs says I am allowed to have right now, never mind I might be getting caught just behind their next wave of configurations or *gasp* actually want to be unique and not just be told I am and create a specific config for my situation.Don't be a fucking troll.
How long did it take apple to get OS/X? Do you even remember the horrors of System 9 / 8 etc?
Not to mention that the stability comes from darwin / bsd.
In any case, without trying to be inflammatory - serious question for you to ponder..
Mac: The OS only has to handle one set of known hardware configuations.
PC: The OS has to handle literally billions of hardware configurations, dating back over 15 years.
The sheer task of maintaining compatibility etc on Windows is amazing - honestly, amazing.Comment
-
Nice review. Will be upgrading in a few days.I have pretty much been a beta tester of Microsoft products since Windows 98.
I loved windows 98SE and didn't upgrade to anything else until Windows 2000 Professional. That was a solid mother fucker right there. Windows XP Professional was a bit testy in the beginning, but SP1 fixed a lot of problems and by SP2 it was just as solid as 2000P...
Vista was a fucking nightmare from the beginning. Nothing worked and all of the high hopes functionality was stripped out because it just got too damn chaotic.
Windows 7 has reminded me of Windows 2000 Professional since the beginning. It is solid as fuck. It is a lot like have the addons of Vista integrated with the solidness of the Windows NT line (which 2000P was a part of).
I have 4 cores on the processor and 6 gigs of ram. I no longer close shit down or have to restart FF because it bloated to 700mb of memory. While FF still does that and seems to always want to consume 16 to 25% of the processing power, which translates to 60% - 100% of a single core, I don't have to give a shit anymore. Yes, this has a lot to do with the simple fact that my PC has 4 cores and so much memory... I know... But Windows 7 seems to handle shit pretty good. I am using 64 bit Ultimate and it kicks ass!
I elected to "upgrade" from Vista. I did this so I could tell you if it sucks or not. I have upgraded from 98 to ME, etc... I know the horror stories. This upgrade was flawless. I truly could not be anymore impressed with how solid this system runs.
Windows 7 found every single driver but one. It was for a USB network card and it seemed that Windows thought it was a drive. So I had to stick another USB network bard I had in another computer into it and it loaded its drivers, hit the Internet and loaded the other cards drivers. Unplugged the 2nd one and Windows 7 elected to switch to the 1st for the wireless connection. Nice.
Overall I have to say Microsoft finally did something right. It has been a long time since 2000P and they finally knocked another one out of the ballpark.
For those of you that don't know, 2000 Professional was built on the Windows NT architecture. I believe Vista was also built on it but it seemed more like the ME architecture... Windows NT was built with corporations in mind. You can have Joe the Plumber complain on his shit blog all you want, but if Sears says your shit sucks, well, you are going to lose a lot of business. So they did NT right. Now they did Windows 7 right.
Comment
-
Which ssd do you have? I was looking at the intels, don't feel like reinstalling win7, should cloning my drive to a new ssd do the trick?Comment
-
-
Comment
-
All you need to know about ssd drives (31-page anandtech thesis):
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/sho...spx?i=3531&p=1
X25M Gen2 review:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/17269/1Comment
-
Well, if you are worried about upgrading, do the "fresh install". It will still copy your windows stuff to windows.old and then you can import it all later.
Also extract portions of your registry you might want... Say you use Windows Live Writer for blog posting, copy that section of the registry to import later and keep your passwords and accounts. Same with Dreamweaver. Same with AOL should you still be using it. Same with Firefox...
Then when you clean install you can copy the windows.old/user/[your account name]/appdata/[local and roaming]/Windows Live Writer/*
etc... over and be right back where you were before starting the process...
Also, the 64bit version is nice. You can go to http://www.crucial.com/index.aspx and pick up a couple extra gigs of ram for almost nothing. Get at least 6gigs and you will no longer use a paging file when switching between open and minimized windows. The speed difference in that alone is worth the upgrade.Last edited by V_RocKs; 10-29-2009, 09:37 AM.Comment
-
We have a good joke here in Russia which fits for Vista vs Win7 case just perfect:
A rat asks a hamster: "Bro, we are almost the same rodents but why people are trying to kill and poison me while they caress, feed and love you?". The hamster fall to thinking for a moment when answered: "I believe it's because your PR-managers suck"Obey the CowgodComment
-
I have no idea who that Tom is and what kind of hardware he hides in his pants, but I'm already told here that Vista and Win7 have almost the same core so even a 7% difference is too much IMHO.
Yesterday I was tying to setup an OpenVPN client on Win7 64-bit and found that it has exactly the same compatibility issues as Vista. I.e. you can read all those "how to make my OpenVPN client run under funking Vista?!" and be sure - they will be 100% applicable to Win7. You will even need to install Vista-compatible TAP driver on Win7 PC.
What a surprise!
Last edited by just a punk; 10-29-2009, 10:51 AM.Obey the CowgodComment
-
Here's an excerpt from an article on http://icrontic.com/news/micron-alle...nand-endurance
"Even Intel?s MLC-based X25-M G2 drive is estimated to have a 31,500 cycle write endurance, which is good for 20GB of erase/write sequences a day, every day, for five years. If that?s not enough, the company has included a 100GB/day margin of error."
Quite honestly for the price, I would pay $280 and replace them yearly because that's how noticeable the speed increase is.Comment
-
Lolz windows 7 rocks, and for most people Vista did great as well.We have a good joke here in Russia which fits for Vista vs Win7 case just perfect:
A rat asks a hamster: "Bro, we are almost the same rodents but why people are trying to kill and poison me while they caress, feed and love you?". The hamster fall to thinking for a moment when answered: "I believe it's because your PR-managers suck"
Here are some reviews from that mac page haha
This program is totally flawed. Apple rushed it to market to compete with Microsoft 7. I installed it on my computer and it completely deleted my iPhoto library on my computer hard drive as well as from Time machine. Absolutely incredible - 5 years of pics completed gone forever! I went to the store and they had no answers and after several wasted hours concluded there is nothing that can be done. They submitted a report but, it seems highly unlikely my pics will be recovered. The program also somehow affected my ability to connect to the airport wireless router. Still haven't figured that one out yet. DON'T BUY THIS PROGRAM - IT IS FLAWED AND ADDES LITTLE TO THE OS!I upgraded to Apple OS 10.6 and with minor fixes 10.6.1, has been nothing but trouble, I we we beta testing this for Apple? Logic has crashed so many times, I lost songs because of it, I was unable to save and stop a song from playing, everything had became un-clickable, I had to manually power down my 8 core mac pro. I have Adobe CS4 and the Apps crash when you least expect it, this is not only happening to me google it, see for yourself. I had to reinstall sever apps after the upgrade, so still do not work correctly. I hope there is a fix soon I really enjoy my Apple when its working correctly, Please hurry up with a fix, if not I will remove Snow leopard and go back to leopard once and if they ever get it working correctly.Being a huge Apple fan I ran out and purchased Snow Leopard. I've only had problems with my MacBook Pro and iMac since the installation of SL. Several hours have been spent with the "product specialist" and many visits to the "genius bar" have not resolved the many issues that have been produced by SL. Preferences does not function on the mail application, Mobile Me only works on the iMac with a manuel syncs. Sound on the MacBook is intermittent. There are lots of little issues that cannot be resolved since the installation of SL. I ran on Leopard prior to SL and my computers functioned beautifully.
Stay away from Snow Leopard.Ever since i loaded this new OS on my macbook, I've had nothing but problems. It slows down my computer, closes Safari right when I'm in the middle of doing something, when i use Safari, it takes forever for it to load.
http://store.apple.com/us/reviews/MC...I2NzQzMzQ&rp=2I have a macbook pro 17" 2.93 unibody with 4gb. I'm a front end developer and use CS4 (usually just Photoshop), vm fusion with (xp pro, vs 2003, vs 2008, Aptana, firefox and ie6) and (win7, ie8 and firefox), Aptana, Entourage, ichat and itunes, all day long. And also Time Machine; thank god.
Before the upgrade, I would have around 1 gb free of ram. After the upgrade... I had 10mb! I couldn't do anything today, except constant restarts. And to top it off, Cisco VPN Client no longer worked.
My thoughts about the os... The option menu is now gray (wow) and there were 2 or 3 new desktop backgrounds. I couldn't figure out the whole Quicktime thing. There was no preference/options for it. Not a big deal. All in all, I'm sure Snow Leopard is fine for people who surf the internet and just get emails. But for people who rely on a mac for work... stay far away from this for at least 4-5 months or be prepared to spend money on an 8 gb ram upgrade.
Needless to say, when I got home I put the snow leopard disk in and went to utilities, then to restore from Time Machine back up. Luckily it worked. On a side note, I am a huge apple supporter and recommend the products to friends an family. So I am, by no means bashing apple products.
I just find these HYSTERICAL as compared to their clique little commercials that tell bold faced lies about windows. lolComment
-
Comment
-
No, this translates to I have no concept of what a good OS consists of and think anything that has clicky icons is awesome.
I use Windows ME and have yet to find an OS that outdoes it.Need Text? X Copywriters | Adult Writing Service - [email protected]Comment
-
I am running a 160 Gig Intel X-25m SSD as my system and application drive.
It is simply the bees knees. There is pretty much nothing else that you can do to upgrade your system that will improve it as much as this SSD drive.
Things like this are pretty much why my main work box is a Win 7 PC. I love to tinker with the latest technology. I also own two Macs and they simply just don't come close to the newest PC technology, not even the Mac Pro. OS X is nice and all, but Apple hardware is always just too behind.Comment
-
damn ssd are expensiveI am running a 160 Gig Intel X-25m SSD as my system and application drive.
It is simply the bees knees. There is pretty much nothing else that you can do to upgrade your system that will improve it as much as this SSD drive.
Things like this are pretty much why my main work box is a Win 7 PC. I love to tinker with the latest technology. I also own two Macs and they simply just don't come close to the newest PC technology, not even the Mac Pro. OS X is nice and all, but Apple hardware is always just too behind.
Comment
-
I am wondering if the speed stays up later on in the drives life.Here's an excerpt from an article on http://icrontic.com/news/micron-alle...nand-endurance
"Even Intel’s MLC-based X25-M G2 drive is estimated to have a 31,500 cycle write endurance, which is good for 20GB of erase/write sequences a day, every day, for five years. If that’s not enough, the company has included a 100GB/day margin of error."
Quite honestly for the price, I would pay $280 and replace them yearly because that's how noticeable the speed increase is.
The way it handles its write endurance is that it will take something like an ini file or a cfg file of a program that gets written to every time the program is closed and move it around the drive. So that it doesn't continuously write to the same spot. Eventually this creates fragmentation issues. So your drive might be lickety-split right now and will be not so much in 4 or 5 years...
BTW - The windows page file would be a good example of a file that will be written to every few seconds while you are actively using the operating system. At a few gigs in size it can really add up quickly and have to me moved constantly by the drive.Last edited by V_RocKs; 10-29-2009, 12:08 PM.Comment
-
Comment
-
-
The newest drives support the Windows 7 TRIM command which in essence defragments the drive to a near new state. Even fragmented the drives are so goddam fast that there is little comparison to mechanical drives.
As for what happens in 4 or 5 years who cares. Things go obsolete so fast now I doubt I have anything older than 6 months in my computer case right now.
Check out: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3607 etc. There is a lot of cool info on these drives there.Comment
-
Did you upgrade to the newest firmware? Saw a few blog postings about people being bricked .The newest drives support the Windows 7 TRIM command which in essence defragments the drive to a near new state. Even fragmented the drives are so goddam fast that there is little comparison to mechanical drives.
As for what happens in 4 or 5 years who cares. Things go obsolete so fast now I doubt I have anything older than 6 months in my computer case right now.
Check out: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3607 etc. There is a lot of cool info on these drives there.
But ya SSD is night and day, going to test this bad boy out for a few weeks and start converting my machine at work to SSD.Comment
-
thanks for the heads up on that one! intel pulled the firmware and i was getting ready to use it-sean
skype: sean.a.christian
sean @ revolutionforce.comComment
-
Ok Dr. Flavin."Haters" is a gay word
The straight males (persons with a male brain and male logic) can't hate the operating system because it's just a binary code
They can discuss it's features (arguing with facts) but not hate or love it - Windows is not a woman.
Actually it does because both OS have a same kernel code.
Just FYI.Comment
-
Look forward to hearing about it.
As for SSD, I guess a fragmented drive doesn't matter. The only reason it does on mechanical is because the head has to be physically moved over the platters. SSD drives just make light speed calls no matter what.Comment
-
Thanks for the review!
Been thinking about upgrading
Comment
-
If you want a good reason to upgrade then consider these points about 64bit Win 7 compared to XP on the same hardware:
1. you can use more than 4GB of ram with 64bit Win 7
2. most programs will run faster if you have more than 4GB of ram in 64bit Win 7 due to having more memory available for each program
3. 32bit programs run faster in 64bit Win 7 than on 32bit XP
4. Win 7 is faster overall than Win XP.
DelanyDecolleur.com :: Satin and Nylon Nude Glamour ModelComment
-
Wrong! Here is the right list (dare try to catch my at any point?):If you want a good reason to upgrade then consider these points about 64bit Win 7 compared to XP on the same hardware:
1. you can use more than 4GB of ram with 64bit Win 7
2. most programs will run faster if you have more than 4GB of ram in 64bit Win 7 due to having more memory available for each program
3. 32bit programs run faster in 64bit Win 7 than on 32bit XP
4. Win 7 is faster overall than Win XP.
If you want a good reason to upgrade then consider these points about Win XP 64bit compared to Win 7 32bit on the same hardware:
1. you can use more than 4GB of ram with Win XP 64bit
2. most programs will run faster if you have more than 4GB of ram in Win XP 64bit due to having more memory available for each program
3. 32bit programs run faster in 64bit Win 7 than on 32bit XP << Wrong for both Win 7 64bit and Win XP 64bit operating systems. It seems you have no clue how 32bit applications are running in 64bit environment and you even have no idea what thunking is, but I'm telling you that 32bit applications will work as fast as they can on 32bit operating systems ONLY.
4. Win XP is faster overall than Win 7 and there are lots of benchmarks in the Net that prove it. Furthermore, there are many benchmarks that says: Vista and Win 7 have almost the same speed,e.g.: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ance,2442.html :


At some serious tasks Vista is even faster than Win 7: What a surprise!





So please don't even try to state that Win 7 is faster than Win XP. Sometimes it even slower than Vista which was sucking from its birthday and will suck forever.
Obey the CowgodComment
-
Win 7 seems a lot faster than Vista because they fixed the bottleneck where the GPU was divided amongst all windows rather than just active ones.
There is no doubt the GUI on Win 7 is much snappier.
But for application benchmarks it's fundamentally the same.Comment
-
Hmm... Have you got a chance to look at the benchmarks above?
Last edited by just a punk; 10-30-2009, 09:22 PM.Obey the CowgodComment
-
Comment
-
my 2 vertexes in raid 0 do 450mb/s read and around 300mb/s write, and access time is like 0.1sec, you click anything and it pops up right away... like right now I clicked photoshop cs4 and it opened up in 3 seconds, lighter programs are instant....Comment
-
-
with enough ram you don't even need to have page file turned on, I got my page file turned off with no problem... been running 2 vertexes in raid 0 for close to 8 months, and performance dropped from 460mb/s to 450mb/sI am wondering if the speed stays up later on in the drives life.
The way it handles its write endurance is that it will take something like an ini file or a cfg file of a program that gets written to every time the program is closed and move it around the drive. So that it doesn't continuously write to the same spot. Eventually this creates fragmentation issues. So your drive might be lickety-split right now and will be not so much in 4 or 5 years...
BTW - The windows page file would be a good example of a file that will be written to every few seconds while you are actively using the operating system. At a few gigs in size it can really add up quickly and have to me moved constantly by the drive.
Comment
-
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ce,2442-9.html
"To better gauge the user?s performance experience or how fast the system feels, load times must be captured. While we could certainly have used a stopwatch, an electronic timer is far more accurate, and benchmarks such as PCMark and SYSmark use them. These programs indicate that Windows 7 feels 7% to 10% faster than Windows Vista, and that?s enough to make us give the new OS the nod in spite of its lack of differentiation in most of our other test."Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000
Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager
Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip ManagerComment
-
Comment
-
The man behind Tom's Hardware is an idiot. Why do you quote his stupid comments? Trust to benchmarks but not to silly jerks. ANY benchmark including those that built into 3D games ALWAYS use an electronic timer. So I don't understand the bullshit quoted above.http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ce,2442-9.html
"To better gauge the user’s performance experience or how fast the system feels, load times must be captured. While we could certainly have used a stopwatch, an electronic timer is far more accurate, and benchmarks such as PCMark and SYSmark use them. These programs indicate that Windows 7 feels 7% to 10% faster than Windows Vista, and that’s enough to make us give the new OS the nod in spite of its lack of differentiation in most of our other test."Last edited by just a punk; 10-31-2009, 07:47 AM.Obey the CowgodComment
-
thanks for the info. I'll get in my next computer.
WeDesig.net - How Can We Web You?
Let us design your next Awesome Website, just email me: Lisa(at)wedesig.netComment



Comment