• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

I have only used 2 operating systems in the past decade. Should I upgrade?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wyndru said:
I used a flash drive, because for some reason the DVD worked fine in one of my drives but not in my brand new laptop (although other dvd's work fine). I searched around and found it was a pretty common issue. There is a tool that MS created that places an ISO onto a flash drive and makes it bootable, so if you have a flash drive, and another computer with a DVD drive, you could do that if you don't want to wait.
Click to expand...

Thanks, if my dvd drive doesn't arrive today I'll try that.
 
there's really no reason to use anything other than win7 if you have a new pc. unless if you love linux, it's the only way to go!
 
I'm happy with Windows 7 at home.
I run Xubuntu & XP on my socket 939 box, and Win7 on my AM3 machine.
Got slack running on my server (old p4.)
 
lxskllr said:
Vista=Win7. It's pretty much the same damned O/S. Everybody hates on Vista because they were told to. A bunch of sheep following the flock....
Click to expand...

I only hate on vista cuz I had to repair my uncle's vista machine.

constantly.
 
Ns1 said:
I only hate on vista cuz I had to repair my uncle's vista machine.

constantly.
Click to expand...

What was wrong with it? I'm still running my 64bit install from fall 07, which I upgraded from 32bit run since Vista's release. I've never done a thing with it. The only time I've ever had issues with this machine was hardware faults. It only reboots for updates, so every 30 days or so. Otherwise, it's always on.
 
rudeguy said:
what size did you go with?

I'm thinking I would need at least 128 gigs.
Click to expand...

OCZ 120GB. Yes, I would recommend going as big as you can afford and only load your OS and most frequently used programs on it (Photoshop, Microsoft Office, Starcraft II, etc). I have about 40GB used on mine so far. If you get close to filling it up it will slow down the read write times drastically. I have an internal 1TB HDD for storage and downloads.
 
JulesMaximus said:
OCZ 120GB. Yes, I would recommend going as big as you can afford and only load your OS and most frequently used programs on it (Photoshop, Microsoft Office, Starcraft II, etc). I have about 40GB used on mine so far. If you get close to filling it up it will slow down the read write times drastically. I have an internal 1TB HDD for storage and downloads.
Click to expand...

Damn it all

I was holding off on this because I didn't think it would matter that much. I'm a 2nd or 3rd gen adapter on stuff like this. Usually by then the prices are better and the bugs have been worked out. I've been wanting to upgrade to a quad core rig...maybe I'll save up a couple extra bucks and get an SSD to go with it.
 
rudeguy said:
Damn it all

I was holding off on this because I didn't think it would matter that much. I'm a 2nd or 3rd gen adapter on stuff like this. Usually by then the prices are better and the bugs have been worked out. I've been wanting to upgrade to a quad core rig...maybe I'll save up a couple extra bucks and get an SSD to go with it.
Click to expand...

I have a quad core i7 860 with 4GB of ram and Windows 7 and the difference in startup times and program loads times is literally like half. I click Excel 2007 and it pops up almost instantly, Photoshop takes about 2 seconds to open, Starcraft II takes about 6-8 seconds to load (less time staring at that ugly mug in the helmet the better). It is VERY noticeable. These things smoke Raptors or SCSI drives.
 
JulesMaximus said:
I have a quad core i7 860 with 4GB of ram and Windows 7 and the difference in startup times and program loads times is literally like half. I click Excel 2007 and it pops up almost instantly, Photoshop takes about 2 seconds to open, Starcraft II takes about 6-8 seconds to load (less time staring at that ugly mug in the helmet the better). It is VERY noticeable. These things smoke Raptors or SCSI drives.
Click to expand...

you asshole, I have NewEgg on the other tab and the deal of the day is a 90gb OCD2 SSD for $150
 
I'm not a Vista hater, I have it on my laptop, but I have an old P4 2.66mhz single core, 2GB ram that was still running XP. I never wanted to upgrade it to Vista because I still game on it and figured Vista would just eat up more memory.

Last summer I had to upgrade the HD so I loaded 32bit Win7 and love it so far. Runs just as fast on my machine as XP from what I can tell.
 
Go upgrade to 7 already...

Hell, you should've updated to Vista.

FWIW, Vista wasn't/isn't a bad operating system. It got a lot of bad press because it had higher system requirements and certain software didn't work with it. Win 7 is effectively a relaunch of Vista, but instead it had a few years of experience and MS slimmed it down a little.
 
You guys are HILARIOUS in saying Vista sucks, yet w7 is the shit. It's the same operating system, with a new theme. That is IT. I have a laptop with w7 and a desktop with Vista. They behave identically. PC World said it best.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/153624/under_the_hood_windows_7_is_vistas_twin.html
Lipstick on the Pig
So where does this leave us? For starters, we can now say with some certainty that the Windows 7 build I tested is just a repackaging of Windows Vista. Key processes look and work much like they do under Vista, and preliminary benchmark testing shows that Windows 7 performs right on a par with its predecessor. Frankly, Windows 7 is Vista, at least under the hood; if nothing else, this should translate into excellent backward compatibility with Vista-certified applications and drivers.

Except that it might not. The M3 build of Windows 7 breaks all sorts of things that, frankly, it shouldn't be breaking. Worse still, the suspected source of a major compatibility bump--the neutered UAC prompts--is in fact architectural in nature, one of the few truly new features of Windows 7's secure computing stack.
Click to expand...

In short, you w7 defenders smack talking Vista know jack shit about operating systems.

Here is a similar article form the same person, explaining in depth how w7 is hardly even a tweaked version of Vista.


lxskllr said:
Vista=Win7. It's pretty much the same damned O/S. Everybody hates on Vista because they were told to. A bunch of sheep following the flock....
Click to expand...
+1
 
I would NOT even consider anything else then the latest MS operating system on any of my computers. I started with Windows 3.1 on my 486 SX25 Packard Bell.
 
lxskllr said:
Vista=Win7. It's pretty much the same damned O/S. Everybody hates on Vista because they were told to. A bunch of sheep following the flock....
Click to expand...

This, the internal windows version # on windows7 is 6.1 (vista is v.6). They didn't increment it because it is just a new theme for the vista os.

The only time I had issues with Vista was when I had Longhorn installed on my PC back during beta testing. Even when final came out, it was a little buggy with the file system (I had issues with zip files taking forever to extract) but even SP1 fixed that shortly after.

It's crazy how quickly word spread and people hated Vista so quickly, yet everyone loved Windows 7. This Vista hating guy at my job doesn't even have Windows 7, but he loves it because he tried it on someone's laptop. And he hates Vista because he got a virus, and he was mad because it corrupted the OS and he had to restore it 🙄

I guess those Apple commercials really did alter people's view of Microsoft while they were running those "I'm A Mac" ads.
 
vista/7 is not better than xp. it's just different.

That being said, the prompt you get when you plug in a camera to win7/vista sucks. no more detailed control of what you want to copy over that winxp used to give. infact, all things being the same, xp is better than 7.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top