Win 7 take-up to trounce Vista's

Who will buy this product ?

Technically, no one.

Brand new systems from HP, Dell etc will generate the numbers that Microsoft need to say that it is a 'solid launch' - but that's just crap.

XP works and, with all of the patches and fixes installed, it works well.

Against XP, Windows 7 performance could be as much as 20% lower.

Also, no one who is famliar with XP will be able to find anything.

Until Microsoft learns to make the operating system better WITHOUT changing the look/feel, they will NEVER crack the problem of 'how do we get people to WANT Windows 7'.

Saying that the launch worked because 'new systems ship with it' - is just SAD, SAD, SAD.

LISTEN STEVE - IT IS THE OTHER 70% TALKING: LEAVE THE F***ING BUTTONS WHERE THEY ARE. MAKE THE OS BETTER, BUT DO NOT MOVE THE BUTTONS.

Do that and I will give you $300 NOW for the new OS.

Don't do that and I will carry on using XP until the cows come home.

ARE YOU LISTENING TO YOUR CUSTOMERS ???

Spot on. It's like creating a new 'improved' car which now has the accelarator operated by your left elbow. We are happy with the accelerator being the right floor pedel. Improve the engine: Fine. Improve the aerodynamics: Fine. Improve fuel efficiency: Fine. But why the hell would they change the interface. All I can say is DON'T get me started on Office 2007 and that bloody stupid 'ribbon' thing. Where's the 'put things back where they were with the old menus' button ?

You all sound like grumpy old men! Geez, common. Some of us like change for the better. Look on the ferrari, the gear stick is now a paddle next to the steering wheel. Different? Yes, Better? Yes.

I like the new ribbon interface. Much better than trailing through 100's of menus and submenus looking for a particular item. Now they're all categorised into handy tabs.

So quit the grumping! Take a step into the 90s. Maybe if you can manage, you might just make it to the year 2009.

Jesus i'm so sick to death of these cry babies who complain about windows os's looking 'different' to win xp. Have any of you cock smacks actually used Vista or Win 7? Can't you clowns afford $30 for 4gb of RAM or something? No one here seems to remember from 98se to xp obviously because it was the same shit. Now everyone praises xp like a god send but the os is still a dog. Vista and more so Win 7 are big improvements on xp although Vista had some teething issues which is understandable.. but so far Win 7 is an interface improvement even on Vista without the higher than the year 2002 hardware requirements. The interface has changed enough to be refreshing but has not changed enough to completely confuse an xp guru. Everything is practically in the same place. I think the only part that was 'wtf' to me was the way networking works. but that being said, networking now 'just works' as appose to xp being picky as all shit. End Rant Here..

A lot of people who complained about how WinXP looked significantly different than Win98 realised that WinXP could be made to look like Win98 with some settings changes. When I migrated from Win98 at home and Win2k at work, I made those changes right away because that is how I want my OS to look. Beyond just the appearance, relocating things is incredibly annoying. Hell, there are network configuration options that are completely inaccessible unless you think to press the Alt key while in Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network Connections...

However, while I believe the interface complaints are valid, the performance ones are questionable at best. Some tests have been done showing Win7 to be as fast or faster than WinXP and WinVista, and my experience with Win7 as my primary OS since the beta release would confirm the first (I never made the switch to WinVista).

As far as the ribbon interface, everyone I know who learned to use Office products efficiently pre-ribbon hate the ribbon, others like it.
I have been unable to learn the ribbon: For example, when I want to add a page break (and ctrl+enter slips my mind), I go to the Insert tab, only to stumble around until I go hunting through other tabs, finding it in the Page Layout tab (or remembering the shortcut).

Win7 still has protected processes, running that no one outside of Microsoft knows what they are doing. Your PC is now a DRM media player controlled by Microsoft.

I get the feeling when there's a great world apocalypse. The people who are unable to show adaptability even in something as simple as learning a [highly similar] new User Interface for our silly computer operating systems. These same people will be the first to bite the dust I presume.

Who needs to learn anything when you can just complain? Took me about 30 seconds to learn how to use Windows 7 UI after using Windows Classic setup since Windows 95.

Keeping XP makes absolute sense for existing hardware... if it ain't broke don't fix it.

However, when updating your hardware, there is no good reason to stay stuck in the dark ages of XP.

I clung to my XP box until it finally died on me, and had to replace with a shiny new one... and *then* I bit the bullet with Vista.

It took me about 30mins to adapt to it, and now I wouldn't go back to XP if you paid me (well, ok, I would if you paid me a whole bunch) as it's just better in every area, provided your hardware is new enough to support it properly.

Windows7 is just a continuation of the Vista concepts... learn Vista and you know Windows7... so it's not a case of learning twice.

to scott and all the others defenders of vista... you lost , all your useless comments about progress mean nothing... NOTHING AT ALL!!! the early release of win7 (because people hate and rightly so, winvista)prove and will prove that the vast majority of users know what vista is, and that is...

ta ta ta ta!!!! a steaming pile of s*

Whether on not you can accept it, facts are that a lot of people can think for themselves, and instead of just conforming to the SlashDot dogma, actually tested Vista on suitable hardware, and found it works very nicely thanks.

That’s not an apology for MS or the many shortcomings of Vista, both have their problems, but for people running business apps on modern equipment, Vista works well.

Far too many people dismiss Vista as crap, having never tried it themselves... because “my friend told me it was rubbish” ...when they may well be better off to have switched.

Of course, you are quite correct that for some users, Windows7 really is the Vista they needed to wait for, but for the overwhelming majority of business users, the decision to stay with XP is based on nothing more than FUD.

As a software developer, I don’t have a bunch of legacy programs to support, or legacy hardware, or any games, or any multi-media needs other than basic YouTube clips, and I simply don’t have a problem with my own Vista machine, despite the myriad of programs installed and running... everything just works, and the UAC never barks unless it should.

For me and my requirements, Vista is *SO* much better than XP, that there is simply no comparison, and for me to stubbornly stick with XP because Vista is not as good as it should be, is only punishing me.

However, your mileage will vary.

your opinion ted , what i said and i stand by it, is that vista is a failure, not an opinion from you or me, it is a fact... ...the fast paced develoment of win7 is the fact! , i am a computer technician, who have used vista and downgraded a lot of pc's (laptops mostly)because the user after some use was tired of the sluggishness of the OS install XP and voila, i'm talking 3GB RAM core2duo not some old pentium 4... all of this for what... nothing for most users... i don't remember exactly where a read it , but there was some acceptance inside MS that while the kernel was pretty good, all the things that come after that were not so much to put it mildly, i understand there are people like yourself that are satisfied with the product, but in this you are in the minority and win7 in OCTOBER prove that they know and thanks God for that, that vista fail...

Why is the fact that Microsoft developed Win 7 at a highly efficient pace an admission of failure? Is that how anyone's job performance is gauged. It is simply the fact that Microsoft is getting into a part of it's life cycle where it actually has competition. People have options and Microsoft has to perform. Stop trying to see what you want in this and ask yourself "why do things like this normally happen?"

I was an early adapter to Vista x64. It worked ok but even on newer hardware was noticeably slower then XP. Its IO performance was terrible. I got so tired of it I switched to Win Server 2008 for my primary Home OS. When Win 7 beta 2 came out I gave it a shot. I loved it so much I now use it for my primary OS. I will be upgrading to the RC this weekend. IO performance in Win 7 is great. Driver support is there, printers are still sketchy but they are always behind. Before you complain or discount Win 7 give is a try. You might be surprised.

I'm not going to lie. Windows 7 is not bad. Infact I like it. It runs XP in virtual machine just fine. Infact I can run any operating system. I don't see what all the fuss is about. I have to run XP on win7 because Photoshop is a little buggy on win7, infact I could not get it to install. But the trusty xp virtual machine does the trick.

But I have new hardware comming in and its going to have 12GB of memory, so it is either going to be windows 7, or windows server 2008. I'll run all of the linux stuff in Virtual servers, I supose the new microsoft hyperv stuff or whatever.

In the end, Windows does virtualization better (or at the bare minimum much eaiser), and I'll run virtual machines for my linux servers.

I tested out vista and win7 is hands down better. Linux really needs to spend some money to get a kick ass GUI like that going.

whatever, I could keep going, all I know is I have a new machine comming in, and I can have 10 virtual machines with that 12GB of memory. So I'm happy.

I suppose you have to move with the times when I had my AMD 939 system it was a single core 4000+. Then I upgraded to a 3800 x2 with 2GB DDR tried VISTA ran very smooth and snappy. The only thing I dont like is the way certain things are moved changed like digs at Add/Remove Programs has been renamed and networking and the layout just bugs me.

I now have a AMD 9550 X4 and waiting on my OCZ 4GB DDR2 PC8500 to arrive but before I install any OS. I'm waiting for my 2x 320GB Hitachi drives because I'm building a RAID O array. I'm going to to test both XP and VISTA for numbers see what I get moving from a 8600GT to a 4770 soon too.

Anyone who uses the computer only for Internet browsing and Office applications SHOULD use Ubuntu Linux. Windows is for games, or if you have some weird device or program that only works in Windows, and if that is the case, XP is what you need, not some new shiny StarWars interface.

STFU ALL OF YOU! DOS 6.22 FOR EVER!
When you had to type to your computer what you wanted it to do, those were the days. Then kick back and discuss world problems with Dr.Sbaitso.
That man knew his shiz.
Love ya!

Bitch bitch.

Hell, if Microsoft listened to these clowns whining about adapting to a new "look and feel" (that really isn't that different than the current one), we'd still be using Program Manager! Maybe these whiners do actually replace "explorer.exe" with "progman.exe" so they can go back to their Windows 3.1 interface.

OMG!!! Someone is asking me to learn something new in Win 7!!! What will we all do?!?! I'm incapable of learning how to use all these new fangled dohickies in Win 7. Give me XP or give me death!

Get over yourselves people. It's just an OS. If you can't figure out the MILD changes to a Windows based operating system that still basically functions the same way as it did all the way back to Windows 95 then it's about time you caught up to the rest of the world.

Change is good. Embrace it.

Well DUH! Unlike Vista, this one actually works without bringing your high dollar hardware to a crawl. Some nice changes and feature additions. Few GUI changes that'll take a little bit to get used to, But quite nice and functional. Those who like to use Media Center will be pleased with the additions to supported formats there.
Does a heck of a lot more for the end user than XP while providing near the same speed performance while running CPU intensive tasks.
A valid step up from XP and truly proves just what a POS Vista is.
And to answer the first comment? As long as they don't muck it up prior to release day... I'LL Buy It! Why you ask? Because it is a true viable OS upgrade from XP.

This is terribles!! I cannot take a few minutes of my time and learn something new! I must stay stuck in 1995!!

It's not THAT big a change people... Within *20 mins* of installing Win7 I was very comfortable with where everything was located and actually like it quite a bit more than XP.

I will make this simple for you - since you struggle with basic concepts

New operating systems are a good idea

Adapting to new interfaces is fine - we do it EVERYTIME we buy a new mobile phone

Now, try and wrap your tiny minds around this next concept.

Ready ?

It's a biggy !

The operating system is NOT the interface

(leaves it a few seconds to sink in)

The operating system is NOT the interface

(getting there ?)

A piece of software that controls your system in a fast, efficient and secure way is an operating system - and we like these - ALL improvements welcome

The interface is what makes you (un)productive

Great interface = one that people are happy with

The Vista/Windows 7 interface has (will be) great at penetrating the market with new systems...

...but the old interface works fine

If Microsoft offers me Windows 7 Ultimate with an XP-style interface - then I will pay them $100 extra

I was speaking with one of the guys who invented DirectX the other day - and he is 100% happy with XP - and hates the change of interface. He says that it massively reduces his productivity. And he is right.

The person who said that Windows is for games - (most) everything else can be achieved with Linux/Dos etc is not a million miles from the truth

Windows gives you (more than anything else) access to high-speed-graphically-demanding applications

In those cases, performance is everything

When all is said and done, and the head-2-head benchmarks come through...

...I'm willing to bet that XP is OVER 20% faster than Windows 7

Why would anyone with a brain CHOOSE SLOW, CLUNKY software that they are not happy with

They will vote with their pockets - and ANOTHER VP will get sacked at Microsoft - and Windows 8 will be hurried along (while Apple and Linux and OpenOffice etc all eat away at Microsoft's profits)

QUESTION: How much money will Microsoft have to lose before they listen to 70% of the population - and give them BACK an interface that they are happy with ?

"...but the old interface works fine."

That is possibly the weakest argument I've ever heard for not bothering to evolve, develop and embrace new interface technologies.

And if your DirectX inventor (*cough*) has become massively unproductive because he can't grap simple advancements to a GUI then it's obvious he's outlived his usefulness, as have you by the sounds of it.

You seem like a nice bloke, but have (unsurprisingly) managed to miss the point

I will help you :~)

In what way does moving a button on a screen make an operating system better ?

It doesn't

Having new features etc - all good

I would buy Windows 7/Office 2007 etc for that. Give me great new features and I will give you money. No problem

Forcing people to accept that 'buttons have moved - it's the future - this is what all the new kids are using now'... is just crap

British car industry made the Mini (read MS launches XP)

British car industry develops mini and makes it much, much better (read MS launches Vista/Windows 7) - but creating the Metro

British car industry dies

Germans take original mini - same style/design etc - make it MUCH better...

...result?...

...MASSIVE SALES :~)

<lesson