Windows 7 will not kick-start PC sales

The problem with Windows 7 is that you have to drop cash on all new equipment to get the joy out of it, and even after that, what have you gained ovr XP other than eye candy? I made the decision last year that, for my purposes, I would hold tight with XP and a dual core Athlon system for as long as possible. (I'm not a gamer) A newer system won't open Word or Creative Suite significantly faster, virtually none of the software can take advantage of even dual cores, let alone the quad cores Intel is pushing these days. The hassle just isn't worth it.

I don't think it's going to help PC Manufacturers that much no, but it's definately going to be a boost for retail outlets and Microsoft as consumers will be rushing to purchase it (as has already been seen in the presales numbers). Thats a huge improvement on their position with Vista.

First, you DON'T have to buy new equipment to take advantage of Windows 7 features. Eye candy? Let's see, is better security eye candy? Easier networking eye candy? Much of the bloat removed... yea, that's candy too (actually that's just MS finally waking up). Uses less memory, less hard drive space. UI improvements to make many of our lives easier like the Aero Snap. Oh but wait, Win 7 will work even on YOUR old system that you're so hell bent on holding on to.

Windows XP is nearly 10 years old and it feels safe to you. I get it. However, there comes a time when you must move on. Stop the griping and go with the times. XP is DEAD. Well, life support- People may not start buying new PC's, but I suspect the uptake of Win7 will be much quicker than Vista as I know many companies are planning the switch.

I know a large number of people that are waiting until Windows 7 comes installed on the PC instead of getting XP/Vista and an upgrade Disc. Ensuring the machine runs 7 and there are no driver hangups from the manufacturer.

While my install of Windows 7 was the best ever Windows driver install I have ever had of a Microsoft OS I have been telling people to wait until the machine is released with the OS pre-installed. You dont want to get the PC and then get the upgrade disc to find out a paticular driver isnt available for some component on the machine.

Some will wait until a DX11 laptop graphics chip is avail on the laptops before buying but a lot of people I know are looking to buy the PC with 7 already intalled.

As to the poster above about needing new hardware. Thats only true for the eye candy portions of the OS but its been installed on very lowly systems with success. There was someone out there which installed the OS on a P90 with 128megs of ram. The Sweet spot for Vista was 4 gigs of ram. Windows 7 Works well with just 1 gig of ram. 2 Gig is ideal which is What XP likes.

IMO W7 is a must... for Vista users. The advantages of W7 over Vista are quite apparent but when it comes to XP users, the so-called 'security' enhancements are really a minor thing compared to the actual functionality of the OS. With new hardware -specifically with SSDs- the new system may help but for old hardware there isn't a real need until the software used is taking advantage of the features of the new OS, which with the possible exception of games isn't the case so far.

Personally I will stick to XP until V.1 (when the major kinks are solved) or more likely when the advantage in games is good enough to merit the upgrade.

Otherwise I might get a netbook with W7 if only because the decent ones come with Vista which I will not buy under any circumstances.

I planning on getting a new laptop and am waiting to have it with 7 pre-installed for better resale value. I don't plan on keeping 7 on it, Linux 9.10 will go on instead while I use it.

But it won't be running Windows 7.

For the operating system, I will be digging into my cupboard and extracting a brand new, shrink-wrapped copy of Windows XP 64-bit edition, which I got before Microsoft killed off supply.

Less security than Windows 7? I don't think so. Less bloat, certainly - even a base install of XP, after disabling certain unwanted services (remote registry, themes, etc) easily comes to within about 128MB of total memory usage, leaving me with the lion's share of my 2GB for applications.

Windows 7 is a step in the right direction, but as an XP user, I see no need to switch. XP 64-bit will run my apps just nicely, and with 24GB of RAM, I do not think I will be upgrading again in a while (I'm still running on a PC I built in 2003.)

Scott, Oliver, please watch this video before you decide to ignore windows 7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYnSGTUU4P0&feature=fvw

Honestly, you guys aren't doing yourself any favours clinging to XP. Just watch that, and then decide. That's all I'm asking.

I run it on a 5 year old laptop and it's as fast as XP, so that's the myth of needing new hardware out the window.

I can't wait for all the overstock suffering!

Windows XP had a poor security model, it really did, and the sooner everybody moves off of that and onto windows 7 the better the world will be. It's not perceivably slower than xp to most people, even on the same hardware.

It's better for everybody at this point to make a serious dent in the malware, trojans, rootkits, viruses etc. Even if you know how to use your pc there's at least 10 people you know who probably don't, and encouraging them to upgrade to windows 7 or get a new pc with windows 7 is doing them a favor. Otherwise in 6 months or a year they'll be asking you for help to recover their documents and de-worm their computer.... I would guess that will happen at least half as often if they use windows 7 instead, saving your weekends :-)

After buying my wife a Vista laptop, the frustration was too much. Went with Apple, and go off this Windows Merry-go-round. You would think after 15 years, Windows OS would be stable (not).

I use XP Pro,but have pre-ordered W7 Home Premium.
I am quite happy with XP & I game a lot,but DX10 was no great improvement on DX9C.
As a matter of opinion, I think there's been more improvement with GPU drivers,especially NVidia Physx.
I will however, install W7,as soon as I
receive it & I reccommend anyone to get it,for the same reason as someone above is holding off buying a new PC & that's because,as I understand it,W7 will be the last M$ distro under X86,which will mean that, users will have no option, but to buy new hardware to run the next Windows OS.
So,W7 will be a good investment for the next few years for that reason & a DX11 will run on it as well.

If building 'puters for Retail Sales Is readers Shop. Awake, Microsoft Now Agreed to:
Allow OEM Mfg to Start Retail OEM to Retail SALE on: 13OCT2009. Better than Breathing Carbon Monoxide for Few more Weeks, Gives SMALl builder Chance to Wooo Customers, NOW. Large Builders will be Months Behind.

Slappie Moves From Frown to Clown & Public CHEERS.

DRASHEK

No more MS bloatware full of security holes for me. I'll stick to using XP for games, and when I browse the web or do anything else I'll stick to using Kubuntu.

It works great for me!

This is what happened with Vista: people didn’t rush to upgrade, because they simply couldn’t get that excited about it. And next thing you know, “not enough of an improvement over XP” gets tl;dr’d to “piece of crap”, and Vista has become the great demon that everybody loves to hate, just because the customers aren’t incredibly enthusiastic over it.

Looks like Windows 7 is in the for same fate.

I agree I dont see extra PC sales due to Win 7. It requires less resources than Vista. As far as my memory servers (pun intended) I cant recall MS ever releasing an OS that required less resources than the one prior. Im expecting MS to make a bucket load of cash from Win 7 but more of it from actual sales of Win 7 not from PC's with it pre installed. For 29.99 I bet a huge percentage of college students jump on the Win 7 bandwagon.

When I open my wallet it's all I can do not to fall into it. I don't think I'll ever buy a computer again let alone one with 7 in it.

"No more MS bloatware full of security holes for me." Hilarious that you'd continue using XP then. Eight years later and major holes are still being found in it because it has such an archaic security model. Bloat? It's just, if not more, bloated than Windows 7.

I must ask, have you even used 7 at all? I was skeptical at first, so I installed the RC on a netbook as a "throwaway" lowest-grade system to test it on. It works wonderfully, without any need to track down obscure drivers or tune it up.

So, following that, I've replaced my old installation of XP with 7 on my older notebook computer and it performs admirably, even with Aero and such enabled.

Unfortunately, it seems so many people think Windows 7 is just Vista 2, with all the problems and frustrations. Rather, 7 is more like Vista done right. More unfortunate, are those who slam it withouth obviously having tried it. So do yourself a favor and at least try it out via torrents or such.

It's not the drivers for the PC that is the problem. It's the drivers for any addons you purchased seperately.

Case in point.

I have an old Wacom pen partner that runs off the serial port. It does not work in Windows 7 and there are no Vista/Windows 7 drivers that work (I tried the Vista drivers and they did nothing).

It's not your PC that will need upgrading but most likely old peripherals.

I agree with you that XP is bloat and full of holes and that's why I use Kubuntu linux for web surfing and web purchases, and I found that it caters for all of my other computing needs too except game playing.

If it wasn't for games then I wouldn't be using any form of MS windows bloatware at all. I already own XP and it allows me to play games so I don't see a need to buy Windows 7 right now. If it offers something worthwhile to me then I will think again.

I say all this as a former windows developer who worked for 12 years with it. I was pro VMS and windows and thought unix was no good. Not any more!

I have pre-ordered it from PC World due to the price and money you save £at least £70.

I ordered the Pro edition as I will be dual booting it along with my XP SP3 on a SSD drive for the ops and dividing a 250GB slave between the two for storage.

I already have upgraded my g.card to a 9600gt 512mb GDDR3 card from a 8600GT I am upgrading my Phenom 9550 X4 to a P-II 945 because I have a buyer for my 9550 and I'll get the 945 for £60.

As for RAM I have 4GB Kingston H-X PC1088.

Win7 and these upgrades are not needed at all my current parts will play it but I do a lot of video editing and the extra parts will come in handy.

I liked the RC1 it was way better than VISTA no stupid constant HDD activity and it felt easier to use ready did.

Well, I watched the video, and I have to say I was underwhelmed. I can have gadgets on my desktop already, I can preview applications from the task bar already... heck, he was reduced to going on about how great the included desktop images are! Thing is, even if I didn't have these 'features' I sincerely doubt I would miss them. I may be the odd ball here, but my XP box at work has Win2K theme, and my personal PCs have KDE but the 'classic' desktop without any gadgets. Overall, one big 'meh, whatever'.

Well yes I did. After testing out Vista for a few months, I decided to upgrade the machine's o/s to openSUSE. I haven't regretted it and Windows 7 isn't on the map. Having installed linux on hardware that floated Vista, well I doubt very much that I have to paint a performance picture.

Guys, enough of the BS. Windows 7 ROCKS: seriously

Do these paid MS whores know how blatantly shrill and sold out their postings look? They pounce and scream in the comments on EVERY SINGLE article about a new version of Windows or Office .. Seriously, its disgusting, get a real job!

Windows Se7en? Hell no! Its nothing but son of Vista, its horribly bloated, slow, and overpriced. Probably the most horrible thing about it is that its crammed to the gills with DRM and spyware ON A CLEAN INSTALL. To me it is LESS THAN WORTHLESS. I'm sticking with XP, UNTIL *I* DECIDE its dead! Then I'll either get a Mac or maybe Linux will tempt me. ANYTHING other than more Microsoft branded torture. I might even go back to DOS, for F*CKS SAKE, I'd get a lot more done.

And as for the same tired lines about 'better security', 'better reliability' its pretty obvious by now that the louder MS screams these things, the less true they are, even fools and politicians can see that! When it comes to MS and people sucking this crap up, MS has proved, and continues to prove that there are at least 1,000 suckers born every minute.

Im not really sure bout win 7 because i've only tested the win7 rc version and yup i admit that its much more faster especially installation software running on my acer 5050 than win xp sp3.But its confusing as vista especially on networking site and control panel.As a normal user i want something easier to learn and configure not confusing and headache. And so far i've tested Mac os snow leopard is the most easiest to learn and configure.I'm not a mac fanboy.I'm just comparing the os on terms of 'user friendly'

Because manufacturers are holding their collective breath on releasing new hardware for the Win7 release. I want a new laptop, and I can't buy one with the latest goodies under the hood until the "Win7" release.

It doesn't matter that I will wipe it the second I get it and put a Debian/XP custom build on it.

"Im not really sure bout win 7 because i've only tested the win7 rc version and yup i admit that its much more faster especially installation software running on my acer 5050 than win xp sp3"

How much does M$ pay you to make such comments? The only thing the upgrade does is wipe your drive and the crap ware you have on it for a clean start. If you didn't install every john, dick and harry on the drive, it probably wouldn't need it to begin with.

I think Andrew’s got a point lets face it, all of us here know computers and the curse that can be.......or is that just having
friends who know your phone number!. If Seven really shows to be the Fort Knox of operating systems and that it could be everything
XP still is. Then I say a good day has come for us all. Is this, in any likely hood, going to come to fruition, Seven will have to answer that for itself?
but looking at Microshafts previous promises I'm not feeling confident, and as far as looks go it still looks too much like vista and that
operating system makes my skin crawl, I don’t want to be told what I can and can't do with my software and hardware and Microshaft
have sat pretty on there monopoly for too long with there corporate nazi like tactics, and with they’re competitors gaining ground everyday,
this is really the judgment day of PC’s as we know it. Only time will tell whether Microsoft is there at the end to raise a glass with the rest.

Heres link, some said yes, then some said Maybe, Now Most Say Clear to go 13)CY''9 on-=7=- Installed OEM RETAIL To PUBLIC.

SO PAINT THOSE SIGNBOARDS & START TAKING THOSE ORDERS & PUTTING UP MACHINES....
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-early-sale-date,8734.html

DRASHEK

While I agree that the release of Windows 7 won't cause a big boost in computer sales, it will definitely sell better than Vista did. There will be some people who are waiting for Windows 7 before buying a new computer system, but there won't be as many as with previous OS releases simply because it's hardware requirements are closer to that of XP than what Vista needs to run smooth.

I have personally been using Vista for about 2 years now with no desire or urge to go back to XP. I have found it to be easier to use, more stable and more secure than XP and also perform better on my hardware which I will admit is quite high end. I also don't need to reinstall the OS anywhere near as often as I did with XP to keep it running smooth.

Having now installed Windows 7 RC and tested it for some time on my main system, I must say that it is a better OS than either XP or Vista. It has a much more refined feel to the GUI and features than Vista while having better default settings and a faster install. It is ultimately what Vista should have been had it been held back from release for a year or two longer.

Personally though I don't see much improvement in the stability and performance of Windows 7 over Vista even though I do use it for a fair bit of gaming and media encoding and the like. Vista now with Service Pack 1 and 2 is far better than what it was when it first launched and so the only differences I have really noticed in regards to performance have been the better memory usage where it uses a tad less by default and that network and hard drive transfer speeds are faster.

XP on the other hand now just looks and feels so outdated by comparison to Windows 7 even more so than it did to Vista. The GUI of 7 is far more intuitive and easier to navigate while being far more pleasing to the eye. While it is still good for those people with older hardware, particularly perihperals like printers and scanners, they are missing out on so many other things that could make life easier for them. Buying Windows 7 will totally be worth the effort of buying new peripherals to go with it if you find your old ones are not supported...

I will stick with XP. Do forgive me, but I could have sworn I heard people saying "Vista is a slam-dunk" when it was launched, too. Having seen the total disaster that is Vista, I'm inclined to distrust any OS that is based on Vista, and I'm afraid Windows 7 happens to qualify for my paranoia. Until I see a shipping version that is as good as it's supposed to be (in my judgement), I will take a thoroughly conservative view and sit on the fence.

I, at least, will do myself a favour and wait until at least the gold version is reviewed - I hear a lot of hand-clapping and shouts of "Windows 7 rules" right now, but how many of you are absolutely sure that MS will not just re-implement the DRM stuff in the shipping version and make you all look like total tools when you install it? Don't give me the "MS would never do that" spiel, either - they've done it once with Vista, and it's clear Microsoft's loyalties are not to its customers.

As for you, David, you had me laughing when you said this:

"Buying Windows 7 will totally be worth the effort of buying new peripherals to go with it if you find your old ones are not supported..."

Erm, the whole POINT of an OS is to support your hardware. If that is news to you, I suggest you pick up a GCSE book on Computer Science, and start reading it, because it seems that you in need of some help with the basics. If Windows 7 doesn't support my hardware, it is not fit for purpose and won't be purchased - end of story.

Unless, that is, you really are so dim that you'd advocate everyone donate their computer peripherals to a giant landfill (as if we don't have enough?), simply so we can all have slightly-shinier icons, Aero and stuff that is "pleasing to the eye"? What planet are you on?!? I'd go so far as to venture you must live in close vicinity to Thomas Drashek: He makes about as much sense.

Oh, and by the way, all this gushing of "it's pleasing to the eye" and "easier to navigate" (I knew where everything was to start with) is totally wasted on me. I'm a UNIX guy, and I don't do eye candy. When you're administering a box over a 9600-baud serial line, eye candy is a Korn shell with set -o vi. I place far more value on something that works, and right now, Windows XP works for me.

I saw the video, and kept trying to find a reason why you asked me to view it. I saw nothing there that would even make me want to buy Windows 7, and plenty that I know would really annoy me very quickly (such as the window snapping, the moved "Show desktop" shortcut and the app previews.) The guy went on about how everything was so pleasing to the eye, and how nice the wallpaper was, "so I wouldn't have go out and download it" - errrm, thanks. But I'll stick with Digital Blasphemy.

However, it was all form without substance - I was waiting for the killer blow that said "Here is how we're going to make your work easier, here's an included SSH client, here's a version of Notepad that can cope with LF-only text files, or here's a copy of Paint that isn't as retarded as the version that first shipped with Windows For Workgroups." The killer blow never came, and all I ever saw was yet more eye candy that I could not give a damn about.

I'm not impressed, and in retrospect, I am very pleased that I stocked up on XP and XP 64-bit when I could. XP might look bland when compared to Windows 7, but it doesn't hide the stuff I want behind a load of crap that looks pretty but doesn't help me in any way. Windows 7 is the dumb blonde of operating systems: It looks great, it seems - but it does not help you to get your work done. And unfortunately, for me, an OS is all about getting work done - and I couldn't care less about the scenery.

When Vista came out, we decided to leave MS for the majority of desktops. Its been one of the best desicions I've made.

Of my company's 250 aging P4 desktops I've already moved 150 to a locked down Linux desktops. Work on replicating the business needs for another 70 is in process now.

I'll eventually move the remaining 30 to Win7, but only because MS will abandon patches for XP. I'm in no rush to go to Win7 requiring retrain users, chasing drivers, finding replacement legacy apps, etc.

After avoiding Vista like the plague I'm going to give Windows 7 a try as a dual boot install on one work machine with 32-bit XP. With a 1 GB graphics card, the OS overhead on XP is just too much for some applications that will use as much RAM as you can throw at them (e.g. MATLAB). A shame XP 64-bit was stillborn.

But I don't think my single OEM licence purchase will kick-start global PC sales.

" for me, an OS is all about getting work done - and I couldn't care less about the scenery."

It's clear to me that you have not tried the RC. I have started work on a 2d-side scroller. Using photoshop for the graphics and C# Express Edition for the coding.

I have found that those things such as window docking and taskbar window preview help a great deal when multi-tasking.

Forget the video that Dave showed you and just give it an honest try.

Human synthesisers, men in dresses, ducks in shoes and the cheerleading boys teaching the girls how it's done.
Do yourself a flavour.
When large enterprises and governments begin to ... duck and cover.

Why all those pub-pups do not pony for 64bits? failed every test, something everybody has been talking about in the Westminster village, but do not have the foggiest idea, I do not roll over. The US system is known as "Dragon's Egg", and like most of its kind it's about the size of a cricket ball and is intended to be lobbied. Weebils wobble but they don't fall down.

The situation will be the same as for Vista. Most people know that XP is good enough and if they want to go up they can always choose Linux, or OS X.

What PC Magazine did was wait for all the security and the other things they took out of Vista when they made Win7 to be put back and then test. The final result was that it ran only 5% faster than Vista--meaning that the average user would not notice the difference.

This tells us that this is essentially Vista with a bunch of bug fixes, a few new features, and a new task bar. Nothing really big. The point is that there's no reason to upgrade to Win7. Even if we were to all take advantage of 100% of the new features in Win7 there still wouldn't be reason to switch. So, naturally, this wouldn't affect the economy. To assume Microsoft is such a big mover in the economy is to make an ass out of you and me.

Those who were moving to new machines will take Win7. No big surprise here. Businesses won't rush out and buy new units because they have Win7 on them. Consumers aren't going out of their way to spend more money when they already spent it on Vista a year or so ago. Few people will rush out to buy an OS that's only marginally faster than Vista that looks like Vista, that offers no major feature updates over Vista. It just ain't going to happen. Let's not forget how much energy and effort is going to be needed to do the upgrade. Essentially a new install where all the programs/printers/etc need to be reinstalled after that.

Let us not forget the large amount of digital restrictions management (DRM) and other spyware features built into the Win7. This is warning enough for most people to avoid Microsoft products in the future. With OSX and Linux you have none of this, none at all.

If you want to be stuck in the dark ages using serial connections at a dismal 9600 bauds, then go for it. The whole "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" attitude is totally unnecessary and only causes a stagnation to the development and advancement of technology the world over.

For example, 64 bit processing and software has been around for well over a decade, but here we are in 2009 still using 32 bit processors and 32 bit software. Why? Because too many stuck-in-the-past corporations and manufacturers and developers are too set in their ways to innovate or change and do something new. Not only new, but potentially better by allowing for things to be done quicker and easier and even looking better just for that added bonus.

It is also quite ignorant to say that they whole point of an OS is to support your hardware. Actually, the main reason people buy a computer is to run software. People don't buy Mac OS X just so it will run their shiny white screen and old model Core 2 Duo processor, they buy it to run things such as Final Cut or because they want to be able to surf the net and edit their photos and all of that kind of thing in a way that they consider easy and secure. The main reason people buy a particular video games console will be so that they can play a specific game.

But in reverse of that, certain operating systems will favor different hardware better than others. Windows 7 is certainly better for multi-core processors, solid state drives, touch screens and writing tablets and a variety of modern devices. It boggles the mind when people buy Core i7 systems with 6GB or more of RAM and DirectX 10 graphics cards, but then install Windows XP on it. Why? That is just just a waste of buying that expensive hardware. You won't get the full features that those pieces of hardware can deliver.

Peripherals on the other hand are a a bit different. While it is true that things like scanners and printers can last quite a number of years, and newer models rarely actually have much in the way of noticeable improvements and then new operating systems have limited or no support for those old devices, they are optional extras to a computer. They are usually bought as an after thought if needed and the cost of replacing them is small compared to the cost of the computer system (except of course in the case of monstrous corporate level multi-functions and plotters and so on, but those devices are usually supported by new driver releases longer anyway).

Refusing to update to a better and newer OS which offers better useability, reliability, security and performance just for the sake of keeping some old peripheral is just silly. Why miss out on awesome new stuff just to keep hanging on to some ancient piece of hardware when you could be working more efficiently on a new OS and new hardware? The pleasing to the eye thing of course isn't really going to make the work go faster or anything like that, but why not when the other features provided by the OS are better anyway?

If you want to be stuck in the dark
ages using serial connections at a
dismal 9600 bauds, then go for it

There are many reasons he might be using 9600 baud, remote locations or low power hardware requirements for example. In any case, administering large numbers of machines is *much* faster over a text based shell that supports scripting than the point the point'n'click interface. Even Microsoft realised this and have produced PowerShell - fixing all the wrong problems as it happens, but still.

but here we are in 2009 still using 32 bit

I upgraded to OpenSuSE 64bit several years ago, and unlike Windows I wasn't waiting for all my applications to get round to migrating to 64bit - they were 64bit ready and good to go from day 0. And they will be ARM ready and good to go from day 0 when I get round to buying an ARM netbook later this year.

better useability, reliability,
security and performance

But the usability, reliability and security of XP SP3 are all just fine, thanks.

Why miss out on awesome new stuff

What awesome new stuff? I mean, the video you posted was supposed to blow our minds, right? I didn't impress me much.

I hope your getting paid for your blatant sales pitches, or are you really that pathetic. Hell I like chocolate, but I wouldn't go down on my knees for it. Maybe you should ask Microsoft for a job?

I cant believe how many shills/fanbois have pounced on this story.
People getting their knickers in a twist when Windows 7 is JUST ANOTHER OS (or you could argue that it is just a service pack for Vista that they want you to pay for).

I didn't post any video... that was someone else... I doubt a video is going to convince anyone that a new OS or piece of software is worth switching to, the only real way to do that is to actually try it out for a while as with most products in the world...

Shell commands are only faster than doing things via point and click when; there is no mouse or it is broken, someone can type commands and use keyboard shortcuts at a speed which indicates they have no life away from the computer or when no GUI interface has been developed for a particular command or task in which case shells and scripts are understandable. However, that still says that someone along the line is too lazy to actually write a more permanent command into a system to do a particular task. It is very common in network and server admin tasks.

And I am quite aware that there are systems that have been running in 64 bit for sometime, but I used the word "we" which is a collective term. Small niche markets and groups of users are far from being any kind of bulk majority. In the case of 32 bit systems, it is still certainly the average user (who are the majority) which are still stuck using software which is not optimised for 64 bit hardware. Most of who unfortunately don't know any better...

I'm no fanboy either, I have never paid for a Microsoft software product, and will continue to avoid doing so. I try to be unbiased to different brands and products and continue to urge for the betterment of mankind through innovation and continued research and development. It annoys me greatly when such things are stagnated by certain aspects that are not allowed to progress like they should because people don't want to change or adopt new concepts or technology.

Hmmm..... lets look at what you actually get with a windows 7 upgrade...

Protected Media Path/Protected Audio Path- DRM in the core of the OS, down samples video when the OS is not secure, prevents playback from spdif. No Thanks.

Windows Genuine Advantage- Prove you have legally purchased your OS, and that you have not "modified" it. No Thanks.

Media Formats incompatible- Did you know that windows 7 burns disks that are only compatible with Vista and windows 7? No Thanks.

As a content producer, we will not be using Vista or Win7, ever. It has too many inherited design flaws from Vista that make it unsuitable for doing serious work.