As per title
2
Windows 7 vs Windows Vista
Started by
Linoman
, Nov 02 2008 02:48 PM
36 replies to this topic
#1
Linoman
-
- Sponsor
-
- 1,536 posts
Established Member
- Country:South Africa (Cape-Town)
Posted 02 November 2008 - 02:48 PM
#2
Roadrunner
-
- Sponsor
-
- 672 posts
Established Member
- Location:Irvine, california
- Country:USA
Posted 02 November 2008 - 05:40 PM
No contest-
It's like asking if ME or XP is better.
It's like asking if ME or XP is better.
#3 Guest_scaramonga_*
Guest_scaramonga_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 November 2008 - 11:28 PM
XP wasn't there, so I voted Win7, obviously, for now. 
#4
m.oreilly
-
- Admin
-
- 8,864 posts
rog'er wilco
- Country:lower uncton
Posted 03 November 2008 - 12:07 AM
you're gonna love it scara... 
#5
talker
-
- Sponsor
-
- 840 posts
Being a Priest is not always easy.
- Location:Huntville, AL, USA
- Interests:Ah lets see...gee, I know...computers.
- Country:USA
Posted 03 November 2008 - 12:34 PM
Being that I have no basis for comparison I will reserve my vote for later...
#6
Linoman
-
- Sponsor
-
- 1,536 posts
Established Member
- Country:South Africa (Cape-Town)
Posted 04 November 2008 - 07:11 AM
So far Win7 looks far more promising than Vista ever did. Although one never knows, imagine if they scrap it and rebuild it again. "Sound familiar?"
#7
hog
-
- Sponsor
-
- 1,302 posts
official linguist
- Location:Montreal area, QC
- Country:Canada
Posted 04 November 2008 - 03:45 PM
I agree, even though I've discarded Vista really fast and haven't tried 7 yet, with the ME/XP comparison. Actually, I threw Vista to the trash and came back to XP the same way I had done before: threw ME to the trash and went back to 98 SE.
I have higher hopes for 7, even if I don't think I would install it on my mother's 3500+ 1gb RAM unless it's significantly faster than Vista, as I like my operations to be lightning fast and I don't need high-end capabilities, XP satifies my/her needs on that computer. Then again I'm afraid XP/7 files and network compatibility could become an issue...
I have higher hopes for 7, even if I don't think I would install it on my mother's 3500+ 1gb RAM unless it's significantly faster than Vista, as I like my operations to be lightning fast and I don't need high-end capabilities, XP satifies my/her needs on that computer. Then again I'm afraid XP/7 files and network compatibility could become an issue...
#8
m.oreilly
-
- Admin
-
- 8,864 posts
rog'er wilco
- Country:lower uncton
Posted 04 November 2008 - 09:14 PM
too early to tell. i just put sp2 on server 08. it runs sweet. windows7 is based on server 08, so i think i'll wait, though it would be nice to have all the media stuff that server lacks. i don't think the "superbar" is going to sway me...
#9
os collector
-
- Members
-
- 178 posts
2nd Innings
- Location:IND
- Interests:programming, Reverse Engineering, Writing tutorials
- Country:india
Posted 22 November 2008 - 07:45 PM
i voted for 7 but it is amazing to know there is no one voted for vista 
Edited by os collector, 22 November 2008 - 07:47 PM.
#10 Guest_scaramonga_*
Guest_scaramonga_*
-
- Guests
Posted 23 November 2008 - 01:58 AM
os collector, on Nov 22 2008, 07:45 PM, said:
i voted for 7 but it is amazing to know there is no one voted for vista
Not really, its shit lol
#11
m.oreilly
-
- Admin
-
- 8,864 posts
rog'er wilco
- Country:lower uncton
Posted 23 November 2008 - 02:47 AM
it's (vista) way better than xp, that's for sure. just beautiful. be nice to have that there touch stuff going on in windows 7 though (if i can afford a touchscreen lol)
just beautiful. be nice to have that there touch stuff going on in windows 7 though (if i can afford a touchscreen lol)
#12
talker
-
- Sponsor
-
- 840 posts
Being a Priest is not always easy.
- Location:Huntville, AL, USA
- Interests:Ah lets see...gee, I know...computers.
- Country:USA
Posted 23 November 2008 - 03:21 AM
m.oreilly, on Nov 4 2008, 03:14 PM, said:
too early to tell. i just put sp2 on server 08. it runs sweet. windows7 is based on server 08, so i think i'll wait, though it would be nice to have all the media stuff that server lacks. i don't think the "superbar" is going to sway me...
Hey Mo, was that SP2 the Beta or have I missed something (which happens often...sigh). If it was the Beta, would you recommend it for a mainline production system or should I wait for the RTM?...Bill.
#13 Guest_scaramonga_*
Guest_scaramonga_*
-
- Guests
Posted 23 November 2008 - 03:34 AM
m.oreilly, on Nov 23 2008, 02:47 AM, said:
it's (vista) way better than xp, that's for sure. just beautiful.
just beautiful.
#14
m.oreilly
-
- Admin
-
- 8,864 posts
rog'er wilco
- Country:lower uncton
Posted 23 November 2008 - 04:00 AM
talker, on Nov 22 2008, 07:21 PM, said:
Hey Mo, was that SP2 the Beta or have I missed something (which happens often...sigh). If it was the Beta, would you recommend it for a mainline production system or should I wait for the RTM?...Bill.
for server, it really is a good thing. still checking out the vista version...
#15
Obadiah
-
- Bots
-
- 10 posts
Member
- Country:Australia
Posted 13 December 2008 - 03:57 PM
Windows 7 will be a 'minor' realease, unlike Vista which was a major one. Win7 has the same Kernal/core as Vista with some 'window dressing, Server 2008 comes to mind. Other than the few interface enhancements I would not waste my time or money if you already have Vista/Client, if not then upgrade, or wait for the next 'major' release of Windows. Win7 is like Win98 2nd edition, or SP2 for XP, a nice improved release, but that's all.
Do not be fooled by the 'cosmetic hype' because that is all it is, look under the 'Bonnet' and you will discover for yourself that Windows 7 is actually Version 6.1 not 7, a minor release...there is still more to come a-ways-down-the-track! Vista is Windows 6.001 (with SP1).
Do not be fooled by the 'cosmetic hype' because that is all it is, look under the 'Bonnet' and you will discover for yourself that Windows 7 is actually Version 6.1 not 7, a minor release...there is still more to come a-ways-down-the-track! Vista is Windows 6.001 (with SP1).
3 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users
