or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Windows 7 a Complete Failure?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Windows 7 a Complete Failure?

Poll Results: Is Windows 7 Going to be a Complete Failure?

 
  • 7% (3)
    Yes
  • 5% (2)
    Most likely
  • 7% (3)
    Probably
  • 78% (30)
    Maybe not
38 Total Votes  
post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
Everything MS puts out these days is a complete failure: Vista, MS Office, etc.

Is Windows 7 going to be really any different? Is it going to require 10000 updates to work?
post #2 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron View Post

Everything MS puts out these days is a complete failure: Vista, MS Office, etc.

Is Windows 7 going to be really any different? Is it going to require 10000 updates to work?

What's the point of posting a poll if you're going to skew it so blatantly? Where're the "most likely not" and "no" options?
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #3 of 56
The fact that this isnt a new realise so much as a update of Vista with the problems solved I'd say its going to do quite well.
post #4 of 56
MS has to extend its "downgrade" to XP till 2011
the transition expense for IT and corps is very high and tedious
mac runs both OSX and XP
why not just get a mac
50+% IT directors seriously looking at snow leopard
$29 upgrade price is cold blast in face of typical MS IT dept
corps are looking to lean expenses and mac may be the ticket
MS can win but they have to lower substantially the cost to enter
W-7, new computer purchases delayed for this reason.
MS has some major problems to overcome
BUT can apple capitalize on this window of opportunity
some say apple didn't hit vista and PC, MS hard enough since vista launch
we'll see
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #5 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

What's the point of posting a poll if you're going to skew it so blatantly? Where're the "most likely not" and "no" options?

See the reply by strange lulz above this one.
post #6 of 56
Failure or not, MS will still have a monopoly to strangle the industry. The failure of Vista didn't stop MS from abuse and unfair practices.
post #7 of 56
Windows 7 will be the SINGLE GREATEST COMPETITOR / THREAT to Macs since Windows XP.

Windows 7 will have sucky bits but people will use it a lot, just like they continue to use Office 2003/ 2007 a lot. A lot of people want to jump up from XP particularly to Windows 7 64bit (since 4GB of RAM is really becoming quite standard in the mid-to-mid-upper range now).

Vista is bad. Windows 7 so far is fast and snappy. Not perfect, but the RC1 was fairly decent at most things and is getting overall decent reviews.

Windows 7 will be something like what Vista was actually supposed to be.

Unless Microsoft somehow royally screws up, Windows 7 will be a definite ongoing threat to Snow Leopard and Macs.

But then again, do we want Macs to have 20% market share? I leave it to you all to decide.
post #8 of 56
Having used the BETA for a few weeks, I found it to be a massive success

I wanted to slit my wrists using Vista but 7 was solid
post #9 of 56
I agree that Windows 7 is likely be much better accepted that the Vista was. It might have impact on Mac adoption/market share gain but your point of view is really narrow IMO. The Vista failure helped the Mac but it was not the only force attracting to the Mac. I think it looks more like this:
  1. Windows Vista/Windows 7 main competitor is Windows XP. Windows Vista failed to attract XP users en masse. Most of the Vista users will upgrade to 7 as soon as it ships, the major reason being that large number of those are Widows enthusiast. Some portion of those who purchased new computers with Vista pre-installed may upgrade e.g. to fix some problems, and some XP users may decide to finally make the jump. How many of those is hard to predict now, and it depends on the pricing as well.
  2. Before the Vista, the average users were under the impression that Windows is the only way to go and everything else is a dead end: no apps, no support, you look like an idiot, Mac is for kids and dummies, ... , you name it. Mac started to gain share (let me say again - not only because of Vista only) and people start to understand that the switch is not the end of the world. It does not matter how good the next and future Windows is going to be, this change of the public perception regarding switching can not be reverted.
  3. iPhone and iPod touch are a HUGE success. Most of the iPhone/iPod touch users are not Mac users (the number of mobile users already exceeds the number of desktop users). This huge installed base helps Apple a lot (the so called Halo effect). Now that we know that the Pre is not The iPhone Killer (TM) and we need to wait for the next one to come around, and more importantly, it is clear that Windows Mobile looks like the big looser in the mobile war, Apple is perceived as attractive option.
  4. Microsoft used to be the media favorite. It was widely believed that whatever Microsoft announces will become a reality. The long list of Longhorn scrapped features and the huge Vista delay signaled significant problems in this department. It was the last nail in the coffin of the illusion that Microsoft is an all-mighty giant and can do whatever it wants.
  5. Many media outlets still have MS bias, but the media focus on Apple and the associated free advertising is nowhere close to what Microsoft can get.
  6. A number of developments like The Zune failure, the Blue Ray win against Microsoft-backed HD DVD, failure to kill the Adobe PDF with it's own standard, loosing market share and playing catch-up for standard compliance in the browser area (that is, burring the idea that Microsoft can take over with it's own proprietary web technologies and kill the competition out of the gate) showed that Microsoft is no longer the mafia guy that can force out of the business everybody who steps on it's way.
  7. The quality of the products aside, Microsoft feels an enormous pressure against it's business model. The "hunters" adds may turn many from switching to the Mac, but it may also make turn same those users away from Windows 7. Squeezed between Linux and Mac OS Snow Leopard $29 upgrade price, Microsoft will need to make hard choices: either to face slow adoption rate or reduced revenue.
post #10 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron View Post

Everything MS puts out these days is a complete failure: Vista, MS Office, etc.

Is Windows 7 going to be really any different? Is it going to require 10000 updates to work?

It works now, quite well actually. If there's a failure, its fro the 800,000 different SKUs. Just over ultimate fro everyone at home's price and be done with it.
post #11 of 56
Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are both a major hit! We will be upgrading our XP machines as our apps develop support for them
post #12 of 56
friend of mine is running Windows 7 RC and has had a 10 fps improvement in World of Warcraft, so he's happy. His Vista install barfed and refused to reinstall.
post #13 of 56
There should be an option that says "definitely not". Anyways, there is no chance of a failure for Windows 7. It has already succeeded in convincing the masses with the good PR coming out of the free RC giveaways. It is difficult to do worse than Vista.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #14 of 56
Until Apple sells hardware at much lower prices, and they could, MS will shine.
post #15 of 56
There's no "no" option. Biased poll me thinks.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #16 of 56
Quote:
If there's a failure, its fro the 800,000 different SKUs.

In America you can choose between:
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Ultimate

In stores you will probably only see Home Premium.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #17 of 56
Where I work we still use XP and Office XP. I'm sure we'll still being using it in 2011.
post #18 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Unless Microsoft somehow royally screws up...

I have faith in them. They will.

Quote:
Windows 7 will be a definite ongoing threat to Snow Leopard and Macs.

Been trying out Win7 for well over a month now, and it can't hold a candle to Leopard's elegance, power, and efficacy. Let alone to Snow Leopard's.
Win7's claim to fame is it's supposedly state-of-the-art security management. Well: it failed! A couple days ago Avast found a W32 Trojan on my Win7 system. A Trojan that Win7 had obviously 'overlooked' and let in without a peep!
Win7 has already failed before it even started!
post #19 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rokcet Scientist View Post

I have faith in them. They will.



Been trying out Win7 for well over a month now, and it can't hold a candle to Leopard's elegance, power, and efficacy. Let alone to Snow Leopard's.
Win7's claim to fame is it's supposedly state-of-the-art security management. Well: it failed! A couple days ago Avast found a W32 Trojan on my Win7 system. A Trojan that Win7 had obviously 'overlooked' and let in without a peep!
Win7 has already failed before it even started!

I disagree here and have yet to have a single security problem.

Windows 7 is a better overall OS than Leopard. Haven't tried Snow Leopard. And my version of Win7 is actually genuinely 64 bit, not pseudo 64 bit like Leopard. Snow Leopard is different, but Apple is behind the eight ball in 64 bit support even for themselves. They screwed the pooch by shifting away from Carbon 64 and hurt themselves and their developers by deceiving themselves that it could work.

And as for those loving the $29 upgrade, less than 50% of Apple users qualify for that price. Those that never upgraded to Leopard have to pay $169 and those with PowerPC's are stuck.

The price issue is also hurting Apple. It's the reason why I replaced my iMac with a Quad-core AMD Phenom, 8GB of RAM, and a 24" Viewsonic 1080P that I built for $1000. I don't care how "elegant" OS X is, there is not a machine built by Apple that can compete with mine at the same price point.

And Windows 7 is what caused me to return to MS. I left back in 2002 and loved OS X when I got Jaguar. I still like OS X, but Windows 7 gives me everything I need. I've had ZERO crashes in a month. And the FREE MS Security Essentials works quite well for the average user. Independent tests have shown it does a great job and it takes about 6MB of resident memory. So I find Win7 to be very secure, very fast, and able to run my fully 64 bit version of Photoshop that doesn't exist on the Mac at this time.

The new taskbar rocks the dock and Aero Peek is so good that Apple tried to copy it into Expose, but MS took the whole Expose idea and made it better than Apple's. Just as they did with Dashboard. Apple came up with the ideas - MS made them better.

And I used to hate MS, but I have to give credit where it is due. They've done a great job with Windows 7 and Security Essentials. I can't remember ever being thrilled by a MS system until Windows 7.

The danger to Apple is if it is very well received and seen as a huge leap forward for MS. Why pay Apple's exorbitant prices if Miscrosoft's OS is just as stable (moreso in my estimation compared to my Leopard experience), just as secure (maybe moreso with the Safari issues - and I see big trouble ahead in the department because Apple and Mac users are overconfident about the OS' security. Eventually that will bite both in the butt), just as gorgeous (if not moreso), and really fast.

It also keeps the registry very clean. Very impressed with it. The Beta and RC are rock solid. Months with nary a crash. More stable than my iMac with Leopard which has crashed on multiple occasions and suffered from major slowdowns every now and again for now apparent reason, though it seems like the kernel ends up getting clogged for some reason.
post #20 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. MacPhisto View Post

I disagree here and have yet to have a single security problem.

Windows 7 is a better overall OS than Leopard. Haven't tried Snow Leopard. And my version of Win7 is actually genuinely 64 bit, not pseudo 64 bit like Leopard. Snow Leopard is different, but Apple is behind the eight ball in 64 bit support even for themselves. They screwed the pooch by shifting away from Carbon 64 and hurt themselves and their developers by deceiving themselves that it could work.

And as for those loving the $29 upgrade, less than 50% of Apple users qualify for that price. Those that never upgraded to Leopard have to pay $169 and those with PowerPC's are stuck.

The price issue is also hurting Apple. It's the reason why I replaced my iMac with a Quad-core AMD Phenom, 8GB of RAM, and a 24" Viewsonic 1080P that I built for $1000. I don't care how "elegant" OS X is, there is not a machine built by Apple that can compete with mine at the same price point.

And Windows 7 is what caused me to return to MS. I left back in 2002 and loved OS X when I got Jaguar. I still like OS X, but Windows 7 gives me everything I need. I've had ZERO crashes in a month. And the FREE MS Security Essentials works quite well for the average user. Independent tests have shown it does a great job and it takes about 6MB of resident memory. So I find Win7 to be very secure, very fast, and able to run my fully 64 bit version of Photoshop that doesn't exist on the Mac at this time.

The new taskbar rocks the dock and Aero Peek is so good that Apple tried to copy it into Expose, but MS took the whole Expose idea and made it better than Apple's. Just as they did with Dashboard. Apple came up with the ideas - MS made them better.

And I used to hate MS, but I have to give credit where it is due. They've done a great job with Windows 7 and Security Essentials. I can't remember ever being thrilled by a MS system until Windows 7.

The danger to Apple is if it is very well received and seen as a huge leap forward for MS. Why pay Apple's exorbitant prices if Miscrosoft's OS is just as stable (moreso in my estimation compared to my Leopard experience), just as secure (maybe moreso with the Safari issues - and I see big trouble ahead in the department because Apple and Mac users are overconfident about the OS' security. Eventually that will bite both in the butt), just as gorgeous (if not moreso), and really fast.

It also keeps the registry very clean. Very impressed with it. The Beta and RC are rock solid. Months with nary a crash. More stable than my iMac with Leopard which has crashed on multiple occasions and suffered from major slowdowns every now and again for now apparent reason, though it seems like the kernel ends up getting clogged for some reason.

A month you say? I haven't had a crash in 1 year with my 2 macs. Good luck trying to keep the billions of spyware and virus at bay while you defragment your HD every week and update the 100 third party crapware every day. Also while you are at it you may want to save for the the Windows 7 downpayment and installment plan you will need to purchase it. And say good bye to streamlined multicore processing or GPU assistance.
post #21 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rokcet Scientist View Post

Win7's claim to fame is it's supposedly state-of-the-art security management. Well: it failed! A couple days ago Avast found a W32 Trojan on my Win7 system. A Trojan that Win7 had obviously 'overlooked' and let in without a peep!
Win7 has already failed before it even started!

Did you download a leaked beta or rc that was not downloaded directly from MS servers? There were many torrents with trojan included into the downloads. Viruses and trojans don't just magically appear, at least not with Vista and Windows 7. Chances are, you chose to install something that had a virus/trojan included. In that case, what OS can protect you? Likewise, false positive have been known to happen.

Remember those people who downloaded iWork with trojan hidden? Yeah, OS X didn't make a peep!
post #22 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinN206 View Post

Did you download a leaked beta or rc that was not downloaded directly from MS servers? There were many torrents with trojan included into the downloads. Viruses and trojans don't just magically appear, at least not with Vista and Windows 7. Chances are, you chose to install something that had a virus/trojan included. In that case, what OS can protect you? Likewise, false positive have been known to happen.

Remember those people who downloaded iWork with trojan hidden? Yeah, OS X didn't make a peep!

Indeed. There's no way for an OS to protect against Trojans without becoming overly intrusive. It's why they're called Trojans - they look attractive on the outside (so user makes the choice to install), but they've got nasties hidden inside.

The only way an OS can protect from that is with code signing and application vetting a la the iPhone - the OS won't run unsigned code, and the only way to get code signed is to have it go via the OS vendor first to be verified. Even that process isn't flawless as malicious code could be missed but it'd be unlikely.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #23 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

In America you can choose between:
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Ultimate

In stores you will probably only see Home Premium.

And Starter Edition on netbooks. But Home Premium will probably represent 90% of the computers sold at retail to non-business buyers.
post #24 of 56
I am extremely fond of W7 RC. Sadly, there are some issues with my iMac and BootCamp. Both Windows and Ubuntu cannot deal with my bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Switching them out for USB would fix that. RC solved some issues that I couldn't fix in W7 Beta. Now I can get audio. Unfortunately, my USB turntable doesn't work correctly with W7 RC and the Realtek drivers. On the other hand, only on a Mac, could I run Mac OS, Windows, and Ubuntu natively. For the most part, W7 RC is stable and I am running a free virus program from PC Tools on both Mac OS and Windows. Unless one is willing to run 2 PCs with a monitor switch, then the Mac is the only way to fly. Windows is Windows, but version 7 will do just fine. In a nutshell, there are things my Mac can do that Windows can't and some things Windows can do that my Mac can't. I cannot imagine having just one OS!
post #25 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

I am extremely fond of W7 RC. Sadly, there are some issues with my iMac and BootCamp. Both Windows and Ubuntu cannot deal with my bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Switching them out for USB would fix that. RC solved some issues that I couldn't fix in W7 Beta. Now I can get audio. Unfortunately, my USB turntable doesn't work correctly with W7 RC and the Realtek drivers. On the other hand, only on a Mac, could I run Mac OS, Windows, and Ubuntu natively. For the most part, W7 RC is stable and I am running a free virus program from PC Tools on both Mac OS and Windows. Unless one is willing to run 2 PCs with a monitor switch, then the Mac is the only way to fly. Windows is Windows, but version 7 will do just fine. In a nutshell, there are things my Mac can do that Windows can't and some things Windows can do that my Mac can't. I cannot imagine having just one OS!

And my point is that everybody wants to believe that Windows 7 is going to be very good because, one way or another, we all have to use a windows PC at one time or another whether we like it or not. But the truth of the matter is that windows 7, like any other windows, is built on top of an obsolete platform using engineers that are used to thinking in obsolete ways. The more you guys use windows 7, the more flaws you are going to find. Right now it is rated "good" because we are all comparing it to the fiasco of Vista. When we start to compare it to it's true competitor, Snow Leopard, the game is completely and absolutely over.
post #26 of 56
My mother has been using a Dell PC for quite some time now. It came with Vista. Did not include SP1. She uses it for the web, e-mail, solitaire, etc. Once in a blue moon, something goes wrong, but Vista works nearly flawlessly in her case. I have bad eyesight and Mac OS does not solve the problem. I am using W7 RC to type this using Firefox 3.5 Beta. I can see the screen infinitely better. I have RC setup to increase the fonts to 125%. If I had to choose just one OS, it would have to be Windows because of my eyes. In my above post, all the issues could easily be resolved by selling my iMac and getting a Dell. This could happen. My eyesight is job one, and for me, Windows wins hands down!!! Windows has always worked better without a mouse. I am not blind and VoiceOver does not solve my problem. Alex is excellent, but there are free apps for Windows that work for speech to text. I am not slamming an OS the way you are, but if push came to shove, I can find fault with Mac OS. My eyesight issues are very unique, and Mac OS cannot solve them the way Windows can.
post #27 of 56
Vista is a great OS, especially with SP1.

haters keep on hatin'
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #28 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Vista is a great OS, especially with SP1.

haters keep on hatin'

Come on groverat, you can do better than that! Nothing to say about Windows being built on an "obsolete platform" or being programmed by folk "thinking in obsolete ways"? Tauron's got his head in the sand, won't you dig it out for him?
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #29 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

My mother has been using a Dell PC for quite some time now. It came with Vista. Did not include SP1. She uses it for the web, e-mail, solitaire, etc. Once in a blue moon, something goes wrong, but Vista works nearly flawlessly in her case. I have bad eyesight and Mac OS does not solve the problem. I am using W7 RC to type this using Firefox 3.5 Beta. I can see the screen infinitely better. I have RC setup to increase the fonts to 125%. If I had to choose just one OS, it would have to be Windows because of my eyes. In my above post, all the issues could easily be resolved by selling my iMac and getting a Dell. This could happen. My eyesight is job one, and for me, Windows wins hands down!!! Windows has always worked better without a mouse. I am not blind and VoiceOver does not solve my problem. Alex is excellent, but there are free apps for Windows that work for speech to text. I am not slamming an OS the way you are, but if push came to shove, I can find fault with Mac OS. My eyesight issues are very unique, and Mac OS cannot solve them the way Windows can.

You don't know how to use mac OS. It has many accessibility features such as increasing font and fine tuning legibility for any need. On top of that mac displays are always higher quality and higher resolution and contrast.
post #30 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

Come on groverat, you can do better than that! Nothing to say about Windows being built on an "obsolete platform" or being programmed by folk "thinking in obsolete ways"? Tauron's got his head in the sand, won't you dig it out for him?

No he can't. He knows I am right or else he is deluded. Ah the typical namecalling. I am used to it by now. Whenever somebody disagrees but has no logical argument then labeling and namecalling ensues. Typical response of those who have lost the debate.
post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron View Post

You don't know how to use mac OS. It has many accessibility features such as increasing font and fine tuning legibility for any need. On top of that mac displays are always higher quality and higher resolution and contrast.

Don't start with me. I have been to UC Berkeley and my vision issues can not be improved by any of the features in Universal Access. I have visual processing problems, mostly blurred vision. I know everything there is to know about making changes with Mac OS. For me, and maybe only me, it just gets more blurry. I need a display with lower, not higher resolution. I probably have more experience with visual aids than you will ever know. So again, don't start with me. You don't know for what you speak. I could complain all day long about Apple. All I would get is a bucket of kool-aid from you people who think you are the master race. I might be able to solve my problems by using HDMI and a TV @ 1366 x 728. Apple does not support such an effort intentionally. Someone else in this forum ran into the situation and called it a problem. I need a native resolution 25% lower than what is available in ANY LCD/LED display around. Some people make an 18.5" running 1366 x 768. That might work. There has been talk about resolution independence, but only talk. Mac OS does not shine for me. I love Mac OS, but hate my iMac screen. It is not the quality you claim. Refresh rate is rather slow by today's standards. And just for giggles, what makes you the expert?
post #32 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

There's no "no" option. Biased poll me thinks.

Everyone here needs to step back and learn how to recognize a troll when you see one.

Take a look at Tauron's post history. Almost every post is in the Genius Bar section just telling people to drop everything MS related and saying how Macs are the greatest thing ever.

Really, if I was an admin I'd just permaban him for spreading misinformation to people who are legitimately asking for help and may not know any better.
post #33 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron View Post

You don't know how to use mac OS. It has many accessibility features such as increasing font and fine tuning legibility for any need. On top of that mac displays are always higher quality and higher resolution and contrast.

Wrong! You cannot increase the font size in the menu bar, for example. You can only zoom the whole display or run at a lower resolution if you want the menu bar fonts larger.

Mac displays are always higher quality and higher resolution? Wrong again!

The 15" MacBook Pro resolution is 1440 x 900; there are plenty of PCs on the market with 1680 x 1050 resolution 15" displays (HP and Dell both being manufacturers who offer that option) and there's been plenty of complaints about iMac screen quality (on the smaller size iMacs, Apple switched from IPS to TN panels a while ago; there have been issues with backlighting unevenness) and colour accuracy of cinema displays (there was a long-running issue of a pink tint that was impossible to get rid of even with display calibration)
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron View Post

No he can't. He knows I am right or else he is deluded. Ah the typical namecalling. I am used to it by now. Whenever somebody disagrees but has no logical argument then labeling and namecalling ensues. Typical response of those who have lost the debate.

Where did I call you a name?

Groverat is a Windows power user so he'd do a better job than me of debating Windows Vs. Mac OS with you.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

I might be able to solve my problems by using HDMI and a TV @ 1366 x 728. Apple does not support such an effort intentionally. Someone else in this forum ran into the situation and called it a problem. I need a native resolution 25% lower than what is available in ANY LCD/LED display around. Some people make an 18.5" running 1366 x 768. That might work. There has been talk about resolution independence, but only talk. Mac OS does not shine for me. I love Mac OS, but hate my iMac screen. It is not the quality you claim. Refresh rate is rather slow by today's standards. And just for giggles, what makes you the expert?

Have you tried running an external monitor at 1366 x 768? What makes you think you can't do it? I can connect my MacBook Pro via HDMI to a 50" plasma at 1280 x 720 resolution. If Mac OS X doesn't present a 1366 x 768 option (which it should if the display properly reports its supported resolutions to the computer) there is a third-party program that present a wider array of resolutions than system preference's display pane.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

Have you tried running an external monitor at 1366 x 768? What makes you think you can't do it? I can connect my MacBook Pro via HDMI to a 50" plasma at 1280 x 720 resolution. If Mac OS X doesn't present a 1366 x 768 option (which it should if the display properly reports its supported resolutions to the computer) there is a third-party program that present a wider array of resolutions than system preference's display pane.

Thank you for the link. I have not tried hooking up an external monitor and the only TVs I have are good ol' CRTs with RCA audio and video inputs. If I switch the resolution on my iMac screen to anything other than the native resolution, everything gets too blurry. While others may not notice it, my brain processes stuff in a different way. I can see a flicker in digital TV that many people can't. It would seem a little crazy to hook up an external monitor to my iMac and perhaps set it on the floor. I do plan to check out some of the monitors that are 18.5" and default to 1366 x 768. I would consider an HDMI connection to a TV, but it would have to be a 720 native resolution. The computer would have to be fooled by the HDMI connection that 720 is the only resolution available. I think that is what you are trying to tell me. If all of that actually works, I'd probably get rid of my iMac and get a mini. I do have a 20 inch CRT TV and would use it at 1024 x 768 if it would work without being blurry. Anyone have experience with a Mac and a CRT with composite video???
post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

If I switch the resolution on my iMac screen to anything other than the native resolution, everything gets too blurry.

Indeed. That's just the way it is with LCD. The solution, as you mentioned earlier, is resolution independence. Hopefully that will be a major feature of 10.7 but obviously that's not going to help you right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

It would seem a little crazy to hook up an external monitor to my iMac and perhaps set it on the floor.

You could use the iMac's monitor as a secondary monitor running at a lower resolution than native. It would be slightly blurred but that wouldn't matter so much on a secondary display and it would give you some more work space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

I do plan to check out some of the monitors that are 18.5" and default to 1366 x 768. I would consider an HDMI connection to a TV, but it would have to be a 720 native resolution.

Yes, the monitor would have to be 1280x720 or 1366x768 native resolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

The computer would have to be fooled by the HDMI connection that 720 is the only resolution available. I think that is what you are trying to tell me.

No, the computer doesn't need to be fooled. Modern monitors should have a chip in them that talks to the computer when it's first connected. Basically, the monitor provides a list of resolutions it supports to the computer, and those are the resolutions that are provided in the list in system preferences. Sometimes the handshake doesn't work properly and you don't get a full list of resolutions. In that situation you have to use something like SwitchResX.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

If all of that actually works, I'd probably get rid of my iMac and get a mini. I do have a 20 inch CRT TV and would use it at 1024 x 768 if it would work without being blurry. Anyone have experience with a Mac and a CRT with composite video???

I wouldn't bother with CRT if I were you. See if there's any way you can test out a 1366 x 768 LCD (don't bother with plasma as they suffer from burn-in) with a Mac without having to buy the monitor first. Sometimes TVs can be a bit blurry even when run at native res. Good luck!
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #38 of 56
Just had a slightly off-the-wall idea WPLJ42. Have you ever considered using a 1080p projector with wireless mouse and keyboard? Project a giant image and sit well back - if that works you get the benefit of running 1920 x 1080 resolution which gives you more screen real-estate to work with.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #39 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

Just had a slightly off-the-wall idea WPLJ42. Have you ever considered using a 1080p projector with wireless mouse and keyboard? Project a giant image and sit well back - if that works you get the benefit of running 1920 x 1080 resolution which gives you more screen real-estate to work with.

Thanks Mr. H! Surprised you haven't got me for bad punctuation yet. I already have a wireless keyboard and mouse. Windows and Ubuntu don't recognize them and I may get USB. I have not considered a 1080 projector, but would like to win the Lotto just in case. Bigger isn't, at least in my case, always better. The bigger it is, the greater chance Mr. Blurry will come to get me. My namesake, WPLJ42 is a reference, in part, to my age and where I'm from. White Port, Lemon Juice by the Four Deuces. Solid Gold 1958 from Oakland, California. I am almost 52 years of age and the bad eyesight I was born with, is now older.
post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

Thanks Mr. H! Surprised you haven't got me for bad punctuation yet.

I try to restrain myself and rely on my sig. most of the time!


Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

I have not considered a 1080 projector, but would like to win the Lotto just in case.

There are some very expensive projectors but there are some surprisingly affordable ones too. You can get the Sanyo PLV Z700 for under $1500. Not cheap in absolute terms, but not insanely expensive either.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Windows 7 a Complete Failure?