"As is often the case with Windows, Iolo found that things only get worse over time. It found that a three-month-old machine can take up to a minute longer to boot, or 2 minutes and 34 seconds. Windows 7 did outperform Vista at the three-month and six-month marks, Iolo said, but it generally "trailed the older version significantly" in its boot-up tests."
Looks like Windows 7 users will still be thinking about a clean install every few months... and wondering why they didn't switch to Mac.
I can't help but be quite sceptical, given this report was done by a PC tune up company.
Most corporations have no interest in Vista or Windows 7. They still run XP because of either proprietary software for the business, or the majority of their client boxes are crippled Celerons that are incapable of running anything beyond XP. Companies won't risk the cost of running Windows 7 if it is not compatible with their software programs, and won't even consider buying new hardware just to run it.
Microsoft's high upgrade prices allow them to make money off the home user because they made little or no money off the original purchase of the OS through the hardware purchase. More home users rush out to buy a new OS before any corporation would.
This is very true. Businesses tend to be very conservative regarding OS upgrades making them as little as possible mainly due to cost as upgrading the OS generally means upgrading the apps that run on it.
When I did my thesis on museum computerization back in 1989 I found machines as old as 286 (and even a 8086) still in use largely because of this. And it wasn't just old museums either. A recently completed museum used an old piece of software because the best climate monitoring system of the time ran on DOS and AFAIK they still do as the company that wrote it never upgraded to Windows.
Um... because you started downloading something within Firefox and did not let it finish. Of course its going to give you that warning, because you don't have the complete file!
Spend more time actually learning how to use the computer, instead of trying to insight FUD.
On the Mac Firefox puts .part after a file in the process of downloading. If you stop downloading the file the .part file and the result "proper" file both disappear. BUT if something else interrupts the download (your connection goes south long enough) Firefox will go stupid and say the file has completed the download.
That said I have messed with .exe files that should run on Windows 95 and 98 on Windows 98 and watch as some of them have problems. it could be programmer was an idiot as well as Firefox flubbing it.
As someone who has to use Windows at work, I'm glad that it is improving. Competition is a good thing. Diehard Windows users should appreciate that even if they don't like Apple or its products, the competition has been good for the industry as a whole.
The taskbar in Win 7 is much closer in functionality to the dock in OS X, so that will be nice. I am wondering though when Microsoft will ever get around to figuring out how to let Windows be installed on, and boot from a USB drive. What is so hard about this? OS X has been able to boot from a USB drive for a long time. Also when is Windows going to ditch the archaic drive letter nonsense, and the awful registry. I'd say that Windows still has a ways to go in several areas before catching OS X.
THANK YOU. i'm an apple fanboy too, but i'm not an idiot. Windows 7 is good. my shares of AAPL are nervous that several switchers will switch back. MSFT will make a killing on win7 because every corporation in the world that's still on XP will upgrade, and that's a shit-ton of corporations.
You did, in fact, read the part about how difficult it was to go from XP to win7, didn't you. I'm not so sure about world wide corporate acceptance just yet .... we'll see.
No, and you're absolutely right, the registry is the root of all evil and most of Windows' problems. They need a clean-sheet rewrite that gets rid of the disaster once and for all.
They need to improve on ergonometric and usability, too. Last time I checked, if you want to turn computer off, you still need to hit "start" button first. That's ridiculous.
You do know that macs use the same parts right? Just because they cost more doesn't mean the internals are any different.
If what you're saying is true (it's not btw) then why do used Macs retain a bigger value than a comparably priced PC on ebay or craigslist. hint: all computer parts are NOT created equal.
I guess you have never heard of NeXTStep, which existed years before the task bar appeared in Windows 95. Mac OS X is a re-write of NeXTStep, which included the Dock.
Don't feel bad ... there's a lot of things TeckDud has never heard of.
HTML5 can be had in any internet browser that supports it. i have 5 installed now. IE, firefox, chrome, safari and opera
GCD is nothing but thread scheduling and MS has the same thing, minus the catchy marketing name. on SL it's useless without appication support.
OpenCL is also on windows as well as CUDA and Stream. and it has nothing to do with the OS
two things Vista and 7 have that SL doesn't is full native 64 bit support and randomizing the memory space for security reasons. my laptop runs native x64 Windows 7 and any "legacy" crap i have a virtual XP machine. MS rewrote virtual PC for WIndows 7 Ultimate where it takes advantage of VT on the CPU and it runs almost as fast as on the bare hardware.
itunes works just fine on Windows 7 x64
Your wrong on almost every account.
First, my point was that Apple is on the forefront of software development. Webkit, HTML5 and LLVM are both examples of heavy involvement from Apple. GCD and OpenCL are at the core of Mac OS X and for a large part developed and designed by Apple.
Apples state of the art software is the reason for future success. And with Snow Leopard Apple user don't have to wait for a new release to see some rendering applications (in some situations) accelerate a 20 times.
Contrary to your claim, LLVM, GCD and OpenCL have everything to do with the OS. GCD uses the (new) concept of virtual threads and sequential and parallel thread queues to schedule real (OS) threads. This is all part of the kernel. And because of that realtime load balancing can be done.
As a result all cores of the system including GPUs (via OpenCL) can be scheduled by virtual threads and can contribute in all kinds of calculations.
This is a big (I would say brilliant) achievement, especially if you know that with Apples C extension of 'closures' (also brilliant) existing code can be 'plugged in' GCD. So application developers can port there code to GCD with relative ease.
Another important difference between Apple an MS is support for open source and open standards. MS is against HTML5 because this conflicts with its proprietary silverlight. Thats the reason it isn't included in IE8. (As you probably know HTML5 can be used with a plugin, but thats Googles effort.)
And finally, your wrong on 64 bit support. Apples OS is fully 64 bit, kernel, drivers and applications (The 64 bit kernel is not on by default (it is for Mac OS X server), but can be turned on easily.) . But MS 64 bit support is crippled because it has limited support for 64 bit drivers.
Yes, they are so dominate with the 10% market share they've just recently earned after having spent over a decade with somewhere in the neighborhood of 4-6% market share.
Sorry, but until Apple is able to take over the enterprise market (which will probably never happen), they will never have any serious market share outside of a consumer market.
Hmm, yes I was a bit carried away when I used 'dominate'. I guess I had the iPhone in mind.
The enterprise market is a 'problem' for Apple because of the legacy windows hardware. But thats a problem for MS too, because no one wants to upgrade if the application runs ok and the hardware still works.
I hope that the people milling about 1 infinite loop each day don't share in your attitude, at least as exemplified by this particular post. Rather, I hope they carefully examine the challenges presented by Android, and Win 7, and whatever other new tech development appears on the scene. I hope they study these issues and I hope they craft strategy to remain dominant, because frankly speaking, in this business if you are not advancing, you are retreating. Arrogance almost universally leads to complacency, and that cannot have good outcomes.
You would have an answer to your question if you looked at Apples keynote presentations, instead of SB face.
It doesn't matter to me that Microsoft has narrowed the gap. I don't care; I'm a Mac user.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
It doesn't matter to me that Microsoft has narrowed the gap. I don't care; I'm a Mac user.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
Ok from the sidechair expert, thats really tells me a lot about Windows 7
It doesn't matter to me that Microsoft has narrowed the gap. I don't care; I'm a Mac user.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
MS has been "narrowing the gap" for years now. Maybe it counts for something that their current OS "sucks less" than the previous one. Problem is, it's still Windows. A fixed Vista does not an OS X make.
As long as the current management is running MS, any product with the MS logo on it will be suspect by default and assumed crap until proven innocent. And I'll be interested to see how Joe Average will do the proving over the course of the next year. It might be fun to start taking bets on how divergent Windows 7 will be from the pre-release reviews and testing. Vista was a complete 180.
Mossberg liked Vista too, when it debuted, including calling it “the best version of Windows Microsoft has produced.”
There’s no question 7 is better than Vista (I mean, that should be a given. Windows sufferers haven't had a decent OS since 2001, and XP was a virus-ridden dog of an OS.) The question is whether 7 is going to get the majority that’s still on XP to upgrade. Probably. But I wouldn’t bet too much on it.
I mean, it'd be one thing if you were making arguments on objective empirical observations, but really the lot of you just come off as brutish as your MS counterparts.
What I can handle is 'I just prefer the GUI on the Mac', or something along those lines. But 98% of the stuff I've read here make it sound like you haven't used Win7 for any length of time. And you guys are tearing down a great OS armed with nothing but opinions and red herrings.
I've worked on, developed for, and supported both platforms for many, many years (typing this on an iMac now), and I think the current iteration of both are just fantastic. I'm hearing the *nix crowd are happy where they're at, so right now it's the best time in history to be a computer fanboy. So please, stop dragging your knuckles and grunting whenever Windows dares to look you in the eyes
I mean, it'd be one thing if you were making arguments on objective empirical observations, but really the lot of you just come off as brutish as your MS counterparts.
What I can handle is 'I just prefer the GUI on the Mac', or something along those lines. But 98% of the stuff I've read here make it sound like you haven't used Win7 for any length of time. And you guys are tearing down a great OS armed with nothing but opinions and red herrings.
I've worked on, developed for, and supported both platforms for many, many years (typing this on an iMac now), and I think the current iteration of both are just fantastic. I'm hearing the *nix crowd are happy where they're at, so right now it's the best time in history to be a computer fanboy. So please, stop dragging your knuckles and grunting whenever Windows dares to look you in the eyes
A lot of people do seem to be quite blind in this matter. How can anyone emphatically state that OSX is better than Windows 7 if they have never used Windows 7? Given that the beta releases were free, no one has any excuse for not trying it. If you haven't tried it, don't bash it. Now if you are happy with OSX and have no need for Windows, that is fine, but state that and not that Windows 7 sucks since you have no way of knowing if it actually does.
Mac fanboys, don't be like Windows fanboys (completely ignorant of the other OS). It just doesn't look good.
Comments
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10370369-56.html
"As is often the case with Windows, Iolo found that things only get worse over time. It found that a three-month-old machine can take up to a minute longer to boot, or 2 minutes and 34 seconds. Windows 7 did outperform Vista at the three-month and six-month marks, Iolo said, but it generally "trailed the older version significantly" in its boot-up tests."
Looks like Windows 7 users will still be thinking about a clean install every few months... and wondering why they didn't switch to Mac.
I can't help but be quite sceptical, given this report was done by a PC tune up company.
It's quite funny though!
Most corporations have no interest in Vista or Windows 7. They still run XP because of either proprietary software for the business, or the majority of their client boxes are crippled Celerons that are incapable of running anything beyond XP. Companies won't risk the cost of running Windows 7 if it is not compatible with their software programs, and won't even consider buying new hardware just to run it.
Microsoft's high upgrade prices allow them to make money off the home user because they made little or no money off the original purchase of the OS through the hardware purchase. More home users rush out to buy a new OS before any corporation would.
This is very true. Businesses tend to be very conservative regarding OS upgrades making them as little as possible mainly due to cost as upgrading the OS generally means upgrading the apps that run on it.
When I did my thesis on museum computerization back in 1989 I found machines as old as 286 (and even a 8086) still in use largely because of this. And it wasn't just old museums either. A recently completed museum used an old piece of software because the best climate monitoring system of the time ran on DOS and AFAIK they still do as the company that wrote it never upgraded to Windows.
Um... because you started downloading something within Firefox and did not let it finish. Of course its going to give you that warning, because you don't have the complete file!
Spend more time actually learning how to use the computer, instead of trying to insight FUD.
On the Mac Firefox puts .part after a file in the process of downloading. If you stop downloading the file the .part file and the result "proper" file both disappear. BUT if something else interrupts the download (your connection goes south long enough) Firefox will go stupid and say the file has completed the download.
That said I have messed with .exe files that should run on Windows 95 and 98 on Windows 98 and watch as some of them have problems. it could be programmer was an idiot as well as Firefox flubbing it.
First the ZuneHD and now this!
Be afraid, be very afraid!
The only thing I'm afraid of is that you'll keep on posting.
The taskbar in Win 7 is much closer in functionality to the dock in OS X, so that will be nice. I am wondering though when Microsoft will ever get around to figuring out how to let Windows be installed on, and boot from a USB drive. What is so hard about this? OS X has been able to boot from a USB drive for a long time. Also when is Windows going to ditch the archaic drive letter nonsense, and the awful registry. I'd say that Windows still has a ways to go in several areas before catching OS X.
THANK YOU. i'm an apple fanboy too, but i'm not an idiot. Windows 7 is good. my shares of AAPL are nervous that several switchers will switch back. MSFT will make a killing on win7 because every corporation in the world that's still on XP will upgrade, and that's a shit-ton of corporations.
You did, in fact, read the part about how difficult it was to go from XP to win7, didn't you. I'm not so sure about world wide corporate acceptance just yet .... we'll see.
The greed of Steve Jobs will be the demise of Apple.
Yea, you wish ... where would Apple be today without SJ ?
Who stole the task bar from Microsoft and named it a DOCK?
TeckDud ..... Take your meds man, you're starting to lose it ... pathetic.
No, and you're absolutely right, the registry is the root of all evil and most of Windows' problems. They need a clean-sheet rewrite that gets rid of the disaster once and for all.
They need to improve on ergonometric and usability, too. Last time I checked, if you want to turn computer off, you still need to hit "start" button first. That's ridiculous.
You do know that macs use the same parts right? Just because they cost more doesn't mean the internals are any different.
If what you're saying is true (it's not btw) then why do used Macs retain a bigger value than a comparably priced PC on ebay or craigslist. hint: all computer parts are NOT created equal.
I guess you have never heard of NeXTStep, which existed years before the task bar appeared in Windows 95. Mac OS X is a re-write of NeXTStep, which included the Dock.
Don't feel bad ... there's a lot of things TeckDud has never heard of.
most of these have nothing to do with the OS
webkit is on windows
HTML5 can be had in any internet browser that supports it. i have 5 installed now. IE, firefox, chrome, safari and opera
GCD is nothing but thread scheduling and MS has the same thing, minus the catchy marketing name. on SL it's useless without appication support.
OpenCL is also on windows as well as CUDA and Stream. and it has nothing to do with the OS
two things Vista and 7 have that SL doesn't is full native 64 bit support and randomizing the memory space for security reasons. my laptop runs native x64 Windows 7 and any "legacy" crap i have a virtual XP machine. MS rewrote virtual PC for WIndows 7 Ultimate where it takes advantage of VT on the CPU and it runs almost as fast as on the bare hardware.
itunes works just fine on Windows 7 x64
Your wrong on almost every account.
First, my point was that Apple is on the forefront of software development. Webkit, HTML5 and LLVM are both examples of heavy involvement from Apple. GCD and OpenCL are at the core of Mac OS X and for a large part developed and designed by Apple.
Apples state of the art software is the reason for future success. And with Snow Leopard Apple user don't have to wait for a new release to see some rendering applications (in some situations) accelerate a 20 times.
Contrary to your claim, LLVM, GCD and OpenCL have everything to do with the OS. GCD uses the (new) concept of virtual threads and sequential and parallel thread queues to schedule real (OS) threads. This is all part of the kernel. And because of that realtime load balancing can be done.
As a result all cores of the system including GPUs (via OpenCL) can be scheduled by virtual threads and can contribute in all kinds of calculations.
This is a big (I would say brilliant) achievement, especially if you know that with Apples C extension of 'closures' (also brilliant) existing code can be 'plugged in' GCD. So application developers can port there code to GCD with relative ease.
Another important difference between Apple an MS is support for open source and open standards. MS is against HTML5 because this conflicts with its proprietary silverlight. Thats the reason it isn't included in IE8. (As you probably know HTML5 can be used with a plugin, but thats Googles effort.)
And finally, your wrong on 64 bit support. Apples OS is fully 64 bit, kernel, drivers and applications (The 64 bit kernel is not on by default (it is for Mac OS X server), but can be turned on easily.) . But MS 64 bit support is crippled because it has limited support for 64 bit drivers.
J.
Yes, they are so dominate with the 10% market share they've just recently earned after having spent over a decade with somewhere in the neighborhood of 4-6% market share.
Sorry, but until Apple is able to take over the enterprise market (which will probably never happen), they will never have any serious market share outside of a consumer market.
Hmm, yes I was a bit carried away when I used 'dominate'. I guess I had the iPhone in mind.
The enterprise market is a 'problem' for Apple because of the legacy windows hardware. But thats a problem for MS too, because no one wants to upgrade if the application runs ok and the hardware still works.
J.
Who cares where it originated - it who utilzed it first and for how long. Besides, Mossberg states in the review today, if you would READ it,
You were the one who suggested the dock was stolen from the taskbar ... now you have been called on it so just man up and eat it.
I hope that the people milling about 1 infinite loop each day don't share in your attitude, at least as exemplified by this particular post. Rather, I hope they carefully examine the challenges presented by Android, and Win 7, and whatever other new tech development appears on the scene. I hope they study these issues and I hope they craft strategy to remain dominant, because frankly speaking, in this business if you are not advancing, you are retreating. Arrogance almost universally leads to complacency, and that cannot have good outcomes.
You would have an answer to your question if you looked at Apples keynote presentations, instead of SB face.
J.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
It doesn't matter to me that Microsoft has narrowed the gap. I don't care; I'm a Mac user.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
Ok from the sidechair expert, thats really tells me a lot about Windows 7
It doesn't matter to me that Microsoft has narrowed the gap. I don't care; I'm a Mac user.
The problem with Windows 7 is that it's still Windows. People who use it will still have the same problems they've always had with Windows - junky, clunky, cumbersome, etc.
MS has been "narrowing the gap"
As long as the current management is running MS, any product with the MS logo on it will be suspect by default and assumed crap until proven innocent. And I'll be interested to see how Joe Average will do the proving over the course of the next year. It might be fun to start taking bets on how divergent Windows 7 will be from the pre-release reviews and testing. Vista was a complete 180.
Mossberg liked Vista too, when it debuted, including calling it “the best version of Windows Microsoft has produced.”
There’s no question 7 is better than Vista (I mean, that should be a given. Windows sufferers haven't had a decent OS since 2001, and XP was a virus-ridden dog of an OS.) The question is whether 7 is going to get the majority that’s still on XP to upgrade. Probably. But I wouldn’t bet too much on it.
I mean, it'd be one thing if you were making arguments on objective empirical observations, but really the lot of you just come off as brutish as your MS counterparts.
What I can handle is 'I just prefer the GUI on the Mac', or something along those lines. But 98% of the stuff I've read here make it sound like you haven't used Win7 for any length of time. And you guys are tearing down a great OS armed with nothing but opinions and red herrings.
I've worked on, developed for, and supported both platforms for many, many years (typing this on an iMac now), and I think the current iteration of both are just fantastic. I'm hearing the *nix crowd are happy where they're at, so right now it's the best time in history to be a computer fanboy. So please, stop dragging your knuckles and grunting whenever Windows dares to look you in the eyes
Wow, most of you people are completely blind
I mean, it'd be one thing if you were making arguments on objective empirical observations, but really the lot of you just come off as brutish as your MS counterparts.
What I can handle is 'I just prefer the GUI on the Mac', or something along those lines. But 98% of the stuff I've read here make it sound like you haven't used Win7 for any length of time. And you guys are tearing down a great OS armed with nothing but opinions and red herrings.
I've worked on, developed for, and supported both platforms for many, many years (typing this on an iMac now), and I think the current iteration of both are just fantastic. I'm hearing the *nix crowd are happy where they're at, so right now it's the best time in history to be a computer fanboy. So please, stop dragging your knuckles and grunting whenever Windows dares to look you in the eyes
A lot of people do seem to be quite blind in this matter. How can anyone emphatically state that OSX is better than Windows 7 if they have never used Windows 7? Given that the beta releases were free, no one has any excuse for not trying it. If you haven't tried it, don't bash it. Now if you are happy with OSX and have no need for Windows, that is fine, but state that and not that Windows 7 sucks since you have no way of knowing if it actually does.
Mac fanboys, don't be like Windows fanboys (completely ignorant of the other OS). It just doesn't look good.