Second Thoughts About Windows 7

Well, I see lots of people have stuff to say about this.

I came home about 10 mins ago and I get food sit down at my computer, click on the Start Menu and I get a BSOD...that the 7th one this install....Windows 7 is such a fail for me.
 
Librarian said:
I have a quad with 4gb and for me in my terms of speed, it is slow. It is bloated because it takes up a huge amount of space. I could care less if I have a TB drive or not, an OS should not take up as much space as 7. XP Pro SP3 only takes up 600mb total compared to 7 which takes up what, 4.75gb roughly. That is bloated.

Again as I stated in my last post though, it is a matter of opinion and perspective.
Click to expand...

Then you most have a bunch of background stuff running or something. I am running Vista 64 on a computer with an E5200 @ stock and 2Gb's of 800Mhz and never have to wait for anything OS related. To clarify that, I am an enthusiast and am used to a quad core @ 3.6 and 8GB's of DDR2 1066. The speed difference in OS related tasks(everything except games, folding, rendering, video/photo editing) is unnoticeable.

In this day and age, space is not an issue. Why compress stuff if space is not an issue for anybody with a modern computer? I understand what you're saying, but in perspective to mainstream hard drive sizes from XP's and Vista's respective day and age, the OS actually takes up less % of disk space. Not to mention a lot of that space can be reduced as it is taken up by unneeded software. They probably shouldn't have included it all, but for the once every 6 months I reinstall, it doesn't really bother me. I can see where it could be bothersome, but I spend a few hours on the computer a day anyways.

Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion, but frankly, the benchmarks tell the truth. Vista SP2 and XP SP3 speed differences on the same hardware that is up to Vista's recommended specs are negligible in almost all applications.
 
All of my components are are from 2007 (minus the video card, 2009). I've been running Windows 7 and I like it more than I like XP, and I skipped Vista in favour of XP. Even my puny laptop computer handles 7 no problem.

Have you tried writing down the BSOD codes and researching a little? It may very well be a hardware issue that causes this incompatibility with 7.
 
The only problem I have with Windows 7 is it constantly freeze my computer for no reason./ I made sure my computer was compatible and it is an annoying problem.
 
Hey Squishy, would you mind posting your specs for us? Maybe this will help us better understand your issue & bring a quicker resolution to it. Also if you use an Intel dual-core cpu (doesnt matter what kind), I have a motherboard that may help you out. Only issue is that it only has 1 pci-e slot (its still brand new, not outta the box & has all the stuff that comes w/ the motherboard). Im currently using the same motherboard in my current rig. Just let me know if your interested by PM me please.
 
Wow lol, I am not a windows fan, but I installed windows 7 on my mac pro and didn't run into any problems. Its incompatible with some of my hard ware and freezes a lot. However it doesn't BSOD at all, I mean its like any other release of windows it will eventually be compatible with everything and then a month later they will release windows 8.
 
FreakingHell said:
Then you most have a bunch of background stuff running or something. I am running Vista 64 on a computer with an E5200 @ stock and 2Gb's of 800Mhz and never have to wait for anything OS related. To clarify that, I am an enthusiast and am used to a quad core @ 3.6 and 8GB's of DDR2 1066. The speed difference in OS related tasks(everything except games, folding, rendering, video/photo editing) is unnoticeable.

In this day and age, space is not an issue. Why compress stuff if space is not an issue for anybody with a modern computer? I understand what you're saying, but in perspective to mainstream hard drive sizes from XP's and Vista's respective day and age, the OS actually takes up less % of disk space. Not to mention a lot of that space can be reduced as it is taken up by unneeded software. They probably shouldn't have included it all, but for the once every 6 months I reinstall, it doesn't really bother me. I can see where it could be bothersome, but I spend a few hours on the computer a day anyways.

Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion, but frankly, the benchmarks tell the truth. Vista SP2 and XP SP3 speed differences on the same hardware that is up to Vista's recommended specs are negligible in almost all applications.
Click to expand...

I do understand your point. In most cases it does make sense. I guess my main gripe is that I am used to my nlite version of XP. I think I boot up with only 16 processes and 150mb of ram being used. Since the guy that makes nlite has not had a win7 version out yet I do forget how slow XP was before I "operated" on it.

I disagree with the giant driver cash though, that has not changed since XP. I hope with a "7lite" version I can strip out the majority of the driver cash and starting processes, that should aid the speed, smoothness, and size.

Of course with a discussion about hard drives we could go into large vs. small; seek times depending on what type, etc...but this thread is about win7 so it's not the right place for that form of debate.

My rig is the same speed specs as yours @3.6, just as a comparison.
 
mad pistol said:
I guess this may be because I have very current hardware in my system, but ever since I got Windows 7 64-bit, my system has been extremely stable. The only times I've gotten BSOD's is when I push an overclock too hard, in which case, any OS will crash. Beyond that, I've NEVER had a BSOD related to software.

I've had a couple of programs that are incompatible with Windows 7, even in compatibility mode, but those have been few. For the most part, nearly every program I've put on here works great.

I still think Winodws 7 is far superior to Vista, and is a pretty good upgrade from XP as well.
Click to expand...

Same exact thing

Are you my long lost twin?
 
Well, all you you guys are going to be like WHY DID YOU DO THAT!? But I went ahead and install (drum roll please) WINDOWS VISTA!, I'm dead serious.

I have Windows Vista Home Premium...and no problems, I have sound for the first time in 2 weeks and so far no problems (I never did have problems with Vista so I shouldn't start to) :)
 
Sadly Squishy, I think you're in a minority here. That doesn't at all take away from the problems that you're having, but I wouldn't base your thoughts of the OS on this one situation. Each system is different, and there may be some incompatibilities with the hardware that's causing your problems.

7 is by far the best OS Microsoft has put out since 2000, and to be honest is probably the best OS that they have ever created. Sure it has some shortfalls, but everything does, and 7's are few and far between.
 
trykael said:
Sadly Squishy, I think you're in a minority here. That doesn't at all take away from the problems that you're having, but I wouldn't base your thoughts of the OS on this one situation. Each system is different, and there may be some incompatibilities with the hardware that's causing your problems.

7 is by far the best OS Microsoft has put out since 2000, and to be honest is probably the best OS that they have ever created. Sure it has some shortfalls, but everything does, and 7's are few and far between.
Click to expand...

That is opinion, not fact. It may be the "best" overall since 2K but it comes no where near the stability and efficiency that 2k was.
 
I've been using Windows 7 since it first went into beta and I've never ran into any issues with using it. I've even went as far as testing it out on my netbook and the performance is there.

Honestly you can't compare Windows 7 to 2000. It's not even close to being the same beast. If you would take all of the security improvements and such and put them into Windows 2000, I guarantee that you would see a drop in performance. Sure 2000 was great for its day, but realistically Microsoft's focus has changed out of necessity. Windows is the main operating system for... well the world. That makes it a huge target and as such it has to now include things to prevent it from being home to every hacker in the world.

Improvements come at a price, but you also have to realize that requirements change every day. I mean look at the games of the past. You could get away with a 8MB video card and 64MB of ram. You can't say that just because games back then used so little resources, that they are better than games of today. That would be a laughable accusation, but only because you can see the improvements with your eyes. Not everything Microsoft does is on the surface. Lots of it is behind the scenes stuff. Fine tuning how the operating system runs, improving security, etc.

To say that Windows 7 isn't an improvement over 2000 and XP is flat out wrong. No matter how you look at it, it's wrong.
 
Well, you guys are right, Windows 7 IS better than Vista, for you. For me Vista is that sweet spot OS where everything is in it's place and everything works without any problems.

The only main reason I went to 7 in the first place was because of Direct X 11, but I got that on Vista now and I'm happy. I may have to re-install all my programs but eveyrthing works for me. Which is the MAIN idea here, isn't it?
 
Librarian said:
I have a quad with 4gb and for me in my terms of speed, it is slow. It is bloated because it takes up a huge amount of space. I could care less if I have a TB drive or not, an OS should not take up as much space as 7. XP Pro SP3 only takes up 600mb total compared to 7 which takes up what, 4.75gb roughly. That is bloated.

Again as I stated in my last post though, it is a matter of opinion and perspective.
Click to expand...

not to be rude, but the only reason the OS is so bloated is because of the people trying to install this OS themselves not knowing wth they are doing.

You dont even have to get drivers when you install win 7 (at least in my experience). They are all included on the dvd. You pop it in, and when you finish installing, your computer can access internet, microsoft office, email, etc.

I think windows is so bloated because of all the complaints of inexperienced people trying to install it. Its became "dummyproof". Think back to windows 98. Its based around DOS, so is win 7. DOS is tiny in comparison to windows. But you take a person who cant figure out vista or win 7, theres no chance in hell they will be able to network in 98 (unless they have the know-how of course).

In conclusion, win7 and vista are so large mainly to make it usable for those who dont know what they're doing. If you can read, you can install it and configure it somewhat correctly.

Hope that makes sense.

-Blue
 
I feel bad for all you guys with the problems.

I have been using win7 since the pre-beta more than a year ago. I have had two problems with it. one, punkbuster would not work to save my life. This is not really microsoft's fault tho, as punkbuster in terms of coding, is a piece of garbage. two, tages, a cd security service (much like securom) disabled me from installing my retail versions of STALKER, but the steam versions worked perfectly.

Keep in mind these problems were in beta and were resolved in the RC (release candidate) before actual release.

I have not yet had a hardware problem (besides poor win7 driver support from dell for my laptops, but whats new....), and ran into perhaps a handful (2-5) BSODS in beta, but not 1 since the RC.

So I would guess you have one of four issues.

-Your hardware is incompatible in win7 for some reason (unlikely since its based off the same framework as vista)
-Your hardware is damaged
-You are installing win7 incorrectly or your install files are corrupted.
-Your copy of win7 is cursed

either way, I would get your hardware posted so we could have a look at it.

-Blue
 
I have had Win 7 since the betas and have not had any problems with it. Take into consideration that windows 7 will run better on newer systems than older systems that use to run windows 2000. If it doesn't run well for you, you might want to start planning a budget to get an upgraded computer that will be able to handle it.
 
I got my windows 7 about 2 months ago. I havent had a single problem yet, and its fixed all the problems i had on vista.

Personally, i would love to be on linux for everything, but a lot of things arent supported, so i run it on an older pc.
 
Vista had major compatibility problems for many old plugnplay equipment. It was also very consuming of speed.

Windows 7 is perfect if you do the correct steps to making it that way. First off don't use it with a computer you have had for awhile. But most of all past that do NOT get home premium. Home premium is like ultimate with less features and more process consumption. Professional is the best, it has compatibility fixes with less resources than the other two and every option you need. Ultimate is professional with business and server tools.
 
Hey, I don't get it. I had Loads of problem with Windows XP. They were so bad I went back to 2000. Windows XP was an OS that worked for everybody else in the world.

I had lots of problems with Windows 7 but none with Vista. Windows 7 works for lots of poeple, but Vista didn't. Now I'm back on Vista

I also had no problems with Windows ME, but again, lots of people everywhere had lots of problems with ME.

Is anyone noticing a pattern here? lol :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top