Second Thoughts About Windows 7

S

Squishy

Thread Junky
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
870
First off this is NOT a tech help thread, otherwise it would be in the TechHelp section, duh.

Ok, I'm having major second thoughts about Windows 7. It's imcompatible with everything, except Steam, it's slow and it's full of holes. I've had on average 5 BSOD's per install (i've re/installed 3 times, 1 32-bit 2 & 3rd install were 64-bit).

The screen keeps cutting in and out (I have the latest 64-bit display drivers) I have no sound (haven't found a sound card that works yet, plus onboard is broken) and I can't print anything cause my printer is not compatible with Windows 7.

Think about that and absord that.

I booted up into 2000 and everything worked...so it's definatly 7.

One more thing, the thought that triggred this was the fact that *deep breath* Windows ME , yes, Windows ME was more stable and reliable than 7 is right now....thats sad.
 
Works perfectly for me. I Havent BSOD'd since i installed. The only problem i've had with 7 was solved by reinstalling my network drivers.
 
I only had problems with the download and installation through that $30 college deal through Digital River. I had to turn their files into an .ISO in command prompt, run to the bookstore and get a blank DVD (flashdrive not big enough to mount :[), then sit and hope it worked as I upgraded.
No regrets or problems since. (Heating problems, as stated in my tech help post, occurred in the Vista era as well.)
 
Ditto with you squishy. Besides the hype it really is not a stable OS yet. MS has still not learned from Vista's disaster and until they do I doubt that 7 will become a great OS. Lots of security holes as well as poor programming continually plagues the modern MS operating systems. I don't think I could go as far as saying ME was better..but it is really not that grand.
 
Librarian said:
Ditto with you squishy. Besides the hype it really is not a stable OS yet. MS has still not learned from Vista's disaster and until they do I doubt that 7 will become a great OS. Lots of security holes as well as poor programming continually plagues the modern MS operating systems. I don't think I could go as far as saying ME was better..but it is really not that grand.
Click to expand...

Vista was a great OS, if not after the first SP, than after the second. 7 will be the same (but it is better than Vista from the start).
 
What kind of system are we talking about here? What hardware?


Just thought I'd ask, if we are talking hardware that has full driver support in 2000, that might show some age on the hardware side. If it's older hardware, I've got lots of hardware sitting around that the companies chose not to keep support for because it's just that, old.


Any hardware for the last few years, I would think, be at least vista compatible by this point which pretty much covers win7 too.


Windows 7 was the first OS I've installed so far that I haven't had to load any driver disks for, runs smooth on any comp I've thrown at it so far.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I had no problems with Vista....It was REALLY slow for me which is why I went to 7.

But I guess Microsoft still hasen't learned to make a great OS cause I'm still glued to Windows 2000 (Yeah I know it's outdated) but EVERYTHING WORKS WITH IT!

For the record, All of my Hardware is new (my Motherboard is the oldest thing, It's 2 years old). They all have Support Ranging from Win 98-Vista...thats not my fault.
 
Last edited:
One machine i purchased years ago came with xp and an upgrade to vista, had a few small problems here n there with it. 4 other machines had no problems with Vista. I am now working on my 6th Windows 7 build with zero issues.
 
win7 is decent for a windows OS but it still has a lot of flaws in my eyes.

if i didn't play games i would never have a windows install or even use it anywhere. hate the OS for general use and it is beyond useless for my work.
 
FreakingHell said:
Vista was a great OS, if not after the first SP, than after the second. 7 will be the same (but it is better than Vista from the start).
Click to expand...

Even after the first SP it is still slow, takes up a huge amount of space, and it still is not smooth sailing.

I too miss 2K. I have one rig still running it and if MS didn't stop supporting it I would still be using it.
 
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.
 
It seems W7 is hit-and-miss for most people.. I've been using it since the very first pre-beta came out, and I've loved it.

Running W7 Ultimate right now, and it's extremely stable. :)
 
Well before I try it full time I will be waiting for a "7lite" release. nlite saved XP and vlite made vista bearable. It does come down to user experience and preference depending on what we expect from our OS.
 
Librarian said:
Even after the first SP it is still slow, takes up a huge amount of space.
Click to expand...

Windows 7 is perfectly fast if you have at least 2Gb's of RAM and a dual core...4GB's and a dual or quad core is pretty much standard now a days. As for taking up a lot of space...I got my 1TB hard drive for $80...

So yes, if you put it on an old computer it will be slow and take up a lot of space. But not on a modern computer, which is what it was designed for.

I only ever had one issue with Vista, and that was fixed pre-SP1.
 
Im running windows 7 ultimate and i've had no problems with it......runs great but i didn't know much of a difference from it over windows Vista except for a little less bugs

Vista ultimate is what i had and it was great also.

Windows 7 is better though and worth it.
 
Passerby said:
win7 is decent for a windows OS but it still has a lot of flaws in my eyes.

if i didn't play games i would never have a windows install or even use it anywhere. hate the OS for general use and it is beyond useless for my work.
Click to expand...

Completely agreed! Linux is much better for most computing, however, emulating windows to play video games is a little too slow. The main reason I use 7 X64 is for the full support for my devices and full use of my memory. Windows XP worked a little better if I wasn't doing multiple things, but would tend to bog down slightly when I was. I would love to use XP x64, but there is nothing that really works under it :(

Windows 7 is a little pickier when it comes to errors than XP or 2000, so if you are overclocking, you should probably go to factory defaults and work your way back up again. I can generally hit 3.4GHz under XP without a bluescreen, but 3.2 is pushing it with 7, as it will blue screen under a wider swath of errors. I usually go to 3 or 3.1 so all my games run stably.

Also, make sure your "latest drivers" are actually written for windows 7. I have seen some issues where the "latest drivers" are actually written for vista, and don't work as well under 7 as the ones included on the install disk! It is sometimes hard to tell which OS they were written for, so update one driver at a time and test for stability, and don't use any drivers that cause problems.
 
stacksondeck said:
I only had problems with the download and installation through that $30 college deal through Digital River. I had to turn their files into an .ISO in command prompt, run to the bookstore and get a blank DVD (flashdrive not big enough to mount :[), then sit and hope it worked as I upgraded.
No regrets or problems since. (Heating problems, as stated in my tech help post, occurred in the Vista era as well.)
Click to expand...

Digital River got me with that one, too :(

My work-a-round: I DL'd the full version of W7x64 from another site & used the key from Digital River. (I emailed them about the problem, and received a form response, "We're sorry and we're working hard to rectify the issues." Uh-Huh.)



I've had no major driver / stability issues. I have an older B&W laser printer I was worried about, but W7 recognized it no problem.

The official Service Pack is due to be released later this year; hopefully, any issues you're still having will be addressed then.
 
FreakingHell said:
Windows 7 is perfectly fast if you have at least 2Gb's of RAM and a dual core...4GB's and a dual or quad core is pretty much standard now a days. As for taking up a lot of space...I got my 1TB hard drive for $80...

So yes, if you put it on an old computer it will be slow and take up a lot of space. But not on a modern computer, which is what it was designed for.

I only ever had one issue with Vista, and that was fixed pre-SP1.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...

Actually, the sad part is both of your numbers are on the low side for a full install.
Microsoft has sadly gotten into the habit of excessively increasing the disk space required for an install. Part of that is the code that enables the new features takes up more space, but another part is they are now installing everything to the hard drive. When you look at the add/remove windows components, you can enable or disable them, but they are still on the hard drive. This can be convinent, such as with drivers, when you need it at some point in the future so you don't have to find the install disk again; however, more often this is just wasted space.

I still use microsoft office 2000 pro for this reason. The full install runs about 300 MB or so. The full install for Office 2007 for the same programs office 2000 has (word, excel, pp, access, outlook), it can run over 5 GB! Besides the size increase, there is no additional functionality I use, and it runs slower. plus... STUPID NEW MENUS!!!
 
I agree about Office 2k. I will never upgrade because all the newer office programs have so much more space required and don't offer me anything else that I need. I agree that my numbers are lower for most people especially with all the apps most people install on their computers. Though it is listed that an avg clean install 7 boot time is around 26s I imagine after the average user loading on programs it will jump will about 45s in most cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top