W7 vs Vista

7 was never intended to noticeably outperform Vista on a reasonable machine - and it doesn't.

The point of 7 is that it runs well on lower spec machines.

M$ got a fright when net/ note things started appearing with
Linux.

If the general public uses Linux and is happy with it - that is the end of M$ dominance.

The public at large doesn't know there is a viable alternative.

M$ wants to keep it that way.

Now they have something that will work well on net/ note, /whatever they call them next.

Shouldn't be too hard to get their "partners" to supply the machines with 7.

Linux disappears off the shelves - the Public stay ignorant - M$ retains it's market dominance.

That's business.

wysiwyg said:

Probably but you'd need a large bank loan.

I'm talking average.

I agree, some of the new desktops are really powerful and need some space in the case and fans for cooling.

For myself, I have both Vista Home Premium 32-bit and Seven 7100 RC and hell, I can tell the difference in booting.

The shut down is considerably faster on Seven.

Some stuff is faster on Vista while some other are in Seven.

Seven uses MUCH less RAM in my case...
Now I'm running Firefox, Windows Live Messenger, Mozilla Sunbird, foobar2000, mIRC, Steam and NOD32. Windows 7 uses ~775MB of RAM. Note that I disabled no Windows services. Vista would use around 1GB of RAM for the same thing! Wow...

Anyway, my opinion.

No, they don't know.

Many people I ask have never heard of it.

Of the few who have heard the name - most don't know anything about it, how to get it, etc. Moreover, they are not interested.

What comes with the machine is what they use.

Many don't even know the name of the o/s they are currently using.

M$ were definitely very concerned about the emergence of Linux on machines generally available to the public - and they were right to be.

Their market dominance is not due to Windows being superior ( it may be, but that is not the reason for the monopoly position) - it is due to clever business strategy - and being in the right place at the time.

Keeping the public ignorant of a viable alternative is what matters here.

If M$ had just kept Vista and phased out XP - they would have nothing to put on the net/note etc.

Hundreds of millions of people would be using a non microsoft o/s.

They can't afford for that to happen.

That is what 7 is for.

SIW2 said:

7 was never intended to noticeably outperform Vista on a reasonable machine - and it doesn't.

Well, I am a Noob but I sure noticed a hellacious difference between the two of them.

I really could care less about the eye candy stuff that Vista brings that may not be on 7, I also understand the other side of the token, the majority of the people who will use a computer love eye candy and care very little about performance... until they have used the thing for a while that is!

SIW2 said:

The point of 7 is that it runs well on lower spec machines.

And how is this a "Bad Thing" when it comes to choosing between the two OSs?

SIW2 said:

If the general public uses Linux and is happy with it - that is the end of M$ dominance.

I hardly doubt this is the case but, knowing how Big Corps think, they would want zero competition from anybody.

SIW2 said:

The public at large doesn't know there is a viable alternative.

This is also true for the most part. Heck, I would probably think that if you put 2 notebooks with two different OS that act similarly, the vast majority of user wouldn't notice a difference.

Hi,

It's not a bad thing.

In fact , M$ have done a great job with with 7 - they have nipped and tucked to make it work on lower spec machines , and haven't lost anything in the process.

Anybody faced with the choice of buying Vista or 7 would likely choose 7.

Those who already have Vista on a reasonable machine, and can't notice any improvement, may not want to rush out and buy it.

I see no difference in performance between the two - like many others. In fact Vista boots considerably faster on my machine - despite having a lot more programs installed.

Your perception may be different - it's a free (ish) world.

SIW2 said:

7 was never intended to noticeably outperform Vista on a reasonable machine - and it doesn't.

The point of 7 is that it runs well on lower spec machines.

M$ got a fright when net/ note things started appearing with
Linux.

If the general public uses Linux and is happy with it - that is the end of M$ dominance.

The public at large doesn't know there is a viable alternative.

M$ wants to keep it that way.

Now they have something that will work well on net/ note, /whatever they call them next.

Shouldn't be too hard to get their "partners" to supply the machines with 7.

Linux disappears off the shelves - the Public stay ignorant - M$ retains it's market dominance.

That's business.

excellent point. i agree with you