Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.



Windows 7: So is it just one big upgrade?

17 Dec 2008   #11

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Dave nobody is going to kick you off for your opinions.

My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

17 Dec 2008   #12

Vista and now 7 in 32 and 64 bit.
 
 

Tks. But I will try hard to tone down a little. Mind you, it sometimes helps to jog the thread along to have a black sheep in the midst!
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #13

Windows 7 Build 7077 x64
 
 

I suppose this is the biggest issue for Windows 7 right now, whether it really is a new OS.

While I do agree that for the most part Seven is "what Vista should have been", I do not think it is just an upgrade.

My personal belief is that it differentiates itself enough to be called a new version of the Windows operating system. Why? Because of changes to its usability, for the most part. The new taskbar is just one change, but it is a major one. While us PC savvy folk like us might choose to revert to the old style one(not me personally, but some of us), the fact of the matter is that at least 90% of consumers will end up using the new taskbar, and in itself it changes the way we use windows substantially. Not in the sensethat it is difficult to use(my friend used my PC and she was totally fine using it), but it is definitely a new step, a step up in my book.

Furthermore, there is the inclusion of libraries, which although I'm not sure how much consumers will make use of it, is quite an improvement to the old file system. From testing with my friends, they really like aero peek and put it to use immediately without me even telling them to once they noticed it.

It's not the largest upgrade in the world, but neither should it be: this OS has some of the best compatibility I've seen in an OS transition. I do think MS is trying to cover up for the disdain people have for vista in some way, but I also think they're doing it the right way.

I personally do see substantial performance improvements, and mind you, I had my vista tweaked very well for performance, and even disabled almost all aero effects save transparency and window decorations. I removed gadgets because of performance as well. It was also annoying that whenever I pressed windows+D to reach my desktop, gadgets would dissapear.

Yet Seven runs better at all times for, especially when I have multiple applications(not to mention boot time ^_^). And I haven't disabled a single effect or standard feature of it, in fact only added features and programs that I would normally remove from vista for the quickest performance.

Theres also desktop slideshow, a feature that many I know will appreciate tremendously. And they got rid of the weird dark blueish greenish hue that Vista had throughout the OS(Thank god, I thought it was a horrible color decoration personally).

I just think its too much of a change for a consumer to get through a service pack. Windows XP SP2 is probably the most substantial service pack I've seen(I was too young back in the 95 days so IDR that, if there were any service packs), and it doesnt come close to the upgrade Windows 7 is. SP2 brought some UI improvements and a huge upgrade in security, but again, it didn't change the way I use my computer.

In fact, I honestly feel the transition form Vista to Windows 7 is greater than that from Windows XP to Windows Vista. I personally didn't have any compatibility issues with the transition to Vista, and when it came to everyday use, there was really nothing different save for the start menu and the new arrangement of documents folders. While there were several added features, Aero 3D and pretty window decorations, tons of changes under the hood, a bunch of tweaks and updates, nothing had fundamentally changed the way I used my computer. Nothing made me more productive in my everyday use. Seven makes me more productive, and overall, get at lot less frustrated at my rig.

And mind you, I like Vista, a lot. I just feel it is, in essence, unfinished.

I do just wish they would somehow make it so you can get new window decorations that make use of aero. That would be awesome. I do think a revamped theme would be nice, but its not prioritary. I mean compare windows 95 to 98 to 98SE to ME to 2000, lol. Prettyness wise, they weren't exactly substantially different.


TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read version)
So to summarize, Windows 7 helps escape the societal disdain for Vista, while bringing enough improvements and changes to the Windows OS to call itself a new operating system. The most important reason for it to be called a new OS is that it brings a huge change to the everyday use of our computer, I would actually say the largest one since Windows 95. The new taskbar brings a huge change to useability while not being so difficult to get used to, and Aero has now become more than just prettyness, its actually useful(Snap,peek, preview, shake).

Seven is mostly Vista done right, but it's done so right that it deserves to be called a new OS. You can't simply bring about all the changes in Windows 7 in a service pack, and expect everyone to just be immediately adjusted to them. Not to mention service packs download automatically by default.

Think of it this way. Imagine Windows Seven were just Vista SP3 now. Can you imagine a consumer downloading Vista SP3 overnight, waking up and being like "umm... what happened to my taskbar? What is this??! Its weird! Why are my gadgets all on the desktop now?"

They'd get used to it quick, but thats a pretty darn big change for just a service pack.

Performance wise, for us savvy folk its not much, but I firmly believe Seven>Vista for the average consumer with an untweaked or barely tweaked PC. New Benchmarks also support me. Conversation with a friend for whoom I installed Seven on also support me. (He's not as computer savvy as me, but wanted to try seven after I told him of awesomeness)

While new window decs would be nice, look at windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME, and 2000. They barely changed appearance wise, yet were all rightfully called new OSs

Lol, event he TL;DR version is long.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.


18 Dec 2008   #14

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by davehc View Post
I have high hopes for 7 and have no wish to put it down, before release, as was done with Vista.
However, I am one of the "what Vista should have been" society.
Unfortunately, I obviously have some subtle difefrences on my computers, so cannot comment on the incredible startup speeds that are being achieved. The "new features could esaily be incorporated into Vista, what few there are so far.
Par for par, identical computers with the same software installed, I have no big differences in performance.
Nothing could be more stable than my Vista installation. I have had no bsod's since RC2, except for bungling experiments of my own making. So I am obliged to discount that as an improvement.
I am not a network game player, so cannot vouch for some of the + and- claims in that area.
"Under the hood" . If you look back at earlier OS pre releases,since win95, you will find that is an oft quoted comment which pops up, even on the Microsoft pages. Yes or No- it cannot be disputed except on observation, or if you should have access to the code.
On thing that stands out is , if you have a quick browse through the files, paarticuarly in operational folders such as system32, and comapre it alongside Vista, there do not seem to be any great changes in size.
Lightheartedly, I mean that, in my more neurotic moments, I am thinking that the computer public are being subjected to the biggest con that MS have ever perpetrated and what we are about to get is Vista SP3 rebadged as Windows 7.
As I said at the start, I am optimistic though.
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by davehc View Post
I'm still not getting it. I must be a real low pessimist!
UAC? Well I don't use it.
"It makes working with several documents a lot easier" How is that?
After installing 7, and putting in my encyption and workgroup name, as requested, my installation sets up the network for me, on Vista or 7. I cannot think of an improvement on that.
Undoubtedly, you'll notice differences that others don't, and at the same time, not notice those differences that are being touted. As you yourself said, you do not use UAC - so the difference in being able to *easily* tweak it without any sort of a restart (other than disabling it) means nothing to you. The same can probably be said for other aspects of it as well.

I was the same way with XP - for the first year+ I beta tested I used the Classic interface, and even up to 2 years after it was RTM I used the classic interface - it was only after I learned about patching the uxtheme that I finally started to use custom styles and themes (mostly styles) to make XP look like *I* wanted it to. Now, with Vista, Other than using Vista Glazz to allow for full-screened apps to show glass-like transparency when maximized*, I really have not done anything to Vista either - I just really really *REALLY* like Aero.

But, you also have to remember that a lot of the FUD surrounding Vista is subjective - people feel the OS is slower to load because it does not present them with a login prompt in 25 seconds flat - however, what they forget to realize is that with Vista and the much improved use of file and folder ownership and permissions, there is a lot less need for the extensive software to practice 'safe hex'. In Vista you'll need an AV, a personal FW if you really want one (I prefer not to use one myself), and perhaps an anti-malware (combining anti spam, anti-adware, etc all into a single package) and you're golden - not the 5-7 minimum packages recommended as being the absolute necessity to run XP efficiently....

Furthermore, your setup sounds like it is completely atypical from a standard user's setup - most users connect to a non-corporate router with multifunctional capabilities, and then get access to the next via broadband or dialup - so for them the intricacies of networking are lost - they just "press the connect button on the LinkSys router" to set up their wireless, or else plug in the machine and "It's off to the races." You go through some setup to have your network set up the way it is suppose to be configured, a *managed* network, unlike most of these folks - and that is a very very different animal.

Finally, comparing the stability of a RTM OS and a pre-beta OS is simply not fair - instability is to be *expected* as code is re-written, removed, appended, etc. Someone with your background obviously will not have major problems with any OS that is presented to them - but most users out there will not see it like that - they will use the OS to about 5-10% of its capabilities and then report that this is the "Best. OS. Ever." Only technical minded people will really see the Windows 7 OS as what it *really* is - and what it is *not*.

Finally, as for under the hood - yeah, M$ has used it a lot (and some would say pejoratively)... However, it is *very* obvious with jsut a little looking around at some of the more detailed aspects that there is a lot going on here that is different from Vista. You gotta remember, major changes under the hood don't meant a completely new engine and transmission - converting a car to Cold Air Intake, modifying the headers for increased flow, adding a turbo or supercharger, all will make *significant* changes to the car under the hood, whereas it is overall, only a small change to the car itself when taken in the totality of it.

Same can be said of Windows 7 - the code is simply faster and seems to be relatively stable in a short amount of time - my biggest regret now is ever buying a Vista upgrade at the ridiculously high price that I did - I should have simply waited and come to Windows 7, as I would have saved a lot of money and a few headaches when testing it on my older machine. But, overall, it not only *looks* it acts slick - and the enhancements go far beyond just aesthetics.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by dsljay View Post
I have had a chance to play with Windows 7 a little. I have to say that it is much more then an upgrade.

Personally, I love the new taskbar. It makes working with several documents a lot easier. I also find the UAC is much improved and will be liked a lot better by the normal users. Networking home computers has had a major change. It is now a lot easier.

Also look at the caculator. It has pretty much been the same since it was added to the Windows environment. It has finally been fine tuned with some additional useful features added.

Granted, it was prebeta that I used, so I am sure that their will be some more changes. I am very much looking forward to the first public beta, the RC and the final release.
I like some aspects of the new intelliBar (or whatever they are calling it now), but I see me disabling some aspects of it pretty quickly - I am becoming more and more fond of RocketDock.....

The new calc I like, but I need about a month with this OS (I currently only have about maybe 2 weeks of experience, and I was taking finals during that time so that means really only 1 week to play with it seriously) and I am missing out on a lot of features and shortcuts and such....

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by dsljay View Post
For users at home and users that are novice when it comes to computers, they leave the UAC on. It has been fine tuned and should not pop up as much. Not everyone is computer smart.

As far as networking, I was refering to home networking. It will be easier for users that want to connect their in home computers together. Granted, networking isn't that hard for people with experiance, but I think it is a good advancement for people who may not know enough to connect home computers together.
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by hethoofd View Post
I have to agree with dave to some degree. Even though I like the new stuff in 7, I won't buy it. It doesn't have enough new stuff to be worth the price.
I have to disagree with you on one major aspect- I am *definitely* buying this one.....

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by napilopez View Post
I suppose this is the biggest issue for Windows 7 right now, whether it really is a new OS.

While I do agree that for the most part Seven is "what Vista should have been", I do not think it is just an upgrade.

My personal belief is that it differentiates itself enough to be called a new version of the Windows operating system. Why? Because of changes to its usability, for the most part. The new taskbar is just one change, but it is a major one. While us PC savvy folk like us might choose to revert to the old style one(not me personally, but some of us), the fact of the matter is that at least 90% of consumers will end up using the new taskbar, and in itself it changes the way we use windows substantially. Not in the sensethat it is difficult to use(my friend used my PC and she was totally fine using it), but it is definitely a new step, a step up in my book.

Furthermore, there is the inclusion of libraries, which although I'm not sure how much consumers will make use of it, is quite an improvement to the old file system. From testing with my friends, they really like aero peek and put it to use immediately without me even telling them to once they noticed it.

It's not the largest upgrade in the world, but neither should it be: this OS has some of the best compatibility I've seen in an OS transition. I do think MS is trying to cover up for the disdain people have for vista in some way, but I also think they're doing it the right way.

I personally do see substantial performance improvements, and mind you, I had my vista tweaked very well for performance, and even disabled almost all aero effects save transparency and window decorations. I removed gadgets because of performance as well. It was also annoying that whenever I pressed windows+D to reach my desktop, gadgets would dissapear.

Yet Seven runs better at all times for, especially when I have multiple applications(not to mention boot time ^_^). And I haven't disabled a single effect or standard feature of it, in fact only added features and programs that I would normally remove from vista for the quickest performance.

Theres also desktop slideshow, a feature that many I know will appreciate tremendously. And they got rid of the weird dark blueish greenish hue that Vista had throughout the OS(Thank god, I thought it was a horrible color decoration personally).

I just think its too much of a change for a consumer to get through a service pack. Windows XP SP2 is probably the most substantial service pack I've seen(I was too young back in the 95 days so IDR that, if there were any service packs), and it doesnt come close to the upgrade Windows 7 is. SP2 brought some UI improvements and a huge upgrade in security, but again, it didn't change the way I use my computer.

In fact, I honestly feel the transition form Vista to Windows 7 is greater than that from Windows XP to Windows Vista. I personally didn't have any compatibility issues with the transition to Vista, and when it came to everyday use, there was really nothing different save for the start menu and the new arrangement of documents folders. While there were several added features, Aero 3D and pretty window decorations, tons of changes under the hood, a bunch of tweaks and updates, nothing had fundamentally changed the way I used my computer. Nothing made me more productive in my everyday use. Seven makes me more productive, and overall, get at lot less frustrated at my rig.

And mind you, I like Vista, a lot. I just feel it is, in essence, unfinished.

I do just wish they would somehow make it so you can get new window decorations that make use of aero. That would be awesome. I do think a revamped theme would be nice, but its not prioritary. I mean compare windows 95 to 98 to 98SE to ME to 2000, lol. Prettyness wise, they weren't exactly substantially different.


TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read version)
So to summarize, Windows 7 helps escape the societal disdain for Vista, while bringing enough improvements and changes to the Windows OS to call itself a new operating system. The most important reason for it to be called a new OS is that it brings a huge change to the everyday use of our computer, I would actually say the largest one since Windows 95. The new taskbar brings a huge change to useability while not being so difficult to get used to, and Aero has now become more than just prettyness, its actually useful(Snap,peek, preview, shake).

Seven is mostly Vista done right, but it's done so right that it deserves to be called a new OS. You can't simply bring about all the changes in Windows 7 in a service pack, and expect everyone to just be immediately adjusted to them. Not to mention service packs download automatically by default.

Think of it this way. Imagine Windows Seven were just Vista SP3 now. Can you imagine a consumer downloading Vista SP3 overnight, waking up and being like "umm... what happened to my taskbar? What is this??! Its weird! Why are my gadgets all on the desktop now?"

They'd get used to it quick, but thats a pretty darn big change for just a service pack.

Performance wise, for us savvy folk its not much, but I firmly believe Seven>Vista for the average consumer with an untweaked or barely tweaked PC. New Benchmarks also support me. Conversation with a friend for whoom I installed Seven on also support me. (He's not as computer savvy as me, but wanted to try seven after I told him of awesomeness)

While new window decs would be nice, look at windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME, and 2000. They barely changed appearance wise, yet were all rightfully called new OSs

Lol, event he TL;DR version is long.
I can't argue with any one thing (not that I was arguing with dave, either)...in fact, I want to commend you on such a well thought out and well written post - I have the distinct feeling that you and I see more eye to eye on this one than most folks....
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #15

Windows 7 Ult x64(x2), HomePrem x32(x4), Server 08 (+VM), 08 R2 (VM) , SuSe 11.2 (VM), XP 32 (VM)
 
 

good job nailopez on such a thoughtful post
i believe i am pondering the same question
to call this an R2 version or a full-fledged OS
and i belive your post convinced me
good job on that nailopez
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #16

Windows 7 Build 7077 x64
 
 

Lol thanks guys!

I must also agree with you johndalt in that I do believe I will actually be purchasing Windows 7. For previous OSs, I would either just get them from a friend who got a new PC, or wait till I bought a new computer. This time, if I don't have a new PC by then, I would actually buy windows 7 pretty gladly(not to mention that I'm actually old enough to but my own OS now XD).

I orginally was only gonna write a couple of lines, but I just finished finals too, so I decided "ahh what the heck", and wrote out a more thorough explanation =P.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #17

Windows 7 Ult x64(x2), HomePrem x32(x4), Server 08 (+VM), 08 R2 (VM) , SuSe 11.2 (VM), XP 32 (VM)
 
 

lol i hear ya i still have my computer science final to do and then im done...
but by that time imma have a multi touch tablet with 7!!!!...
it would get even sweeter if it had a duo core or quad....
but i guess hp is teaming up with AMD (at least on mainstream tablets)
so oh well..
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #18

 

I might add that Vista cant be used on Netbooks or lower end hardware while Windows 7 has had quite a bit of success here already.

I saw someone using a Pentium4, 2.8ghz with 1gb DDR2-400mhz ram, 5500FX Nvidia GPU, running Windows 7 and he says Windows 7 has way better performance on his system than he was able to get from using Vista...He also said he switched it to his Main OS

The other comments are people using Windows7 on Netbooks and Tablets and they have also mentioned the huge Improvements over Vista in that regard.

I cant and will not believe Windows 7 is just Vista SP3 or RC2 because looking at the hundreds of changes (New Taskbar, including Hyper-V and VHD booting anyone?(just to name a few)) Just show its actually a Major release.

Going from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95 was a Major upgrade yet they used the same Codebase for everything and Microsoft is doing the same here but using the Vista codebase...

Also...During Widnows 7 setup you can actually create a VHD and install Windows 7 inside that VHD, My Windows 7 Partition only has a VHD file, no ProgramFiles, Windows or user directory's...Nothing but one VHD file thats loaded by the bootloader and Seven`s Kernel yet everything is functioning like these files actually exist on the HDD even though I cant see them unless I mount the VHD...That in in itself is an insane new feature opening up a ton of new possibility`s because I can boot another VHD while running Windows 7 or boot it naively or have two or three VHDs setup for different purposes like Gaming or Programming and still have them all accessible and usable from any booted VHD or non booted VHD.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #19

Windows 7 Ult x64(x2), HomePrem x32(x4), Server 08 (+VM), 08 R2 (VM) , SuSe 11.2 (VM), XP 32 (VM)
 
 

wow dmex....lol
the way i see it....
its more of a combination of vista and server 2008 (most of these features are in MS server 08 series)
of course the kernel and the speed improvements are more than enough to call this a new os
(wont go in UI improvements as its been discussed)

ive been having these features in server 08 for a sometime but to have it in a consumer (server well its for server...lol) is a great move by ms
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Dec 2008   #20

Windows 7 Build 7077 x64
 
 

Haha, I agree dmex. My PC isn't ancient, but the general trend is that 7 runs better on systems less powerful. My WEI is 3.6... And it all runs better on Windows 7. I'm sure those with more powerful systems notice less of a difference. However, I find the fact that I don't even get significant slowdown when I'm doing heavy editing in Sony Vegas and have a gazillion apps open is wonderful. Normally I would disable aero and window composition in such cases for Vista, but not so for Seven.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 So is it just one big upgrade?





Thread Tools




Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:27 PM.
Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App
  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33