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: Convince me !

18 Jun 2009   #61
Lebon14

Windows 7 Home Premium x64 SP1
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by ten View Post
So basically, upgrade your hardware so you can get the same performance you are getting now.

Hum... try running a Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz with 2GB of RAM, Win7 and try it also with a Pentium Dual-Core @ same frequency with 1GB of RAM.

I'm positive that the Core 2 Duo will be faster. Sure, it's an upgrade, but a meaningful one

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by CaptainZero
We're all fans of XP,
Not anymore.(I think I've said it enough).


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
18 Jun 2009   #62
Avien

Windows 7 Build 7600|16384- 64bit
 
 

Not sure if this has been said, 7 pages of posts, but the only way we can truly convince you is by installing 7100 or 7229 on your computer so you can see for yourself. Everything else is heresay and personal opinions, you are the only one that can change your mind all the way.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jun 2009   #63
GatoSoft

@Home/Work: Windows 8.1 Enterprise x64
 
 

I must to say that all depends on your hardware configuration. Windows 7 IS NOT less "resource-eater" than Windows XP. It depends mostly on your hardware.
If you're using old hardware, like PCs with 1 GB. of RAM, you'll get better performance with XP than with 7. But, if you've a PC with 1,5 GB. of RAM or more, and a nice processor, nice motherboard's chipset, etc. you'll get much better performance with Windows 7 than with XP, because it takes advantage of new hardware's technologies, thing that Windows XP can't do because it's a mature OS.
Windows XP and his kernel was released 8 years ago and was designed for machines of that times. There's no way that Windows XP can run like Windows Vista or 7 in new PCs, because Microsoft will not compile a new Windows XP kernel for new PCs, because for that is the new operating systems that Microsoft himself created, or not?
Is just as easy to explain as this: Old Windows XP for old PCs; New Windows 7 for new PCs.
I can say that because I'm installing and reinstalling around 5~20 PCs per day, each one of different categories and configurations since 5 years ago, so I think that my experiences have some validity.

Hope it helps somebody to decide the right option.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

19 Jun 2009   #64
bjs53

Win 7, Home Premium
 
 

I appreciate your explanation. It seems reasonable. In fact it is not that kind of issue like long lasting disussion about Linux and Windows - more interesting is that Win 7 works smooth on quite old hardware. In my case it is laptop 5 years old, P4 and 1.25 RAM. Installation is significantly faster (moreover no need to update to SP 2 or SP 3), no need to install many additional drivers (graphic card, audio, lan, wifi, etc). All typical applications work without problem, system is modern, nice, easy to adapt and offers many new convenient solutions. In short, for everyone not sure and asking: should I install and check it - I would say yes.
Regards,
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jun 2009   #65
njel

Windows 7 Build 7232 x64 RC
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by bjs53 View Post
I appreciate your explanation. It seems reasonable. In fact it is not that kind of issue like long lasting disussion about Linux and Windows - more interesting is that Win 7 works smooth on quite old hardware. In my case it is laptop 5 years old, P4 and 1.25 RAM. Installation is significantly faster (moreover no need to update to SP 2 or SP 3), no need to install many additional drivers (graphic card, audio, lan, wifi, etc). All typical applications work without problem, system is modern, nice, easy to adapt and offers many new convenient solutions. In short, for everyone not sure and asking: should I install and check it - I would say yes.
Regards,
Tell that to this guy

Tried installing SoLar's 7260 .iso but i get BSOD

or to this one

https://www.sevenforums.com/general-discussion/13799-rolling-back-xp.html


I am not sure theyl think the same...
My System SpecsSystem Spec
20 Jun 2009   #66
Charles Kane

Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by GatoSoft View Post
Is just as easy to explain as this: Old Windows XP for old PCs; New Windows 7 for new PCs.
Have to disagree - at least a bit! I built my PC on the cheap at least 4 years ago. It was all good quality, but there's no hiding its age, esp the fact that its single core. But it always ran XP OK - no complaints, tho of late things like PhotoshopCS4 started to struggle.

Whilst I haven't run benchmark tests I can say without doubt that everything runs snappier and better on the same rig under Win7! The best example is again PhotoshopCS4. It is absolutely at home. I've worked on top of the line dual core rigs only a year old and my experience there is no better within PSCS4 than on my rig.

What is noticeable is the amount of RAM the system uses - really I should say RESERVES. Its here that 7 is the out and out winner - its not the memory it uses per se but the way it manages that memory.

So its WIN WIN. Old rig - runs better, new rig runs in sync with its hardware.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
20 Jun 2009   #67
bjs53

Win 7, Home Premium
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by njel View Post
Any case may be different - First, I have installed official 7100 RC build. Any leaked version from unknown sources is another story. Second, we all make some experiments with different builds and not final versions and in some cases we find troubles and issues we need to solve. It gives us possiblity to analize how system works, what are advantages and weak points. We exchange our opinions. You may find a lot of valuable advises here. It is great opportunity to learn how his new system works, to compare its behaviour with previous solutions like XP or Vista. There is of course also a room for critic opinion. Thats how we get some knowledge. For some who are not pro - and I am not - it is excellent opportunity to know what I can buy in future.
best regards,
My System SpecsSystem Spec
20 Jun 2009   #68
grouchpunk08

Windows 7 Ultimate retail // Windows 7 build 7264 x64, Vista Home Premium SP2 x64
 
 

Take all of your Vista opinions and throw them out of the window. I never thought vista was *that* bad, but I know people who downright hated it. Windows 7 is by far Microsoft's best operating system. With so much fuss over vista, I guess they decided to get their Sh** in gear and roll out something truly great. But Vista used NT6.0, while 7 uses NT6.1. Also, everyone hated windows me, which was NT5.0 while xp was NT5.1. All of the 'NT*.0' will never be as good as the 'NT*.1'

But yeah. Dual Boot xp and 7 and go crazy

EDIT: Windows 2000 was NT5.0, and IT was the one that was terrible. Mistakenly said Windows ME instead of Windows 2000
My System SpecsSystem Spec
20 Jun 2009   #69
Dzomlija

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by grouchpunk08 View Post
Take all of your Vista opinions and throw them out of the window. I never thought vista was *that* bad, but I know people who downright hated it. Windows 7 is by far Microsoft's best operating system. With so much fuss over vista, I guess they decided to get their Sh** in gear and roll out something truly great. But Vista used NT6.0, while 7 uses NT6.1. Also, everyone hated windows me, which was NT5.0 while xp was NT5.1. All of the 'NT*.0' will never be as good as the 'NT*.1'

But yeah. Dual Boot xp and 7 and go crazy
Actual, Windows ME had nothing to do with NT. Windows ME was based on the Win9x kernel (Windows 95 and Windows 98)

And for the record, out of all the Win9x operating systems released by Microsoft, Windows ME was the one where "they got it right".
My System SpecsSystem Spec
20 Jun 2009   #70
grouchpunk08

Windows 7 Ultimate retail // Windows 7 build 7264 x64, Vista Home Premium SP2 x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Dzomlija View Post
Actual, Windows ME had nothing to do with NT. Windows ME was based on the Win9x kernel (Windows 95 and Windows 98)

And for the record, out of all the Win9x operating systems released by Microsoft, Windows ME was the one where "they got it right".
Well I read the NT5.0 being windows me or 2000 somewhere, i guess it was a bad source. But thats beside the point, I definitely think he should try out Win7

EDIT: Windows 2000 is NT5.0, and windows 2000 was the one that sucked, I mistakenly said windows ME instead of Windows 2000 in my last post. My bad
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Convince me !




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Convince Me - Window Blinds 7
Well, I've been thinking of getting Window Blinds 7 for a while, so I just need someone to convince me with some amazing - unique themes. What is so great about WB? Please post skins. Thanks. ~Joshua~
Software
I am sticking with Vista - convince me otherwise
I have been using Windows Vista x64 for nearly a year and really can't see any real benefit to upgrade to Windows 7, just yet. While initially enthusiastic, my home PC, does what it needs to do. I use it for 2 things mainly. 1) Internet Browsing 2) Civilization 4 modding (see KiwiTT's...
General Discussion
Convince me to try/use Windows 7
I know Windows 7 is still beta, and that might affect some of the criteria I'm about to list, but here goes: I am a Windows XP user who (obviously) skipped Vista. I've been hearing only good things about Windows 7, but I'm still a bit leery. I figure that these forums are full of knowledgeable...
General Discussion


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 13:45.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App