The Fight is on:- Windows 7 or Vista SP2?

[NormCameron]

There is the start of a bitter debate amongst the "experts" as to whether Windows 7 is a genuinely new OS or just Vista SP2

It's Just Vista with Bells

"Test Center benchmarks: Windows 7 unmasked
Measured by runtime specs and performance benchmarks, Windows 7 M3 looks like Vista, and it runs like Vista. Welcome to Windows Vista R2!

* By Randall C. Kennedy
November 10, 2008

It's here! After months of speculation, Windows 7 was finally unveiled last month at Microsoft's Professional Developers Conference (PDC). Through a series of well-orchestrated keynote presentations and supporting breakout sessions, Microsoft walked conference attendees through the highlights of its new desktop OS: better performance, an improved user experience, and some nifty media-sharing features. Overall, Microsoft's pitch was quite compelling, and the PDC crowd was practically salivating at the chance to play with Microsoft's latest and greatest.

Accelerating Virtualized Environments - read this white paper.
» Back to special report: What to expect from Windows 7

But after the stage props came down, and after the projectors finally went cold, attendees were left with a pre-beta copy of something that looked less like a new OS than the repackaging of an old one. At least that was my impression after I started exploring the Windows 7 M3 (Milestone 3) bits that came on my shiny new 160GB Western Digital USB hard disk (one of the better tchotchkes I've received at a conference). As I reported on my Enterprise Desktop blog, the more I dug into Windows 7, the more I saw an OS that looked and felt like a slightly tweaked version of Windows Vista...." read on
Test Center benchmarks: Windows 7 unmasked | InfoWorld | Analysis | 2008-11-10 | By Randall C. Kennedy

Randall is Bogus. Uses Psuedo Science and and false logic.

"Unmasked by Thread Counts

Yesterday, a story made its rounds across the internet. It was picked up by many large news websites, and I'm sure it will be quoted by people until eternity. It was published by a large website, looked all fancy, it had multiple pages - it looked like it was really something. However, anyone with even the remotest bit of knowledge knows that the article was a collection of complete and utter bogus.

The article in question is titled "Windows 7 Unmasked", and in it, author Randall C. Kennedy tries to prove that Windows 7 is Windows Vista. While this may or may not be the case - it's the methods that he used that made me - as someone who enjoyed a strictly scientific education - almost want to poke my eyes out. Let me walk you through some of them.

He starts by using the Windows Performance Monitor tool to look at the kernel included with the Windows 7 PDC build - build 6801. "When comparing Windows versions," Kennedy explains, "it's always good to start with the kernel because this is where the most fundamental changes take place." This is a pretty reasonable starting point. However, he follows up with his findings.

In fact, the kernel in each major new version of the Windows OS has spawned a different, typically higher number of threads. So when I examined Windows 7 and found a nearly identical thread count (97 to 100) for the System process, I knew right away that I was dealing with a minor point-type of release, as opposed to a major update or rewrite. This was not "MinWin," the mythical, streamlined new Windows kernel that promised a clean break with the bloated Vista.

Oh boy. Where on earth do I start...." read on

Unmasked by Counting Threads?


What do you think?

 

[smarteyeball]

I think that regardless of whether it's a 'new' OS or just Vista SP2, it's still the Vista that should have been.

End result=A better OS for all

 

[x3haloed]

If you consider Windows 7 to be Windows Vista R2, then Windows XP is just Windows 2000 R2.:sarc:

 

[davehc]

I have a really heavily customised 64 and 32 bit Vista running. I applied all the tricks and patches available. <since RC2 I have had no bsod's, other than those brought about by my own experiments. Surpluse services etc, have been removed. Vista runs for me faster than XP and is easier to handle. I have installed 7 and run it through its paces. The install was a little faster, but this could be that there are still a few things MS are planning to hang on it.
I am afraid this was where I parted from my fellow critics. Having alonside my Vista machine, on identical computers, I failed to find any mind boggling performance improvements - but wait!
Is this because I have already self configured my Vista into 7? I am inclined to follow the now popular view that 7 is the version of Vista, pre customised, that should have been retailed originally. It would be interesting to hear if other customising freaks, like me, have had the same experience and views.
Not so much SP2, as has been lauded, but maybe SP4!
Another improved feature - It finds the correct drivers more easily and the compatibility options work marvellously. I have even reintroduced some old 98 games for my grandchildren.

 

[echrada]

If you feel that W7 is just a tweaked version of Vista, would you still pay for the new o/s?

 

[NormCameron]

If you consider Windows 7 to be Windows Vista R2, then Windows XP is just Windows 2000 R2.:sarc:

From what I can see Windows 7 is a good solid OS with room to grow, so YES I would.

 

[davehc]

I would, of course, wait for later test releases before. Fact is, I got my Vista OS's from Microsoft free, through the Beta testing, and backed up with a Technet subscription, which I have now had to abandon, because of the cost. I am a pensioner on a very low income and doubt if I would feel my budget would allow the purchase of another OS in my lifetime! As I said, so far I would not even see the justification for it. Messing with Vista, and XP a little, before that, has been an engaging hobby but the bottom line in my environment, would have to be "How much"

 

[skunksmash]

well W7 is NOTHING like vista was in its inception, pre SP1 was a nightmare even with the final build.....

this ''PRE RELEASE'' offering is pretty flawless, there are the odd few programs that W7 don't like but as far as the OS is concerned its solid!!, i think i would buy this on release

SK

 

[davehc]

I ask with genuine interest, not rudeness, as Vista testing became a large part of my life. Can you recall any of the particular nightmares. I have had Vista as my only desktop since, maybe RC1, but certainly from RC2 and the problems have been really few. - Maybe not appropriate to get drawn into a thread like this on a 7 forum?

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

Hello all....

I will buy the final release of Windows 7. The thing is that I really like Vista but sadly it has recently fallen by the wayside.














Later Ted

 

[garysgold]

I will buy W7 on final release. Normally I would wait until the release of SP1 before buying any MS product, but there are several enhancments that for me are 'just what the doctor ordered'. The Libraries are a big hit with me. Shawn has done several tutorials on Libraries if your looking for info. In the past few days I've only booted into Vista to 'check something out'. W7 is working great for me.

Gary

 

[dmex]

How pathetic that article was...Counting threads is NOT proof its Vista R2, I can write 5-10-50 applications and functions that use the same thread for preforming functions, It is not by far a reliable way of reading anything other than CPU usage :sarc:

Randall is Bogus. Uses Psuedo Science and and false logic.

The only people that can compare the amount of changes within Windows is Microsoft, How can you just take the look of a few numbers and the Areo interface and call Windows 7 Vista...Thats the most pathetic excuse of say Windows 7 is VistaRC2 I heve ever heard and I hope people grab their pitchforks and torches and kills his pathetic lies

How can anyone compare an Alpha prebeta OS to one thats been released to manufacturing...the PDC build is Milestone 3, you cant expect many (if any) changes at all this early in the release cycle...

Just another example of Lies about a product by an idiot, He takes a popular belief about Windows 7 then attempts to back up with fiction and presents some poor facts he oviously doesnt understand anything about and skews them in a narrow mided view to try convince everyone its the truth :sarc:

Heres a video about just some changes within Windows 7, If you listen to everything he talks about you will hear about how they had to change I quote "hundreds of Core architecture functions" for the many new improvements and features with Windows 7 from Memory to drivers and more....

Mark Russinovich: Inside Windows 7 | Going Deep | Channel 9

If you consider Windows 7 to be Windows Vista R2, then Windows XP is just Windows 2000 R2.:sarc:

Exactly, If 7 was really just a few minor GUI tweaks Microsoft wouldn't waste billions developing Windows 7 and just skip to Windows 8 and release it as a service pack :sarc:

Looks can and are deceiving, ANYONE that believes Windows 7 is just Vista with a new look will only prove how little they know about Windows and how narrow minded they are and anyone with even the remotest bit of knowledge knows that the article was a collection of complete and utter bogus.

 

[davehc]

Here is a fairer "pro" comparison. As you will see, at this stage the boot up (lot of emphasis on that for some reason) is not so much faster, but even that slight improvement is an indication that MS are working hard to produce something worthwhile. As I understand it, boot times are only a small, insignificant part of the overall package.
Windows Startup Showdown: Windows 7, Vista, and XP Bootup Benchmarks Updated

 

[echrada]

Windows 7 on a pre beta is already better than any other o/s i have tried so as far as I am concerned the proof is in the pudding and nothing is going to dissuade me.

 

[garysgold]

Windows 7 on a pre beta is already better than any other o/s i have tried so as far as I am concerned the proof is in the pudding and nothing is going to dissuade me.

I agree. I also believe that anyone upgrading from XP or earlier is going to have some of the same issues going to 7 as they would have had going to Vista. Vista is a leap and leaps involve a learning curve. W7 is built on Vista and the learning curve is not going to go away. I learned many of those new things in Vista and that has made W7 much easier to use.

Gary

 

[whoosh]

I have run xp and vista in many guises and flavours the service packs made the two systems work far better then prior.
I dont know if windows 7 is a vista clone -the way vista should have been ?
Do know I like it and would buy it if I could afford to

 

[swarfega]

Windows 7 is what vista should have been were Vista not rushed. But I feel with service packs that you are just fixing an existing product already whereas with 7 its a new design philosophy where they have listened to the users and clearly thought about the product.

 

[grumpy40]

The new kernel tells the tale.

 

[Adamd]

Even if Windows 7 was 100% the same as Vista SP2 some people have it so engraved into there heads that Vista just sucks.

You could give them a laptop with Vista SP2 and they would use it for a few minutes and say it sucks. You give them Windows 7 with the "new looks" and they will be like WOW this is great. Even if beyond the eye candy everything was the same it is not going to change what people were already thinking.

Windows 7 is going to be a win. No chance left for Vista even if us users on this from like it like myself lol.

 

[kpo6969]

What fight?
I run both and will continue to do so, and when Win7 goes rtm I will install that and continue to dual-boot. Best of both worlds.
Vista32 SP2 6002.17506.090313
Win7 x86 Ultimate 6.1.7077