Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista

[Night Hawk]

Well a simple look back in the Windows history shows the pattern seen for new versions until Vista was delayed several times. Due to the large amount of hardware capacity changes seen in that time MS made the mistake of not raising the minimum system requirements ending with everyone running 512mb-1gb systems screaming about performance issues.

After all that and not wanting to see another ME II flop MS then had to take a serious look at refining the next version to meet the average consumer needs for the desktop editions to follow starting with 7. This is one main reason why 7 has been made more widely available with the RCs over needing to sign up for the Vista RC previously in order to reach out to the customer base a bit further.

 

[djfirestorm]

Night Hawk, you still DO NOT GET IT. Stop chirping for Vista. W7 IS NOT A F'N REFINED VISTA KERNEL. VISTA IS NT 5.x, W7 IS NT 6.1. Get it through your head. The coding behind the OS is 100% different than any previous version of Vista. RST101 is somewhat true with regards to the service packs...although results still PROVE that Vista is slower than both XP and W7 regardless of how much ram you use. Comparing different ram does not even give an accurate comparison. Each stick responds in a different way. Speed is mostly about RAM. You need to reuse the exact same chips to compare. Changing the size doesn't work simply because a 1GB stick is completely different than a 2GB stick with regards to timing and latency.
As far as security issues, haha Microsoft propaganda blinded you that Vista is more secure than XP. I fix more Vista machines than XP for security breaks and spyware issues believe it or not.

 

[Win7User512]

I think you will find M$ decided they left it too long between XP and Vista.

They are now planning to release another o/s version every 3 years.

Win 8 by Xmas 2012 - with luck.

That is not because 7 is bad.

It is the product life cycle/business model which generates the most profit for M$.

Perhaps it will help their OS turn around time. They seem to struggle the longer the time between releases.

 

[darkassain]

They seem to struggle the longer the time between releases.

oh so true...

 

[Night Hawk]

Perhaps it will help their OS turn around time. They seem to struggle the longer the time between releases.

You'll a good deal of that has to do with the faster paced turnover of hardwares. You now see desktop model boards with 32gb memory capacities while 7 will only be the 3rd major release seeing 64bit editions. The OS and softwares have sadly fallen behind there.

 

[bodmas]

Night Hawk, you still DO NOT GET IT. Stop chirping for Vista. W7 IS NOT A F'N REFINED VISTA KERNEL. VISTA IS NT 5.x, W7 IS NT 6.1. Get it through your head. The coding behind the OS is 100% different than any previous version of Vista. RST101 is somewhat true with regards to the service packs...although results still PROVE that Vista is slower than both XP and W7 regardless of how much ram you use. Comparing different ram does not even give an accurate comparison. Each stick responds in a different way. Speed is mostly about RAM. You need to reuse the exact same chips to compare. Changing the size doesn't work simply because a 1GB stick is completely different than a 2GB stick with regards to timing and latency.
As far as security issues, haha Microsoft propaganda blinded you that Vista is more secure than XP. I fix more Vista machines than XP for security breaks and spyware issues believe it or not.

kernal of vista is not NT 5.x but it is NT 6.0.
while win7 kernal is NT 6.1 till now.

kernal NT 5.x is of XP

 

[Night Hawk]

And what they both seemed to have missed there is that MS first tool the Vista kernel to start with in order to see that refined in order to come up with the new one for 7. That was expressed some time back by one of their own regular testers.

 

[bodmas]

And what they both seemed to have missed there is that MS first tool the Vista kernel to start with in order to see that refined in order to come up with the new one for 7. That was expressed some time back by one of their own regular testers.

I forgot the original source but as I remember an half year back Steve Balmer himself said that kernal of win7 and vista is almost same but still you will find win7 much different from the vista.

so basically kernal structure of vista and win7 till the build 7100 is the same.

 

[mustang]

hahaha.. okay plz explain...
i have a retarded pc.. p4.. with very old mother board and config..etc etc etc...
probably the first p4
i couldnt even run vista ultimate for 5 mins in that.. and xp was slow but stable...
i installed win7 in that.. and now even have gadgets and desktop change evry hour..
and programs run FASTER THN XP.. AND VISTA BASIC...
i see huuuuugeee diff.. not that small graphic diff thats shown here..

and in my core 2 duo... my pc score just increased from vista to win7 by 2 points from 5.5 to 7
well almost 2)

i looove win7!!!

 

[darkassain]

And what they both seemed to have missed there is that MS first tool the Vista kernel to start with in order to see that refined in order to come up with the new one for 7. That was expressed some time back by one of their own regular testers.

actually the server 08 kernel was used....
minwin was included in server and was brought up (with some more features) to 7....

I forgot the original source but as I remember an half year back Steve Balmer himself said that kernal of win7 and vista is almost same but still you will find win7 much different from the vista.

so basically kernal structure of vista and win7 till the build 7100 is the same.

nope usually it goes from server/corporate to consumer (at least starting with win2000>XP)
7 was based on the server 08 kernel which is based on vista kernel and that was based on the server 03 kernel which is based on the 2000 kernel (as 2000 came at the corporate level workstation and server was the package MS brought up) which is based on the NT 4.0 kernel which is based on NT 3.5 and so on....
so you can say this whole kernel is a "evolution" (as ms will like to say) from both the original NT kernel with the original Windows 9x (1.0 had this taskbar that you see now...) feautures (such as system restore (which was done in ME) and WMP (which was a feature in Win 3.0)
my two cents...

 

[Night Hawk]

The Win 9x kernel was dumped after ME being the last of the Fat based versions. XP then incorporated the NT kernel into it while still retaining a degree of backward compatibility with Fat for use on older Fat16/32 networks.

The largest leap in the line was seen with the long gap between XP and Vista there. Once Vista was perceived as bloat wagon for desktops MS went to work on refining things there in order to see 7 come about while retaining Vista compatibility for most things especially existing device drivers.

The surprize here was seeing XP tuner card drivers work on the 64bit 7 while the Vista updated set for the same model fails every time showing a 3rd party problem not MS fault seen there. The one thing seen now in 7 will make XP users happy when upgrading and finding ways to see all their XP apps working on 7 but not Vista!

 

[torrentg]

I challenge the internet to find a post by Night Hawk that doesn't have some form of seeing in it, past or present tense. lol

Sorry, had to. lol

 

[bodmas]

I challenge the internet to find a post by Night Hawk that doesn't have some form of seeing in it, past or present tense. lol

Sorry, had to. lol

LOL, some times I find my self a pretty dumb. say, I did not get the above post at all..

May be that line is specially for Nighthawk.