Two month with Seven 7000 x64... back to Vista and ...

[LePoilu]

...hhhooowww that's fast !!

Everybody say that Seven is faster than Vista
Even in built 7000 (public beta) everybody say that Seven run really well.

Today after using Seven 7000 x64 during 2 month I booted my Vista home Premium 32bit.. and my first thought was: Damn Vista is so fast ?!?

I allways loved Vista.. since I stared using it with the Beta2.
I really love Seven .

But at this time, on the same hardware my old Vista installation (something like 18 month without reinstallation, and a motherboard switch few month ago) is really faster than Seven built 7000 x64.

I have exactly the same feeling that I had when I first tried Vista and go back to XP.


So what's the magical thing which make Seven loved by all against the poor Vista :huh:

How many here switch back from Seven to Vista and what your your feeling when you go back to Vista ?

 

[Fizban]

...hhhooowww that's fast !!

Everybody say that Seven is faster than Vista
Even in built 7000 (public beta) everybody say that Seven run really well.

Today after using Seven 7000 x64 during 2 month I booted my Vista home Premium 32bit.. and my first thought was: Damn Vista is so fast ?!?

I allways loved Vista.. since I stared using it with the Beta2.
I really love Seven .

But at this time, on the same hardware my old Vista installation (something like 18 month without reinstallation, and a motherboard switch few month ago) is really faster than Seven built 7000 x64.

I have exactly the same feeling that I had when I first tried Vista and go back to XP.


So what's the magical thing which make Seven loved by all against the poor Vista :huh:

How many here switch back from Seven to Vista and what your your feeling when you go back to Vista ?

I like 7 far more than Vista due to well, UAC isn't a PITA on 7 and it's more stable for me. I do agree on speed though I tested with several benchmarks and x86 Windows Vista Business kicked the **** out of Windows 7 Built 7057 x64 on almost every benchmark known to man.

 

[scrooge]

have you tryed one of the latest builds in win 7?
on my system it cut the boot down alot. with vista it takes almost 2mins just to boot up.
with win 7 build 7057 it takes about 30 to 40 secs. and over all win 7 seems alot faster then vista.
scrooge

 

[Fizban]

have you tryed one of the latest builds in win 7?
on my system it cut the boot down alot. with vista it takes almost 2mins just to boot up.
with win 7 build 7057 it takes about 30 to 40 secs. and over all win 7 seems alot faster then vista.
scrooge

Me or him? Either way, yes I'm using the x64 Build 7057, it can't touch Vista Business. I do believe it boots faster, but on tests like Super Pi and other proc intensive tests Vista Business was faster by a margin on 5-10%.

 

[ukgovsucks]

Interesting thread. I personally find that Windows 7 is running a little faster than Vista in some areas, and in others about the same. However for me, there are 2 BIG reasons why I prefer Windows 7 to anything else....

1. Better compatibility with my software than Vista.
2. Faster than XP 32bit.

Of course then you have the additional nice touches of Windows 7 that makes it that little bit extra special.

So for me a slight speed difference either way, I really couldn't care less. Just want a stable, more compatible, less bloated OS.

 

[Romulinx2]

I used Vista since beta2/rc1/rtm. I loved Vista ultimate x64.

Now since using Windows 7 7000 & above, and learning how the program runs and the way it utilizes minimum resources I am very impressed.
The graphics are not so important, its the way this OS runs on my PC that's important.
So many better features, easier ways to do things. (Lists are around on this forum.)

At the moment build 7057 is more stable than Vista Ultimate. Now that's impressive.
I will be getting RC1 and then look forward to the final release.

 

[sandman]

My Vista Ultimate compared in speed to Windows 7 Super Pi test for the 4m Vista 1.29.879 and 7 was 1.22.019 and for the 16k Vista .690 and 7 .661 with a 8400 processor. Build 7057 Windows 7. I like this version so much not using Vista anymore on this system.

 

[Fizban]

At the moment build 7057 is more stable than Vista Ultimate. Now that's impressive.
I will be getting RC1 and then look forward to the final release.

Same thing in my experience, not sure why so many people seem to be complaining about 7057. I've only seen a BSOD twice and both were my fault not the OS's. (I had overclocked my video card too high.)

 

[Jac]

I think the Windows 7 speedy boot times are smoke and mirrors. Windows loads up and the Start up sound is supposed to signify that the system is ready to go yet 7 has just delayed loading processes to give the impression that the boot time is faster. You still can't really use your system because processes are still being loaded in the background.

Not too much of an issue for me as I rarely shut the system completely off. It's usually in S3 sleep. As for speed issues I really haven't noticed significant noticeable differences between the two and Seven has a few useability features over Vista so I'll stick with it.

 

[Jacee]

I've worked with Vista Premium, Business and Ultimate. I love all three of them. I love Win 7 too, so I will keep it on my main computer and buy the OS when it's retail version comes out.

 

[davehc]

I think the Windows 7 speedy boot times are smoke and mirrors. Windows loads up and the Start up sound is supposed to signify that the system is ready to go yet 7 has just delayed loading processes to give the impression that the boot time is faster. You still can't really use your system because processes are still being loaded in the background. .

Correct. But, if you tune up a Vista installation, taking out superfluous programs from the (MsConfig, for example) startup, and then use an expert, who has already done the homework for you, such as Black Viper (www.blackviper.com/WinVista/servicecfg.htm) you can achieve the same startup speed. In fact, you are partially wrong in one respect, one of the "smoke" effects that MS has evoked, is not to load some of the services at all, until needed. I think they probably referred to Black Vipers suggestions! Another trick is that they are using the onboard memory, from boot, to load processes in parallel.
If you look through the configuration opportunities in Gpedit, you will find that all of the items, without exception, refer to Vista or even XP.
Again, examine the files in the Windows folder, particularly System32. You will not find many changes, apart from the dates, from Vista.
As I stated in some posts months ago, at the first available tries of 7, I honestly believe that 7 is a tuned up Vista.
This is not a bad thing! Vista wrongly received bad publicity. It is a magnificent program. It failed very much by lacking compatibilty with a lot of hardware, and some software. The manufacturers, working with MS, have now had a chance to catch up. 7 has added a couple of new items and moved a few others around, which gives it a fresh appearance. All of these could have been incorporated into Vista, through another monster SP. The only way that Microsft were going to move on from the alleged Vista disaster, was to create something that had a good reception. The 7000 Public release was an outstanding publicity boost. If you gp back to the earlier days of posts, you will see that 60% of the acclaim was for the boot up time. (250 posts on this site alone) What a stroke of genius from Microsoft!!
Memory useage, with, as I allege, the Vista tuneup and removal of superfluous items, is naturally more impressive in its use.
I do not point a suspicious finger at Microsoft. They are, at the end of the tech day, a business organisation. The Vista black shadow had to be removed. What they have done to achieve this, whether my view is right or wrong, is to be applauded.
I will certainly be moving on to 7, as it will save me the weary task of recustomising my Vista OS on every reinstallation

 

[drazenn]

Damn Vista is so fast ?!?

So,if speed is everything what you look at,maybe the best solution for you is to get back to XP

Try to look at this more widely.
Win 7 is OS of new generation if compared to Vista,like Vista was better then XP :sarcI'm not sure how many people would agree with that second part
of sentence,me in the first place).
I tried Vista but uninstalled it after few BSOD's in few hours,and also tried Win7 but didn't even think about uninstalling.

 

[RST101]

...hhhooowww that's fast !!

Everybody say that Seven is faster than Vista
Even in built 7000 (public beta) everybody say that Seven run really well.

Today after using Seven 7000 x64 during 2 month I booted my Vista home Premium 32bit.. and my first thought was: Damn Vista is so fast ?!?

I allways loved Vista.. since I stared using it with the Beta2.
I really love Seven .

But at this time, on the same hardware my old Vista installation (something like 18 month without reinstallation, and a motherboard switch few month ago) is really faster than Seven built 7000 x64.

I have exactly the same feeling that I had when I first tried Vista and go back to XP.


So what's the magical thing which make Seven loved by all against the poor Vista :huh:

How many here switch back from Seven to Vista and what your your feeling when you go back to Vista ?

you obviously aint set up proper then cos seven eats vista. I also admired vista more than xp which I think is bland and lifeless so don't think im one of those vista bhaters cos im not, but i do think seven kills all other os's.

 

[Decca]

Absolutely hated Vista...
Windows 7 is much better.
Vista reminds me of Windows ME - a stop gap OS released between major builds.

Decca

 

[Fizban]

you obviously aint set up proper then cos seven eats vista. I also admired vista more than xp which I think is bland and lifeless so don't think im one of those vista bhaters cos im not, but i do think seven kills all other os's.

No no, fast is Free-BsD

 

[zone23]

Vista and 7 on my PC run about the same, although 7 idles with lower CPU usage. I love Vista always have.

Its funny now when I go back to vista everything works, kinda like how it felt when I used to go from vista to xp. Evolution.

 

[zone23]

No no, fast is Free-BsD

Free-BsD is awesome..... AS A ROUTER FIREWALL. HAHAHAH!!!

Lets step back.. key word FREE in this case equals crap.

I don't think anyone on this form is going to be switching to a undeveloped Linux.

 

[Fizban]

Free-BsD is awesome..... AS A ROUTER FIREWALL. HAHAHAH!!!

Lets step back.. key word FREE in this case equals crap.

I don't think anyone on this form is going to be switching to a undeveloped Linux.

Err? Free equals crap? Most linux distributions are anything but crap.

 

[kpo6969]

I am dual-booting Vista SP2 and Win7 7057 at the moment.
There is nothing wrong with Vista and Win7 is as good and getting better.
Both also run about the same for me (great).
Main difference I see is Win7 uses about 5% less system memory and caches less.

 

[napilopez]

I think sometimes people forget that different software runs differently on different hardware. Some people might be better off speed wise with vista. Me? No way. I had an extremely optimized vista isntall, and 7 is still palpably quicker.

Also, please don't get toooo caught up with benchmarks, remember that in the end benchmarks are only there to help give an assessmant for ultimate real world performance. I wouldn't mind if 7 got 1000 points less in a certain benchmark than vista, so long as it ran tangibly quicker, which it does for me. Very noticeably quicker