ninjageek Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 Now the big hype is on windows 7. Will it be another flop like vista?? I think the 2 big problems with vista was the price and the ability to clone xp to look and act like vista. Many said no way could you put glass effect in xp. Sure ya can and there is a free program to achive just that. When windows 7 gets close, many will just start working on cloning xp to look and act like that release. I guess I should add it takes a pretty hefty computer to fun vista full blast. I think, that people will just avoid it like they did with vista. Clone xp to look and act like it, and save some money on another release that will not be needed. I thing I hated the most about vista, was the price and it wanting to take over your computer. Be inresting to see if gates and microsoft learned there lesson. I just feel sorry for the people that went out and paid full price for vista, and got it on a computer from wallmart. Myself, I HATED the fact it was such a pain to dual boot xp and vista, and unable to edit the boot ini file to fix it. You would think microsoft would of atleast got the dual boot right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 I added a poll to this... And Yes I think windows 7 will be a flop like vista. Why because either way you cut it, it will still be windows vista. All thats going to happen is, MS will add some of the stuff that was suppose to be in vista to windows 7, and they will take the stuff apple added to leopard, and whatever they do with 10.6. But it will still be vista. Which if you ask me is really stupid, they are going to be changing the kernel some but not much. MS did come up with this great new core for windows called minwin, which is quite amazing its only about 25mb and has all the features of the full OS kernel, but they are not going to use it this time around, because oh developers wont be happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 Well, if you go by MS's history, and their normal patterns, Windows 7 should not be a flop, but a large success. Only time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 Well, if you go by MS's history, and their normal patterns, Windows 7 should not be a flop, but a large success. Only time will tell. Well generally intermediate releases do pretty well. at least win98 did well. But with XP there wasn't a intermediate release, vista was a big one, so we really don't know if that will work again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 what about me...everyone loved me all i know is i want my xp back...but i'll hang tight with what i have and wait for the good one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 The way its looking now, I would have to say Windows 7 will be an intermediate release, especially if its going to come out next year.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark06 Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 By the time ppl look at the winmin they will realize that some linux distros are that small and have lots of apps i hope more linux support comes out of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 For the life of me I still don't any issues, or why someone would hate vista, unless you don't have the hardware to support it. Maybe I'm not using vista often enough, or running it " full blast " , what features can I turn on that are not set by default that will " push " my hardware that you people speak of ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buntz Posted June 6, 2008 CID Share Posted June 6, 2008 For the life of me I still don't any issues, or why someone would hate vista, unless you don't have the hardware to support it. Maybe I'm not using vista often enough, or running it " full blast " , what features can I turn on that are not set by default that will " push " my hardware that you people speak of ? I would like a answer to this question too. I have Vista running on two computer and I have had no problems with either computer. My laptop is a $800.00 HP with a AMD X2 mobile [ TL-62 @ 2.1 GHz ] with 4 GB of ram, Nvidia Geforce 7150M internal graphic and a 250 GB harddrive, running Vista Home Premium 64 bit. My desktop is a Intel Xeon X3350 overclocked to 3.5 GHz and watercooled. It also has 4 GB of ram, a Nvidia 9800 GX2 graphic card on a Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS4 motherboard and 2 x 74 GB harddrive. It running Vista Ultimate 64 bit. The only time I had problems was when I overclock it too much. Turn the overclock down and it ran Prime 95 for 19 hours on all four core at the same time before I turn it off with no errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tikitom Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 Three things about this thread: The OP buys his putes at walmart and his biggest vista gripe is the cost. Conclusion: He's poor The one who added the poll has no concept of objective polling. He preloaded it with "a flop like vista" Vista is not a flop and is at a better adoption rate since release than XP was in the same time period. I was a beta tester for XP and for Vista. I find it amusing that whenever a new version comes out the masses cry about how the previous was better, then over time adopt the newer version and learn it so when the next gen comes along they can cry about how what they currently have is better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 tikitom windows vista is a flop, everyone knows it, even MS does. Steve ballmer has even gone on to stay vista a "work in progress" And they are pushing up windows 7 because vista is really bad, and they know it. You have to have 4GB of ram for the damn thing to perform decently, and that is just wrong. It took them 5 years to come out with the second worst OS ever. Vista may have "good" sales numbers but what MS won't tell you is how many people actually reverted back to XP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 Three things about this thread: The OP buys his putes at walmart and his biggest vista gripe is the cost. Conclusion: He's poor The one who added the poll has no concept of objective polling. He preloaded it with "a flop like vista" Vista is not a flop and is at a better adoption rate since release than XP was in the same time period. I was a beta tester for XP and for Vista. I find it amusing that whenever a new version comes out the masses cry about how the previous was better, then over time adopt the newer version and learn it so when the next gen comes along they can cry about how what they currently have is better Very interesting deductions indeed. Just a side note, sales are always good when they are installed on most new computers. Not necessarily by choice always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tikitom Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 tikitom windows vista is a flop, everyone knows it, even MS does. Steve ballmer has even gone on to stay vista a "work in progress" And they are pushing up windows 7 because vista is really bad, and they know it. You have to have 4GB of ram for the damn thing to perform decently, and that is just wrong. It took them 5 years to come out with the second worst OS ever. Vista may have "good" sales numbers but what MS won't tell you is how many people actually reverted back to XP. It was designed for 2gb and runs very well on it. Have you priced memory lately? I can get 2 gigs for less than it costs to fill my gas tank.. Not kidding, my car takes 91 or better and that just hit $4.71 here. again with the vista is a flop opnion stated as a fact. That is not a fact that is an opnion and to state "everybody knows it" is a complete fallacy. Jeez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 It was designed for 2gb and runs very well on it. Have you priced memory lately? I can get 2 gigs for less than it costs to fill my gas tank.. Not kidding, my car takes 91 or better and that just hit $4.71 here. again with the vista is a flop opnion stated as a fact. That is not a fact that is an opnion and to state "everybody knows it" is a complete fallacy. Jeez Memory has been extremely cheap for the past 3 years, that doesn't mean that the OS should need 4GB to run right. 1GB works, and 2GB works, but it still runs like shit. even with 4GB it doesn't really run the way it should. 8GB of ram is a good spot. Why, because the OS is massive, and they put some stupid half assed "let's just cache everything in ram" in, they didn't think it through. The UI is over done, and not optimized correctly So again it performs like shit with your average graphics card, unless you go for 4GB of ram. The OS is over done, the code is not optimized correctly, and MS didn't think it through. There is no reason why you should even need 2GB to make it work well. It should be fine with 1GB of ram, because that is what the average notebook comes with. But its not. And when for the first year of vista, you could only have 2GB of ram in your average notebook, so you couldn't even get it to perform the way it should. Microsoft Fucked up, and they know it. Its a overpriced, fucked up OS, that kills your battery life on your notebook, needs a crap ton of ram too run right, doesn't play games very well, nvidia can't seem to get good drivers for it, it has the most fucked up security policies every, oh and your printer probably wont work with it. Its the worst modern OS you can get hands down. Microsoft knows its a total flop, business aren't moving too it, and if it wasn't they wouldn't be pushing windows 7 so hard so early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tikitom Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 this is starting to bore. It needs 2GB minimum, it needs a dual or quad core processor, it needs a 512mb dx10 video card. That's what it was designed for and that's where it runs as it should. If you haven't noticed it's mid 2008 not 2001. we're not running p3's or p4's anymore. Dual core and 1GB ram is standard on even entry level pc's. dx10 cards are cheap and that is the current standard. Personally I want my OS to be optimized for current hardware. My ipod nano has 8GBs and it cost $200. Big ram, big hard drives and multicore processors are not for the hardcore PC's anymore, they are the standard and that is what vista is there for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 Even with current hardware its slow. And have you ever read the vista requirements? Because it doesn't need DX10 like you say, Aero is DX9. It shouldn't even need that. Some linux distros pull off the same and better effects but can do it on 1/3 the power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tikitom Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 Even with current hardware its slow. And have you ever read the vista requirements? Because it doesn't need DX10 like you say, Aero is DX9. It shouldn't even need that. Some linux distros pull off the same and better effects but can do it on 1/3 the power. it needs dx10 to run it's best and obviously to run current games which again are designed for dx10 aero runs just fine on dx9 vid. Name one pc or laptop that is in a current product line that doesn't at least have dx9 capability. Are you really throwing linux out there? Your mac os has better market penetration than linux. It's irrelevant for the mass market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 it needs dx10 to run it's best and obviously to run current games which again are designed for dx10 aero runs just fine on dx9 vid. Name one pc or laptop that is in a current product line that doesn't at least have dx9 capability. Are you really throwing linux out there? Your mac os has better market penetration than linux. It's irrelevant for the mass market. No windows vista does not need DX10 too run its best. DX10 is only there for games. Not one part of the vista UI will take any advantage of DX10, its 1000% DX9. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 welcome tikitom... enjoy ur stay come back often...new name huh peepers?? this is a valid pole with a valid question...worded pretty much the only way it could be worded...to me anyway... i don't like vista...just cuz i don't like it...no probs...just don't like it...so to me it's a flop...yep that's my opinion...i know nothing about this windows 7 but it has to be better than this... i don't have a dual core or a quad core...not necessary for me at this point...but it doesn't cause problems...i just don't like it any one that does...u must be more technical than me...so for now i wait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlucardHS Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 well this thread is mildly entertaining Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark06 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 it needs dx10 to run it's best and obviously to run current games which again are designed for dx10 aero runs just fine on dx9 vid. Name one pc or laptop that is in a current product line that doesn't at least have dx9 capability. Are you really throwing linux out there? Your mac os has better market penetration than linux. It's irrelevant for the mass market. Linux use has gone up in the last few months mostly due to windows vista being to much to handle for most computers pre windows vista Yeah most new pc can support it but hey i have a 1.8 ghz pc with a gig of ram it ran horrible in vista im back to xp dual boot with fandora I got a vista notebook and it runs horrible the battery runs down in about an hour plus it was a 1k notebook and i cant run aero effects on it only thing i like in vista is the wireless built in program other than that in really sucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 The main problem with Vista is 3rd party driver support, which has greatly improved, but not good enough for me. I couldn't use my Belkin Wireless N1 adapter with it, because it would shut off every few minutes in Vista. That's the only reason I'm not using it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 7, 2008 CID Share Posted June 7, 2008 The main problem with Vista is 3rd party driver support, which has greatly improved, but not good enough for me. I couldn't use my Belkin Wireless N1 adapter with it, because it would shut off every few minutes in Vista. That's the only reason I'm not using it. I had that same problem with my windows notebook. And could never figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted June 8, 2008 CID Share Posted June 8, 2008 I had that same problem with my windows notebook. And could never figure it out. With the Belkin, or just wireless in general? I think it was an Atheros driver issue, that was fixed in a hardware revision. Belkin stopped updating drivers for the one I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted June 8, 2008 CID Share Posted June 8, 2008 For one thing windows will never really be a flop, at least not financially, there are way too many people out there that have no clue other than " oooh lookie pretty colors " . I also think there are millions more who would say " Linux , wtf is that again ? " . And half as many that say " I don't want to have to learn a whole new system by getting a mac ". And I have also heard them say, " I would have to throw out all my software from windows , and then buy all new for the mac " ( mostly untrue anymore ). If nothing else , this is what will keep the box stores, and dell/ gateway ect... mass licensing windows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.