News - Windows 7 hits 600 million sales

[aidanjt]

I see, so why do you care so ardently?

I care about computing and technology in general, and yes, that even includes the state of Windows.

[SineWave]

First: Where do they pull those numbers from, I wonder? Second: I don't see the need to make my computer run slower. I'm perfectly fine with XP. Another 20 years at least. I'm not considered about the OS at all. Why would I? 7 brings nothing new to the table as well 8, regarding *less bugs*, *more performance*, *efficiency of using RAM* and things that *really matter*. Fancy GUI is just not my cup of green and healthy tea. I need a reason, a seriously good reason to upgrade, or rather "upgrade". I mean *seriously good*. I've had enough of advertisements and empty promises. I don't **** dosh, yet...

[SineWave]

Actually scratch all that. I'm using XP just for my audio DAW because I have no other choice. I'm going to be using Ubuntu Linux for the Internet-ing and other stuff anyway... So just scratch all that. I'm tired of MS sheisse. They won't see another penny from me. It's just not worth it. Linux is at least consistent within a chosen distribution, of course, and I don't have to learn where things are from anew every time, and with all the different options in the GUI it should satisfy everyone. From the 3D maniacs, to minimalist users like me. I just want my apps to run properly, nothing else, really. Also, since Android is Linux, and it makes me really happy on my idiotphone, and W8 looks just as a kid's toy, I see Windows as something that's going to nicely go away like a bad nightmare. d= Yeah, we need windows, but only to let some fresh air in!

So what are you talking about then? Windows what? XP was the last MS product worth mentioning. They should have developed it further, iron out the bugs instead of putting a shiny new GUI on the rusty *old* machine. The core is in need of some heavy optimisations, and all they sell is changes in GUI. That's selling snake oil in my book. Well, I'm not stupid... sorry , no go any more. You've had enough years to make it right MS. I think it's about time for something *really new*. Ubuntu all the way. And it's only my choice to go with Ubuntu because I like it. You can go with any of the countless free Linux distributions there are and pay nothing for using an OS.

p.s. don't tell me about Linux being old, as they're constantly developing and optimising the *core*, the kernel of the OS, which is the most important thing to do. Not changing where things are in the control panel. That sheisse just makes me laugh, and lose precious time, as well as changes to the "Start menu". It's just sooo ridiculous! They think people are stupid. Well, maybe they are... but when someone tells me I'm stupid, I kick his arse, and W8 would be the third time MS would be telling me that. Vista, W7, W8. Just shove it, man, enough snake oil already...

[marshalex]

we've had multiple discussions on this within our office and our general consensus is that none of us will upgrade to windows 8 and that there should be 2 versions of windows released. windows 8 (minus all the tablet focused metro interface) and windows metro (exactly what it says on the tin). that way tablets get an easy to use interface and pc users aren't forced into a significant change in the way that they have to work with their pcs. big example of this is server 8, which underneath the poorly laid out start menu and options has some really fantastic features and improvements but the big changes made to the way users interact with the OS will put many (especially business) users off. it seems that windows 8 is destined to be the "crap" of microsofts good-crap os cycle.

[SineWave]

All this "upgrade fever" is 'sheisse", too. There is a proverb, a very wise one that says: look before you jump. People just don't get it...

[crossy]

First: Where do they pull those numbers from, I wonder? Second: I don't see the need to make my computer run slower. I'm perfectly fine with XP. Another 20 years at least. I'm not considered about the OS at all. Why would I? 7 brings nothing new to the table as well 8, regarding *less bugs*, *more performance*, *efficiency of using RAM* and things that *really matter*.

Actually, Windows7 WILL give you those features that you want. Remember that XP is a dead product (as far as MS are concerned) so you're going to have to end up "living with" some pretty nasty drawbacks. As to the GUI - no arguments accepted - it (the Windows7 one) IS quite nice (unlike the Win8 one!). Partner Win7 with an SSD for OS and you'll have a pretty zippy OS.
On the other hand, we all know about XP's "need" to be reinstalled annually or else it starts to go slower, and s.l.o.w.e.r, and s...l...o...w...e...r. Only criticism I've got is that Win7 seems to be more prone to BSOD - both my works laptop (which corporate IT look after) and my own box seem to do that more than I'd like (McAfee being wonderful for hosing an OS apparently).

Actually scratch all that. I'm using XP just for my audio DAW because I have no other choice. I'm going to be using Ubuntu Linux for the Internet-ing and other stuff anyway... From the 3D maniacs, to minimalist users like me. I just want my apps to run properly, nothing else, really.

I'm in the same boat as you - Win7 is only there for some games and a couple of apps that don't play nice with Wine - my main system is Ubuntu (10.04LTS 64bit - no Unity "sheisse" for me!). I cannot be bothered to waste the time primping and preening a Windows system to get it to the level of stability and responsiveness that I've got "out of the box" with Ubuntu. Of course, replacing it is going to be slightly more complex than before - because the latest LTS has been downgraded to Unity. So I'll have to manually "upgrade" it to a GUI that's actually usable.
Again, I've not seen ANYTHING in Win8/Metro that I've said "wow, I'll need to upgrade to get that" - not a single thing.

p.s. don't tell me about Linux being old, as they're constantly developing and optimising the *core*, the kernel of the OS, which is the most important thing to do.

Anyone who complains that Linux is "behind the times" is not someone whose opinion I'd value or even be interested in listening to. Heck, wasn't that a common MS FUD - that "Linux" was continually changing so trying to develop/use it was trying to hit a moving target.
Where Linux scores big time for me is of course that it's a very modular OS. AFAIK you still can't rip out IE from Windows, on the other hand a web browser on Mint, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc is merely a program, and as such has no elevated status. If you've got some component - e.g. a driver - causing problems, then it's not usually rocket science to replace it. And again, here's where I've got serious reservations about Windows8 - from what little I've seen Microsoft seem to be hell bent on producing a system where every component is tightly coupled to every other. So with full Linuxing-cynic mode on I've got to wonder if the "self healing" features in the OS are there because they have to be to keep the Jenga-like conglomeration "flying in formation".
And anyone that says "all Linux users have to recompile their kernels" is a cretin, out of touch, or has some very specific requirements. My main system has been running for more than two years, and in that time I've never had to recompile a kernel. And I'm not alone - apart from Gentoo users - gen'ing kernels seems to be so "last decade".

we've had multiple discussions on this within our office and our general consensus is that none of us will upgrade to windows 8 and that there should be 2 versions of windows released. windows 8 (minus all the tablet focused metro interface) and windows metro (exactly what it says on the tin).

Hmm, I'd be quite happy to settle for "Disable Metro" or "Windows 7 Classic desktop" options in the Win8 install. That's the charge I'd slap (literally!) Microsoft for - their hubris in assuming that "our new way is the only way" - if you want to rollout a "new way" then fine. But unless there's a compelling technical reason then ffs allow the users to have the "old" option so they can transition gently. I can see businesses being really (sarcasm) happy about having to teach users the new interface if/when Win8 rolls out - and personally I can see a lot of big businesses just saying "sod it" and skipping the (unecessary?) expense - especially in the current cost-concious climate.

[aidanjt]

apart from Gentoo users - gen'ing kernels seems to be so "last decade".

Even on Gentoo you can just leave it to the distro's genkernel utility to automatically configure, build, and install a reasonable generic Linux kernel for the manual-shy (who probably wouldn't last long on Gentoo, anyway).

[dangel]

First: Where do they pull those numbers from, I wonder? Second: I don't see the need to make my computer run slower. I'm perfectly fine with XP. Another 20 years at least. I'm not considered about the OS at all. Why would I? 7 brings nothing new to the table as well 8, regarding *less bugs*, *more performance*, *efficiency of using RAM* and things that *really matter*. Fancy GUI is just not my cup of green and healthy tea. I need a reason, a seriously good reason to upgrade, or rather "upgrade". I mean *seriously good*. I've had enough of advertisements and empty promises. I don't **** dosh, yet...

Whilst i'm happy you're OK with XP I'd point out Vista was a major rewrite (because XP's codebase was effectively unmaintainable) and 7 refined it. 7 is immeasurably more stable, more secure, makes use of free RAM for caching etc etc. This fits into "Things that matter". The core changes to the OS in the past few years are a huge step forward compared to XP and seeing it differently is ignoring reality. From XP->8 everything (including the kernel) has seen major advancement.

Whilst your own use case may make staying with XP a good choice for you, what you're stating isn't defensible. A bit odd to hear it in 2012 to be honest! XP was awful compared to modern Windows - which is only to be expected given how much time has past since it was released and much MS as a company have changed to focus on things like security, stability and efficiency (none of which apply to XP).

Anyway, back OT - I'm pretty much OK with W8 - i'm using it full time at work and there's a lot to like outside of the start screen (which apparently is the only change in some people's minds). Whether it's worth the upgrade from 7 will be a personal choice though because 7 is a very good OS anyway and 8 will struggle to convince people to change given it's nowhere near the huge leap forward that a lot of people took from XP to 7. I'm lucky enough not to pay for my MS software (legally mind) so i'm pretty likely to do it right now - there's nothing in 8 that's a blocker for my use cases and I do appreciate some of the new features and enhancements (speed, win2go, new explorer, multi monitor support etc).

[TAKTAK]

currently the operating system on nearly 40 per cent of internet connected devices according to Microsoft figures.

Really?.. Really though?

Smartphones, tablets, digiboxes, smart TVs?

They're all internet connected devices, plus many others..

Plus, 'the operating system'? I have Win 7 and Bodhi running on my laptop, so Win 7 is 'a' operating system on my internet connected device.


40% of PCs yeah sure, but 40% of internet connected devices??