Windows 7 -When will you get it?

[dangel]

Its the same as Vista. A few very subtle differences......but otherwise the same.

Actually, it's the same as NT3.51, a few subtle differences..

[matty-hodgson]

1-2% CPU usage while doing nothing isn't idle at all, the OS is stopping the CPU from entering Cn states, that gobbles up battery time and stops the machine from reaching it's full potental battery life.

that's something i NEVER seen happen in Vista, and very rarely happen in XP.

[dangel]

Lots of stuff open, including 7 desktop gadgets, VS2005 * 2, VSS etc etc - left to idle for 20 seconds or so.

[GoNz0]

well having avoided vista i am rather impressed with 7 so far

decent install, rana few updates and put a new nvidia driver on, found the x-fi win7 drivers and so far all seems good.

easy enough to remad the my docs to my other install, the only issue i had is the silly thing didnt dual boot with xp.

its put the boot manager on my data drive for some strange reason..

[TheAnimus]

well having avoided vista i am rather impressed with 7 so far

That is a bit like saying well having avoided the renaissance i'm rather impressed by milton keynes.

[fallen2004]

I never liked vista but im guna have to go to 7 before microsoft kicks every1 off XP. Im guna get it on release and put it on my new comp il build as it would be nice to have directx 10 but not have vista

[Oobie-]

Hopefully it will be released before my title of student is taken away. Otherwise I dont see myself using it.

I havent read all the posts in this thread, but is the general perception of "vista is like win ME and windows 7 is like XP (in terms of good releases) therefore of course its going to be awesome" still applied?

[Splash]

I havent read all the posts in this thread, but is the general perception of "vista is like win ME and windows 7 is like XP (in terms of good releases) therefore of course its going to be awesome" still applied?

Worst analogy. EVAR

XP was not built on any of ME's technologies. It was built on Win2k.

Aside from all the "vista sux0rs" FUD... Win7 is like a refinement of Vista.

[dangel]

Then again, XP was a refinement of 2000 and 7 is a refinement of Vista..

[kalniel]

A 98 to 95 analogy is closer.

[dangel]

No, I think NT5-> NT5.1 and NT6->NT6.1 fit quite well

[Saracen]

I don't think anyone here is denying that tearing up existing network infrastructure to go all modern Vista/2k8 doesn't make a lot of sense. Hell, even XP didn't bring anything new to the table either, nothing has really changed from an infrastructure point of view since Windows 2000. My point is, the majority of "lolz vista is t3h suck" comments is mostly purist drivil. That's not to imply that I think that is what you think, because that would be silly, I know you're far more rational than that, and if I was in your position I wouldn't bother with an enmass upgrade of a company network either, especially with the current economic chaos. At most I'd be experimenting with less costly and more robust alternatives with labs machines.

Sorry for the slow response.

I guess my issue is with the characterisation. I'm sure there are people for whom "lolz vista is t3h suck" is a fair characterisation, but I have a few doubts over "mostly".

Of those that I know, some love Vista. Some don't like it because it's different. But most just don't see what it gives them that makes it worth the cost or hassle.

I've no doubt that some people sticking with XP are purists that don't like Vista because they don't understand what it offers or don't like the visual changes (and I agree with that, as I don't even like XP so set it to Windows Classic view, but it wouldn't stop me if I thought the change worth the cost and effort). But equally, I'm sure there are those that like Vista without understanding what is good about it, but think Aero is 'pretty'. In other words, prefer Vista for reasons equally as fatuous as some people's reasons for not wanting it.

And I'm sure there are those like like the improvements in the driver model, or security, just as there are those that don't like Vista because they don't want a fight finding new drivers for old hardware or don't want to change low-levels apps that work with XP but not Vista.

In other words, I'm not convinced that mostly is a fair description of many of those not seduced by Vista, though I have no doubt it's fair to some.

There seems to be a tribal type thing developing, a bit like PC v Mac, XBox v PS3 or in the photo world, Canon v Nikon. Not all those not willing to switch to Vista are ignorant luddites, just as those that have switched may either have done so for sound reasons, or because of upgraditis or a wish to have the latest trend or fashion. Some but not all of those that prefer Vista have valid reasons, just as some but not all of those that are sticking with XP do.

I'd love to know the basis for "mostly" though. Personal experience? Anecdotal? Statistical study?

[aidanjt]

I'd love to know the basis for "mostly" though. Personal experience? Anecdotal? Statistical study?

Mostly from personal experience. There's also the Mojave 'experiment', while it's more of a marketing generated ad than a ligitmate scientific statistical study up for peer review, it's fairly indicative of general perceptions of Vista. But I agree that your argument has merit regardless.

[format]

That is a bit like saying well having avoided the renaissance i'm rather impressed by milton keynes.

Steady on there chap, let's not go crazy.

[stonecold_jpm]

Got the win 7 beta, not had chance to test it out yet though, sounds better than Vista from reviews though I always imagined that was going to be the case.

oh prob after a few week from the poll question

[toml245]

I'm using the beta now and I like it. I'll probably get it a within a few weeks of its release.