Windows 7 beta

[ebdoradz]

Originally Posted by enaberif

Windows Vista and Windows 7 just prove to people if it ain't broke don't fix it.

thats true with Vista ...

so far for the 2 days i've pass on Win 7 i would say its the same has vista...

but like i said so far i like it better then Vista because you dont have those "gadget" and it looks to be faster...

so far i like it but if it ain't broke don't fix it.

i better like the idea to move to Windows 7... then moving to windows Vista.

both os so far need to be tweak for maximum performance and this is was i find annoying ... but don't forget enaberif that XP need to be tweak a bit too.... but its nothing compare to windows Vista or 7

EDIT : the gadgets dont seems to works whatever i do to try using them ... and the temp preview of the windows when you pass over it in the taskbar dont work either, its only showing a black square EVEN if i have untick the option "show temporary preview" in the control panel ....

[Nodscene]

I'm going to play around with it as soon as I can get a 64bit version of it. My boss handed me the MCTS book for Vista so I don't have a choice really haha. I figure since Windows 7 is basically Vista it will be good enough.

[DarKStar]

Originally Posted by Squeetard

Well, I just installed Far cry 2 and am getting 2fps faster in dx10 than I was with xp dx9.

The task manager shows more than xp's.

Install it and try it yourself, I highly recommend it.

That is not a good comparaison - How about comapring Far Cry 2 VISTA DX10 against DX10 in Windows 7 - and besides, it's pointless right now to run such tests on an OS running in debug mode with premature drivers - and Far Cry 2 is not exactly the best showoff of DX10.

[DarKStar]

Originally Posted by enaberif

This is installed within a Virtual Machine with just over 1gb of ram. OS install size is 8.1gb.

LOL - Holy CHrist ! 25% memory usage ? All that waste for useless features - My VISTA runs on 15-16% at most, ULTIMATE version, classic theme / high performance mode. You can probably bring that number down by removing all the unecessary services and crap at startup. That's insane.

8 GB ? Yeah that's even more than VISTA Ultimate FULL isntall FFS !

I'd like to ask all you Windows 7 users right now, since I won't bother installing it until I can do so LEGALy (when M$ sends me the e-mail) - Is it true that unlike VISTA, you cannot use CLASSIC Windows theme, you are STUCk with the new interface ? That would really suck ! EVERY version windows I used has had the classic theme, can anybody confirm this ? Can you remove all the shit and make your desktop look like Windows 98's classic plain desktop theme ? yeah I'm old fashioned I hate the looks of new interfaces, :)

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by DarKStar

LOL - Holy CHrist ! 25% memory usage ? All that waste for useless features - My VISTA runs on 15-16% at most, ULTIMATE version, classic theme / high performance mode. You can probably bring that number down by removing all the unecessary services and crap at startup. That's insane.

8 GB ? Yeah that's even more than VISTA Ultimate FULL isntall FFS !

I'd like to ask all you Windows 7 users right now, since I won't bother installing it until I can do so LEGALy (when M$ sends me the e-mail) - Is it true that unlike VISTA, you cannot use CLASSIC Windows theme, you are STUCk with the new interface ? That would really suck ! EVERY version windows I used has had the classic theme, can anybody confirm this ? Can you remove all the shit and make your desktop look like Windows 98's classic plain desktop theme ? yeah I'm old fashioned I hate the looks of new interfaces, :)

Classic interface is there just not the classic menu; so you get 1/2 of it and lose the other half.

Very annoying.

[Jonwall]

Originally Posted by DarKStar

LOL - Holy CHrist ! 25% memory usage ? All that waste for useless features - My VISTA runs on 15-16% at most, ULTIMATE version, classic theme / high performance mode. You can probably bring that number down by removing all the unecessary services and crap at startup. That's insane.

8 GB ? Yeah that's even more than VISTA Ultimate FULL isntall FFS !

I'd like to ask all you Windows 7 users right now, since I won't bother installing it until I can do so LEGALy (when M$ sends me the e-mail) - Is it true that unlike VISTA, you cannot use CLASSIC Windows theme, you are STUCk with the new interface ? That would really suck ! EVERY version windows I used has had the classic theme, can anybody confirm this ? Can you remove all the shit and make your desktop look like Windows 98's classic plain desktop theme ? yeah I'm old fashioned I hate the looks of new interfaces, :)

This is what i dont get... MOST people have 2gb+ of ram, those that would be running vista and win7 anyways, and most people have at least a 250gb hdd, maybe 160gb on a laptop. Why NOT make use of this? Why should we constantly be minimizing the footprint of everything when year after year the hardware is just getting better and better. Really whats the point in 4gb of ram if youre going to use an os that uses like 200mb of it?

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by Jonwall

This is what i dont get... MOST people have 2gb+ of ram, those that would be running vista and win7 anyways, and most people have at least a 250gb hdd, maybe 160gb on a laptop. Why NOT make use of this? Why should we constantly be minimizing the footprint of everything when year after year the hardware is just getting better and better. Really whats the point in 4gb of ram if youre going to use an os that uses like 200mb of it?

Why does a OS have to have so much crap installed that will never used by most people? Where on the 7th version of Windows and yet we still are dealing with an OS that has to come as a complete package. Why can't they take a section out of the Linux textbook and learn what a modular kernel and OS is?

People want things to be fast and quick not slow and bloated. People want to see their 4gb of memory and quad core cpus work as efficiently as they can.

Have two options..

Option 1 = default OS installation; perfect for the people who don't care
Option 2 = You select what you want installed; don't want Windows Defender installed PERFECT! We won't. etc.

I honestly miss the days of installing Windows 98 when you were allowed to select components you wanted installed gone are those days just like a lot of the functionality of a good OS.

[sswilson]

Originally Posted by Jonwall

This is what i dont get... MOST people have 2gb+ of ram, those that would be running vista and win7 anyways, and most people have at least a 250gb hdd, maybe 160gb on a laptop. Why NOT make use of this? Why should we constantly be minimizing the footprint of everything when year after year the hardware is just getting better and better. Really whats the point in 4gb of ram if youre going to use an os that uses like 200mb of it?

Most people figure that the extra memory we're installing in our rigs should be available for apps while multi-tasking rather than taken up by system resources. We don't build computers to run an OS, we build them to run apps.

If (and it's a big if) it can be demonstrated that background OS services will speed up my apps I wouldn't mind sacrificing some resources to them. Until that time though... I expect my OS (and always-on background apps) to have the smallest possible footprint.

[sswilson]

Originally Posted by Jonwall

This is what i dont get... MOST people have 2gb+ of ram, those that would be running vista and win7 anyways, and most people have at least a 250gb hdd, maybe 160gb on a laptop. Why NOT make use of this? Why should we constantly be minimizing the footprint of everything when year after year the hardware is just getting better and better. Really whats the point in 4gb of ram if youre going to use an os that uses like 200mb of it?

This is a long-time gripe of mine and (IMHO) one of the reasons we get so much buggy crapware out of the coders these days. Too much emphasis is being placed on the ability of hardware advances to do error corrections quickly.

The idea of writing tight code is dead with folks spending too much time trying to throw in every possible feature, but not getting any of it completely right. We (users) end up doing the beta work rather than getting something that works out of the box.

[DarKStar]

Originally Posted by enaberif

I honestly miss the days of installing Windows 98 when you were allowed to select components you wanted installed gone are those days just like a lot of the functionality of a good OS.

I've always wondered that myself - And thank goodness for tools like nlite and vlite, that allow you to do just that, and they are FREE. You can save 200-300MB of RAM usage in VISTA just by removing the uneeded JUNK and trimming the fat while not affecting functionality of your OS! I'd rather my RAM be used (every bit of it) for games or applications rather than bloatware.