|
Post by philbarker on Oct 24, 2009 8:06:52 GMT
I have just spent the best part of the last 2 days installing and getting to know Windows 7.
Generally speaking it is a lot faster than Vista and boots and shuts down much more quickly. My computer, using Vista, was down to snail pace, so that’s why I have upgraded so quickly.
Windows 7 upgrade only upgrade’s Vista settings so your computer is pretty much the same afterwards – most, if not all your programs and settings are there and working. You will probably have to uninstall your anti-virus to install correctly and then get a new one that runs Windows 7. It took a long time to do the upgrade as I have lots of stuff on my hard drive.
You can’t upgrade XP in the same way and have to do a clean install, which is fairly quick but then you have to set about re-installing all your software and settings manually.
Would I recommend Windows 7? – Yes, but a lot of patience is needed.
|
|
|
Post by asimmd on Oct 24, 2009 9:45:59 GMT
Hi Phil
Are you saying that you don't need to do a clean install if upgrading from Vista?
What about an Internet Browser,does it use your existing I.E 7?
Alan
|
|
|
Post by Cruachan on Oct 24, 2009 11:50:55 GMT
Hi Phil,
"You can’t upgrade XP in the same way and have to do a clean install, which is fairly quick but then you have to set about re-installing all your software and settings manually."
...which is precisely why, barring unforseen circumstances, I'll be sticking with XP for the forseeable.
IMHO Microsoft missed a trick (once again?) here by deliberately ignoring the needs of existing XP users (and I'm ignoring their lame attempt to appease users like me by providing an XP emulation with Windows 7) by failing to provide a bullet proof upgrade path.
Vista, in the end, proved to be something of a disaster. Windows 7 is now what Vista should have been, but is it now too late? I do wonder.
I imagine that the bulk of users are still on XP and some, like me, with very complex, highly configured and well performing stable installations will be dreading the day when they will have to start over. In fact, there is still no real incentive to do so as Microsoft will be providing ongoing support for XP until 2014.
I suspect the early adopters of Windows 7 will be those who always have to have the latest software and those purchasing new PCs who have little choice and will want Vista off their machines at the earliest opportunity.
Good as Windows 7 seems to be, never mind Joe Public I predict Microsoft may be in for a hard time ahead trying to convince all those businesses out there to change once again and this could prove to be a real problem for them commercially.
The only realistic way around this issue is to create an additional partition, if you have the space, and install Windows 7 on that. This is far from being ideal from the performance point of view but by providing a dual boot arrangement you can, over a period of time, move everything over. I don't think I'll bother. To expensive for something I don't really need right now and too much hassle. Who needs it?
Mike
|
|
|
Post by philbarker on Oct 24, 2009 12:28:50 GMT
Alan
Windows 7 comes with Internet Explorer 8. But it does not have Windows Mail (Vista) or Outlook Express (XP). W7 has Windows Live Mail - similar to both though.
You do not have to do a clean install and W7 upgrades Vista, so you are left with nearly all your old programs and settings. When I say nearly, I had to uninstall ITunes and Virgin PC Guard. Also it was not compatible with my partition image program Acronis. On install W7 tells you what it definitely does not install and those programs it might have a problem with. It said it would have a problem with my sound card drivers but after re-installing them it is OK. Some of the programs I run are quite old and they are OK. Please feel free to ask anything else you are not certain about and if I covered it doing my installation, I'll certainly let you know.
Phil
|
|
|
Post by philbarker on Oct 24, 2009 12:45:43 GMT
Mike
I am certainly in agreement with what you have said. When I upgraded to Vista, XP was running very slowly on my machine. I did also upgrade my motherboard at the same time but have not done so for Windows 7.
One of the main reasons I upgraded so quickly to W7, was because the thought of having to re-install everything from a clean install would be a nightmare. So if you are happily running XP you should certainly stay with it for the time being and put of the nightmare for as long as poss!! A few years ago when XP went pear-shaped on me for some reason, I re-installed the image and succeeded in losing most of my documents and mp3s etc as the ghost image re-partitioned the whole drive which previously had 3 partitions. Since then I have kept the main OS on one 80 GB HDD, so if it goes down all my docs etc are safely stored on either another of my internal HDDs or on external HDDs.
Phil
|
|
|
Post by graeme on Oct 24, 2009 23:06:48 GMT
So if you are happily running XP you should certainly stay with it for the time being and put of the nightmare for as long as poss!! Yes indeed - very good advice. Changing to a new version of the OS is a potential source of a whole heap of problems (as many people who jumped on the Vista bandwaggon discovered to their cost) even with a fresh install. It has always been my practice to never install v1 of anything that was going to be important to me. I always wait for others, who don't run a business and enjoy being at the bleeding edge of technology, to find all the initial and inevitable bugs on my behalf. Never is such an approach more valid than in the case of an OS. It took me several years to move from 95 to 98 and then from 98 to XP (which, is some ways, is not as relaible as 98 was). Because of all the problems some of my peers suffered with Vista, I never installed it - although I did briefly run it on a spare machine, only to find it was useless for my purposes. Personally, I shall not be going anywhere near Win7 for at least a year, if not longer (depending how it pans out for those brave enough to leap in now). I certainly wouldn't even think about it until after Win7 SP1 has been issued - which it certainly will be.
|
|
|
Post by grip on Oct 24, 2009 23:33:21 GMT
Hi All,
Perish the thought of having to do a clean install, I've used XP for years. XP is Microsofts' resource eating security sieve, and they still issue updates on a very regular basis after all these years.
I never downgraded to Vista because I have some peripherals that they gave no driver support for, and I can't imagine Windows 7 will be any different.
I think I would rather learn to use Linux than buy another Microsoft product.
Kind regards
grip
|
|
|
Post by graeme on Oct 25, 2009 5:10:03 GMT
I think I would rather learn to use Linux than buy another Microsoft product. I know the feeling. Unfortunately, you might find there is even less support for your peripherals that you would have got from Vista. Like it or not, Microsoft is the de facto standard for PC's. Nothing else is going to give you anything like the variety of hard or software that's available for a Microsoft platform - and that includes Apple.
|
|
|
Post by didier on Oct 25, 2009 8:38:45 GMT
Using DIY assembled PCs, I can install any OS I want, and my choice is to keep using Windows 2000 Pro, although I am considering to upgrade to XP, as more and more software new versions can't be installed with W2K. Vista will not be an option ! Being limited to IE6 with W2K is not a problem, as I am using Firefox 3.5.
Didier
|
|
|
Post by BarryH on Oct 25, 2009 12:11:33 GMT
Hi Didier,
Good to hear you say "Vista will not be an option". So many have installed it and found so many problems with different recording software programmes.
Cheers Barry
|
|
|
Post by sheendigs on Oct 25, 2009 18:34:12 GMT
Hi There Just a quick note.. It seems that one cannot execute a great number of Windows XP applications in Windows XP Mode for the 'Home Premium Edition' The professional and Integral edition allows that. Naturally The professional version is more expensive than the Home Premium version. The Integral version more expensive than the professional..Hum! A way..to make you pay more. I will wait for a year and see if it drops. Sheendigs
|
|
|
Post by graeme on Oct 26, 2009 8:27:00 GMT
It seems that one cannot execute a great number of Windows XP applications in Windows XP Mode for the 'Home Premium Edition' The professional and Integral edition allows that. I rather think that Microsoft have shot themselves in the foot by having different 'versions' of an OS. All it has done is confuse their customers, many of whom really have little idea of the differences between the versions - so they play safe and stay with what they already have.
|
|
|
Post by Cruachan on Oct 27, 2009 17:27:15 GMT
Hi sheendigs, " It seems that one cannot execute a great number of Windows XP applications in Windows XP Mode for the 'Home Premium Edition' The professional and Integral edition allows that." ...and that's not the end of the story: www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2346464,00.asp The relevant bit follows: To install XPM, you'll need the right combination of hardware and software. Your hardware must include a CPU and motherboard that supports Hardware Virtualization Technology, sometimes known as VT-d, AMD-V, or Vanderpool. Most middle- and high-end systems sold in the past two years should be safe, but not all, and even some quad-core CPUs don't support the necessary technology.I think you are very wise to wait. Regards, Mike
|
|
|
Post by Cruachan on Oct 27, 2009 17:37:56 GMT
Some sane and sensible advice: www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2354488,00.asp The only bit I take issue with is the sentence that states: " People who have Windows XP can't upgrade, which is generally fine; their machines tend to be getting too old anyway." This is likely to apply to a great many folk, but not everyone by a long stretch. My PC is a home/custom build and while it may not be the latest and greatest it remains a very good performer. One of my interests is simulation, especially simming of the flight variety, and my ASRock 939Dual-SATA2 (AM2CPU Board), AMD Athlon 64X2 6400+ (BE,3200MHz,Windsor),Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro, 2GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC2-6400 4-4-4-12(2T) (Dual Channel), NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB (DDR3) (ForceWare 182.08 WHQL) does just fine thank you very much. I doubt whether Windows 7 has much to offer me right now other than a great deal of hassle and time spent reinstalling everything. Mike
|
|
|
Post by twang46 on Oct 27, 2009 17:49:52 GMT
Using DIY assembled PCs, I can install any OS I want, and my choice is to keep using Windows 2000 Pro, although I am considering to upgrade to XP, as more and more software new versions can't be installed with W2K. Vista will not be an option ! Being limited to IE6 with W2K is not a problem, as I am using Firefox 3.5. Didier I'm with you on this one Didier & will hang on to win 2000Pro as long as is practical, as most of the software I use is several years old now & I'm unlikely to update to the current versions in the foreseeable future. Wasn't there a song about the Emperor's new clothes that may be relevant ? Cheers Dick
|
|
|
Post by dobroman on Oct 31, 2009 16:34:32 GMT
Hi All,
I am running an Apple Mac, and have just loaded Windows 7 (using Parallels), without any (apparent) problems at all. Also running Windows programmes without any apparent problems . . . get the best of both worlds then!!!
Regards
Dobroman
|
|