Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
RubenX
The Drifters
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 14:15:00 -
[1]
Edited by: RubenX on 19/01/2011 14:17:31 Things like browsing the file system or working your networking settings, etc... is Win7 more similar to Vista or to Win XP?
Also, what's the difference between Win7 Home/Pro/Ultimate?
|
Vogue
Skynet Nexus
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 14:59:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Vogue on 19/01/2011 15:00:00 Windows Vista was beta for Windows 7. Both of them have a different interface to Windows XP. I still use XP on an old Laptop and I replaced Vista on my dads laptop with XP. Shipping Vista and Windows 7 with laptops that have 1GB RAM is daft. XP is ideal for older PC kit.
Its worth mentioning that SSD TRIM is not supported by XP and won't be.
Wiki blurb:-
In computing, a TRIM command allows an operating system to inform a solid-state drive which blocks of data are no longer considered in use and can be wiped internally. TRIM was introduced soon after SSDs started to become an affordable alternative for traditional hard disks as permanent storage in PCs. Because low-level operation of SSDs differs significantly from traditional hard disks (see details below), the typical way in which operating systems handle operations like deletes and formats (not explicitly communicating the involved sectors/pages to the underlying storage medium) resulted in unanticipated progressive performance degradation of write operations on SSDs.[1] TRIM enables the SSD to handle garbage collection overhead, that would otherwise significantly slow down future write operations to the involved blocks, in advance.[2]
.................................................. One man with courage is a majority
|
Keiran Trehart
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 15:22:00 -
[3]
To me, it feels more like XP, with more of Vista's features.
|
Corozan Aspinall
Party Time Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 16:15:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Corozan Aspinall on 19/01/2011 16:15:21
As long as you have 2gb of ram and a dedicated GPU made in the last 3-4 years Win7 is a great step up from Xp in general functionality. Its definitely more like Vista (obviously) than Xp but don't let that deter you if you have a modern machine.
If you don't, don't even think about it tbh. Xp will be faster in every scenario.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 16:39:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Corozan Aspinall Xp will be faster in every scenario.
Not always true.
Win7 has much, much less problems with bootup slowdown than XP. After 6 months of XP my comp was taking 2-3 mins to boot up. Same hardware with Win7 and I'm constantly at ~1min bootup max, even a year later.
Also, Win7 performs better on low end machines than XP does last I checked, especially laptops. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
|
Implying Implications
Minmatar Autistic Sharks Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 16:54:00 -
[6]
Windows 7 is Windows Vista version 2. > |
Brujo Loco
Amarr Brujeria Teologica
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 16:59:00 -
[7]
Go LINUX ... you can even play eve on it and do most of work related stuff too. Since all I do is Play EVE/LOTRO (yes you can run LOTRO on Linux) I use Linux some of the time, rest is me booting crap Win XP for some old games I got from STEAM. --- Viva VENEZUELA!!! Archipelago Theory
|
Vogue
Skynet Nexus
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 17:06:00 -
[8]
Bleugh Linux is so involved. For me 80% of stuff I need to do in Linux I can do but its the other 20% that requires so much tweaking and googling multiple websites. Wireless LAN is typical - I got a windows driver working with ndiswrapper but I gave up as I could not find a gui tool that would not auto-negotiate security protocols. And I tried all the manual conceivable permutations.
If want to use Linux as a webserver\forums, etc platform then its worthwhile. But myself for day to day desktop stuff I cba.
.................................................. One man with courage is a majority
|
Brujo Loco
Amarr Brujeria Teologica
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 17:15:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Vogue Bleugh Linux is so involved. For me 80% of stuff I need to do in Linux I can do but its the other 20% that requires so much tweaking and googling multiple websites. Wireless LAN is typical - I got a windows driver working with ndiswrapper but I gave up as I could not find a gui tool that would not auto-negotiate security protocols. And I tried all the manual conceivable permutations.
If want to use Linux as a webserver\forums, etc platform then its worthwhile. But myself for day to day desktop stuff I cba.
Hmmm Ironically enough I consider booting from a pendrive in a HD-less netbook and not having an actual HD to save stuff on, manually input passwords for wireless networks and shut down and forget platforms the beauty of such systems.
Oh well I must admit, yeah, Linux is not for everyone, but hey, Can't beat free
Back on topic tho, go Win7, cant go wrong with it, since its more a modified and better version of Vista. --- Viva VENEZUELA!!! Archipelago Theory
|
Corozan Aspinall
Party Time Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 17:31:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Blane Xero
Also, Win7 performs better on low end machines than XP does last I checked, especially laptops.
Can't agree with that one tbh. It runs like crap on integrated graphics unless you turn off aero - which looks like crap. Also you need at least 2gb of ram and forget Atoms etc. Nah XP for netbooks imho. I have installed Win7 on my Samsugn nc230 but it just didn't have the zip I was used to with Xp.
That said Win 7 is, without a doubt, way better than Xp in every area if you can/are willing to shoe horn it on to a lower end machine.
|
|
DarkXale
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 18:37:00 -
[11]
Edited by: DarkXale on 19/01/2011 18:39:19
Originally by: RubenX Things like browsing the file system or working your networking settings, etc... is Win7 more similar to Vista or to Win XP?
Also, what's the difference between Win7 Home/Pro/Ultimate?
1) Much closer to Vista than XP. 2) Mostly secondary features. Above Home Premium, those are virtually never used by home users. (Yes including 'pro gamers' 'overclockers' and so on) If you don't want Remote Desktop hosting functionality, XP Mode, ability to join a Windows Server Domain, demand the ability to configure and enforce Group Policy settings, Bitlocker, access to the SUA (Subsystem for UNIX Application), or the ability to use more than 16GB of RAM - or don't even know what the hell I was talking about here - then you don't need more than Home Premium.
|
Feilamya
Pain Elemental
|
Posted - 2011.01.19 20:39:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Brujo Loco Oh well I must admit, yeah, Linux is not for everyone, but hey, Can't beat free
That's true. Not everyone's time is worthless.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |