A week with Windows
In computing terms, I live a double life. At work, I use our corporate IT system which runs on Windows XP; at home, I'm a Mac user and have grown accustomed to the Apple environment. But for the last week, I've been living in a Windows world, preparing for the launch of Microsoft's latest operating system.
I borrowed a small, very expensive Sony Vaio X running Windows 7 - the lightest laptop I've ever used - and tried to do as much of my work as possible using the unfamiliar operating system. I didn't carry out the kind of tests you might find in a grown-up review but then most of us don't do that - we just try to get on with new software and only really notice it when it goes wrong.
If you're used to one operating system, trying another is like moving into a strange house - it may all look very nice, but it's a pain trying to find out how to turn up the central heating or where the glasses are stored. But Windows 7 did at least boot up reasonably fast - Microsoft says it's reduced the "footprint" of the system by 50%, and that's made it more efficient.
The first thing I want to do when I switch on is connect to the internet. I'm used to searching out a wireless signal at the top of a Mac screen but I found, without too much trouble, a similar connection area to the right of the Windows taskbar and was quickly online.
The Start button in the bottom left-hand corner still provides the route to the applications, though the taskbar has become a little like Apple's dock, so you can simply drag frequently-used applications onto it.
I set about opening a browser, e-mail and word processing applications, and tried to work out where I would keep my photos and music. That process somehow feels more integrated on a Mac because of the iLife suite that comes with it. But having dragged a few tracks and pictures off my home network into the Vaio, it was reasonably easy to start playing.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
Microsoft Corporate Vice President Julie Larson-Green says Windows 7 has been prepared better than its predecessor, Vista.
But what's really different about using this operating system? The two things that stood out for me were the ability to hover over open items in the taskbar and see what was happening at a glance - and a function which allows you to snap two open windows alongside each other so that you can compare or maybe transfer information between them.
But here's a funny thing. By the end of the week, I looked at what I was doing on the tiny screen - and found that just about everything involved software not made by Microsoft. So I'd installed the Firefox browser in preference to Internet Explorer, and started writing documents using Google Docs rather than Microsoft Word, and checking my e-mail via Gmail. As for music, I'd installed iTunes, and to feed my social networking needs, I placed Tweetdeck on the taskbar.
I had ended up furnishing my new Windows 7 home with some familiar items from elsewhere - so perhaps the operating system matters less than it once did.
Of course, what is really important to Microsoft is not winning over the minority who use Mac OS X or Linux variants, but reconnecting with the many previously loyal customers who were deeply unimpressed by Vista.
This week at the National Museum of Computing at Bletchley Park, I met Tony Sale, who has spent 15 years working to rebuild Colossus, the world's first programmable computer used to crack German codes in World War II. At home, Tony has used every version of Windows since 3.1*, but he's stopped at XP. What was wrong with Vista?
"It tried to tell me how to organise my files all the time, I didn't like that." By contrast, Tony says he finds XP very stable and very usable - and he's going to have to be sure that Windows 7 does a similar, or better, job before upgrading.
Computing has come a long way since Colossus, but Microsoft's customers will be asking the same question about its new operating system as the code-breakers did about their new-fangled toy. Does it do the same job better and faster than what we use now?
* As some commenters have pointed out, what Tony Sale must have started with was Windows 3.1, not 3.2 as I had previously written.
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~37~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I think you are right about what annoyed Windows XP users about Vista - It made what could be achieved easily and safely on Windows XP difficult and cumbersome and therefore slower. In short its security got in the way - so most people, I suspect, have switched it off!
Tony Sale, for whom I have a lot of time, probably did not use Windows 3.2, but Windows 3.1 - the first usable version of Windows. (I started with Windows 1.0 - a really painful experience after CPM, MSDOS, etc..) Don't get me wrong I like Linux, which is now essentially fully capable of doing anything that you describe as your 'requirements'. (I started on hand coding in hexadecimal with front panel switches the very first microprocessors so I fully appreciate almost any operating system and coding environment. I have used and developed for Apple Macs, Windows, MSDOS, Linux and various mainframe systems.)
What essentially a personal computer's operating system should do is let the user do what he/she wants to do in an obvious way whilst at the same time behind the scenes trying to prevent unintentional wrecking of work what has been done in the past and maintaining, in so far as is possible, security. I will always be concerned by proprietary closed source computer systems because of the risk that, when they go wrong, which all systems do, it may not be possible for them to be fixed as access to the code that is causing the problem may be impossible. (See the 12 inch optical disks used by the BBC Doomsday Project as an example.)
Your 'review' is curious in that you still expect to have to look for buttons to push to do the things that you want to do - why not just speak to the machine and it directs your attention to what you need? Why are you happy with 'learning' a new interface when we have developed a very flexible communication system over the millennia and modern computers have more than sufficient power to handle the necessary processing? (Or even an initial interface that lets you write to the computer and it does what you want.) Why are you pleased to put up with the old fashioned and stilted interface of hunting for buttons to push? This is not the dark ages of secret panels behind curtains in dark cellars, but computer operating systems companies persist with this medieval interface!
Complain about this comment
Thank you very much, but I'll stick to Ubuntu and XP dual boot for now.
I agree with Tony Sale, I hate it when the PC tries to "organise" my files for me. Call me old fashioned, but I know how my directories are organised and where exactly my files are located.
And what about all those fancy user interfaces? I tried using the fancy graphics in Linux and Vista, for me they are unneeded distraction that I would never use. When it comes to switching between windows Alt+Tab and Windows Key+M is all I need. The simpler and quicker, the better.
Complain about this comment
I still use XP and was put off by upgrading it to Vista when it came out. I will still use XP for some considerable amount of time (maybe another year) before going on to Windows 7. Probably after when everyone else has used it to see if there are any major problems with it or not...
Complain about this comment
I had to get Vista (cheapest option) when my old XP laptop died slightly. Apart from seamlessly connecting with all the other bits of equipment and Windows machines in my realm, it's been no improvement on XP for me, at all.
Wikipedia (ahem) suggests that Windows 3.2 was a Chinese edition of Windows 3.1 which might explain why I didn't remember it - though I've been using Windows since version 2.0 Runtime. Gosh, I'm old.
Complain about this comment
Sigh.
Yet another version of windows shamelessly cribbing off the advancements in MacOS.
I too use windows at work (not through choice) and go back to my Mac at home.
Right from 95, a shameless clone of MacOS 7... Here;s just a few of the features copied over the years.
wastepaper basket = recycling bin
apple menu = start menu
dock = quick launch bar
expose = compare windows
Perhaps is MS did some innovative thinking for themself they might have a better chance of winning back their market losses, and the awful sham that was vista.
Complain about this comment
Umm Rory some of us have been using it for a while now. The Release Candidate was released ages ago. ;)
Having said that I still use XP as a primary OS on my dual boot laptop, Windows 7 still has some of the compatibility issues with older games, Oblivion for example just plain refuses to work on my Win 7 RC 1 64 bit install but runs perfectly well in XP Home SP3 32bit.
For gamers who don't just play the latest games M$ have a long way to go before they eclipse XP.
Complain about this comment
Mac Fanboyz - (yawn) - Wikipedia confirms the widespread belief that Apple got the GUI idea from what was Xerox PARC (and incidentally the mouse from SRI).
Hopefully we can move on from the dogmatic OS wars...!
Complain about this comment
Same old Windows. Same old problems;
Still requires anti-virus.
Still has a Registry.
Still need to click 'Start' to shut it down.
Still slows down over time.
Still has a myopic file structure that makes no sense, even to techies like me.
But hey, it comes pre-installed on a £399 PC, so it's worth it. Right?
In a world without walls, you don't need Windows.
Complain about this comment
Microsoft has steadily intruded in the way I like to work with a PC. I found myself turning off their latest features in each new version of software, be it an operating system or application. Windows XP is usable, but is still slow to start, and steadily degrades over time until the dreaded reinstall is needed to sort it out, with the resulting loss of something precious.
Rory's point about moving away from MS applications is true, but the way he (and many others) suggests that the operating system should provide things like a browser or a media player is part of the triumph of Microsoft's (and Apple's) marketing team. An operating system should provide the framework to operate the computer, mostly as the interface between applications and the hardware. Not surprisingly MS wants all of the applications to be theirs too.
Now that the user interface of Linux has evolved, it provides a much better environment to work in. You can fill it with the applications you like, it is compact and fast, with much less of the power of your machine consumed by stuff you don't want and can't turn off, all of your disk access is not slowed down by virus checkers that are there simply to plug holes left by poor design. It also runs well on small, cheap machines yet can use the power of a high-spec machine. Crucially, you can cleanly and fully uninstall applications that you tried but don't want. It is, of course, available free-of-charge as are almost all of the applications - I think this puts some people off, they can't believe that free things can be as good or better than ones they paid for, but they are.
Macs too perform well, but at a serious cost which some of us cannot or will not pay.
I hope Windows 7 is better than the dreadful Vista, and indeed better than XP which is far from perfect, but it will take a lot to persuade me to move away from dual boot with Linux, and Linux is my default.
Chris Twitter:@chillly
Complain about this comment
TwelveEightyOne, please ellaborate on the problem with a Registry. How is a kernel optimised setting store less efficient than random Settings files? OSX uses Propery List files which must be read from a disk, parsed and then the settings extracted. The registry is a much better cached solution. Plus, it is consistent across the entire System, a Property List file on OSX can be placed anywhere.
Also, are you forgetting that Snow Leopard now comes with built in anti-virus?
Myopic file structure:
c:\Users = User Data
c:\Program Files = Program Data
c:\Windows = OS files
I know, its confusing ..... ?
If they removed "Shut Down" from the Start menu wouldn't you complain that they're confusing users? Users who since 1995 are familiar with the concept of using the Start Menu to Shut Down. Personally I like how everything in Windows is on 1 bar (on whatever side of the screen i choose) as opposed to OSX with its 2 bars, 1 of which must stay at the top...
"Slows down over time". I quite like having an Operating System that is targetted by so many developers. Of course, the down side is that alot of developers like embedding their applications into startup routines, however, Windows 7 does solve this by delaying service boot ups and loading drivers in parallel. When OSX gets more than 4% market share maybe it might see a thriving developer community too ?
Also, i'm struggling to see what "features" Microsoft copied from Apple. The "Dock" first appeared in Windows 1, the desktop gadgets came from a 2000 Microsoft Research Prototype called "SideShow". Desktop Search was first popularised with Google Desktop and then Microsoft introduced Windows Search. Although, Microsoft did release the Windows Indexing Service in 1996.
Personally, I can't stand OSX with its same old problems:
Deletes entire user profiles (see last week news)
Has finally entered 64-bit land ... still waiting on drivers
Doesn't have any DLNA support
Is lacking in ASLR which prevents kernel injections
Encourages their users to feel smug about lack of viruses yet secretly ships anti-virus software
Shuns all PPC hardware with Snow Leopard (Spent $2000 on a Mac in 2006 with a G5 processor? Tough luck with Snow Leopard)
Microsoft backwards compatibility features (I can still run Windows 95 software ... can OSX run anything from OS9?), their Enterprise support, open developer community (I challenge you to find an apple developer blog that can rival the thousands of official MSDN/Technet/User blogs) will ensure that Windows 7 will set the benchmark for a long time to come.
Complain about this comment
Hi Rory,
I was wondering whether you plan to do a Week With Ubuntu next week? After all, that's coming out on the 29th.
I found about this review after reading a transcription of your conversation on BBC News this morning: http://popey.com/blog/2009/10/21/bbc-breakfast-talk-up-windows-7-dismiss-rivals/
I wonder whether you'd be willing to address any of the "points" made on that page?
Regards,
Jon "The Nice Guy" - Twitter: @jontheniceguy identi.ca: @jontheniceguy
Complain about this comment
The thing that gets me that on the modern OS MSWord opens no quicker than it did in DOS or Win3.1. It's also no more efficient than Wordstar was to use! Productivity seems to be hindered rather than enhanced!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"8. At 11:25am on 21 Oct 2009, twelveightyone wrote:
Same old Windows. Same old problems;
Still requires anti-virus.
Still has a Registry.
Still need to click 'Start' to shut it down.
Still slows down over time.
Still has a myopic file structure that makes no sense, even to techies like me.
But hey, it comes pre-installed on a £399 PC, so it's worth it. Right?
In a world without walls, you don't need Windows."
Just want to pick you up on a couple of your points there.
You don't just click start you click start and then press the shutdown button.
Alternatively there are some freeware/shareware apps that will put a button on your desktop that you can press once and shut the PC down. I personally use Stardocks DesktopX and a widget (which is where M$ stole their little sidebar and gadget idea from), although iirc I had to pay for that but as I said there are freeware/shareware apps out there.
Or you can press ALT+D, then ALT+F4 then U and then Enter. :P
And most people don't delve into the inner workings to have a look at the file structure. Windows is not aimed at techies like you, that's what Linux is for. Windows is a mass market OS aimed at the "noobs" who have been welcomed into the fold of computing circles by purchasing their PC with an OS installed already, usually from places like PC World (I bet the moderators remove that company name).
Techies like yourself need to get over their "nerdyness" and realise that for most people Windows works fine, it's only us techies (I actually consider myself to fall in-between your average computer "noob" and a techy) that push the boundaries and find out just how broken Windows can be at times.
Oh btw Rory, I see you have what appears to be a black BlackBerry Curve 83xx (I'll hazard a guess at 8320) sitting by your laptop, shouldn't that be an iPhone. Lol.
Complain about this comment
Vista was a bit slow and cumbersome, but 7 is great. I also like to organise my PC my way, all my devices in fact, which is why i hate apple so much, especially its portable and mobile devices. 7 seems better than Vista for that and its much quicker on both my Quad core desktop and netbook.
I did like XP, but recently had to put XP back on my netbook (dual booting 7), to get a bizarre peice of hardware to work, and i was shocked how awful it was. I just dont like it any more.
Complain about this comment
Rory, saw your report on Windows 7 Breakfast News this morning. What a dreadful feature. Touch screen wouldn't work, and you were totally dismissive of the alternatives, particularly Ubuntu, which you described as "being out next week." Ubuntu has been around for 5 years; what is out next week is the latest, regular, 6 monthly upgrade. Also the emphasis on the touch screen features of Windows 7 was just ridiculous. How many people are really going to be using that in the next couple of years?
Complain about this comment
@tenorwoody85,
If you need the problems with the Registry explaining to you, then it's really not worth the effort. I have many years experience with Windows and if you don't understand the shortcomings of the Registry, please do not embarrass yourself by asking why it is so bad.
And FYI, I made no comparisons with OS X, you brought that into the discussion.
Plist files are nothing like the Registry, they are simply user specific preferences.
"Personally I like how everything in Windows is on 1 bar (on whatever side of the screen i choose) as opposed to OSX with its 2 bars, 1 of which must stay at the top..."
Fine. You are happy with it, I'm really pleased for you.
Anyway, this is all arbitrary - let's look at the bare facts;
Apple - record profits, record number of Macs sold, totally bucking the trend.
Microsoft - well let's just say if Windows 7 fails to impress the great unwashed, it will be the beginning of their end. After all, every other market they enter, they are making a loss. Their monopoly with Windows/Office is the only thing keeping them profitable.
Complain about this comment
I'm sure the holy wars will continue to rage in the comments, but I think it would be interesting if Rory could repeat the week with Windows experience (experiment?) with a Linux system; given that the pattern of use seems to be pretty generic (mostly clients to web services, some music playing), it's not at all obvious that either of the proprietary systems is bringing much of an advantage.
Complain about this comment
"You don't just click start you click start and then press the shutdown button."
Funniest. Comment. Ever. Thanks for 'clarifying' that!
"Techies like yourself need to get over their "nerdyness" and realise that for most people Windows works fine"
That's exactly the problem. Windows doesn't just work "fine". It slows down. Gets infected. Needs to be reinstalled. Needs yearly subscriptions to anti-virus (yeh yeh I know AVG is free, but most people get upsold Norton or similar when they buy their 'bargain' PC).
Complain about this comment
Hey Rory,
Where do I start?
'...a similar connection area to the right of the Windows taskbar and was quickly online.'
Its been there since XP
'though the taskbar has become a little like Apple's dock'
Quick Launch, since Win2000
That process somehow feels more integrated on a Mac because of the iLife suite
My Documents?
'The two things that stood out for me were the ability to hover over open items in the taskbar and see what was happening at a glance'
Vista
'just about everything involved software not made by Microsoft'
Are you stating this as a negative? Personally, I'd have thought the ability to install and run the apps you like was a good thing. It is just an operating system after all.
Complain about this comment
Windows NT4 is still my favourite OS from Microsoft. I use MacOSX as OS of choice with Sun's VirtualBox running XP, Ubuntu and, when I feel like getting Commander Keen out, DOS.
The OS should be transparent to the user. It is the software on top that is what is important. The OS should get in the way as little as possible, unless it is providing a service. Having tried the Windows 7 beta it feels very Mac-like but is that right in a simple office environment? Even XP felt slow and bloated. Surely Microsoft's core market was a simple, stripped down, fast OS for the average business environment.
If you like how MS Office,etc. works then use that. If you prefer the superb integration of MacOS, iWork, iLife then use that. If you like the freedom of Linux, you can choose it. This is an operating system, not religion. If it isn't working for you, investigate the others.
Simon
www.thefreemac.com
Complain about this comment
""Slows down over time". I quite like having an Operating System that is targetted by so many developers"
Unfortunately most of those developers are busy writing key loggers, trojans and viruses. Targetted (sic) is quite an apt word.
Nice try though ;-)
"When OSX gets more than 4% market share maybe it might see a thriving developer community too ?"
Sorry, I must be imagining the 246 Apps in my Applications folder.
Next!
Complain about this comment
Work took away my rickety old XP laptop at the beginning of September and furnished me with an all singing, all dancing Vista one....only it doesn't sing...or dance...in fact it can hardly get on the stage at all!
My adobe won't .pdf word documents any more without publishing them to the web first, my web-page is 5cm tall, when I search it hides the path to the document plus numerous other problems & irritations that the combined brain-power of a government department can't remedy.
I'd give anything to downgrade to my old laptop again...even if the screen did fade away 5 times each day - at least a sharp poke made it work properly again.
Complain about this comment
I currently have been using Ubuntu for the past 3 years i downloaded a trial version of Windows 7 it seems to be more optimized than vista less bugs, faster, and detected all my hardware meaning i didnt need drivers however i inly have a basic graphics card and that had a baring as long as you running a dual core machine with 2gb of memory,anda minimum of 128mb graphics i feel you can get by. I was less than impressed with vista but i like Windows 7 as far as Microsoft products go, but at heart and for security i still use Linux it is my OS of choice.
Complain about this comment
I feel Microsoft lost a lot of customers due to the fact they made Vista look like a mac and they changed there look and shell of their de facto standard OS pushing their consumers to change, a change i may add that cost them dearly the elderly who have plucked up the courage to use a PC for the first time and are currently using XP are now finding themselves having to get used to a new OS (Operating System) or getting rid of there PC all together, as i said before i like Windows 7, but thats just me, i am not elderly and its not just youngsters and techies that live in this world Microsoft might want to go back to the XP drawing board if they want to keep the custom they have lost.
Complain about this comment
Rory says "taskbar has become a little like Apple's dock, so you can simply drag frequently-used applications onto it". I can't be absolutely certain when that came in but it's been a feature since at least XP.
In general I'm not sure how helpful this article is, constantly comparing W7 to an Apple. I don't think that most folk who want to know about W7 are Mac users. They are probably (like me) slightly fed-up Vista users. perhaps someone who's familiar with XP and Visat would have been more use
Complain about this comment
@ravenmorpheus2k: I resent your comment of "Windows is a mass market OS aimed at the "noobs" who have been welcomed into the fold of computing circles by purchasing their PC with an OS installed already, usually from places like PC World". No, it's not. Have you ever written inline assembler code in a C++ software project in Microsoft's Visual C++, which is intended to run on Windows? Ever written a Windows device driver? Ever had to perform binary serialization to pass data between 2 or more Windows (Windows) PCs? When you've done any one of those, you can come back and tell me you still think Windows is for "noobs" who shop at PC world.
@tenorwoody85: sing it, brother. I'd like to add 2 things:
1. that as recently as 2006, OSX didn't have a GUI enabling you to do something as mundane as change the keyboard layout without using the installer. no, I had to search the internet for an incomprehensible #bash script which then did it for me. it just works eh?
2. the underlying OS of OSX isn't developed by Apple. It's a fork of the FreeBSD UNIX variant, and an old one at that. Apple uses version 4.4 whereas FreeBSD is on version 7.2. Sure Apple has bolted on it's own stuff, like it's own desktop and the apps, but is the high price tag for a dated OS that they didn't really write really justified? I mean, you can get free desktops like KDE or Gnome for FreeBSD, to name just a couple.
@TwelveEightyOne: it's OK, your mum still loves you
And finally a global message to all those who can't even keep their windows PC in check (you know who you are, boo-hoo-XP-keeps-getting-slower crowd):
1, Get SysInternals Suite + Power Defragmenter, run that for starters
2, Remove apps you don't use
3, Don't use McAfee as it's a memory hog, use AVG + Ad-Aware + Spybot instead (and they're free)
4, Set up your page file properly
5, Regularly delete the contents of nethood and printhood folders
6, Empty the "startup" folder in your start menu of items you don't use
7, Clean up your desktop. Your desktop is part of your profile. If your desktop weighs several gigabytes, your profile will too. Ergo loading all that lot will take longer.
8, Emtpy the recycle bin once in a while
9, In the services console, disable all the services you don't need
What you lot are saying is akin to a driver who doesn't have a clue about it's inner workings moaning about his car running badly when:
a) he can't fix it, and
b) won't take it to someone who can.
The worst thing about all computers by far is that many people assume they will somehow be flawless - how's that? they were designed and built by humans after all..
Complain about this comment
" please ellaborate on the problem with a Registry"
1. Single point of failure. I've seen numerous machnies unable to boot because of registry corruption, registry files corrupted or just plain gone missing.
2. Complexity. I own two books each 50mm thick on the registry. Surely things can be named better than {065c132f036510fe66d5a41616} if humans are to work with them ?
3. Software installation / removal involves masses of changes to the single point of failure and almost always leaves significant amounts of data behind after uninstalling. The days when each app had its settings in its own directory were far preferable, as Barry Scott would say - delete the directory and the application is gone ! But no more, uninstall the software and there'll be 157 registry keys remaining, bloating the registry and slowing it down.
4. Unwanted retention of settings data. Something doesn't work, perhaps a wireless card or an application, you uninstall it to clear out the problem only to find the registry retained all the settings in their corrupt form.
Complain about this comment
"17. At 12:58pm on 21 Oct 2009, twelveightyone wrote:
Microsoft - well let's just say if Windows 7 fails to impress the great unwashed, it will be the beginning of their end. After all, every other market they enter, they are making a loss. Their monopoly with Windows/Office is the only thing keeping them profitable."
Ding ding ding. We have a winner for the lack of research of the day award - M$ are making a profit in their Xbox 360 division, they have been for the past 6-12 months as I understand it (and I will provide links to articles that prove that if you wish).
And by great unwashed you mean those less technologically savvy than you my good man, don't you.
Talk about snobbery.
Complain about this comment
"19. At 1:04pm on 21 Oct 2009, twelveightyone wrote:
"You don't just click start you click start and then press the shutdown button."
Funniest. Comment. Ever. Thanks for 'clarifying' that!
"Techies like yourself need to get over their "nerdyness" and realise that for most people Windows works fine"
That's exactly the problem. Windows doesn't just work "fine". It slows down. Gets infected. Needs to be reinstalled. Needs yearly subscriptions to anti-virus (yeh yeh I know AVG is free, but most people get upsold Norton or similar when they buy their 'bargain' PC)."
I have been using the same laptop with XP Home SP3 32bit for the last year and I have not had to do a clean install due to slowdown.
All of that can be managed with a good defrag util (I use jkdefrag myself, once a month if I can be bothered) and registry cleaning (CCleaner is what I use every once in a while).
I also don't use anti virus protection either (mainly because my internet is on T-Mobile and they have their own firewall back at where ever their servers are), and I don't get viruses. I used to use Kaspersky Internet Security (back in '07) and I've used AVG before and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and I never picked anything up with any of those, even in safe mode.
Granted the average joes doesn't know how to do all of that but to them the slowdown is a way of life and they are happy to put up with it because they know no better.
People are happy with the way their PCs work with Windows on it, if they were not they would not be still buying Windows based PCs.
And as for viri, well I say user beware because most viri are contracted due to user error in visiting the wrong type of sites or opening infected emails etc.
And lets not forget that the reason you don't get viri on a Mac OS or Linux is because people just don't write many viri for them because compared to Windows, Mac OS and Linux are not as widely used.
Apple can say they've bucked the trend but at the end of the day they have not and will not overtake the vast masses of Windows machines out there.
Complain about this comment
Putting my 'user' hat on, rather thinking like a software developer, I rather like Windows 7. XP is now ancient, and it's age shows, as it was built for a time when the average home PC was not connected to the internet 24/7. The same would apply to any operating system of that age. Vista improves on XP, but was sluggish and unloved by many.
Windows 7 works well. Performance is as good as XP, and better than Vista by far. Security is a vast improvement over XP. The new improvements to the task bar are handy, but don't force you to learn an entirely new way to work. For the most part, if you know how to use XP or Vista, you can just get on and do stuff. The rest of the operating system has been burnished to a high standard, and generally works pretty well out of the box. I can't really think of anything I strongly dislike about Windows 7.
I can see the point cynics might make that Windows 7 is what Vista should have been first time around, but in defence of Microsoft, it's hard to get something to work perfectly for such a wide variety of users and computers, as Windows is still expected to be all things to all people.
Complain about this comment
I too use both Windows and Mac. As you said in your review, I'm finding that the operating system is of less importance nowadays. That was one of the reasons I switched to Mac last year - I can still do all the same things I do on Windows (internet browsing, listening to music, organising my photos etc) without relying on Microsoft-only software, and with a more reliable and easy to use machine.
That said, I have been using Windows 7 on my other machine for the last 6 months and it is a good operating system. I don't find an awful lot has changed from Vista (it's more of a series of tweaks), but the small changes they have made are very effective. It may have a new version name, but it's more of a tidying up and polishing of Vista, in the same way as the recent Snow Leopard version of Mac OSX was.
The new taskbar is a big improvement and the "peek" features are very useful. I still don't think they are as good as Mac's "Exposé" for allowing you to quickly find what you're looking for, but it's an impressive feature nonetheless.
Some of the small things like dragging a window to the side/top of the screen to maximise it or have it fill half the screen, or wiggling it to minimise the other windows are innovative and useful.
I think some of the early reviews are quite misleading regarding the improved startup times - I believe a lot of this may be down to the fact that Windows 7 requires a clean install, and a freshly installed machine is always faster. After 6 months of usage my machine is filled up with programs and more-or-less back to the way it was on Vista before that, regarding startup times.
For the record, I don't believe there was anything particularly wrong with Vista, more to do with the minimum hardware requirements being set too low. I've been asked for help by several people with Vista machines, and in every case it has been down to manufacturers installing it on PCs that are just not powerful enough to run it. For me, running Vista on anything with less than 2Gb of RAM is an incredibly frustrating experience.
How well Windows 7 runs on a low-spec machine I can't say, but unless it's a big improvement, Microsoft would do well to insist on higher specs to ensure that the new OS doesn't suffer from the same perception as Vista.
MS have done a good job here, and the pricing, especially with the family packs of licenses seems a lot more reasonable than the extortionate prices that they have charged in the past. Proof that, with the rejuvenation of Apple and the increasingly consumer-friendly versions of Linux, that competition is good for everyone.
For me, I still prefer OSX Snow Leopard over Windows 7, but it's a close run thing.
I am hoping that with opting for the simple "7" name, Microsoft is embarking on a similar path to Apple regarding releases, with each version bringing tweaks, polishes and a few more features, without being a complete rehash like Vista was. I'd very much like to see the next versions be "Windows 7.1" and "Windows 7.2" with an affordable price and a shorter time between releases.
Complain about this comment
If 'Vista' were an anto, it would have been recalled shortly after it was first launched due to malfunctioning. MicroSoft continues to release software that is practically quaranteed to cause problems. This is really abuse of its virtual monopoly position. It's hard for me to accept that issuing faulty operating systems software is not an intregal part of M/S's business model. Doesn't some sort of anti-trust law cover this kine of thing? Anyone out there really think that Windows 7 will be significantly different than XP? Yet, in the meantime we have had to pay again and suffer with Vista; now we must anti-up once more, and for really how much improvement over XP.
Again, if Vista were an auto, it would have been recalled, repaired, upgraded, and returned to its owner in good working order at NO CHARGE!
Anyone know of any firm starting a Class-Action suit?
Complain about this comment
So, let me get this straight...
Rory Cellan-Jones is the BBC's 'Technology Correspondent'.
Rory has to use an 8 year old version of Windows at work.
Rory has only just got round to trying Windows 7, which has been publicly available in Beta for 9 months. No access to a spare PC...?
Rory uses an up to date version of MacOS at home, so he installs the same third party software he uses (and probably *has* to use due to lack of alternatives) at home on his Mac, on the 'unfamiliar' Windows 7.
So a question - Why is Rory paid a salary from public tax as a Technology Correspondent, when he evidently does not keep up with current technology, is apparently denied access to it at work (time to talk to your boss about next years 'research' budget, rather than the pay rise), then can write a column for a publicly funded organisation with a world-wide audience...?
Complain about this comment
@twelveightyone
You say XP slows down over time? Not in my experience it doesn't. I have had the same build on my PC for five years with no significant loss in performance. I run a disk clean up and a defrag once a month.
Like most things in life, a little bit of maintenance is all it takes to keep things running smoothly.
I have now switched to W7 and am super pleased with it (hated Vista for many of the reasons posted above). It boots up in 15 seconds, it has so far run everything I've thrown at it, detected and recognised everything I've plugged into it and more.
Complain about this comment
Windows 7 - meh.
Complain about this comment
My Windows XP is great. I don't even use an anti-virus, or have one installed. Best thing about windows is that I can play any game I want whilst doing everything else that the other OS's can do.
Complain about this comment
I have yet to see a balanced view by the BBC which compares (say) Windows 7, Apple OS/X 10.6 ("Snow Leopard") and Canonical Ubuntu Linux 9.10 in use doing normal types of things that people use PCs for. I use Ubuntu 9.04 (64 bit) as my primary O/S and like many Windows users use:
* Firefox - for web browsing
* Thunderbird - for email (+ gmail online)
* OpenOffice - for documents (and swap documents with Office users all the time)
I have about 400 applications installed in total (all completely legal and free) some multimedia, some graphics, some software development, databases etc. If I was to replicate this environment using Microsoft software and/or other payware it would cost in excess of £20,000
I can watch DVDs on my laptop (completely legally using VLC), author and burn DVDs, listen to music, edit photographs, use Twitter/Facebook and not use a single piece of Microsoft software.
I have some excellent native Linux games installed (have a look at http://www.happypenguin.org if you don't believe me) but have also paid for Transgaming Cedega so that I can run SOME Windows games. WINE is not perfect but you can run many games.
I do not run a virus scanner as Linux distributions are vastly better than Windows in terms of general stability, security (as any security holes are generally patched within 24-48 hours of the problems being found) but I do run a firewall (Firestarter is a nice GUI) and have rootkit scanners. No operating system is 100% secure and Linux is no exception but if you are sensible on a Linux box you will NOT be infected.
Bottom line is that most users DO NOT NEED WINDOWS. You can get everything you want to do with a modern Linux distribution such as Ubuntu or Fedora - I have not used Windows on my own PC for over four years now and have not missed it. Now if you WANT to run Windows (or OS/X if you like Macs), that is a different matter and is your own choice. At the moment, I cannot go into most computer shops and buy a PC with Linux on (there are a very SMALL number of exceptions) - I am FORCED to buy a PC with Linux and then try and claim the cost back. What the government should do is to make sure that shops are forced to give people a choice. It might be that many will continue to PAY for Windows + Office (and you do pay for it) but in the situation where users are given a choice (especially one that is more stable and virus free) they may choose not to have Windows.
Complain about this comment
So, you had a week with Windows. Why don't you try a week with Linux, say Ubuntu or Fedora, and report back to us? Go on, you're the tech correspondent, try Linux and correspond.
Complain about this comment
On my previous post - should have said - "I am FORCED to buy a PC with Windows and then try and claim the cost back"
Complain about this comment
Cant understand why people have problems with windows, if in fact it was so bad then why is it so popular, please no conspiracy theories.
Getting infected isn't what makes Windows so bad, because its so popular its targeted. If Macs and Linux ever reach the popularity of windows they will also suffer from the same problem.
Whether Windows 7 succeeds windows XP who knows, but Mac and Linux have a long way to go yet to catch up.
Complain about this comment
I've been using W7 for nigh on the last year, as a tester and from August as a user of the final Win7. I'm amazed there has been little or no mention of two aspects of XP and Vista that have gone missing in Win7. There is no longer an email program, like Outlook Express or Windows Mail. If one upgrades from Vista, as I'm sure some will, all previously downloaded emails will no longer be accessible.
Additionally the Quick Launch bar low down is no longer shown. I use it all the time to start programs.
Complain about this comment
What annoys me is that Win7 is still slower than XP.
I will have had to pay for 2 upgrades to eb worse off than I was on XP (I have Vista now and there is no easy way to downgrade).
Win7 may be better than Vista but unless it is clearly better than XP people will be disgruntled - especially at the price point they are demanding.
The biggest problem throughout the life of Windows has been networking. It has always been at best a black art and normally just plain flaky. Having to reboot computers al the time to "see" them, having trouble transferring files due to user account restrictions and permissions (even if you set everything to wide-open)... it's long past time to sort that out. But from the reviews I have read, all we see are cosmetic changes to the look and feel.
I am seriously considering going to a Mac for my next set of PCs - they seem to be winning the UI war on usability etc.
Complain about this comment
Yes, its dramatically difficult to turn off a PC running Windows. I sometimes find it very hard to tap the off button on the top of my PC to initiate shut down. After all its at least 12 inches from where I'm sitting... As others have pointed out, there are desktop gadgets that can acomplish the same if you have a burning desire to click on something.
Windows 7 just works. Its been around in its time limited beta and RC forms for months now. I've been using it for 6 months myself with no issues whatsoever. The only issue I came across was an overzealous security system on my work network (which uses XP) which can only interact with XP and Vista PCs. I resolved this by logging on to it in XP mode. End of story.
Support for almost every file type and function is simply integrated into the OS. The system runs faster and doesn't slow down over time. System maintenance happens automatically as a background task and the system adjusts its settings depending on your behaviour in practice. The OS can be used on almost any kind of PC, laptop or netbook. Every feature has been tested to destruction by millions of beta testers worldwide. There's a lot to like here.
I was so impressed with it I pre-ordered 3 licenses (PC, my laptop, other half's laptop) when they were first released in July. I've ordered another 2 since then (netbook and fathers PC).
At the end of the day I can't help thinking this OS will be one of the biggest changes (and sellers) in IT history. Not because it is radically different, but because the changes are evolutionary but completely functional/logical.
I can't help agreeing on the stickers point made by another poster though - who thinks it is a good idea to cover PCs and Laptops in these things? They end up looking like a kid's lunchbox!
Complain about this comment
"27. At 1:38pm on 21 Oct 2009, LuftHamza wrote:
@ravenmorpheus2k: I resent your comment of "Windows is a mass market OS aimed at the "noobs" who have been welcomed into the fold of computing circles by purchasing their PC with an OS installed already, usually from places like PC World". No, it's not. Have you ever written inline assembler code in a C++ software project in Microsoft's Visual C++, which is intended to run on Windows? Ever written a Windows device driver? Ever had to perform binary serialization to pass data between 2 or more Windows (Windows) PCs? When you've done any one of those, you can come back and tell me you still think Windows is for "noobs" who shop at PC world."
Oh well I'm sorry if you resent my analysis of who's buying windows PCs. You don't see the technologically illiterate, or "noobs" as I refer to them as, possibly a bit snobbish myself there, putting Linux on their PCs, no they go out buy a PC off a shelf and stick with whatever comes with it. Some people may choose a Mac but even the OS on that is just as simple and user friendly, possibly more so, as a Windows OS.
Of course more techy people use Windows, but on the whole Windows is used by people who are by and large not computer literate in the sense that you or I may be.
Complain about this comment
The fundamental problem is that the operating system should be an irrelevance. Mac is popular because it is cut down and limited - unfortunately there are silly things that just don't work properly and yet it goes on to producing new glossy features - I'd just like to be able to paste a file into a folder through a reliable interface.
Unfortunately, Windows 7 is yet more "what's the point?" glossy nonsense that doesn't really let you work smarter and harder, but instead distracts you as you spend more effort maintaining your PC than doing useful things on it. PCs with terrabytes of disk should be a clue that something somewhere has gone horribly wrong.
Come back PC-DOS, Lotus 1-2-3 and DisplayWrite: all is forgiven.
Complain about this comment
I've been running Windows 7 GA since last week as I got an early copy of Ultimate at a launch event in Cork. I had backed up all my files (from my dying vista install) onto an external hard drive, and a fresh Windows 7 install got me up and running in no time - impressively quickly.
Admittedly it couldn't detect my laptop's graphics card like I've seen Vista do with similar Dells, but a quick search and download on nVidia's site fixed that - Aero was up and running. What impressed me initially was that Win7 detected every other piece of hardware so well, giving impressively functional generic drivers to get things running. So far I haven;t been racing to update any other drivers!
I liked that it checked for network connectivity at install time so I could just activate it automatically. I liked that it ran so VERY much faster than my bloated Vista. I love that it was so much easier to set up other user accounts. While the GUI mouse shortcuts work, they felt a little gimmicky (but they do for me in the Apple OS too), but the HomeGroup function is truly excellent, easy creation of libraries to merge all my video to a library (ditto my music), and then easy to share to my xbox or other PCS wirelessly.
So far only downers have been the need to switch to a beta-build of my antivirus (can't be helped until the vendor releases a full win7 supporting version), lack of driver support from Dell (again I expect this to be remedied now Win7 has gone publicly GA), and a single unexplained bluescreen during a period of inactivity.
The only other complaint was that, even before today's release, there were a *lot* of updates installed for Win7 from the web, and this is ongoing - maybe it just coincided with Patch Tuesday, but it feels like MS are bloating my win7 already for security's sake.
But I have to say I'm as happy with this OS as I've been since XP, except this has some great new features. Ask me again in a year, but right now, major thumbs up!
Note - I've avoided OS comparison across vendors as this sparks flame wars online. But i have to add... I saw some Ubuntu posts above, and I have to say that, if I wasn't using MS, Ubuntu would be my OS of choice. A linux-loving colleague of mine once spurned Ubuntu as being a lame OS, as it was too user friendly to be respectable, and not "l33t" enough for sysadmins who use nothing but a console. I was shocked to hear someone give out about an OS being something that people could use easily - I suspect hardliners like him get all linux flavours a bad name!
Every OS built that people will use keeps sysadmins in business...
Complain about this comment
Why do people at the BBC keep talking about it being the "start of the OS wars"?
Apple sells hardware and a proprietry OS that will only work with its hardware, so they are not really in the same market.
90% of the world's PCs and software run MS Windows in one form or another. Apple is targetting the premium market. There is no war.
Linux in all its wonderous forms has been around for years and is great if you're a techie - although not something for the faint hearted.
Windows 7 is for the rest of us who want to buy our hardware from a more flexible and competative market, rather than a niche monopoly, and an operating system that will run on practicaly 100% of the PCs (unlike other more restrictive OSs) I have been running W7 beta for a year now and it is awesome. It's fast, reliable, I can still seamlessly run stuff from my Win98 days using the fabulous compatablity modes and should a piece of 3rd party software be a bit buggy then it handles it without fuss.
When OSX can run on all PCs then we'll have an OS war.
My Dad had a Mac running OS9 so my bro & I bought him a lovely new iMac. He still runs his old Mac next to it as the family tree software he has spent hours setting up with our family history will not work on his new machine. He mainly uses the iMac to browse the internet and do email.
My bro went on to buy himself a Macbook and instantly turned in to a Mac envangelist. Of course the PC he was comparing it to was about 4 years old running XP and the macbook was top of the range and brand new - but your critical faculties seem to disappear when you become a Mac user!.
He can't use his Sony e-reader properly - because it's not supported - nor his Creative Zen mp4 player. Every time I look over his shoulder he has XP running in a window - as his work software won't run on a Mac - so he mainly uses his Mac for browsing the internet and email.
But it is very pretty and expensive and did I mention how pretty it looks? (Oh! and look it does this and that and it is pretty and expensive).
Complain about this comment
I know so little about computers it is funny. The thing is though, I dont need or want to know much about computers, hence why monopolies like MS exist. Society has pretty much developed whether we like it or not and to be included in this society, you gotta use PC's or Computers or boxes or whatever they are called.
So, people like me who choose to be ignorant (mostly because we have better things to do like use our natural instincts and abilities to have fun and interact with people "personally") have to be provided for by companies like MS. I could never be expected to understand the ins and outs of advanced computer useage as i am too busy speaking to my friends, playing sports, hunting for food and generally engaging in what I call proper life.
So MS does have a use and so do Apple and the other players. Each surely provides a base for consumers to do whatever it is they want/need to.
I do have very little knowledge, but some comments on here do smack of people thinking they are wonderful because they can not cope with Microsofts insatiable efforts to do everything for you. Naturally you are better than that and can do it for yourself. That is fine, you should do it but dont come on here and strut around your own kudos feeling big.
Anyone for a game of squash? You will have to get off your backside and move to another area of town and then you will have to run around and make some effort but it will be worth it lol.
I think there should also be a computer staged ruck between TENORWOODY85 and TWELVEEIGHTYONE. Im gunning for you Woody, get him fella.
Ravenmorpheus sums it up quite nicely.
Oh nuts, I have just posted a comment which makes me as bad as the rest.
People in the "know" seem to dislike the report, for a mere mortal like me, I thought it was just fine Rory.
Complain about this comment
@cynicaleng:
1, System Restore? Maybe a backup of the registry? your scenario is akin to moaning about Microsoft when the MBR on your hard drive goes (which it can, Microsoft OS or not)
2, The very fact that registry settings are stored in hexadecimal as type REG_DWORD points to the reality of the registry not actually being for humans, but for the system. just because there's an editor for it doesn't mean that everyone will be able to use it. even though lowly notepad can show me binary, doesn't mean I can automatically sight-read it, does it? I'm not saying the registry is a perfect solution, but apps can and do need certain values in a non-human-readable format like hex, maybe encrypted or randomly-generated. these values need to be stored somewhere. whether you store application settings in a global registry or in application-specific local resources, if the application question has some unreadable settings to store, it will. having them locally won't make them any more readable just because they're not in the registry. it's not the registry that says to use that data type as you can store strings and full binary in there too, it's the application that chooses to store the data in that way.
3, How can this be the fault of Microsoft? You're talking about third-party applications leaving their own registry settings behind after a deinstall. take up your issue with the manufacturer of whatever third party software.
4, Again, we're dealing with third parties. Device drivers generally come from the manufacturer of that device. If they've neglected to do a RegCompare on their test systems after running their deinstall it's entirely their fault, and not Microsoft's.
Complain about this comment
Whoopee! - The delivery man has just been and I now have my copy of W7. One day early (I suspect thanks to the postal strike - talk about silver linings to dark clouds!).
I'm like a pig in the proverbial!!!!
:O)x
Complain about this comment
@UseLinuxNotWindows:
Let me point you in the general direction of the MAPS annual subscription. over £20,000 of Microsoft software, for less than the cost of XP when it came out new!
Note: This is entirely legal. and before you ask, I don't work for Microsoft nor do I love everything they do without question. I do know, however, that if take a little time to find stuff out, you're rewarded with knowledge. and cheap software.
Complain about this comment
I'm still using Windows 2000 on two laptops, which are set to hibernate when not being used. So they come back to life very quickly. They are also networked via a wireless router, share a printer and files easily and quickly. Some one tell me what I'm missing not upgrading to a later OS.
Complain about this comment
Never had a problem with Vista from the month it came out. Just updated as Microsoft made improvements and made sure there was plenty RAM from the outset. Runs fine. I suspect a lot of the criticism arose because people's computers were getting too old - and the same problem is likely to afflict those that try and change from XP to 7. Caledonian Comment
Complain about this comment
10 days ago I bought a Dell from Tescos. On the Dell site it tells me that I qualify for a free Windows 7 upgrade - whoopee!!
And then it says it does not recognise the number.
4 phone calls later it turns out that my brand new machine is nearly a year old (tescos have ancient stock, apparently) and so does not qualify even though I bought the machine as new ten days ago .....
So, I will not be giving my reaction to Windows 7 soon!
Complain about this comment
"twelveightyone wrote:
Anyway, this is all arbitrary - let's look at the bare facts;
Apple - record profits, record number of Macs sold, totally bucking the trend."
To be fair Apple profits are probably from the iPhone/iPod side of the business, there might be a record number of Macs sold but that is because the computer market share for Apple is pretty low.
I don't have a problem with Apple products (most of them are pretty cool) however you do pay through the nose for them.
I bought a Toshiba laptop (so not a no-name jon) about 5 months before my cousin bought a Macbook and we ended up with equivalent specs (although mine had a much larger screen) and my laptop was almost a third the price of his as mine was on offer.
He might have the better OS but I don't have any problems using Windows and IMO you get a better "bang for buck" with Windows.
Complain about this comment
@ravenmorpheus2k: it's not really an analysis when you only quote your own personal opinion and can't show me any figures whatsoever.
you've basically made my point for me: computing beginners generally buy Microsoft because it's the most widespread option by far, not as you imply, because they're too dumb to install Linux.
Fedora 4 had nice graphical installers while at the same time us XPers were still kicking around in the straw and filth with the ASCII installer, deleting, sizing, formatting and creating partitions rather haphazardly by today's standards. Press F6 at exactly the right time to install a third party SCSI or RAID driver? that's user-friendly for "noobs"!
So, by your "analysis", putting in a DVD when prompted and clicking "next" is beyond the capabilities of computing beginners.
Complain about this comment
"ravenmorpheus2k wrote:
And by great unwashed you mean those less technologically savvy than you my good man, don't you.
Talk about snobbery."
I imagine he means people who don't earn enough to justify the massive "Mac-Markup" :-)
If Apple put a little logo on a turd and shipped it out in a nice white box with a £300 price tag to hear Apple-fanboys shouting from the rooftops about how great a turd it was.
I don't have anything against Macs they are lovely machines but I would need a damn good reason to justify buying one over a cheaper equivalent spec Windows machine especially as I could probably buy a Wii and a holiday with the spare change!
Complain about this comment
Linux in all its wonderous forms has been around for years and is great if you're a techie - although not something for the faint hearted.
This really isn't true any more. My mother-in-law has a dual boot XP/Ubuntu system (both OSes installed by me) and she's very much happier in Ubuntu because it's so much easier to deal with.
Complain about this comment
@psychobdelic #48
That post made me laugh quite alot.
I use mac and pc. PC because I like the tech side of things somewhat.
But I will defend the MAC's here in terms of photography, having used both OS's I can tell you that MAC's are far superior when it comes to imaging and graphics.
I suppose, though, that is your point, it is niche as there more non-professional photographers than Professional Photographers..
I will re-iterate and risk being a bore. MAC's are great for some things, Windows for others. It's just choosing the best tool for the job right??
Complain about this comment
"To be fair Apple profits are probably from the iPhone/iPod side of the business, there might be a record number of Macs sold but that is because the computer market share for Apple is pretty low."
It's amazing how many people guess at facts to support their story.
Probably? PROBABLY? So you don't know then. Here's a clue;
Apple sold 3.05 million Macintosh computers during the last quarter, representing a 17% unit increase over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 10.2 million iPods during the quarter, representing an 8% unit decline from the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 7.4 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 7% unit growth over the year-ago quarter.
17% increase in Mac sales. But just keep telling yourself that their profits are 'probably' from the iPhone, certainly not the iPod, which saw an 8% decline, largely due to the increased iPhone sales.
Complain about this comment
" 55. At 3:45pm on 21 Oct 2009, Gurubear wrote:
10 days ago I bought a Dell from Tescos. On the Dell site it tells me that I qualify for a free Windows 7 upgrade - whoopee!!
4 phone calls later it turns out that my brand new machine is nearly a year old (tescos have ancient stock, apparently) and so does not qualify even though I bought the machine as new ten days ago ....."
I'd inform Trading Standards and then take the machine back to Tesco to demand a refund. If they are passing off old stock as new, claiming that you can get software free when you can't, that's got to be illegal.
Complain about this comment
Why do people assume that Linux is difficult to use?
Have a look at Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/810features/)
Have a look at this (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SwitchingToUbuntu/FromWindows)
and this as well (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ubuntu-linux-guide,2293.html)
The thing is most people purchase a PC with Windows pre-installed. They have to do very little before they can use it. If they had to start from scratch (even with Windows 7) it would involve:
1) Installing the operating system
2) Installing drivers that don't come with Windows
3) Installing some sort of virus scanner (e.g. Grisoft AVG)
4) Installing some sort of malware/trojan scanner
5) Installing Microsoft Office
6) Installing DVD burning software
7) Installing tools and utilities - such as WinZIP
8) Installing graphics software such as Adobe Photoshop
9) Installing eMail client software (if you have home/student version of Office)
10) Installing updates/patches
11) Configuring up the display/printers/network/other peripherals
All except for (11) is done for you by the shop. If you install (say) Ubuntu then you can wipe the disk and start again or install within your Windows partition (WUBI http://wubi-installer.org/) and it does (1) to (9) automatically for you. It really is as easy (if not easier) than installing Windows 7.
If you could buy a PC preloaded and preconfigured with Linux - why would it be any harder than Windows to use. Have you tried it?
Yes, Linux (and Apple OS/X for that matter) is DIFFERENT to Windows but then Windows 7 is very different from (say) Windows XP. If your dear old Grandma got used to Windows XP and you then upgraded her to (the default desktop of) Windows 7 then she would also have to find her way around a completely different system.
My wife uses Windows Vista. In fact she is the ONLY Windows user in the house - the children use Edubuntu (http://edubuntu.org/Screenshots) and find it no harder to use than Windows (which they use at school) and I use Ubuntu. When she got get laptop she was shocked as to how different Vista was from XP and even more how much Office 2007 was different from Office 2003.
The point is that was a bit of familiarisation, it is not hard for a Windows user to use a Linux distribution (such as Ubuntu) or even Apple OS/X. Just don't expect it to work EXACTLY like your old operating system. Many Windows users (I'm not accusing anybody here) are quite happy to jump to the next (completely different) Microsoft user interface without any comments but then kick up a fuss if they have to use some other software.
Microsoft have a stranglehold on desktop computers at the moment which is stifling innovation and hurting the IT industry (IMHO). They maintain this monopoly by the fact that adults and schoolchildren are shown Windows and no other alternatives (in the majority of cases). This means that people do not even consider other alternatives because they have no experience of them. If people could see a selection of computers in (say) PC World with PCs running Windows 7 right next to Macs running Apple OS/X and (the same hardware) running (say) Ubuntu and Fedora all fully configured and shiny new then it might be a different story.
People might have a CHOICE - and that REALLY scares Microsoft!
Complain about this comment
49 - why do you seem to assume that because people are interested in computers - or "tech savvy" they don't lead interesting lives as you??? and don't talk to real people??
Being a techy is a hobby - just the same as your hobby of squash. I love computers, work in IT, and also enjoy programming when i have some spare time. I also enjoy many sports, mainly basketball and football. My life is very much "real" thank you.
Oh by the way - i agree with the statement about the OS wars. There is no such thing. I am far from a fan of Apple - i was forced to use one back when i worked in support (uugh) but they offer something completely different to microsoft, which i dont personally need or want, but some do. The arguments about security, viruses etc are not even worth mentioning. If everyone switched to using a mac as these Apple "fans" keep on about, Macs would be plagued with viruses and crap software written by part time - part knowledge developers!!
Oh and Windows 7 looks fairly good - i even managed to run it in a Virtual Machine and it was still responsive, which is saying something as Vista stood no chance!!!
Complain about this comment
@ 58: "I would need a damn good reason to justify buying one over a cheaper equivalent spec Windows machine especially as I could probably buy a Wii and a holiday with the spare change!"
That misses the point, you say an "equivalent spec" but you can't compare Macs with Windows PCs by looking at the numbers in the specs.
Windows by its nature has to be designed to run on whatever concoction of hardware happens to be in any PC (that's why there are so many bugs etc. that go unnoticed), whereas Mac OSX is designed specifically to run on Apple's hardware.
Therefore, the Mac generally functions faster at day-to-day activities than a Windows machine of the same specifications. This is absolutely my experience with my Macbook, which zips along doing the same things compared to my Vista PC at work, which actually has a faster processor and more RAM.
You also have to look at how well built the Apple laptops are, particularly the aluminium unibody ones, and how light and compact they are. They're very easy to carry round in a briefcase.
I wouldn't really recommend carrying it like this, but they are so solid that you can pick an aluminium Macbook up by the corner, where a normal plastic computer would flex and possibly break something. They also have very neat finishing touches, such as the magnetic power connectors which simply pop out if you accidentally trip over the cable, rather than pulling your precious laptop onto the floor.
If you look at some of the more top-end laptops from, say Sony or Samsung that are sleek, well designed cases, these also carry a hefty price tag.
I completely understand why a lot of people wouldn't plump for a Mac - they are VERY expensive, and there is a bit of getting used to the difference in how things work compared to Windows, but in my opinion the extra money is worth it if you can afford to part with the cash upfront as they will last a lot longer.
A lot of people seem to think that the premium price on Apple products is simply because of the branding, but you need to realise you are getting a real quality product, and you only need to pick one up to see that. They are a world of difference from the £300 Chinese laptops you can find that are put together from cheap components and will probably be good for nothing in three years time.
And I know they're not perfect, there are plenty of flaws to Macs too, however you can't just look at two computers and say they have the same specs, therefore they must be the same.
Complain about this comment
One last thing, alot of consumers don't even know what Linux is. I was in the pub not long back and one guy was saying how much his computer was getting on his nerves - he asked what OS i had. When i Said Suse Linux - his reply was "What?".
Most of my friends have never heard of Linux - my family have never heard of it either, come to mention it alot of the support people where i work aren't totally sure what it is. I think that if people did know about it as an alternative some would give it a go at least - i know my one friend tried the Live CD for Ubuntu recently after finding out what it was. He didnt carry on using it as he didn't like - but he tried it.
Complain about this comment
A couple of things.
When a new Mac OS comes out when I install it I take about half an hour to customise it the way I want it. I get rid of support files in the world's languages, organise my folders, set expose up to work how I like etc.
When a new PC OS comes out I do the same. I loved Vista because I turned everything I didn't want off. Simples.
I just want a system that is as unobtrusive as possible so I can use the applications I want. If 7 does this better than Vista great.
Complain about this comment
Windows 7 is a very useful OS and is definitely over Vista, just as Vista was to most people over XP.
Almost every article and most of the comments on the BBC website seem to be negative towards Vista. I know there were and in some cases still are problems, but my personal experience is that Vista is fine, not perfect, but hardly some of the adjectives used to describe it. In fact I find XP rather awful compared to Vista, it 'fell to pieces' under less strain than I have put Vista. I think Vista got a bad press because it wasn't good enough for 'techies', who made themselves quite vocal, but worked fine for most people who therefore didn't bother making a fuss.
Also, Rory, you say you use Google Docs. How confident are you that they are secure (both from deletion and snooping), especially when you don't have a backup?
Complain about this comment
@ 61
Well said Twelveightyone.
Had the RC for WIN7 on my MBPro and it's good. Runs OK.
@27
LuftHamza - your top ten tips is interesting but when using OSX you need only two:
1. Turn it on.
2. Get on with it :)
Always seems silly to me to sit on one fence because it's more comfortable than the other - where is the danger and where is the fun and more importantly where is the life?
Complain about this comment
Waiting eagerly for my Windows7 delivery. Got forwarded a student offer at http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/studentoffer/ to get HomePremium for less than half price.
Kudos to Rory for using TweetDeck!
...
Come on, let's move on from OS wars to Twatter application wars.
Complain about this comment
Personally, I’m loving all the Dock/Task Bar discussions. But wait - wasn’t Acorn doing that in the 1980’s on their RISC OS?
;-)
Complain about this comment
@neilephipps: Your argument is somewhat nonsensical as I was talking about keeping an 8-year-old OS in running order. you're talking about OSX today. if we hark back to the time of XP's release, we can quickly find out that Apple had only just the previous month shipped DVD playback support in OSX 10.1 Puma and support for SMB was only introduced nearly a full year later in 10.2 Jaguar..
I would turn it on and get on with it, but I can't. my DVDs won't play and I can't find my network.
Complain about this comment
@ twelveightyone #61
"Apple sold 3.05 million Macintosh computers......sold 10.2 million iPods....sold 7.4 million iPhones....."
So that's over 5 times as many "non-PC" items as PC items, seems to me Apple are no longer a computer company!
Here's a thing: the only reason Apple's computer line could make more money than the massively selling ipod/iphone line is that the margin on those 3million computers is huge - because they're charging you a fortune so you can be self righteous. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Mac PC's are still a niche product. It's easy to grow 17% when you have a small starting base. Market expectations are that Microsoft will sell 177Million copies of Windows 7 alone in 2010.
By all means use your Mac - be happy with it. Just don't criticise me because I choose a PC.
Complain about this comment
tenorwoody85:
So what you're saying about Windows Registry is this: If I want to use one application, and maybe today I only want to use 1, then Windows has to load ALL the settings for EVERY application, including, on most Windows systems, literally thousands of settings for applications the user has long since 'uninstalled'.
It doesn't seem like a good idea to take such a monolithic approach. Perhaps that's why Windows runs like a dog and gets slower over time. Perhaps that's why there are so many shareware and commercial 'Registry Cleaners'.
Complain about this comment
Obligatory shot in OS war:
There's also many many freeware registry cleaners.
And the program base is much bigger for windows than owt else.
It has it's problems, but I'll happily put up with them to save 2/3rds of the price.
Actually on-topic, I've been using the 7 release candidate for bloody ages too. Thing is though, using that at home, and XP at work, I can't say I really notice much of a difference. I've replaced most of the basic windows functions, copy, process manager, explorer etc., with my own open source freeware choices, and in the end, I don't think there's much of a difference. Which really, is what's important in an OS. I want it to be stable, be speedy, and run all the programs I need to run. 7 does a better job than XP at that, but that's the only major difference. So, upgrade if you want the speed and security, but it's not really much different.
Complain about this comment
Oh, twelveightyone, if only you weren't so predictable and actually knew what you were talking about...
Let's look at a few things...
"If you need the problems with the Registry explaining to you, then it's really not worth the effort."
Well no, you were asked and all you've done is evade the question and insult the person who asked you. I mean I know the advantages and disadvantages of the registry against, say, ini files but he may not.
So, please, enlighten him and if you can't do so then I'm quite happy to explain the pros and cons.
"Apple - record profits, record number of Macs sold, totally bucking the trend."
Ok, what's the split of profit between Macs and iPhones/iPods? Not that it matters - all profit means is that the company makes money out of what it sells and since Apple have a margin of 35% or so they make more profit.
As for numbers, there were 3.05 million Macs sold last quarter out of 75 million computers in total (from Gartner and IDC). That puts the Mac sales share at under 4%.
Let's go over that again: Less than 4%. Less than 1 in 25 of computer users are interested enough in Macs to buy one. Of course that might be higher if you count consumer sales only but what? 1 in 10? 1 in 8? It's still pretty trivial.
So it's difficult to say if it's a success or not since the numbers are not really statistically significant in comparison to Windows OEM sales. Sure, financially - which is great if you own APPL stock but totally irrelevant otherwise - but by user volume? Nah, not really - it's just a blip on the radar.
"Microsoft - well let's just say if Windows 7 fails to impress the great unwashed, it will be the beginning of their end."
Well since the reviews are universally positive (apart from a few dubious characters) and pre-order sales are at record levels I'd say it's going to do very well. I guess that's what having a completely open public Beta does for you.
The point is that you hate Microsoft and it hurts you to think that the overwhelming majority of the computer buying public - of all technical abilities and social backgrounds - don't. Sure, I'm not sure they love it but the accept it as part of their lives because it just works, doesn't give them any real problems and does what they want at the right price.
Apparently that's what the overwhelming majority of people want.
Complain about this comment
I thought that the EU had insisted that the installation process for W7 should offer the option of replacing Internet Explorer by a different browser such as Firefox, Opera, or Safari.
This doesn't seem to have happened - are MS in the running for enormous fines?
Complain about this comment
For the first time ever, I have disliked your reporting.
Windows 7 seems to be made out to be the Devil very much like Vista (which NEITHER are).
Your TV Report seemed to skim over any Microsoft positive message about Vista is the MOST stable Windows ever, easier than ever to setup with hardware and software.
I'm sorry but this was negative reporting to say that the only advantage was touchscreen compatibility? Erm excuse me there is a heck of a lot of more to it than that!
Warning to those on Windows XP though, it will not and should not live forever! And if you really hate Microsoft why are you using their software. Make use of the "glorious" free options....
Complain about this comment
Rory, you say that MS's priority is "reconnecting with the many previously loyal customers who were deeply unimpressed by Vista"
we're seeing an increasing rate of disloyalty - in the form of windows-to-mac switching - happening in the small/medium-sized business market (i'm at an IT support company that deals mainly with windows). More and more of those windows users who can choose are switching to macs.
This is helped by snow leopard's free Exchange support but also in laptops by the erosion of windows' cost advantage - i just compared the MacBook Pro vs a comparable dell laptop and the mac is cheaper, significantly so if you're using Exchange and include Outlook for the windows machine. And the white MacBook has an even greater advantage. Sure, we're talking solid, well-spec'd machines - but most businesses are happy to pay for business-class kit.
mac vs windows laptop cost comparison - http://effortlesscomputing.co.uk/2009/10/20/mac-laptops-more-expensive-than-windows-think-again/
...however most business users can't choose their OS... for them, W7 is a great relief. With support for XP going to fade, they will need to upgrade and finally that's not hobson's choice.
-ben
Complain about this comment
Some of the comments here aren't even worthy of Digg. We have some people making technical claims that they don't understand.. some people cheering the profits of a corporation as if they were a football team. Some people who need to get out more!
Personally I use a combination of what I need for work and what I am comfortable with. I'm glad that there is OS options around as choice drives innovation. But in the end, it all comes down to personal choice, no amount of arguing on the internet is going to "win" the OS wars.
But.. if I must choose an OS, I choose Amiga Workbench! It was the first true multitasking operating system, and the only operating system to support multiple resolutions and bit depths on screen at once! What's more is that for a breif few years in the 1990s, it had the best and biggest selection computer games (some of which are still considered best games of all time: Worms - The Director's Cut).
Complain about this comment
I find it a great shame that a discussion about the merits of Windows 7 degenerates into a debate about Apple's profit margins. It's also a shame that many of the correspondents spend more time trying to impress each other with their vast knowledge that posting sensible comment that might be of interest and helpful to the masses.
Complain about this comment
Still no reaction to my 53...
Complain about this comment
When Fedora 12 is released in a few months will it get a free publicity boost on BBC Breakfast?
Complain about this comment
Dont get me wrong i'm grateful we have the BBC
BUT....
this is another example of how dumbing down of Technology, Science & Business by the BBC makes reading these stories a waste of time.
Fine on the headlines / main story where you dont want to lose the consumers attention, but on the blog of someone with expertise/knowledge in a particular field, I would expect a little more.
Complain about this comment
I also have to say that I dislike the BBC's Windows 7 coverage.
Why is there so much focus on Apple? It seems to me that these media types use Apple computers, think they are fashionable, and therefore add to the Apple-hype. In reality Apple has such a small market share in the PC industry that they are not as significant as the media like to portray.
As for Windows 7, I also dislike how the media seem to show-off its more trivial features such as touch screen support or "aero shake". I have used Windows 7 since the beta versions in July and its main benefits are performance and stability. Notably for me, video playback performance is much better under 7 than it was under XP with the latest ATI video drivers installed. UI changes such as the new Windows Explorer, Taskbar and "aero snap" are also good.
As for those posters claiming that it is stupid to "click start to shut down". Well, this is NOT stupid, it is completely logical. The start button is to start a TASK - shutting down the computer is a task like any other.
As for the debate on the Windows Registry - with the amount of RAM available on a modern computer, the Windows Registry is a better design than the simple text files used on UNIX/Linux/Mac OSX. The registry offers faster performance than would otherwise be available from reading a simple text file from disk.
Complain about this comment
dish_of_the_day wrote:
Dont get me wrong i'm grateful we have the BBC
BUT....
this is another example of how dumbing down of Technology, Science & Business by the BBC makes reading these stories a waste of time.
Fine on the headlines / main story where you dont want to lose the consumers attention, but on the blog of someone with expertise/knowledge in a particular field, I would expect a little more.
I would absolutely agree with this. The review here is very shallow on technical details. And for a technology based blog, statements like "I set about opening a browser, e-mail and word processing applications, and tried to work out where I would keep my photos and music." make the report seem very dumbed down.
Complain about this comment
@ LuftHamza
Good homework - but surely your top ten includes all CURRENT users of XP of which are legion due to the failure of Vista?
OSX has matured into a killer OS. That is good for Microsoft because the ante is up'ed and Redmond has to work harder. Good for me and good for you = positive and competitive progress.
If you can't see that then your argument is merely personal, one sided and flawed.
@ Conosco
Spot on! We are seeing a huge shift in small to medium sized enterprise's actively asking for Mac based solutions. As little as two years ago this NEVER happened unless we where dealing with a creative based company. Personally this is where MS have really failed with Vista and the bad PR that has gone with it.
Complain about this comment
Windows 7? Wow, what a big, huge irrelevance to this household this latest 'n greatest offering from Redmond is to us. We've made the transition to Linux some time back now, we're quite satisfied and happy with it and there's no going back. It's on our home server, our laptops and on our desktop, (which incidentally, still has a copy of windows 2000 running on it in dual boot mode).
What still galls me is that if you buy a PC or laptop, it comes with Windows preinstalled. I think as consumers, we should get the choice of whether we want an OS loaded or not. With a desktop system, at least you can build it yourself, so you can get round this, but not with a laptop. if you're a n00b, then you have the option of having it preinstalled. If you're a bit more savvy, and don't want to pay the Microsoft Tax, then you shouldn't be forced to.
I bought my wife a new laptop very recently as a surprise present. Sadly, it came with Windows Vista and a lot of vendor rubbish preinstalled. I contacted the company and asked beforehand if they would sell me a laptop with no OS. 'No' What about without a hard drive? 'No' In fact, they weren't interested at all - I thought bizarre, since you can custom build a laptop to your own specification on their website. They claim to offer Linux, but this is merely lip service as when you look at what's on offer, it comes on only a select few machines with poor specs...
As it was, just looking at the desktop and the laptop doing nothing much else, it was using around 900Mb of RAM. It was slow, took ages to boot up, and generally wasn't a very pleasant eXPerience; and the the UAC, with vista...oh, my, word....
Of course, it didn't last long, not even a full day. I nuked the hard drive, formatting both the main and recovery partitions. It now has Kubuntu Linux 9.04 on it, (free download) along with the latest version of Open Office (also free download), and it even has WINE (yep, another free download) so she can run some of her old windows graphics packages like livepix that she has from 10 years ago, (don't ask, but apparently its better than photoshop coz it's uncomplicated and can do certain things better) and other windows programs, should she need to. But there's soooo much free stuff out there, we haven't seen a need to..for example, Amarok and Kaffeine are trully great multimedia programs for playing mp3's and dvds
All the software and OS that the laptop got shipped with, that came on a series of DVD's, have been posted back to the computer manufacturer, along with the unused windows licence sticker. Thanks, but no thanks. Shame they were unwilling to refund us the cost of a windows licence. I wonder what they will do with it? We aren't allowed to sell it on; they've already 'sold' it, so they surely cannot sell it again...
For those of you willing to fork over your hard earned ££'s, for yet another roll of the dice on whether this is a good OS or not, well good luck to you. You pays yer money's and yer takes yer chances. There's one born every minute. I still do not understand why people still want to pay, when there are better, legal and free alternatives out there. Oh, and if you think I'm a cheapskate, I'm not...I do donate money to those out there who make all this wonderful software for free. :o)
Complain about this comment
pauloxter wrote:
"the Windows Registry is a better design than the simple text files used on UNIX/Linux/Mac OSX. The registry offers faster performance than would otherwise be available from reading a simple text file from disk."
Sorry, mate, but you seem not to grasp the idea of what the registry is. The windows registry is a database that over time, gets bigger, bloated, fragmented, sometimes corrupted, and littered with orphaned entries from uninstalled programs...Is it really any surprise that windows gets slower and slower and sloooower the longer it is being used? It is also a single point of failure for the entire OS. It is a gross hack.
Unix, Linux and other variants, do not have a registry, and for a very,very good technical reason, that I have outlined above. Simple text files are very easy to edit, requiring no more than a good editor, be it vim, kate or emacs. Good luck trying that with a windows registry.
Complain about this comment
Oh for goodness sake! This is just another load of crap from Bill Gates - yours for only £75!! The last load of rubbish didn't work properly so what is so different with this version. If its so damn good why dont we get it foc as an upgrade?
Yet we pander to this bloke. So you nerds want to pay this money out so the system might just boot up - if thats the correct term - 50% more quickly. Sounds impressive but XP takes 3 mins to come alive, 90 secs might be an improvement but what would you say to Mt Philips in Eindhoven if it took that long for your light bulbs to illuminate?
Complain about this comment
@pauloxter @tenorwoody85
I suggest taking a quick dekko at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry#Advantages_and_Disadvantages
The disadvantages of having a registry, where:
1. Application data is stored remotely from the application itself.
2. Application portability is lost.
3. You allow 3rd party applications access to a DB which contains device driver and kernel information.
4. You rely on 3rd party apps to clear it on uninstall.
But if you disline text config files, nobody's stopping you from using XML! (In fact, google tells me that's what Mac OS X uses.) Some linux programs, pam_mount (if I remember right) for instance, have moved towards using XML configuration files.
outweighs the pros by FAR!
Complain about this comment
I found it interesting watching Rory's report this morning on Breakfast that he made a point of referring to his home usage of a mac as "another OS". As a long time watcher of BBC tech programs and "click" in particular I've not noticed any particular bias towards Apple in fact the reverse (which I've just put down to the market share argument).
Many of the above comments which seem to fall into the age old OS Wars debate miss the point. This is likely to be MS last major release of windows as we know it for the consumer market. The days of the cloud OS are upon us, where you need little more than a browser to complete all our home tasks irrespective of what OS you use. Many of the apps Rory has customised his PC with are cross platform and integrate with web services. This is the threat to Windows not what your OS is.
With the much hyped mac tablet (iPhone Lanrge?) on the horizon which may well kill of the netbook as we know it, Apple are doing what they really know how to do, marry a great looking gadget with a great User Interface. This has pretty much been the mantra of Steve Jobs since his return as iCeo. The computing proletariat want something as functional as a washing machine, the computer is becoming white goods and needs an interface which allows them to do what they want to in an intuitive and simple way with little need for IT knowledge. They are flocking to iPhone like they flocked to iPod and are enjoying the user experience, when they look at renewing their PC they are buying Apple for home BECAUSE they have a choice and are rewarded by having good looking design and a great UI. As for the premium price point argument, it's getting more and more competitive hence why Apple's hardware sales are bucking the downward trend that other hardware makers are enjoying.
If only MS could understand their own UI needs and implement innovation in an intuitive way. Just look at Office 2007. Needless to say when the corporates need to refresh their technlogy MS will roll out the business edition of Windows 7 which will be snapped up and the company will be able to once again rest at ease when the procurement cycle revolves and returns their locked in office users to the family table for another round of Enterprise Licence negotiation.
Complain about this comment
I am certainly not going to embrace Windows 7 for a long long time. I have used windows XP for possibly the longest and have grown accustomed to its quirkiness. I started with DOS and then Windows 1. all those years ago ( an illegal copy I suspect) and moved to Windows 2.11 after playing with GEM (remember that?). I still like to write my own batch files in DOS rather than use other software that never seems to do what I want.
I sometimes think I would like to try LINUX but lack the courage to make the change. XP will probably keep me going - I'd like a MAC but us pensioners can only dream!!!
Complain about this comment
@StargateHitchHiker - there is no need to talk to me in such a condescending tone, and no I am not your "mate". I am more than aware of the ins and outs of the Windows registry. Speaking as a professional engineer, when you want to design something there are always pros and cons to any particular design - likewise, the Windows Registry has both pros and cons to its design.
@evilimmigrant - I noticed you only posted the disadvantages. On the link you posted there are actually listed more advantages of the windwos Registry than disadvantages! I would agree with you that when programming your own Windows application it's good practice to store application-specific settings in a .xml file, and leave the registry for storing operating system settings.
Complain about this comment
At the moment it is still very much a case as to what software you want to use.
If you like MS Office, then its probably easier to go for windows, for instance.
I have various systems to cater for the things I do. One system is Ubunto, and I have to say that installing software is a complete pain! If it is in a package, fine, if it is not then the chances are that you get some madly complicated set of instructions including chmod this and mv that and find this requirement from this out of date website and so on.
It is the same with various open source software applications - often very clever, but the developers haven't the foggiest idea about how to make something usable.
My favourite example is the Gimp. Great bit of software, but a complete mare to use - clunky, unfriendly user interface and the most appalling help documentation. Various professional graphics friends of mine are very praising of its power, but would never use it for their business - much to much like hard work. They want sleek, easy and familiar - they dont want to be computer geeks, they want to be graphic artists.
Until the OS community can actually get their heads round some serious market research, they will never get close to MS or Mac to be honest when it comes to the ordinary everyday user.
And lets face it, that is what the internet and the IT industry is all about - the ordinary user.
Complain about this comment
I hope we get to use W7 at work. I miss my Mac when I
at my desk and W7 looks pretty much the same, so it should make my life a whole easier.
Complain about this comment
I'm itching to make a few not so serious comments :)
#95: You are talking about some very specific programs that only a few select professionals should need. The professional in question should be able to compile those programs. I do admit versioning can be a bit painful in the open source world, but then again you don't pay for it. Let me rephrase it, you pay for it with your time and not in cash. There is a trade-off and sometimes open source could end up being more expensive, as I found out at my personal cost :(
#92: Tablets or netbooks would never replace the good old PC. I remember reading an article about the netbooks back in the 1990s, and the author was very dismissive of the idea. Fast forward 10 years, distributed computing (read as The Cloud) moved up a few levels, but the main principles are still the same. I personally don't want to store my data in a remote location. There are things I'm willing to store on a remote computer and things I'd like to keep on my hard disk.
I can see how the idea of sharing data is very useful in the corporate environment and they pay handsomely for the ability to share data between employees, but I would not use nor pay for such services. My personal data will never live my house, just like some governments require that sensitive data not be routed to another country...
#90: What light bulbs do you use? My light bulbs do indeed take a minute or two to come into life. The new generation light bulbs are not that different than the computers :)
To all the Apple users: Why don't you wait for an Apple related blog and then you can have your chance to talk about how great (??) Apple is. Sadly for me, Mac is out of my price range at the moment. A few of you saying that it's cheaper than it used to be made me compare the prices and it is still not in my price range. It is a good looking PS though.
#78: Sorry I didn't realise XP came with an expiry date. Why shouldn't I be able to keep using it for as long as I want? It works well, and I want to keep using it for the foreseeable future.
How is saying "We like XP" being anti-MS? I have tried the fancy features of the new OSs, and I don't like them. It's about preferences. I prefer my OS UI to be simple. I do not want changes for the sake of having changes.
#44: I like the lunch box look :)
Stickers on laptops are great. They make it look more personal, as opposed to a cold and boring work machine.
About the registry: My instinct tells me loading a single file and reading its content is more efficient than fetching multiple XML files and parsing the XML tags. I remember reading something about XML parsers being bottlenecks in SOAP (Web Services) like distributed architectures. If kept clean, a central registry should be more efficient than XML based configurations.
I have had my fair share of registry troubles, and I understand the criticism as well. I don't want to sound like a pro-MS person here, but aren't third party developers more responsible for the faults in the registry than MS?
****************************************
Completely unrelated subject: If an OS had to be designed from scratch today, I believe it would follow the modular design of Minix as opposed to the existing monolithic kernels. Almost all the design principles of the IT world are based on modularity and layering. Modularity brings flexibility, extendability, interoperability between independently developed components, increased reliability, etc.
Complain about this comment
Can i ask how much microsoft is paying the BBC for all this free advertising? Seven stories on the Technology page devoted to a commercial product...someone in the Marketing department at MS must be either very rich or lauging all the way to PC World (other computer stores are available.....)
Complain about this comment
I installed W7 Ultimate on my 4 year old notebook last night and I am impressed.
It goes from cold boot to working in 2 minutes 17 seconds (and that includes me logging on and inputting a password).
Because it's a notebook I backed up the drivers before the clean install. W7 found them all and then went and looked for updated drvers where relevant.
Brilliant
Complain about this comment
This is for at Rory Cellan-Jones.
I listened with interest (and some fury) at the Radio 4 "P.M." broadcast about Windows 7 and that you mentioned Windows (of course), Apple OS/X and Google's operating system (did you mean Chrome or Android and why not tell the listeners) but of course NO MENTION OF LINUX directly to the public.
Why will the BBC NEVER mention the 'L' word? Microsoft have admitted several times that Linux is the biggest threat to their desktop monopoly - perhaps (as with the government's deal with Microsoft) there is a secret understanding with Microsoft to not mention the competition. God forbid there could be real opportunity and choice for consumers!
Google's Android operating system - IS LINUX - and is used on many phones - indeed I have a HTC Hero with this installed. Google Chrome - IS LINUX - although is used by very few people.
From a number of sources including DistroWatch ( http://www.distrowatch.com )
1) Canonical Ubuntu - is the most popular home Linux distribution (+ derivatives)
2) Red Hat Fedora - is a close second
3) Novell OpenSuse - is third (and)
4) Mandriva Linux - is fourth
although for business desktops, the ordering is
1) Red Hat Enterprise Linux
2) CentOS Enterprise Linux (free version of Red Hat)
3) Debian Linux (used by most Internet Service Providers)
4) Novell Enterprise Linux
None of these names were mentioned. Why? Probably because Microsoft has a big political influence and they HAVE to maintain their monopoly.
I understand that you have to cover Windows 7 as it will be used on a large number of desktop PCs but I would bet you won't mention that Ubuntu 9.10 is just about to be released or when it happens. You also did not have such a big feature when Apple OS/X ("Snow Leopard") was released.
Yes I'm biased and a big supporter of Linux but (to be honest) Microsoft get ALL the publicity. One of the main reasons that Microsoft is so dominant is MINDSHARE. If people do not know about perfectly credible and usable alternatives then they will continue to buy from a monopoly supplier. The BBC should report on all the options but particularly Microsoft's stated biggest competitor.
Also in these times of austerity, if more public services were to use open source software such as Linux and Open Office rather than Windows 7 and Office 2007 then we could save literally millions of £££'s (rather than pay Microsoft) and put this money back into public services and schools (etc). I do not accept that people could not switch if they are happy to switch from XP to Vista or Windows 7 and accept the retraining required.
Many people do like Windows and I am pleased that they Windows 7 is an improvement (although many people including my wife think that the user interface is worse than XP and "gets in the way" more but that is one opinion). That does not mean that you should not state what other choices there are.
Complain about this comment
@97 Windows XP does come with an expiry date but it's a long way off - 2014. It won't stop running but MS will stop patching it, so any security holes found after then will be left open. You'll probably find that most app developers have abandoned it long before then anyway.
-ben
Complain about this comment
Another thought for Rory Cellan-Jones and either the "Today Team" or the "P.M. Team" on Radio 4.
Ubuntu 9.10 (http://www.ubuntu.com/) is due out in a weeks time on the 29th October (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KarmicReleaseSchedule).
Why not have a brief interview on the 29th with Mark Shuttleworth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shuttleworth) who founded Ubuntu about the new release, Windows vs Linux on Netbooks and what Linux is as many people have never heard of it.
That might give some balance to the Windows 7 launch.
Complain about this comment
@100 Google Chrome isn't linux - it's a web browser. Written using C++ and assembler.
Complain about this comment
For Virtual_Doctor:
Google Chrome is also an operating system as well as a browser. Have a look at these links:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
http://sites.google.com/site/chromeoslinux/download
Another up and coming distribution is Intel Moblin (http://moblin.org/) but this only works on Intel CPUs and graphics chipsets.
Complain about this comment
I sit corrected then :) I hadn't heard of that.
Complain about this comment
For Virtual_Doctor:
To be fair, Google's Chrome OS is not exactly publicised everywhere :) and many people have (of course) heard of the browser. You can also install Chromium (which is a Linux build of the Chrome browser) on Ubuntu
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/how-to-install-chromium-google-chrome-in-ubuntu-using-deb-package.html (bit geeky I'm afraid)
which I have but I prefer Firefox (on all operating systems) :)
Back to Google OS - this is why I was so annoyed about the BBC mentioning Google OS and not Linux. Virtually no one has seen Google's Chrome OS although many have seen Google Chrome browser on Windows so many listeners would confuse it with that.
Contrast that with Ubuntu which many people have heard of (or even Red Hat for that matter). If they had mentioned either of these along with the magic word "Linux" then perhaps people might have been interested and found out about them after "P.M." finished. By mentioning Google OS instead they have ensured that nobody will start looking at (currently) viable alternatives like Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE or Mandriva.
http://www.ubuntu.com/
http://fedoraproject.org/
http://www.opensuse.org/en/
http://www2.mandriva.com/linux/one/
(sorry if I have missed someone's favourite!)
Perhaps next year Google Chrome MIGHT launch although many vendors are saying they will install Android (http://code.google.com/android/) instead on small Netbooks.
Complain about this comment
UseLinuxNotWindows - You might consider a formal complaint to the BBC. As well as being a technical alternative, the Free software movement is also a political one, and if the BBC isn't giving it a covering it a reasonable proportion of the coverage that may be a breach of the charter; the impartiality requirements don't just apply to Westminster politics.
Complain about this comment
Invention has no end.Theory,concept and law etc. research has no end.It will run upto infinite period.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As a Vista user, I have only had one problem with my computer since I bought it over a year ago, and that was caused by a 3rd party programme so nothing to do with Vista itself. Part of the problem with Vista was that it came with so many functions that old or slow PCs just couldn't cope and people didn't know how to turn them off.
http://game-booster.en.softonic.com/
This is a massive help, especially on laptops as switching off a few apps really speeds up the response time.
As well as this, Vista has the opportunity to run programmes in compatability mode. The main issues with compatability were people buying 64bit Vista and not realising that it is different from 32bit. In the old XP days, there was no need for a 64bit OS at home as very few computers came with the 4gig including video memory that went beyond what a 32bit OS could cope with. Now most mid-range laptops come with 4gigs of RAM so 64bit is required.
My PC hasn't slowed down under Vista, and unlike with a Mac I can by a computer capable of playing all the latest games at an affordable price and on decent settings.
If I was buying a new computer then Windows 7 would have been the chosen option. Windows has the edge on gaming and that swings it for me!
Complain about this comment
@107 (_Ewan_)
Comment @109 was a bit too defamatory towards Microsoft so I apologise for that.
Moderators please delete comment #109 if you like.
Modified version follows:
I guess I was being too "British" (aka "mustn't grumble" etc). I too am involved in the political side of FOSS e.g.
http://en.windows7sins.org/
http://boycottnovell.com/?stories
http://www.groklaw.net
The main thing (I think) is for people to have choice. I actually started my career with commercial Unix and found it very limiting and expensive to use. When Windows 3.x came along (especially when ODBC made connecting to different databases very easy) I found Windows to be enabling technology (i.e. it made it easy to do what I wanted to with my PC). At the time there was a huge choice of software you could use - e.g. Office Suites
Microsoft Office
Borland Office
Lotus Office
Agility
Coral Office (including Wordperfect)
You even had a choice of operating system on which to run these programs (such as IBM OS/2 Warp).
Development software was the same - plenty of choice.
As time has passed, the choices of key pieces of software to run on Windows has fallen (for most people) to
Operating System: Windows (XP, Vista, 7)
Office Suite: Microsoft Office (2000, 2003, 2007, 2010)
Development Software: Visual Studio (2003, 2005, 2008, 2010)
unless you put FOSS or Java into the equation. Microsoft also introduced Digital Rights Management (refered to as Digital Restriction Management by many FOSS users) on Windows which restricts how you can playback or copy your own media or recordings.
Whilst this was happening, Linux (and also FreeBSD) was starting to emerge along with a vast amount of open source software. All of a sudden it was Linux that was the enabling software allowing me to do what I wanted to and Windows that was the expensive, limiting and proprietary software. Things have sort of come full circle.
In general Free and Open Source Software:
* Works across multiple operating systems (e.g. Windows, OS/X and Linux)
* Is free from DRM, activation, crippling 'features'
* Can be copied and distributed legally by anyone
* The software is completely free but you pay for support
* Supports standards and interoperability (i.e. all works together)
Microsoft Software
* Only works on Windows (except Office which also runs on OS/X)
* Is encumbered with complicated EULAs and activation keys - no copying
* Is expensive - but support is 'free' (often not the case though)
* Generally supports Microsoft's own proprietry formats and protocols better than any others
* Very grudgingly interoperates with anything non-Microsoft
I say this from experience. I have done Microsoft based development for over 17 years and Unix/Linux based development for nearly 20 years.
Having said all that I want people to have CHOICE. If someone WANTS to use Windows (or OS/X for that matter) that is absolutely fine by me. I want to use Linux but am generally forced to purchase PCs with Windows on in - in fact it is very hard to buy a PC without Windows installed on it. Why can't I buy a PC with Linux on it?
According to some recent web figures, usage is roughly:
64% Windows XP
24% Windows Vista
10% OS/X (Puma, Leopard and Snow Leopard)
2% Linux (mainly Ubuntu, Fedora and openSuSE)
Now 2% is not huge but it is growing fast and Android/WebOS (Linux) phones are pretty much taking over the smart phone sector. What is stopping bigger Linux growth is VISIBILITY - i.e. most people have never seen or used a PC with Linux on it. If more people knoew about it then more people would probably use it especially when they found out that:
1) The software was free/legal/friends could have a copies
2) It was generally faster on the same hardware than Windows
3) It was MUCH more immune to viruses/root-kits/worms
4) You could do exactly the same sort of things that you are doing under Windows
5) Not encumbered by DRM
You get the idea - sorry for the big rant - perhaps I will submit a complaint.
Complain about this comment
I love a good debate, I like more often that not the comments on BBC Blogs more than the content of the original posting. But I must add my own comment into the foray here.
Put simply it is this, if can put it like this, fan clubs for different OS's. You've got the Mac OSX lovers and following behind are the Linux faithful. You don't however ever get much of a love from Windows users. At most you will seem to find people saying things like, it has worked for me, it has crashed for me, I can use it or I hate it - but never really a passionate support for such.
I think why this is, is because most people use it. It is a given. You get a computer, you get Windows. You use it. Much like an appliance, many different models, all doing much the same thing.
As with Internet Browsers some use Firefox, Some Google Chrome etc etc and with each comes a 'this is better because...' I am not a fan boy of Microsoft, indeed of any company or product. So what has got me to say all this?
Simply the average user. The person who goes out to PC World and buys a new laptop/desktop/netbook they want it to go online, watch films, store photos (everyday tasks) they want something that looks nice, is priced well against the others. Now let us say the sales persons says, now what OS would you like that to come with? Windows or Linux..Or maybe you would prefer an Apple Mac with it's version.
Is someone really going to know what is best? Would someone want to pay over the odds for a very nice looking, easy to use Mac to do much the same with the 'PC' next to it can for half the cost? Would one know the benefits of Linux over Windows? Would a sales person be able to impartially and knowledgably say this is better for your needs because...? I think not.
Like many, I only end up with the next version of Windows when I get a new computer. Yes I have tried Linux, but the simply little things that I am used to (that will work) but not in quite the same way as on Windows made me go back to Windows. I've 5 machines in my house, 2 run Vista, one XP and one Windows 7. And you know what, since Vista's SP1 came along the problems I personally had went away with Vista. XP hardly ever crashes, and to be honest cannot remember last time Vista did. Windows 7 is working a charm to.
If I can get things done, look at sites, catch up with my missed TV shows, chat to friends online and over Skype..I am happy. This whole idea people get it, hate it must change it to Linux (for example) because it was just soo terrible astounds me. Those who do such, care about such even - Surly are the types who know what motherboard and processor go, what the best Ram is etc etc and can build a system, choose to go with Windows or not..But Joe blogs consumer and company will just go with the flow, it just (usually) works.
Complain about this comment
I always love these Mac Vs Windows Vs Linux debates.
TwelveEightyOne:
"Apple - record profits, record number of Macs sold, totally bucking the trend.
Microsoft - well let's just say if Windows 7 fails to impress the great unwashed, it will be the beginning of their end. "
You forgot to mention that Windows runs on around 90% of the world's PCs. I don't think Microsoft has any fears about this imminent rise of the Mac (which Mac fanboys have been touting since at least the first iMac). The record number of Macs sold is just puny compared to how many Windows machines are sold. Perhaps we live in a world of irrational idiots, where only a select few can see the light and buy a Mac?
The fact is that for most people (including many techies like myself) Windows does everything required of it, and some more.
Sure I could pay 3 times as much for an Apple Mac (since they rather uncompetitively won't license their OS to other manufacturers) but would I really then turn up here proud of myself - "hey guys - I paid 3 times more for my PC than you, to do the same stuff as you do". I don't think I would.
I have a Mac that I use for testing websites. Its okay - does what I want it to. But so does Windows. And the basic Mac I have cost way more than a very basic PC.
Again, Linux is fine too, and its free. But there are so many flavours of it... trying to resolve problems or get support for some software or hardware just isn't as easy as with Windows. But if it works for you, great!
The fact is that Windows is in use on 90% of the world's PCs because for 90% of people it does the job. Its widely supported, reliable (can't recall the last time I saw a blue screen of death, which wasn't always the case with older versions) and it will run on machines by numerous manufacturers... I was recently travelling so I picked up a cheap (150 quid) Lenovo netbook running XP in Dubai. Its tiny to carry around, battery lasts forever and at 150 quid I won't be crying if it gets broken or lost on my travels. Like the other 90% of PC users, for me, it does the job.
Most people aren't bothered about what is best... they want something at a sensible price that can do the job they want it for. And for 90% of people, that is Windows. For 10% its not.
Complain about this comment
Alright. Time out. Is anyone here really posting from a center point? Or are we all just biased PC (personal computer) users. Really?
I will state my bias. I use both Mac and PC. I own both Mac and PC. I PREFER my Mac. That is my preference. I have a degree in Computer Science and find that on my Windows (XP) machine I must dip into my nerd bag a little to often where as on my Mac - I just use it. This is MY experience. I am admittedly surprised when I read about persons who using windows don't need any antivirus software for instance because of MY experience with Windows but that is not to say that their experience is not impossible.
". At 1:38pm on 21 Oct 2009, LuftHamza wrote:
@ravenmorpheus2k: I resent your comment of "Windows is a mass market OS aimed at the "noobs" who have been welcomed into the fold of computing circles by purchasing their PC with an OS installed already, usually from places like PC World". No, it's not. Have you ever written inline assembler code in a C++ software project in Microsoft's Visual C++, which is intended to run on Windows? Ever written a Windows device driver? Ever had to perform binary serialization to pass data between 2 or more Windows (Windows) PCs? When you've done any one of those, you can come back and tell me you still think Windows is for "noobs" who shop at PC world...
...And finally a global message to all those who can't even keep their windows PC in check (you know who you are, boo-hoo-XP-keeps-getting-slower crowd):
1, Get SysInternals Suite + Power Defragmenter, run that for starters
2, Remove apps you don't use
3, Don't use McAfee as it's a memory hog, use AVG + Ad-Aware + Spybot instead (and they're free)
4, Set up your page file properly
5, Regularly delete the contents of nethood and printhood folders
6, Empty the "startup" folder in your start menu of items you don't use
7, Clean up your desktop. Your desktop is part of your profile. If your desktop weighs several gigabytes, your profile will too. Ergo loading all that lot will take longer.
8, Emtpy the recycle bin once in a while
9, In the services console, disable all the services you don't need
What you lot are saying is akin to a driver who doesn't have a clue about it's inner workings moaning about his car running badly when:
a) he can't fix it, and
b) won't take it to someone who can.
The worst thing about all computers by far is that many people assume they will somehow be flawless - how's that? they were designed and built by humans after all.."
Wow. So really this Windows thing is really for me and you dude... I mean thank god I've done C#/C++ programming, etc., etc. - This is my windows fear. To really have my OS run well I need to do your steps 1 through 9 which in my opinion are not for the 80% of the world that are basic computer users.
"At 1:52pm on 21 Oct 2009, ravenmorpheus2k wrote: And lets not forget that the reason you don't get viri on a Mac OS or Linux is because people just don't write many viri for them because compared to Windows, Mac OS and Linux are not as widely used."
"At 2:24pm on 21 Oct 2009, MrBeemer wrote: Getting infected isn't what makes Windows so bad, because its so popular its targeted. If Macs and Linux ever reach the popularity of windows they will also suffer from the same problem."
I'm not walking the virus myths with the Mac or Windows. Its a little more secure. Nada mas. There are some issues with the issues of open ports on Windows. It is not about market share. Based on the market share logic then Macs should have their 4% of the over half a million viruses that exist. Basic math.
So what really is being asked here is: where is computer usage now? Clearly it seems that the trend is that applications are moving online - Google Docs for instance or Adobe Remix or Photoshop Online - So what do computer users need really? A browser perhaps and a few other items depending on their need. I am sure if people made informed computer choices they probably would not buy either Windows or Macs. They probably would just get an "empty" PC and have Ubuntu installed as it has everything they need right there ready to go. My educated guess is that 80% of persons actually don't really know about what options they have and they have assumed that a computer must run Windows - a credit to Bill Gates and his marketing team over the years. Discounts to corporations, schools and governments have reinforced the idea to that 80% that all computers MUST run windows and nothing else. The strategy has worked well and left this unfortunate divide between us computer users who as it turns out are all able to do the same things differently. Such as posting on the BBC's website with little difficulty at that.
Good day to all.
Complain about this comment
UseLinuxNotWindows, I undertsnad your argument but the BBC are supposed to be reporting the news not advertising new operating systems, that is the the Ubuntu foundation / Cononical Ltd job, not the BBC's.
The majority / 90% of computer users use Windows, that's a fact, so the majority are interested in Windows articles and couldn't care less what Ubuntu are doing as not may people have heard of them.
If Ubuntu had a percentage of the market, even as much as Apples small slice, then we would see articles about Ubuntu.
But until then, I'd expect to see more articles about Windows and Apple.
Complain about this comment
@110 - The_Hess
I am pleased that Windows 7 solves your compatibility problems even though it is really Vista SP2 - there are no fundamental changes - I have been running the pre-release candidate for a while. It does seem a BIT faster and does use a bit less memory. It would be nice to turn off most of Aero's graphical features + unnecessary services though and save every possible CPU cycle for what I want to run :) (which is what that utility is trying to do).
My impression (and it is my own opinion) is that Microsoft would rather downgrade the PC as a games machine and encourage users to migrate over to the XBox 360 (which after all is a dedicated games box tuned for games usage) and keep the PC for media and business oriented applications.
I too play games (primarily Quake FPS type games) on Linux although would like projects like this one (http://openpandora.org/) to succeed.
I also have a Media PC running Mythbuntu
http://www.mythbuntu.org/
http://www.mythtv.org/detail/mythtv
and can also run iPlayer on it (as iPlayer is now Linux friendly - thank you BBC)
You can also do this on Windows if you like - have a look at
http://www.team-mediaportal.com/
http://www.gbpvr.com/
Also don't pay for expensive DVD watching software for Windows - use completely legal free software like:
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ (or)
http://mpc-hc.sourceforge.net/
Complain about this comment
Just my 2p on W7:-
I used it on two machines, one with Xp Pro and the other with OpenSuse. On the XP machine, I figured I would try the Upgrade advisor, downloaded it from MS website and ran it - it immediately failed "unable to connect to the internet". Hmm, my internet connection's working fine, after all, the download of Visual Studio Express, also from MS's website, was chuntering away in the background. So far so good? Well, not really. With the UA not working, I knew it was a sign of things to come! So, being an IT pro and used to installing OSes I decided to flick the switch so to speak and give it a shot.
My first impressions were nice, it installed quite quickly (compared to Vista which by the way did NOT like being installed on the very same PC and when it did, well, it was horrible so went back to XP!) and when it was done, I was presented with the desktop as expected. I must say, it was very nice, really polished and quite a nice experience to use. All went well I thought until I tried to play some multimedia. "No sound device". Ah. It didn't like my on-board soundmax card and could I find a driver? Could I heck! As the main purpose for this machine was as a media centre, it was a total show-stopper so after 2 days decided that enough was enough and put XP back on.
My other machine, also a HTPC (this time in the master bedroom), I put in a spare HDD as I'd gotten Suse configured and working like a charm so figured a fresh install on a blank HDD would allow me swift recovery if/when things went wrong.
So, installed, booted and this time, all worked, sound was good and even on my Nvidi 6200 graphics card, was very smooth and again, a real nice experience. Hoorah I thought. Media played and everything seemed well but I noticed that the quality of audio had been reduced to that of a pirate video tape from the 80s. Before in Suse, my Soundblaster Audigy card was great, crystal clear and what not.
OK, perhaps not a show-stopper but it started to grate after a few days (bear in mind this was the Beta W7). After using it I discovered a lot of features that seem to be basic in Linux missing, the most common resource I use if the Konsole or command line. Linux has a really handy feature, "bash history". Basically, it remembers what you type even when you close the Konsole/Command prompt. Very handy to recall those long-ago used commands that you've forgotten! Alas, W7 still fails to address this very basic omission and it only remembers commands typed in that "session".
So, after a few days of trying to find where all the bits and bats were (Add/Remove Programs and all the other Xp familiar stuff) I decided to scrap W7 and return to my friendly penguin friend.
I won't be running out and buying a copy of it but I am hoping for a new PC to replace one and it will no doubt come with W7 pre-installed but that's OK, I know everything will work from the moment I power-on and it's going to be a decent spec for games.
All in all, the eye-candy's very nice indeed but where are
Multiple Desktops?
Commandline history?
Wobbly windows?
As for the other features I've read about but not used (touch-screen for example), well, I'm sure when touch-screen hits the regular household then it might be OK (although having to get up from the sofa to touch the screen to change channel/volume? No thanks!) but until then, a bit of a wasted feature from my POV.
Oh, I started by saying "just my 2p", sorry it turned out to be more like "my £1.50" ...
Complain about this comment
To #113 "DontCallMeDarling"
"Again, Linux is fine too, and its free. But there are so many flavours of it... trying to resolve problems or get support for some software or hardware just isn't as easy as with Windows. But if it works for you, great!"
While I agree that there are alot of flavours, this does give you choice. If you want Desktop replacement, you can get Ubuntu, or Mandriva or whatever takes your fancy. If you want to run it on old hardware, you can get Puppy, or a lighter derivative of, say, Ubuntu.
As for support, I don't think your point is entirely fair since you can hardly expect to get good results for fixing Windows 7 if you just type "[problem] windows" into Google and try to use a walk through for XP.
Complain about this comment
@112 and @113
If you really like Windows and want to use it that's fine by me - but there are alternatives and many people simply do not know about them.
The majority of the people commenting here are very IT aware and would probably be able to install an operating system from scratch whether that be Windows 7, "Snow Leopard" or Ubuntu 9.10. The MAJORITY of people who use PCs are not that IT aware and are being denied a CHOICE.
I agree about a small netbook PC running XP - but why XP by the way (which is an outdated operating system). Should it not have Windows 7 on it or would it (perhaps) run too slow?
What if you had been offered the same netbook running Linux (unfortunately the distribution that they tend to use is Linpus which is awful - Ubuntu MID Edition is much better) - would you have discounted it for that reason alone and would you have been annoyed if it had ONLY been available with Linux on it rather than XP?
I don't want O/S wars - what I want is for people to have a CHOICE and also for PCs to interoperate (work together) if the O/S providers use STANDARDS and not be FORCED to use Windows.
It is true that often people like what they have. In many cases the people here like Windows because they already have (a previous version of) Windows. If they had grown used to OS/X or Linux then they would probably stick with that. That is why Microsoft is so desperate to ensure that children are only exposed to Windows as they are growing up so that they do not consider other alternatives (personal opinion).
My own children use both operating systems - Windows at school and Linux at home and swap between them without even thinking about it. If I had a Mac I would have shown them that as well.
It is expensive to move from XP to Vista or Windows 7. The latest (32 bit) version of Ubuntu will run quite happily (and pretty fast) on a 2GHz Pentium 4 with 512MB RAM and a modest graphics card (I know as I also have an old laptop with this specification). The same cannot be said for either Windows 7 or Vista. Think of the cost savings for all the schools if they could avoid upgrading all of their PCs and also not needing to upgrade their operating systems or office software.
What if you realized that as long as you applied all of the software updates (and used common sense) you did not NEED to run anti-virus software or spyware scanners like you do on Windows (and I do not accept that this is anything to do with market share - these are software architecture problems with Windows).
There are certainly advantages in running Windows in that more people tend to be familiar with it. There are also more games available for Windows than either Linux or OS/X - BUT
Most of the people here want to run Windows because they have always run Windows and do not want to change. That is certainly a valid point but not the only point of view. You would not worry about swapping to another mobile phone (no matter what O/S it was running) if it did the job you wanted it to.
Complain about this comment
Virtual_DoctorI undertsnad your argument but the BBC are supposed to be reporting the news not advertising new operating systems
The BBC's remit is to inform, educate and entertain. Coverage of Windows might count as the first of those, but telling people about something they don't already know about would be both of the first two, and possibly a bit of the last.
Complain about this comment
Reading through contributions to this blog left me shaking my head; whether it was disbelief or despair (or possibly something else entirely) is till unclear. My gloom lifted at # 112 - londonrascal who (for me at any rate) introduced a bit of sanity. For most users the OS they use is of no consequence. As long as it works; fine. How many, I asked myself, worry about whether Mr Dyson's latest vacuum cleaner uses a shunt or series wound motor? How many worry about the number of times their new washing machine drum changes direction during a wash cycle?
For myself (with XP) I ask more basic questions; while I can export email contacts to an external file and thence upload them on to a new or repaired PC, WHY can I not export my toolbar settings for precisely the same purpose?
From an "average" user's viewpoint all the rest is froth.
Clearly there is a place for a detailed comparison between operating systems, but I would have thought from the majority (user) perspective such a discussion has little relevance.
Complain about this comment
Hmph - why are we all fighting over which is better?
Windows has its problems, and always will do, such as:
Registry
Poor file architecture = lots of virii (plural of viruses)
Degrades speed overtime = need reinstall
Once all allocated keys are used you need to buy a new disk, which is absiloutely pointless and waste of money in my opinion.
And mac also has its down sides too.
If you don't like neither, or can't afford neither then why not fuss for linux? The only thing you need to learn is to adapt to the UI, which is nearly the same as Mac. No virus, free, fast, never breaks down.
Complain about this comment
"57. At 3:59pm on 21 Oct 2009, LuftHamza wrote:
@ravenmorpheus2k: it's not really an analysis when you only quote your own personal opinion and can't show me any figures whatsoever.
you've basically made my point for me: computing beginners generally buy Microsoft because it's the most widespread option by far, not as you imply, because they're too dumb to install Linux.
Fedora 4 had nice graphical installers while at the same time us XPers were still kicking around in the straw and filth with the ASCII installer, deleting, sizing, formatting and creating partitions rather haphazardly by today's standards. Press F6 at exactly the right time to install a third party SCSI or RAID driver? that's user-friendly for "noobs"!
So, by your "analysis", putting in a DVD when prompted and clicking "next" is beyond the capabilities of computing beginners."
Yes quite right (that last sentence).
I work in IT (or ICT as it's been "rebranded"), I have done for a while, currently I work for a BlackBerry reseller on their helpdesk.
And you'd be surprised the amount of people we have on our helpdesk that don't know how to use a mobile phone, let alone a BlackBerry and when we ask them to do a simple task such as open outlook we get asked "what's that?".
So yes it is quite beyond many people to put in a DVD and click next, perhaps not beyond them to do that but installing an OS properly takes a bit more than that, seeing as most machines don't just rely on the bog standard M$ drivers.
And like I said people are happy with what they get, and part of that reason is because they are too lazy or not computer literate enough (or believe they are not) to choose to use any other OS.
Sure a lot of it has to do with M$s OSs being the most widely used, but if people were installing Linux after buying a PC with an M$ OS you'd see a decline in M$s OS wouldn't you? That hasn't happened.
And each time a survey of "the general public" is done it comes up with the same answer for the overwhelming majority - I use Windows, I don't know a lot about computing, I wouldn't have a clue how to install an OS, what's an OS?
I'm sure if I trawled the interweb I could find figures to back that up.
And if people are signing up to the Norton products that come pre-installed when there are alternatives out there, often free alternatives, which do the same job, in many cases better, I don't think anyone should give the PC buying public any credit for having any computer skills.
"34. At 2:02pm on 21 Oct 2009, cinemaparadiso wrote:
So, let me get this straight...
Rory Cellan-Jones is the BBC's 'Technology Correspondent'.
Rory has to use an 8 year old version of Windows at work.
Rory has only just got round to trying Windows 7, which has been publicly available in Beta for 9 months. No access to a spare PC...?
Rory uses an up to date version of MacOS at home, so he installs the same third party software he uses (and probably *has* to use due to lack of alternatives) at home on his Mac, on the 'unfamiliar' Windows 7.
So a question - Why is Rory paid a salary from public tax as a Technology Correspondent, when he evidently does not keep up with current technology, is apparently denied access to it at work (time to talk to your boss about next years 'research' budget, rather than the pay rise), then can write a column for a publicly funded organisation with a world-wide audience...?"
Yes I've often wondered that, but at least Rory tries, Maggie, well...
I got my copy of Win 7 Home Premium today, and it's exactly the same as the Release Candidate, apart from the fact the RC was the "Ultimate" version. Haven't loaded all my games and apps I have in XP onto it yet so time will tell...
Complain about this comment
Oh and a point on opting for Linux - there are many apps that simply don't work in Linux, not least of all games.
The same goes for Mac.
Gaming especially is best done on a PC running Windows, I've seen too many threads over the years seeking help and advice on getting x game to run on Mac/Linux that it's not funny anymore.
If you only want to surf the web, listen to music etc. then yeah great go for Linux.
Complain about this comment
@ DontCallMeDarling
'Perhaps we live in a world of irrational idiots, where only a select few can see the light and buy a Mac?'
'I have a Mac that I use for testing websites. Its okay - does what I want it to'
....and another one bites the dust, da du du du, another one down, another one down, another one bites the dust.
Complain about this comment
Gaming especially is best done on a PC running Windows
Only if you enjoy dealing with viciously invasive DRM. Proprietary games are best run on consoles.
Complain about this comment
@99 psychobdelic
I wouldn't boast about that boot time if I were you, here are my boot times:
Fedora Linux on 12 month old desktop - 40sec
Ubuntu Linux on 5 year old laptop - 65 sec
Puppy Linux on 9 year old desktop - 55 sec
and I didn't pay for my software, you've been ripped of mate.
Complain about this comment
@41 MrBeemer
The reason Windows is so 'popular' is because its pre-installed on virtually all new PCs. Mac and Linux have a long way to go yet to catch up??? They are already way ahead 'cos they are Unix based and therefore superior to Windows.
Complain about this comment
'viciously invasive DRM'
Really? Invasive?
'Proprietary games are best run on consoles.'
Best how exactly?
Complain about this comment
@123
Most people are not dumb BUT are not trained in ICT (as many of us are here) so are not capable of installing ANY operating system - whether Windows, OS/X or Linux. Many people will take their PC into PC World just to upgrade from Vista to Windows 7.
This is the WHOLE POINT!
They will not change over from Windows to anything else since they are not capable of doing so - therefore most users will not choose to change from Windows to Linux because they are not capable of it. It it was Linux on the computer and they wanted to change to Windows 7 it would be the same situation.
This is why I said that computer buyers need a CHOICE at the point that they buy the PC so that they can purchase it pre-installed. I think the situation is a bit like the Telecommunications industry when BT was the monopoly supplier and things were opened up to competition - we need some sort of regulation so that an incumbent (such as Microsoft) cannot abuse their position - and start-ups or competitors have a fighting chance. Years ago, nobody had heard of Virgin Media or TalkTalk or any of the other competitors to BT.
In this internet driven age, you can run many applications just as well on any operating system - Firefox is a good example. My children do not notice any significant differences using websites on Windows or Ubuntu. In fact when some of their friends came around, it was a fair while before they noticed that the computer was not running Windows!
This is why this is important.
Microsoft is a company whose business depends on selling software licences whether new versions of the software are actually required or not - aka the "Upgrade Escalator". They have about 93,000 employees to pay so that takes a lot of income. In order to do this, they HAVE to bring out new versions of software very quickly so that they can charge people and bring in the money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft
Open Source based companies (such as Red Hat and Canonical) tend to be much smaller since they collate open source projects from across the internet into distributions of software. They do not OWN the software - in effect the community does but they can charge for help or better installation disks which they do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_Ltd.
Contrast these with Microsoft - Red Hat has about 2800 employees and Canonical about 200. They still produce good products - both Ubuntu and Red Hat Enterprise Linux are excellent products - but have nowhere near as many mouths to feed.
They also have far fewer resources to advertise their software. Microsoft has an income approaching a small country. How can any anyone compete fairly with that unless they are protected from the monopolist to some extent?
Would you want to go back to the time in which had only ONE choice of telephony provider - aka British Telecom? The same thing applies to operating systems on PCs. We should be able to have a choice without unfair uncompetitive advantages such as only having Microsoft software preloaded onto PCs.
Complain about this comment
"The reason Windows is so 'popular' is because its pre-installed on virtually all new PCs. Mac and Linux have a long way to go yet to catch up??? They are already way ahead 'cos they are Unix based and therefore superior to Windows"
First off, they aren't superior to Windows and your a fool if you truly beleive that. I've seen alot of comments about Windows coming Pre-Installed, So does the Mac OS.......
Consumers have a choice between a PC pre-installed with Windows or a Mac pre-installed with whatever garbage they are currently throwing out. Why not argue that Mac hardware won't come pre-installed with Linux???
One sided jealousy it sounds like to me.
Sorry, that's a bit biased of me against apple i know, ah well....
P.S Before the 'You're a Windows fanboy' rubbish starts, yes i am a fan of Microsoft and of their software - I'm also not an idiot. I use Linux almost as much as I do Windows and personally don't have a favourite between them.
Complain about this comment
@131 - Virtual_Doctor
Actually you can run Linux or Windows 7 perfectly well on a Mac. What is more annoying is that you can't run Apple OS/X or hardware other than a Mac (without resorting to semi-legal USB dongles that fool the O/S into thinking that the hardware is a Mac). You also cannot (as yet) run a copy of OS/X on VMware, VirtualBox, Xen, Virtual PC etc
Consumers DO NOT have a choice about which O/S is installed except for a handful of cases. Microsoft claims that pre-loading is necessary since otherwise people would run pirated copied of Windows on the 'bare bones' PC. What if I want to run something else such as Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSolaris, ReactOS etc. Pre-loading is out-and-out anti-competitive practice and should be referred to the Mnopolies Commission in the UK.
This is not about jealousy, it is about anti-competitive practices designed to drive out any competition.
I am happy that you use Windows and Linux. So do I.
I use 64 bit Ubuntu as my primary operating system and use a (paid for) Windows XP VM for any Windows work that I have to do. I also have a Solaris 10 VM, Windows Vista VM, FreeBSD VM and can/have developed/administered all of them.
I have also tried out Windows 7 as a VM and looked at the features. It is somewhat better than Vista in terms of CPU/memory usage but should really be Vista SP2. From an end user perspective there are not any huge differences - just some differences in user authentication and configuration details which users will have to learn anew.
I am not anti-Microsoft or anti-Windows but I am pro CHOICE and unfortunately Microsoft do not want people to have a choice (quite naturally - they have a successful monopoly after all).
Having used both Windows and Linux for years, Linux does generally run 10-15% faster on the same hardware - probably because Linux does not required virus/spyware scanners running all the time as long as you keep Linux patches up to date and do sensible lock-downs to prevent root kits. It is also has a much lower total cost of ownership (TCO) than Windows and allows me to do what I want to with the PC.
As I said before - I am pleased if you like Windows - that is your CHOICE. I would like to be able to have my choice as well.
Complain about this comment
@126. At 01:21am on 23 Oct 2009, _Ewan_ wrote:
"Gaming especially is best done on a PC running Windows
Only if you enjoy dealing with viciously invasive DRM. Proprietary games are best run on consoles."
That's what the console manufacturers would have you believe. However, if you look at games that are available across the platforms, those that come to the PC generally have better graphics on the PC. Take Grand Theft Auto IV for example - the draw distance is much higher on the PC so you can see further. Call of duty - on consoles it's so difficult to aim properly, most servers run auto-aim. With a PC, the mouse is so intuitive and precise, you don't need auto-aim. As for graphic intensity, consoles make a big thing of running at 1080p - PC gamers tend to look at 1900x1200 as the standard resolution.
I do play games on my PC and they look fabulous. However, if you could run GFWL and World of Warcraft on Linux, I'd probably switch.
Complain about this comment
'There’s something called ‘Ubuntu’ which is launched next week. It’s a whole sort of little community of enthusiasts building operating systems for absolutely nothing and trying to persuade us that we don’t need to be in with the big boys'
Ubuntu (now in version 9.04) is written by Canonical - Founded in late 2004, Canonical Ltd is a company headquartered in Europe with over 200 employees working in 23 countries (and counting). Canonical is the commercial sponsor of Ubuntu project.
OpenSuse Linux - Today, with more than 25 years of experience, Novell delivers the best engineered, most interoperable Linux platform and a portfolio of integrated IT management software that help customers around the world reduce cost, complexity and risk.
Free BSD -2007 was a tremendously successful year for the FreeBSD Foundation. Thanks to the overwhelming support of our donors, we shattered our fundraising goal, raising over $400,000!
They are largely 'supported' by the efforts of enthusiasts, and smaller distro's are written entirely by enthusiasts but you will probably find these enthusiasts like myself are Professional Software Developers, and yes I develop software for Microsofts Platforms just to show no bias!
Yes they are enthusiasts - enthusiastic supporters and followers of forward thinking stable technology, open your eyes, there is so much more out there than Windox! At least 2 major companies are supplying PC's with Linux pre-installed and most Net Books run it, hell even the Sky Satellite Receiver Box runs it!
Complain about this comment
@133 - for aardfrith
Have a look at Transgaming Cedega
http://www.cedega.com/
http://www.cedega.com/gamesdb/games/view.html?game_id=5133
http://www.cedega.com/gamesdb/
It isn't free but is pretty cheap - (about £5/month - for updates)
There is also Crossover Games (also payware)
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/
http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/cat?cat_id=2
and you can try with standard WINE if you want (supports WoW)
http://www.winehq.org/about/
http://appdb.winehq.org/
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Wine
I run the Windows version of Doom 4 on standard WINE (was given it as a present).
Also have a look at
http://www.happypenguin.org/
http://www.linuxgames.com/
http://www.linuxgamingworld.com/
http://www.linux-gamers.net/
Share and enjoy (whether that be code or knowledge) - that is what the open source community is all about :)
Complain about this comment
Lem007 wrote:
'viciously invasive DRM'
Really? Invasive?
Yes, really. If you'd like to spend a few hours, go have a look at the reviews of 'Spore' on Amazon's UK site. There are currently four hundred and five one-star reviews, mostly on account of the DRM. If that's not enough, try the results of a Google search for 'spore drm'. It limits you to a fixed number of installs ever, tinkers with hardware drivers, resists attempt as removal and objects to the mere presence of perfectly legitimate software including the Microsoft SysInternals tools recommended in this very thread as useful for keeping a Windows system in good order. If that doesn't meet your idea of 'invasive' what would?
Complain about this comment
a) Many people are already running Linux, without realising it. A great many routers, digital video recorders and such like use Linux components entirely hidden from view. Three reasons why this is attractive to electronic suppliers 1) modular design - just use the bits you need 2) open source - modify the bits that don't do what is required 3) no licence fees.
b) The reason why it should be more popular - is the cost - if people are not prepared to pay for licensed software, they shouldn't "just use it anyway" - they should use legally available programs like Linux and the associated open source software.
I use both Linux (ubuntu) and Windows (XP) happily. The reason why used Linux so heavily when my children were growing up - virus avoidance. 3 children on windows meant a rebuild every other month despite using AV programs.
Complain about this comment
@ 131
Virtual_Doctor
'Consumers have a choice between a PC pre-installed with Windows or a Mac pre-installed with whatever garbage they are currently throwing out. Why not argue that Mac hardware won't come pre-installed with Linux???'
'I'm also not an idiot'
'You're a Windows fanboy'
William Burroughs would have loved you
Complain about this comment
Just installed Windows 7, having used Vista for the past year, and OSX for 6 years before that (switched so I could get the latest Java updates without needing to update my whole OS, quite critical for a developer)
I must say I am very impressed. Much quicker and a lot less clutter. Libraries are useful (just show me my files!) Yes one could argue that Microsoft took inspiration from the dock, but anyone who knows anything about the history of computing in this country will be well aware of an operating system called RISC OS, which features a bar, very much like the dock, back in the early nineties.
Good job Microsoft. I’m about to slow the whole thing down by installing iTunes *sulks*
Complain about this comment
@131 Virtual_Doctor
You claim that you're not an idiot and I respect that. So, don't call me a fool, we can disagree over choice of OS, but resorting to personal insults is childish. For the record, I have been in IT for nearly 40 years working on many hardware/software platforms. I've lost count of the number of programs I have written. I too have used Windows and Linux as well as Unix and other mainframe OSes and in my opinion the *nixes are superior. If Windows didn't crash as often, wasn't full of bloatware and DRM, didn't need de-fraging or anti-virus, etc, etc, then its as good as *nix, which of course it is potentially. But its Microsoft's business model which turns its developers best efforts into the MacDonalds and Coke of software to satisfy its bottom line.
Complain about this comment
Mac fans are forgetting that unfortunately OSX comes with a premium price tag at the expense of a Mac computer to run it on.
With a normal PC I can have a hardware specification that can rival the Mac Pro for a shy under £600.
I'm just wondering what the markup Apple really makes off every computer they sell.
Complain about this comment
The DRM related comments might be relevant for a few games but that is not a concern for most users, EA simply messed up with their over-powering version of SecuROM. For a start, those that game on PC by choice tend to enjoy the higher frame rates, superior graphics and custom content. Take the Valve games as an example. With the Source Game Engine and Garry's Mod, there is a treasure chest of free custom content. In GTA4 on the PC it is possible to drive 'real' cars and bikes around Liberty City. This level of customisation is not possible on a console. Since Windows is what games are programmed for, Windows shall remain on my computer for the foreseable future.
Complain about this comment
"142. At 8:00pm on 24 Oct 2009, The_Hess wrote:
The DRM related comments might be relevant for a few games but that is not a concern for most users, EA simply messed up with their over-powering version of SecuROM. For a start, those that game on PC by choice tend to enjoy the higher frame rates, superior graphics and custom content. Take the Valve games as an example. With the Source Game Engine and Garry's Mod, there is a treasure chest of free custom content. In GTA4 on the PC it is possible to drive 'real' cars and bikes around Liberty City. This level of customisation is not possible on a console. Since Windows is what games are programmed for, Windows shall remain on my computer for the foreseable future."
-----
Couldn't have said it better.
I do find it quite tiresome when someone starts the old console>pc because it has no/less DRM debate again.
I have added almost all the games I currently play onto my Win 7 install and I have to say that I am suitably impressed, going from 32bit XP to 64bit Win 7 gives me a slight boost in fps on some games it seems. No real compatibility issues (aside from having to ticking some boxes in the properties>compatibility tab for one game - Blood Bowl, to get past the opening FMV properly, but that issue is also affecting Vista users apparently...). I haven't tried Oblivion yet though, that will be the clincher for me moving wholly over to Win 7 as it ran rather badly under the RC version...
Just need to move all my saves and userdata across now as well. It is rather tiresome having to do that but I prefer having to do a bit of work for getting that little bit extra over the lazy console gamers out there.
Complain about this comment
Problems with Samsung Vista-laptop [more-slow than usual; McAfee...] bought a much-hyped HP-notebook; day-1 [eventually] discovered changing background [wallpaper] NOT possible with W7 Starter.
Prompted to ask; if changing background [wallpaper] locked-out what other 'features' do NOT work across the W7-range?
Microsoft 'greed-&-negligence' do NOT inspire corporates-&-others to invest in current-generation where existing software-&-hardware; NOT unlike Vista, will NOT work.
Corporate-buyers 'try' before committing orders.
Complain about this comment
@ Ewan,
30 seconds on google and I find a link to an article covering installing spore 4 times. 1 phone call and it was sorted (allowed them to reinstall). I disagree with this type of DRM, and hopefully the actions on Amazon will (and have) meant that the games industry pay attention, but the games industry has to do something to try to control the piracy of games. Besides, you cant blame windows for the actions of 3rd party companies.
Arguably, the DRM on consoles is far stricter, by denying any copy of the disk to be made in case it gets scratched or damaged, and offering real problems to get a replacement (Try getting another copy of Wii sports for instance)
Games cost in the region of £10-£20 more on consoles, are commonly only available on one platform and are inferior to their pc equivalent. I really dont see how you can claim they are 'better' on a console.
I want one 'box' in my sitting room, hooked up to my tv, that can play films, music, record tv, go online, work from and play the latest games. I use windows because it is the only operating system that can do this. Thats it, there is no CHOICE.
Ok, so I could use linux, pay for Cedega, spend hours getting a game to run, and even then, it would be slower than if it where running in its proper windows environment. (and just so you dont feel left out, forget playing games on a mac).
The only way Linux is ever going to compete toe to toe with windows is if it makes huge advancements in getting games to run on it. Its that simple. Get gamers on board in their masses and you could well see a real threat to windows.
Until then, there is no choice.
Complain about this comment
Has anyone seen thos windows 7 ads on the telly? The one's where there's that guy whio says having windows that snap together is realy wonderful, and where that woman says having previews in the taskbar is wonderful?
They've had me in stiches...This sort of stuff's been available in Linux for a few years now. Nice to see Microsoft finally catching up to us! ;)
Oh, and as for the Aero, the so-called '3D' desktop, over here in the Linux world, we've had that feature for around a year or so before Aero came out; Its called Compiz Fusion, and it blows Aero right out of the water... Take a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w
Complain about this comment
Over-hyped Vista upgrade £150
OSX Snow Leopard upgrade £25
Do the maths.
Any Windows OS is full of bloat and hogs resources, hard disc space and is virus ridden. I would not give them house room and what has happened to the ballot screen on the install, allowing you to select a default web browser rather setting the non-web standard IE8 which is 'integrated' into the whole OS?
By comparison, a Snow Leopard install actually occupies less HD space than Leopard. An upgrade on my Mac actually created an additional 22GB of HD space, having removed all the legacy PPC files. While Safari is installed as the only web browser on a clean install, it is not tied into the OS.
I am sick and tired of the BBC love-in with Microsoft and all their non-standard software. The I-Player was a case in point, being released only for Windows while Linux and Mac OS users had to wait a considerable amount of time to be able to use a service that our TV licence pays for.
Microsoft lock people into their awful software at an early age and by the time they are old enough to know about the alternatives, the majority are stuck with it.
Complain about this comment
Turkeybellyboy, 3 mistakes;
1 Fanboyz. really? That, my friend, is trolling, rendering any point that you make irrelevant.
2. Wikipedia is not the most reliable of sources. They even say so themselves! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer)
3. The GUI was not "invented" by Xerox. It was in fact developed a quite few years earlier than that by Doug Engelbart and his team at the Stanford Research Institute after working on the mouse (1963). Many of this team, including Engelbart, went on to work at PARC and further developed the idea there in the 1970's. What Apple actually *licensed* from Xerox was WIMP. Look it up.
Complain about this comment
#147 - Your so called summary of Windows 7 is nothing more than a rant. Have you actually used Windows 7? Probably not by the sounds of things. You also need to check your facts by the way. I paid £45 for my upgrade not £150 as you say. The upgrade cost will go up but I would expect the £150 to be an RRP price and usually going onto Amazon for example will mean you will get it much cheaper. Read this as well: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/technology/8227071.stm
My view point is that Microsoft do have alot to answer for and have only themselves to blame for the mistrust they have created. Windows 7 is a marked step up and step forward. I for one do not get sucked into the MS markerting world - the latest Windows 7 adverts really really are awful! Snow Leopard seems to be a great OS as well and I hope that I get a chance in the future to try it out some more.
It is a win win situation now with choice being at the heart of what is available now both for free OS's and fee paying OS's.
For me now though Windows 7 rules. I binned XP sometime ago (although I use it work for the next year) and Vista was a joke - enough said. I have been trying it out before the official release and now have the official release and it really is an excellent OS.
Complain about this comment
"147. At 2:59pm on 26 Oct 2009, Cynicall_Sid wrote:
Over-hyped Vista upgrade £150
OSX Snow Leopard upgrade £25
Do the maths.
Any Windows OS is full of bloat and hogs resources, hard disc space and is virus ridden. I would not give them house room and what has happened to the ballot screen on the install, allowing you to select a default web browser rather setting the non-web standard IE8 which is 'integrated' into the whole OS?
By comparison, a Snow Leopard install actually occupies less HD space than Leopard. An upgrade on my Mac actually created an additional 22GB of HD space, having removed all the legacy PPC files. While Safari is installed as the only web browser on a clean install, it is not tied into the OS."
----------
Firstly my good man Windows is not full of bloat or viri unless you allow it to be. The user is the person responsible for the OS being full of bloat and viruses, not M$, granted they have holes that can be exploited but if the user is careful, and educated about correct usage and installation of software then there isn't a problem.
Secondly IE can be replaced by any browser you wish, just in the same way Safari is not tied into the Mac OS.
"I am sick and tired of the BBC love-in with Microsoft and all their non-standard software. The I-Player was a case in point, being released only for Windows while Linux and Mac OS users had to wait a considerable amount of time to be able to use a service that our TV licence pays for."
---------
And I am sick and tired of Mac fanboys posting when they have no clue.
The majority of people use windows, that is why the iPlayer is aimed at windows users, not mac or linux and any additional coding required for linux/mac does take time, the majority come first, not the minority.
"Microsoft lock people into their awful software at an early age and by the time they are old enough to know about the alternatives, the majority are stuck with it."
----------
Yeah and Apple allow you freedom to do whatever you want with their products...
The windows platform is not perfect but it's far from the evil platform that many rather uneducated (in terms of computing) people make it out to be.
Complain about this comment
58 Mark_WE wrote:
"I imagine he means people who don't earn enough to justify the massive "Mac-Markup" :-)
If Apple put a little logo on a turd and shipped it out in a nice white box with a £300 price tag to hear Apple-fanboys shouting from the rooftops about how great a turd it was.
I don't have anything against Macs they are lovely machines but I would need a damn good reason to justify buying one over a cheaper equivalent spec Windows machine especially as I could probably buy a Wii and a holiday with the spare change!"
Clearly you must look a little closer at the specs of a machine before buying. Your post (and several others) is like comparing a 2.0l Ford Focus to a 2.0l Saab 95 Turbo!!! 'Same' specs, very different.
IE: Most PC manufacturers (the top range are different) use older processors that have the 'same' GHZ's but much lower transfer rates. Toshiba (as mentioned by a poster earlier in a similar 'my PC was 1 third the price of a mac' message), tend to use C2D T7000 range processors for the machines. Apple uses T9000 versions which are faster and more expensive. Apples motherboards are optimized to work with the hardware (often tweaked to ensure better results.) They also uses DDR3 1033Mhz Ram as standard (there is faster out there but only if you buy expensive), most PC builds still use either DDR2 or DDR3 866Mhz. SLOWER.
Apple screens are now all magnificent LED screens compared to the old LCD or *shudders* TFT. Again, more expensive but of higher quality.
My point is, if you actually took the time and found machines that have THE EXACT SAME specs as a mac machine you'll find the costs are the same IF NOT HIGHER. I certainly can't find a Windoze machine boasting the same specs as my machine for €1400!
Yes, I am a Machead and proud of it but I have to say that while most macs are now more aimed for 'normal' use, you HAVE TO REMEMBER, ALL OF THEM CAN BE USED AS PROFESSIONAL MACHINES!
The BBC and more than two thirds of all Video/TV, Music and Design (all types) studios use Macs as their preferred machine choice and ALL OF THESE ARE THE SAME MACHINES YOU CAN BUY IN THE SHOP!
That should tell you something regarding the quality of these machines.
Complain about this comment
#151 Finglish - Seeing that this a blog regarding Windows 7, what do you think of Windows 7?
Complain about this comment
Finglish,
As a mac fanboy dont enter the world of hardware when there are windows and linux users around.
I notice you didnt post the model of your mac?
Im not going to trawl the Internet looking for price comparisons (as you haven't either)
DDR3 is not always faster than DDR2 because of something called latency (look it up)
LED screens are still LCD (the LED is the backlight, replacing CCFL)and are used by nearly all PC manufacturers.
We used to hear 'apple are more expensive because they make there own superior hardware' Now they just plug components from other manufactures into their motherboard so its easy to work out the price.
Complain about this comment
A message for Rory Cellen-Jones:
Ubuntu is probably the most used Linux distribution by HOME users (Red Hat Enterprise Linux is the most used BUSINESS distribution (or free unsupported clones like CentOS)
http://www.ubuntu.com/
http://www.redhat.com/
http://www.centos.org/
The new release of Ubuntu - 9.10 comes out tomorrow as a direct competitor to Windows 7. Does this mean (in terms of non-bias and in the public interest) that you will be covering the release of Ubuntu 9.10 tomorrow and also explaining to listeners what LINUX is (and actually calling it Linux) - I guess I should be strictly accurate and calling it GNU/Linux.
http://www.gnu.org/
Does this mean that the BBC will have a review of Ubuntu 9.10 and perhaps have a copy of the BBC web site as well? Perhaps Stephen Fry might like to comment as well
http://www.gnu.org/fry/
Even Windows 7 users (and big Windows supporters) would be interested to know what the competition was up to.
I appreciate (for Windows 7 users) that
Complain about this comment
#154 -At 10:38am on 27 Oct 2009, UseLinuxNotWindows wrote: "...Does this mean that the BBC will have a review of Ubuntu 9.10.."
It's not a review but have you seen this by any chance?: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8326264.stm
Complain about this comment
@Lem007
Just for the record I have an iMac. The Specs, should you be interested are... PRICE: €1400
Intel Core2Duo 3.06Ghz E7600, 3Mb L2 Cache
4Gb PC3-8500 DDR3 1066mhz Ram, expands to 16Gb
1TB SATA 7200Rpm HD
256Mb ATI Radeon HD 4670
27" LED screen supporting up to 2560x1440 and output up to 2560x1600
8x Superdrive (who needs bluray?)
802.11a/b/g/n wireless plus all the usual latest blutooth support.
Firewire 800.
The 'equivalent' PC (i.e. completely integrated design). Benq, Nscreen i221 21,5" PRICE €550
AMD Sempron 1.5Ghz - WEAKER
1GB DDRII-667 Ram - WEAKER
160 Gt 5400Rpm HD - WEAKER
128Mb ATI Radeon X1200 - WEAKER
21.5" LCD - WEAKER
Need I go on.
BUT just to be fair, an equal(ish) priced machine... Hp, Pavilion m9754 €900 PLUS Viewsonic, Va2626wm 25.5" €450 - TOTAL €1350... This was the best ready made setup I could find at my local dealers. They do custom but they cost more...
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 2.4Ghz - WEAKER
4 Gt DDR3 RAM (unspecified clock speed) - EQUAL (not sure with clock speed)
500 Gt SATA 7400Rpm HD - Same speed but SMALLER
Nvidia GeForce GT220M 512Mb - Arguable. Uses shared memory so technically WEAKER
25.5" TFT supporting up to 1920 x 1200 - WEAKER
Bluray - I would argue, that this is not needed but for the sake or argument... BETTER
LAN 802.11 b/g - No 'n' standard meaning it's limited to 40Mbps. 'n' standard goes to 200.
Only has Firewire 400.
Look around... once you actually price most PC's, they are NOT cheaper than Macs. Budget end machines are just thrown together and if you want something that will last more than 6 months, you have to be ready to PAY. But like I said before, Macs are ready to be professional machines right from the box. How many PC's can do the same?
Complain about this comment
I will concede however, that there are many PC's that are 'cheaper' (around the €1200 mark) that are more powerful with Quad Core processors etc. BUT, these machines invariably do not have a monitor with them. Since you'll want a half decent monitor to go with that power, you'll be expecting to pay upwards of €400 for one meaning you machine will suddenly be more expensive.
Worth remembering, methinks.
Complain about this comment
@ Finglish,
The 27" iMac is a great deal for the price, but mainly because of the display.
You can get a Fujitsu DP3 for £513, which would compete nicely (without a display)
You could buy the bulk of your components there for under €350 retail.
That leaves a lot for a display, motherboard, psu and case.
My argument has its flaws and is based on the fact that a lot of serious PC owners build their own systems (agree that a lot of PC manufacturers through together sub standard systems, using inferior components, and adding to windows stability reputation problems)
Thats what you pay for in a mac, ok hardware that has been thoroughly tested to work with OSX. If you want a safe bet on a system working out of the box then get a mac, you'll pay a premium for the performance you get from your hardware.
The best bang for buck is always to build your own. I always hoped that Apple would free up OSX to install on any system, but with windows 7 looking as good as it is, who needs that?
Complain about this comment
@Finglish - You haven't done much research there.
If you build you're own PC you can get a better PC than a Mac for equal or less than the price of the Mac.
Can you build you're own iMac?
And if you looked around a bit more I'm sure you could find an equal spec PC for a comparable price if not less than your iMac, if of course you wanted to, which given your post I can plainly see that you don't.
Macs and PCs both have their plus points and sadly their fanboys who will always claim and provide evidence that theirs is better.
However last time I looked this was a blog about Windows 7 not a "My Mac is better than your PC" blog.
Complain about this comment
Okay, I admit I may have gone a bit off topic here but I'm not the only one...
At the risk of getting flamed, I could still argue (on a hardware note) that PC manufactured laptops of equal to higher specs to say a Macbook Pro, cost the same if not more. Just look at the top-of-the-line Sony's and Toshiba's. They're all over €2000.
Again, while it's easy to say it's cheaper to build your own (and it is, I did a machine years ago), most people don't want the hassle and choose out of the box. My argument is that Mac's offer better value for money than most people are willing to admit.
GETTING BACK TO THE POINT OF THIS BLOG (and I apologise for getting sidetracked), I think that Win 7 looks a whole lot better than Vista, although you have to admit that was not so difficult. I still would prefer Win XP SP3 since, to me, it is more like the Windows knew while at college (my first had Windows, University had the Macs that converted me.)
Windows 7 still bothers me in that it looks (from my angle) that it's trying too hard to be like OSX. The Gadgets and Quick task bar all seem like OS 10.3/4 to me... but that's just my opinion.
Just one quick question, is this operating system 32/64 bit hybrid like Vista (and Mac OS up to 10.5 or plain native 64 bit (like Snow Leopard)? If the latter, how will the support the older chipsets?
Just asking...
Complain about this comment
I received a copy of windows 7 32 and 64 bit about 2 weeks before the release and after installing the 64bit version initial thoughts were favourable. Coming from XP which I hasten is still my main operating system I found the dual boot worked as expected and I was quickly up and running.
Initial observations were good but I found that my Creative Web cam and rather expensive HP colour laser printer had no drivers so I’m unable to print. HP say they are on their way. Now I can live with out the printer for a bit, but I have given up with Win 7 after spending over 2 days struggling with the lack of Yamaha drivers.
I am a musician and present a Blues show on Internet radio so I have a small recording studio based around Yamaha’s 01X Digital mixer and I88X interfaces which is linked to the computer over firewire Yamaha call is mLan. This works great on XP 32/64 and vista 32 (only). Despite this expensive equipment being only 3 years old Yamaha refuse point blank to develop drivers. Routing around on the self help groups for mLan some people have got the XP64bit version to work but as Windows 7 has a tantrum and refuses to load unsigned drivers. It’s a long tiring process to which requires a driver signing tool, constant Blue Screens a reboot every time a new part of the system is loaded. I did find a useful option when you are presented with the boot options, press F8 and there was the ability to load unsigned drivers. Wow this is new and managed to get the drivers to load but had to do this every time I booted the machine and then found the quality of the music using the Windows WDM was poor and would lock the machine if I stopped Media Player. So I have given up and gone back to XP which works perfectly.
This is a pity as the interface on 7 is great, easy to use, I love the new features and even found the help intuitive but for me the lack of support for a very expensive mixing desk leaves me with a bitter taste in my mouth. I still have a musical project I need to complete and my Internet Blues show to do and can’t afford the time trying to get this to work.
I will keep watching the mLan threads see if my answer gets resolved.
Yamaha, are you listening!!!
Complain about this comment
'plain native 64 bit (like Snow Leopard)'
I thought only Xservers booted by default into the 64bit kernel
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10320314-37.html
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
you are right about MS not bothering about those who use Mac OS X or Linux.
I've not owned a MS operating system for quite a few years now (Win 98 put me off completely), but if I wanted to put Windows 7 on my PC it would cost me around £100 ! I've built entire PCs for that sort of money!
So, although Windows 7 looks interesting, I won't be ditching my free OS (Ubuntu Linux) any time soon.
Complain about this comment
"160. At 4:13pm on 27 Oct 2009, Finglish wrote:
Okay, I admit I may have gone a bit off topic here but I'm not the only one...
At the risk of getting flamed, I could still argue (on a hardware note) that PC manufactured laptops of equal to higher specs to say a Macbook Pro, cost the same if not more. Just look at the top-of-the-line Sony's and Toshiba's. They're all over €2000.
Again, while it's easy to say it's cheaper to build your own (and it is, I did a machine years ago), most people don't want the hassle and choose out of the box. My argument is that Mac's offer better value for money than most people are willing to admit."
---------
Nope they don't. And yes I am carrying on the off topicness. :P
What do most people do with a computer? Surf the web, do a bit of spreadsheet/word processing work, watch videos, listen to music.
You can do all of that on a PC that is far cheaper than an iMac.
For the majority a Mac is an overpriced piece of kit that they don't need to buy because they can get capable and cheaper hardware straight off the peg in a PC. It's only when you get into specialist tasks and gaming that people might want to buy an iMac but certainly not for the latter. And even when it comes to video/music editing, the usual stomping ground of the Mac, cheaper PCs are fast catching up, as are laptops compared to the Macbook.
Now back on Win 7 - My copy has a couple of niggling bugs bothering me, the power settings I set don't appear to save themselves, i.e. don't turn the monitor off, don't turn the hdd off, don't go to standby after x amount of time etc. and game compatibility is pretty much the same as Vista.
I don't think that when Windows 7 was in production that M$ considered gamers who don't have an ever expanding bank account, i.e. only buy the latest games.
Having said that everything seems to be running fine now that I've worked out how to get my older games to run adequately and I'm prepared to ditch XP now (or at least until I've finished putting apps and games on the OS and find that there is something that just plain will not work in 7).
Which as a long time XP user and gamer is a milestone.
Complain about this comment
This started out about Windows 7, but at times has just turned into a grumble for those who do not like windows, and has nothing to do with windows 7.
To be honest I'm not sure what I said in my last post that had it removed, but I've taken out the only things that might have been considered not allowed, but I do feel others have gone much further that I did, only they were writing out from the other point of view!! That seems a bit unfair.
For me windows normally does what it says, lets me write (using both Word and Open Office, I use both), email, go on the net, use photo and movie editing programs. Thats it, it works. Why would I want to bother going somewhere else. It looks professional, Apple on the other hand looks like it was designed for and by children, Linux and others by a group programers in need of a graphic designer. Yes I know that sounds mean, but very often THAT IS, the their O/S screens look.
So, windows 7. XP ran for years without a problem for me. So I do hope 7 is more stable that Vista, in two years I've had to reload it three times, each and every time after a windows update screwed things up beyond fixing!! Not clever that Microsoft. If windows 7 turns out to be stable it will be the first O/S I've bought without a PC attached at the same time.
But even with the problems I still would not change to another O/S system, by and large I like windows and the way it works.
Complain about this comment
But with the WINE compatability layer, even many windows only applications can be used under Linux OS. When it come's down to it, we should be suspicious of any software that doesn't have a released source code. Does malware come to mind anyone??
Complain about this comment
as you say "Computing has come a long way since Colossus, but Microsoft's customers will be asking the same question about its new operating system as the code-breakers did about their new-fangled toy. Does it do the same job better and faster than what we use now?"
I've applies a similar principle with all my hardware and o/s upgrades since... XT or was it 286 ?
the biggest gain was going from 286 to 386
when we went from Pentium to P2, I could measure difference with stop watch, but, not workload throughput.
So I quit the bandwagon.
FWIW, I still use OS/2 Warp on a P2 350 with 768MB RAM. I also have Core 2 Duo with 4GB running XP
guess which one can do more work in less time??
now I go back to my cave.
Complain about this comment
For the record, my friend just built a new gaming computer with windows 7 and he says it is brilliant. For less than £1000 he got:
Core 2 Quad q9550 now clocked to 3.6GHz
8 GB 1066MHz RAM
2x NVidia gtx 260 grapphics cards
750W PSU (corsair)
Asus MoBo
DVD drive
Decent cooler
1TB hard drive
Keyboard and Mouse
Now find me an equivalent Mac at tell me how much it costs.
Yes Linux would make it cheaper but since Linux needs an extra programme to run most games, is it worth the drop in performance? He also got 2 free games with his graphics cards (Batman Arkham Asylum and Terminator Salvation) and a pair of 3D specs since he cam play most games in 3D now.
Windows regains its dignity with 7
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS