Windows XP, great new look

[localzuk]

I don't understand why people complain about the changed UI in Vista/7. It isn't that different! The only major differences are the addition of Libraries (which, lets face it, existed in a poor form already in XP in the form of 'My Music' and 'My Pictures'), the addition of a quick search box in the start menu, and a slightly different taskbar. The control panels, once you get into them are mostly the same (other than the networking part, which I will admit is not the best design in the world), explorer behaves in the same way.

 

chazzy2501, why did it take you 20 minutes to show hidden files? It is exactly the same as in XP! The only minor change is that the menu bar (like many menu bars) is hidden by default and you have to press Alt to show it. Wireless settings? Network & Sharing Center -> Connect to a network. Ok, its different, but not exactly difficult to understand!

 

It seems a lot like there are a group of people who would never have updated from Windows 3 if they'd been given the choice...

[chrisredfield93]

Well everyone have their preference of each operating system.

 

I have XP at home pc, Vista on Laptop and my brother has 7, when I first had vista I disliked it but im guess i have slowly accpeted it becuase i have altered it to have classic mode of the start menu and control panel, but win 7 was a no no and still is

 

so XP is my winning operating system, and Office 2003

 

the reason being which they both have in common and the one one i think is yes it simpler with win 7 and the new office 2007 but when I look at it from my point view and i guess this would cover other techies stuff it all down we miss the toolbars since that what we been use to finding stuff and talk and walking people through it but since they scraped it , it easier if u new to the computer world but it hard for us since we use to it and been with for ages and also now we have to go even further and harder to find stuff and configure.

 

I still tell people to press the start menu and that but these win 7 users look puzzled,

 

so my request to microsoft bring back these title bars

 

it upto ou either agree or disagree

[shadowx]

Are we still having Vista/every other OS?! Is there any argument here?! Damn!

 

I have a reasonable spec gaming machine at home, 4gb RAM, quad core, 1gb gfx 64bit arch, it's not top of the range but its fast... Unless you put vista on it. Downstairs i have a laptop 1gb ram a crappy dual core 1.6ghz on board graphics, the usual... it runs XP and Ubuntu 9.10 and both of those were faster than Vista on the gaming rig, it was ridiculously slow, unusable, crashing constantly games pretty much didnt work it was awful... Whack the free upgrade to win7 on it and suddenly it zaps through boot up and general use, gaming is a dream. There is no other opinion, it is pure fact that Vista was slow, buggy and unstable otherwise why would MS say it themselves?

 

Windows XP still, in my opinion, is probably the best overall. It is simple enough for end users, old enough that 99% of programs work perfectly on it and at the same time it is bare-bones enough that an advanced user or techie can easily get behind the scenes and change things a lot easier than with windows 7. Perhaps Win7 is better for an end user but overall XP takes it, and i'm not a microsoft fan.

 

I still like the UI of win7 though... I just wish it was as easy to modify as XP.

[shadowx]

the new start menu is truly awful i have to agree! I love the idea of typing in "firefox" and hitting enter and not having to click my way through menus but at the same time i also love being able to browse the list to check if i have a specific program installed or if i forget the name of a program etc... and that pathetic scrollbox is absolutely useless unless you have a grand total of 3 programs or less!

 

All it needs is a little "classic programs list" option, keep the search bar and the round icon but give me back my lists!

[Tunster]

I'm also in the XP camp, and it certainly isn't "dated".

 

7 would be great if they hadn't completely removed the "classic" option. I don't like a wide Start Menu.

 

I think some people forget that an OS is primarily there to provide a platform for running apps. I'd rather my memory and processor power go on the application I'm running, not the OS.

I'm going to have to disagree. XP is dated but "clean". To think Windows 7 is bloated and non-customisable is rubbish. Pretty much XP will be left in the dumps this year with its support expiring and new programs now becoming incompatible with it. You have to take Windows 7 for what it is. It pretty much will run on any hardware you can throw at it and doesn't have a "lag-factor" Vista inherited from it's poor coding.

 

Changing the log-on screen is extremely easy on Windows 7 (unlike XP), UI is much more clever and Aero won't zap power out of our teacher laptops (unlike Vista) and everyone who's been upgraded has noticed the speed difference straight away. Yes, I still install XP on some very old but late Pentium 4's with lots of RAM for reliability; but if you are so desperate to cling onto XP, use the XP Mode on Windows 7. Works like a dream . To manage, Windows 7 is my preference now just because of it's ease of deployment, licensing, and speed. What's the use of the "classic" UI? Especially when Windows 7 has a more efficient pin style taskbar?

 

On the other hand, I use Mac OS X much more on a daily basis personally . All OSes have their up's and down's. I could put a case forward that Mac is better than Windows and write an essay about it. Point? There is none.

 

All I can say that for the average-joe user (most of our teachers), Windows 7 has made it easier for them to click around the UI much more effortlessly. Especially connecting wireless which takes two clicks rather than XPs several clicks method. I can see why techies still love XP though (for hyperterminal is priceless!).

[shadowx]

Certainly for end users who arent so techie and especially those who havent already got used to XP then windows 7 is the OS of choice but as i support the machines i still prefer XP to tinker with. I do like the UI of 7 but the start menu ruins it and im not a fan of the taskbar to be honest either. But personal preference doesnt make it good or bad i just dont like it.

 

The point stands though that windows 7 is like a maze to get to relatively simple network features like TCP/IP control. and as noted already the control panel in general is pretty poor. *shrugs* i still like win 7 but it isnt perfect.

[morrig]

I've always had a huge problem with both vista and windows7. it's like the supermarket they know you just want bread and milk so every 6 months they rearrange the shelves hoping you buy something you don't need.

 

So with Vista and Win7 they've changed all whole gui to make it easier? easier for who? The people who've been using XP for the last 8 years and can navigate it at the speed of light? No... for new users who've never used a PC before... well fantastic, so you made them for the 0.0009% of users who've never use XP and want they're first PC to be Windows... my butt, those people buy MACs!

 

So everyone else.. you remember 99.9991% who use XP now have to relearn where everything is and start using the new OS at the same speed as their grannys!

 

p.s. The other day it took me 20 minutes (and I had to google it) to show hidden and system files on win 7. It took me 10 minutes to configure my wireless settings, I couldn't just click on the wireless icon anymore! I turned bright red and my shpincter ate the chair.

 

WIH

 

 

 

chazzy2501 can't believe it took 20 mins to find hidden files,i just typed in search box hidden and in my lowly 512 mb's Win7 it took 10 seconds to first show hidden files and folders,and do the same for any other thing you are looking for.

 

XP is now an old croc ready for the graveyard!

[shadowx]

XP is now an old croc ready for the graveyard!

 

But why?! Everyone says it but few give reasons.

[Tunster]

If you think XP will be "left in the dumps this year with its support expiring and new programs now becoming incompatible with it" I have to say that I don't think your finger is on the pulse of IT.

 

XP support has been extended - that tells you something. Just take a look at the reader comments on any XP / 2000 / Vista / 7 articles on The Register.

Excuse my ignorance on this fact. Okay, 2014 is the extension from what I've discovered now (because we only deploy XP on very few machines now). Only because the whole industry made a fuss about Vista and took a blind eye to it. Our school grabbed the opportunity to deploy Vista. Some might say it was a very unwise and foolish decision, but we worked through the very few issues we had. People who are still are on XP will have the more difficulty to jump to 7 because they missed our learning/installing the new systems Microsoft introduced for deployment and licensing. I guess that's why there's more reason for some to stick with the old from schools still on Windows XP. Saying XP is faster than Windows 7 is debatable like any other technical comparison. It's hardware dependant and even on some of our older AMD and Intel Shuttle based machines, Windows 7 can quite easily match XP SP3. This is why we were glad of the Windows 7 release when it appeared.

 

My experience has shown that schools and businesses will not be upgrading their kit for some time, certainly not just for the excuse of a new OS which provides nothing but a flashy UI to compete with Macs. 7 is faster than Vista, but XP knocks it into a cocked hat.

I personally don't believe it's healthy for students to be behind. I know cost will probably be big issue to upgrade for many schools, but when laptops are much more affordable and including Windows 7 as standard; is it good for an educational establishment to be using an almost 10 year old operating system (especially at Junior and Secondary level)? UI enhancements such as the pinned/tidy taskbar, instant split screen, quick search from start menu (and customisable from Group Policy). I know XP is seen as clean and classic, but it is simply old now. Doesn't reflect the initiative interfaces in many new products (touchscreen phones, iPads, touchscreen computers, netbooks).

 

Connecting wireless on XP takes "several clicks"? I think not. Click the wireless icon in the tray by the clock. Click the access point you want to connect to. Put in the key. Job done.

It's certainly a couple of extra clicks more (and slower waiting for the huge wireless box to appear) in comparison to Windows 7 "2 click" process straight from the taskbar.

 

7 not bloated? There's a reason it comes on a DVD as opposed to a CD for XP!

What operating system isn't on DVD now? Even the bigger linux distro's are DVD worthy now. I know that shows how bare XP is as a functional OS.

 

Which apps are incompatible with XP? If that's truly the case, why did 7 have an XP compatibility mode?

I'm talking forward compatibility, not backward compatibility. Microsoft were at least clever enough to recognise that some developers refuse to push forward or don't develop any more and legacy products need XP support.

 

There's less reason to keep with XP now Windows 7 is around (especially when a new hardware refreshes are expected) and how well it will cope with any hardware you throw at it. That's my stance knowing that I use most operating systems daily.

[srochford]

p.s. The other day it took me 20 minutes (and I had to google it) to show hidden and system files on win 7. It took me 10 minutes to configure my wireless settings, I couldn't just click on the wireless icon anymore! I turned bright red and my shpincter ate the chair.

 

Press Windows and type "Wireless" or type "Hidden" - not exactly difficult (and I know it's different but the point if you want to do anything with Windows 7 you "press Windows and type a key word")

 

No idea what you mean about hidden files. In XP I would press Windows E to open Explorer and then do ALT T O to get to Tools | Options and then just click view. In Windows 7 I do exactly the same thing - I'm guessing you knew some secret way to do it in XP which no longer works :-)

[PeteM]

I'm also in the XP camp, and it certainly isn't "dated".

 

7 would be great if they hadn't completely removed the "classic" option. I don't like a wide Start Menu.

 

I think some people forget that an OS is primarily there to provide a platform for running apps. I'd rather my memory and processor power go on the application I'm running, not the OS.

 

Absolutely. Unfortunately, Microsoft has tried (& failed on many counts) to be all things to all users.

[Arthur]

My experience has shown that schools and businesses will not be upgrading their kit for some time, certainly not just for the excuse of a new OS which provides nothing but a flashy UI to compete with Macs. 7 is faster than Vista, but XP knocks it into a cocked hat.

This is so wrong I don't even know where to start. There is a huge long list of new features and improvements in Windows 7. While a lot of them are behind-the-scenes (much like Apple's Snow Leopard update) calling it nothing but a flashy UI is a huge exaggeration and completely incorrect.

 

XP support has been extended - that tells you something.

It does. It tells you that there are far too many Luddite's in this world who don't like any kind of progress.

 

7 not bloated? There's a reason it comes on a DVD as opposed to a CD for XP!

Bloat is completely relative. The largest HDD in August 2001 (when XP was released) was 60GB (or 1.14% of a CD). The largest HDD, when Windows 7 was released in October 2009 was 2TB (or 0.21% of a DVD). I don't think anyone is going to complain about losing 1-2% (or less) of their HDDs capacity. Processors have also seen massive speed increases in the last decade too.

 

Would you rather have a single DVD with all editions of Windows 7 on it, or multiple CDs each with a different editions of XP on them (Home, Pro, MCE, Tablet PC)?

 

Which apps are incompatible with XP? If that's truly the case, why did 7 have an XP compatibility mode?

There's IE9, Windows Live Essentials and anything which involves playing Blu-Ray discs (XP doesn't support HDCP). The XP compatibility mode in Windows 7 won't help you with any of these. I'm sure there are plenty of other programs.

[mac_shinobi]

This is so wrong I don't even know where to start. There is a huge long list of new features and improvements in Windows 7. While a lot of them are behind-the-scenes (much like Apple's Snow Leopard update) calling it nothing but a flashy UI is a huge exaggeration and completely incorrect.

 

It does. It tells you that there are far too many Luddite's in this world who don't like any kind of progress.

 

 

Bloat is completely relative. The largest HDD in August 2001 (when XP was released) was 60GB (or 1.14% of a CD). The largest HDD, when Windows 7 was released in October 2009 was 2TB (or 0.21% of a DVD). I don't think anyone is going to complain about losing 1-2% (or less) of their HDDs capacity. Processors have also seen massive speed increases in the last decade too.

 

Would you rather have a single DVD with all editions of Windows 7 on it, or multiple CDs each with a different editions of XP on them (Home, Pro, MCE, Tablet PC)?

 

 

There's IE9, Windows Live Essentials and anything which involves playing Blu-Ray discs (XP doesn't support HDCP). The XP compatibility mode in Windows 7 won't help you with any of these. I'm sure there are plenty of other programs.

 

1. Snow leopards update from Leopard was a half way house between an upgrade and an update because

 

A - it added true 64 bit support with 32 bit backward compatibility --> In the same way that if you originally purchased a 32 bit version of windows, you don't get the 64 bit version for £25 afaik you have to fork out the full amount for the 64 bit version of said operating system so not bad although I will admit they could of possibly added more feature wise but all in all not bad for £25 considering they did add grand central dispatch ( as far as helping multi tasking across multiple processor cores etc ) along with the other behind the scenes features / additions.

 

2. Not that I don't agree with progress as I do because on the mac side I am using snow leopard and I have not stuck with tiger or leopard but personally ( this is my own personal opinion / preference etc ) but I think office 2007 is not great in comparison to 2003 and also that most people still use 2003 so easier to stay with 2003 and I didn't really get on with office 2007, I would much rather either use office 2003 or open office, I know they are making office 2010 but have not bothered with it as it's not really a big thing to me.

 

3. I think they should of done something similar to linux ( on linux if you want fancy graphics effects for the GUI you use something like compiz ) reference the extra graphics features such as aero , printer drivers, languages, keyboard layouts where by if you want the extra things you add them on ( control panel --> add / remove windows components ) and with it being a UK version of windows 7 obviously make the default keyboard layout UK Great Britain ) and if its the US version then obviously make it the US Keyboard layout. Same for Aero , if you want it, then add it on, if not then its not taking up space on your hard drive. The same with the GUI make the classic one the default so as not to use resources and if people want the extra flashy GUI then they can add it and apply it.

 

Not really used windows 7 that much to be honest but just to get an idea how much space capacity wise does a base default install take up ?? I think ( could be wrong as haven't installed snow leopard for a long time ) takes up around 11gb ( give or take a few gigs )

 

Also with reference to your capacity statements - just because windows 7 is released does not mean everyone will run out and upgrade current hardware ie hard drive to a larger capacity.

 

Also with regards to having one dvd or multiple cd's for the OS - I would prefer if they did what apple did, just have one disc for the OS ( if they include extra software like on the mac where you have iLife, etc then have the extras on the 2nd dvd ) and whilst on this point before Apple dropped support for PPC they used to include PPC and intel OS installer on one disc ( I think ) could be wrong as I do know that intel only mac book pros had an intel only installation disc but until snow leopard the applications at least still had ppc code / stuff in them because when you went to show package contents you could see it had extra stuff in them that was not required on an intel platform

 

4. Could be wrong on your blu ray point ref xp - I was under the impression it was down to all the hardware supporting HDCP although there is the work around of using SlySoft AnyDVD HD

 

point 4 does not bother me ref blu ray as I have and use a PS 3 so not bothered about that - I always get rid of windows live essentials and other stuff like that as when I install msn messenger on windows I only literally want that not anything else

Edited July 21, 2010 by mac_shinobi

[Quackers]

OK, i am back on my Windows 7 laptop at the moment, and i am getting wound up.

 

Anybody have a solution to why when i click the "Documents" library, i get items from under my user documents and the "public" documents, and how i can make it NOT show the public ones?I am getting folders listed twice with the same name, and it makes my head hurt, never mind the normal users. Right clicking on the "Documents" library, properties, and removing the Public folder from the list is not doable, because that will only do it for ME, what about everybody elses user account on the network.

 

I have tried removing librarys using the adm templates somebody has made, that makes things worse, because on the save/open dialog windows i do not get a "My Documents" link on the left.

 

I have loved every new MS OS Since Windows 3.0 and all its new features. I have agreed with most of their logic in changes, and enjoyed the new versions. Vista/7 is the first time this has not been the case and it seems like MS have made things longer to do, thats not making this easier, or advancing! It feels like MS have made everything now take 1 click more than it did before, for example these two things.

 

Renaming a computer

 

Windows 7,

 

Right click "Computer", click "Advanced System Settings", Click Computer name tab, then "Change"

 

Windows XP

 

Right click "My Computer", click Computer name tab, then Change.

 

Why does quickly finding my IP of the Wireless adaptor via a GUI now take longer?

 

Windows 7,

 

Click Wireless icon by clock, click "open network and sharing centre" , then click "Wireless Network Connection"

 

Windows XP,

 

Double click wireless icon, then click details tab.

 

This is why my head hurts running Windows 7, things take longer, and have been moved not to make it quicker to get too, but to take it longer to get too! I wish i could have a few hours with the Vista/7 team, i have a few choice words for them!

 

Now Office 2010, i love that, that is change for the better.

[localzuk]

OK, i am back on my Windows 7 laptop at the moment, and i am getting wound up.

 

Anybody have a solution to why when i click the "Documents" library, i get items from under my user documents and the "public" documents, and how i can make it NOT show the public ones?I am getting folders listed twice with the same name, and it makes my head hurt, never mind the normal users. Right clicking on the "Documents" library, properties, and removing the Public folder from the list is not doable, because that will only do it for ME, what about everybody elses user account on the network.

 

Right click on it and view the properties - each library allows you to specify what gets listed.

 

Renaming a computer

 

Windows 7,

 

Right click "Computer", click "Advanced System Settings", Click Computer name tab, then "Change"

 

Windows XP

 

Right click "My Computer", click Computer name tab, then Change.

 

Globe -> Type 'Rename my computer'.

 

Why does quickly finding my IP of the Wireless adaptor via a GUI now take longer?

 

Windows 7,

 

Click Wireless icon by clock, click "open network and sharing centre" , then click "Wireless Network Connection"

 

Windows XP,

 

Double click wireless icon, then click details tab.

 

Globe -> Ip address (choose the only option) -> right click on a connection and choose Status.

 

This is why my head hurts running Windows 7, things take longer, and have been moved not to make it quicker to get too, but to take it longer to get too! I wish i could have a few hours with the Vista/7 team, i have a few choice words for them!

 

Now Office 2010, i love that, that is change for the better.

 

Most things are quicker to find, as you simply use the globe search box to do it.

[srochford]

OK, i am back on my Windows 7 laptop at the moment, and i am getting wound up.

 

 

Can't help with the libraries stuff but for the other things you just need to get used to the Windows 7 way of working - press the Windows key and type what you want to do!

eg: rename - first option it finds is "rename this computer

IP - first option is view network connections; open that and look at the properties of the connection you want.

 

It is different but it's consistent - most things you're going to want to do are now searchable and that just wasn't there in XP. I now really, really miss that if I use an XP machine!

[Arthur]

1. Snow leopards update from Leopard was a half way house between an upgrade and an update

A bit like Vista. If you think about it, Microsoft did exactly this. They added the foundations to Vista and built upon these to make Windows 7 even better.

 

In the same way that if you originally purchased a 32 bit version of windows, you don't get the 64 bit version for £25 afaik you have to fork out the full amount for the 64 bit version of said operating system

If you buy a retail copy of Windows 7 your product key will work with both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. With an OEM copy of Windows, this is not possible. You either buy the 32-bit version or the 64-bit version. This is why the latter is cheaper (£111 vs £78). If you buy a PC from an OEM such as Dell or HP there is a way to switch between the x86 and x64 editions, but technically it wouldn't be legal.

 

2. I think office 2007 is not great in comparison to 2003 and also that most people still use 2003 so easier to stay with 2003 and I didn't really get on with office 2007

I'm the opposite. I really like Office 2010 (and 2007 before it) because I can do things a lot faster compared to in 2003. Saving documents in the new file format also means they take up less space on your HDD because everything gets zipped up.

 

with it being a UK version of windows 7 obviously make the default keyboard layout UK Great Britain

I would like to see Microsoft create a UK language pack for Windows since there's already one for Welsh. Perhaps with Windows 8, Microsoft can use the location sensors feature from Windows 7 to detect where you are via geo-location and set your keyboard layout (and other settings) appropriately.

 

3. if you want it, then add it on, if not then its not taking up space on your hard drive.

I can see what you're getting at, but having nice new features which are disabled by default doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it would totally confuse most normal computer users. It would also be incredibly annoying if you had to spend a lot of time making it look and function how it should do in the first place. Apple isn't any different to Microsoft in this respect. When you buy a new Mac, you get iLife pre-installed whether you like it or not which takes up approx. 4GB of disk space. Linux is the almost the same. If you download Ubuntu you get OpenOffice bundled with it.

 

If the extra features didn't take up any disk space on your HDD, you would either have to keep inserting the disc every time you wanted to add something or download them from the Internet (like Apple do with printer drivers in Snow Leopard and Microsoft do with Language Packs in Vista and 7). One of the annoying things with XP, is having to insert the disc when you want to enable an extra feature. Although you could copy the contents of the XP disc to your HDD, you have then done the exact opposite to what you wanted to do in the first place (i.e. save disk space).

 

The same with the GUI make the classic one the default so as not to use resources and if people want the extra flashy GUI then they can add it and apply it.

Leaving Aero enabled actually improves performance because your CPU has less work to do...

 

Aero utilizes the graphics processor in your video card to composite and render the display. This design leads to two main advantages over the other Vista interfaces. First, the display is more reliable and seamless, with none of the weird tearing effects that can mar the other interfaces. Second, by offloading the display from the system microprocessor to the GPU, Windows Aero frees the microprocessor to perform other tasks, leading to better overall performance.

 

 

Not really used windows 7 that much to be honest but just to get an idea how much space capacity wise does a base default install take up ?? I think ( could be wrong as haven't installed snow leopard for a long time ) takes up around 11gb ( give or take a few gigs )

A base install of Windows 7 Ultimate (x86) with all of the latest updates installed comes to 7.3GB. Likewise, Windows XP Pro SP3 is around 4.5GB. Not a huge difference between them really, so I wouldn't call 7 bloated at all.

 

Also with reference to your capacity statements - just because windows 7 is released does not mean everyone will run out and upgrade current hardware ie hard drive to a larger capacity.

That's true. Most people don't install operating systems themselves or even upgrade their own HDDs. They usually choose to buy a new computer with the latest OS already loaded. I think a better example would be to say that HDDs have increased in capacity by 3313%, while Windows 7 only uses 62% more disk space compared to XP! I honestly don't think most people care how much disk space their OS uses. They just accept it.

 

I would prefer if they did what Apple did, just have one disc for the OS

Me too. I don't see Microsoft ever doing this because they wouldn't make as much money. Why sell one version when not everyone needs things like Remote Desktop or BitLocker? From a business perspective it makes perfect sense to do this. From a users perspective, it's annoying. One good thing about Windows 7 (and Vista) is that you can easily make a single disc which includes every edition (inc. Enterprise) for both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. If you wanted to, you could even create a USB flash drive which contained both Vista and 7.

 

4. Could be wrong on your blu ray point ref xp - I was under the impression it was down to all the hardware supporting HDCP although there is the work around of using SlySoft AnyDVD HD

Yes. Everything needs to support HDCP, from the graphics card and monitor to the OS and playback software. AnyDVD HD can be used to strip away the DRM, but it's not exactly legal in the UK.

[Arthur]

Most things you're going to want to do are now searchable and that just wasn't there in XP. I now really, really miss that if I use an XP machine!

I love the search feature. You can even misspell things too. e.g. Windows Key + Pritn

[mac_shinobi]

A bit like Vista. If you think about it, Microsoft did exactly this. They added the foundations to Vista and built upon these to make Windows 7 even better.

 

 

>If you buy a retail copy of Windows 7 your product key will work with both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. With an OEM copy of Windows, this is not possible. You either buy the >32-bit version or the 64-bit version. This is why the latter is cheaper (£111 vs £78). If you buy a PC from an OEM such as Dell or HP there is a >way to switch between the x86 and x64 editions, but technically it wouldn't be legal.

 

 

>> I'm the opposite. I really like Office 2010 (and 2007 before it) because I can do things a lot faster compared to in 2003. Saving documents in the new file format also >> means they take up less space on your HDD because everything gets zipped up.

 

 

>I would like to see Microsoft create a UK language pack for Windows since there's already one for >Welsh. Perhaps with Windows 8, Microsoft can use the location sensors feature from Windows 7 to detect where you are via >geo-location and set your keyboard layout (and other settings) appropriately.

 

 

>I can see what you're getting at, but having nice new features which are disabled by default doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it would totally confuse most normal computer >users. It would also be incredibly annoying if you had to spend a lot of time making it look and function how it should do in the first place. Apple isn't any different to Microsoft in >this respect. When you buy a new Mac, you get iLife pre-installed whether you like it or not which takes up approx. 4GB of disk space. Linux is the almost the same. If you download Ubuntu you get OpenOffice bundled with it.

 

If the extra features didn't take up any disk space on your HDD, you would either have to keep inserting the disc every time you wanted to add something or download them from the Internet (like Apple do with printer drivers in Snow Leopard and Microsoft do with Language Packs in Vista and 7). One of the annoying things with XP, is having to insert the disc when you want to enable an extra feature. Although you could copy the contents of the XP disc to your HDD, you have then done the exact opposite to what you wanted to do in the first place (i.e. save disk space).

 

 

>> Leaving Aero enabled actually improves performance because your CPU has less work to do...

 

 

 

 

 

A base install of Windows 7 Ultimate (x86) with all of the latest updates installed comes to 7.3GB. Likewise, Windows XP Pro SP3 is around 4.5GB. Not a huge difference between them really, so I wouldn't call 7 bloated at all.

 

 

That's true. Most people don't install operating systems themselves or even upgrade their own HDDs. They usually choose to buy a new computer with the latest OS already loaded. I think a better example would be to say that HDDs have increased in capacity by 3313%, while Windows 7 only uses 62% more disk space compared to XP! I honestly don't think most people care how much disk space their OS uses. They just accept it.

 

 

Me too. I don't see Microsoft ever doing this because they wouldn't make as much money. Why sell one version when not everyone needs things like Remote Desktop or BitLocker? From a business perspective it makes perfect sense to do this. From a users perspective, it's annoying. One good thing about Windows 7 (and Vista) is that you can easily make a single disc which includes every edition (inc. Enterprise) for both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. If you wanted to, you could even create a USB flash drive which contained both Vista and 7.

 

 

Yes. Everything needs to support HDCP, from the graphics card and monitor to the OS and playback software. AnyDVD HD can be used to strip away the DRM, but it's not exactly legal in the UK.

 

1. On apple it is just one disc and with regards to installing on other macs may or may not work due to the way they match it up to the hardware with ref to drivers and type of hardware you purchased it for ref when you get the installation disc with say a Mac Pro ( The tower ) and another installation disc with the mac book ( pro ) afaik and I have not tested it you cant for example use the installation disc from the mac book ( pro ) and install OS X on the Mac Pro ( Tower ), at least thats what I have gathered, as said earlier I have not tested this so could be wrong.

 

I have also not really looked into spec wise of the newest apple range with regards to the processor line but with snow leopard being 64 bit I am guessing the processors must support 64 bit so don't think aside from some of the actual software being 32 bit the OS provides backward compatibility for 32 bit applications but runs in 64 bit

 

As they have removed PPC support from snow leopard onwards this should make it a bit easier for apple ref pushing out the new operating systems as I am hoping 32 bit apps will be phased out and it will be purely 64 bit ( both os and applications )

 

2. with regards to your comment about when you get a mac you get iLife etc installed that is the image you get from factory if you want to call it that, I always fully format and go through the installation process myself so I get rid of every language ( chinese, japense, russian, etc ), all the printer drivers ( because I don't own every printer in existance ) and if I do purchase a printer I will install only the relevant driver myself and if there are any software updates that relate to helping then I install those, I do install iLife again as nice to be able to use iMovie and other iLife apps now and again

 

3. Fair enough ref taking the load of your actual cpu's and loading it onto your GPU but to run Aero requires at least in vista a heck of a lot of GPU power ( only exclusion that I am aware of is the mac mini's because when vista was released I know quite a few people who had mac minis and aero ran on the mac minis fine - go figure ). I am pretty sure that the effects such as expose and other ones that apple use does not use as much GPU power as aero ( need to google that to confirm that though ) but I had a G4 power book and also an iBook at work that can still do expose and all the other stuff without any hitches and they don't exactly have an ATI 5870 or a GTX 4XX gfx card in them.

 

4. In respect to the installation discs or amount of them - they should do a business version and a home / personal version ( 2 editions of the personal or home version ) ie one for pc enthusiasts that includes stuff such as bit locker and all the useful stuff and then a normal home version ( that can't be joined or used on a domain, does not have bit locker and all the business side of things ) and hence make this cheaper.

 

That way if you work in IT and want all the goodies for home use ( for yourself ) then you buy the pc / personal version and if you are a normal user then just the home version and in the same way if you are a business then you just purchase a volume license or as many required licenses for the business version.

 

5. fair enough reference not legal in the UK ref slysoft any dvd - If I was to use sly soft any dvd ( hd ) then it would only purely be to playback blu ray movies not to copy / re sell or anything like that and I am not saying that makes it legal as it does not but they should at least have the fair use act or something like that or make a patch for xp to allow blu ray playback for those of us who want to stick with xp for the time being and who have a blu ray drive ( personally I don't as I have a PS 3 and that plays my blu ray movies back )

 

You are correct reference the OS supporting it because when I was looking at adding a cheaper blu ray drive ( LG ) to my Mac Pro, Leopard and Snow Leopard did not support it and I was contemplating to bootcamp windows for blu ray playback ( which ever version of windows whether it be xp, vista or whatever ) but without being able to test it and see if it worked etc I went with the PS 3 option as it just made my life a lot easier and also meant I could play games on the PS 3 as well as having a blu ray player.

 

I still think windows is behind on the search feature - not got windows 7 so not tried it but I know spot light is pretty darned quick, If I re call correctly I think windows vista or 7 was going to include some sort of SQL database to index all your files on your filing system but they scrapped that - not sure if windows 7 does anything like that, I know xp had a service that ran in the background but personally I think that was a flakey approach

[Quackers]

Right click on it and view the properties - each library allows you to specify what gets listed.

 

Cannot do that, as that only effects me. I need the default to be this for EVERYONE.

[localzuk]

Cannot do that, as that only effects me. I need the default to be this for EVERYONE.

 

Lots of information on that here, including Microsoft's official way of doing it - http://www.edugeek.net/forums/windows-7/35953-controlling-libraries-group-policy.html

[sted]

If you buy a retail copy of Windows 7 your product key will work with both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. With an OEM copy of Windows, this is not possible. You either buy the 32-bit version or the 64-bit version. This is why the latter is cheaper (£111 vs £78). If you buy a PC from an OEM such as Dell or HP there is a way to switch between the x86 and x64 editions, but technically it wouldn't be legal.

 

you may only get one disk with oem but the code does work with both x86 and x64

 

as to adding hdcp to windows xp why would ms put money into something that may not even be sensibly doab le it may require a major rewrite of code not to mention vendors then having to rewrite drivers etc its just not going to happen

[mac_shinobi]

Considering the problems with IE5, IE6, IE7 and IE8 I can't see anyone rushing out to replace their machines and operating systems just to run IE9.

 

Windows Live Essentials works perfectly well here.

 

Considering Microsoft put their faith in HD-DVD I can understand why they don't support Blu-Ray. Although other posters have stated otherwise. And I'd like to see the figures of how many people have Blu Ray in their PCs and use it, as opposed to a PS3 or dedicated player.

 

It was reported recently in the media that 76% of businesses are still running Windows XP for many reasons. Calling them "Luddites" is very ignorant and shows how little you know about computing in the wider field.

 

 

 

I've just logged into the MS Licensing Centre and there are 25 choices of Windows 7 to download. So much for your "single DVD with all editions of Windows 7".

 

Incidentally, what part of the IT curriculum teaches the complexities of using an OS to the point that the task will only work on one OS and not a previous one? As far as I'm aware you still create folders and shortcuts the same way in Vista and 7 as you do in XP.

 

Just because pupils might run 7 and Vista at home (probably because it came pre-loaded and they didn't get a choice to get XP) doesn't mean its the "perfect" OS. They also use PS3s and XBOXes and Wiis, but that doesn't mean we have to teach that technology to them in school.

 

Sadly, Microsoft have "dumbed down" their OS. First with Vista, and continued with 7.

 

Microsoft obviously lost the HD-DVD vs Blu Ray war - no need to say anymore there.

 

Ref not fitting 25 on one dvd - Most of windows 7 will be the same excluding the home edition and the ultimate or business equivelant so if you were only doing 2 or 3 variants then you would have no need for 25 editions of it.

 

I mean why make ultimate / professional editions which don't afaik have much difference between them, surely thats a waste of time and effort.

 

I agree, windows vista and 7 is dumb....ed down

[mac_shinobi]

Cannot do that, as that only effects me. I need the default to be this for EVERYONE.

 

Make the changes to your account and then over write the all users profile with whatever settings you want as default - would this resolve that issue ?

 

Then you can image it afterwards and use said image to image other pc's

[webman]

I reluctantly started using Windows 7 in April after being a long-time XP user (and 2000 for a long time before that). On the whole, I rather like Windows 7. I've listed below what I feel are my personal likes and dislikes based on how I'm used to working.

 

Likes

 

• Wallpaper slideshow
  
• System tray icon management
  
• Start menu buttons without titles
  
• Jump lists
  
• Start menu search
  
• Windows Explorer Favourites
  
• Windows Explorer address bar breadcrumbs
  
• Windows Explorer search box
  
• Windows Explorer keyboard shortcuts (Alt + Up to go up a level)
  
• Font installation is vastly improved
  

 

Dislikes

 

• Start Menu. My old way of launching programs was quick and efficient - Win key followed by letters. (this screenshot might help explain). Can't do this in Windows 7. I've resorted to pinning most-used apps to the start menu for when I feel like clicking. The others I use Start Menu search to launch - but the delay between typing and showing the result is longer than my 'XP' way of doing it.
  
• Still no native virtual desktops like Linux