# Windows 7



## Edward Campbell (26 Jul 2009)

I didn’t see this topic anywhere else. Maybe it’s just _radio chatter_ but some of you may be interested.

I have been using Windows 7 Release Candidate for a few weeks now.

Initially I loaded it on my Windows _Vista_ box – a Core 2 Duo processor with 4 Gigs of RAM.

It is more compact than _Vista_, and, maybe, a little faster. But I have a computer that is, properly, _Vista_ ready – enough power and enough RAM.

I took Windows 7 off the _Vista_ box and put it on my older _Linux_ box – a fairly old 486 processor with just 1 Gig of RAM. This is a computer that would not be able to run _Vista_ at anything like acceptable performance, if at all. Windows 7 works fine on it. It is not as fast as my _Linux_ distro (Ubuntu 9.04) but then almost nothing is. It loads and works faster than the version of Windows XP Pro I replaced. This – use of a less than _Vista_ capable computer, including _netbooks_ with Intel _Atom,_ processors and only 1 Gig of RAM – is what I think Microsoft was aiming for. If so they have managed to hit the target. It is compact, quick and will run on a pretty _basic_ machine. 

Thus far, after a few weeks, Windows 7 appears stable and has no problems coping with any of my favourite programmes including Avast anti-virus (I use the *free* “Home” edition) and Open Office 3.1 (which is also free!).

You can use it, too, for “free” until March 2010 if you download the Release Candidate version before 20 Aug 09, but I would not recommend making it your *primary* operating system if you have only one computer. If you have two computers or enough hard drive space to run it on a separate partition then you may wish to give it a try.


----------



## tabernac (27 Jul 2009)

I've been running the RC for about a week now, and it's pretty solid. WAY faster than Vista, boots up and loads my profile in nearly no time at all, and shuts down without hanging! Everything an OS should be. 

Quite pleased with it, enough that it's now my main OS. No Vista partition for me.


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Jul 2009)

I think that, at long last, the _personal_ computing environment is changing.

Windows 7 is "better" than _Vista_ because it is more compact, less of a power and memory hog and will, therefore, run on less capable machines - like _netbooks_.

Google is going to offer a new OS based on its Chrome browser, aimed, primarily at _netbooks_ and users of web based applications, including players of web based games.

Linux is "ready." I use two _distros_ on a daily basis: Ubuntu 9.04 and Linpus Lite (on my little (9" screen and <1 kg) Asus _netbook_). Both are fast (faster than anything Microsoft has produced since DOS), compact and dead stable. Both are, essentially, free.

People who use their PCs as game consoles are, almost certainly, stuck with Microsoft, but the rest of us have choices.

I doubt I will migrate away from Microsoft for a few - many many - years. I have a few applications that will not run on a Linux box. But, as more and more applications become web based then OSs like Chrome and Linux will find greater and greater acceptance.


----------



## WannaBeFlyer (27 Jul 2009)

If you don't like Vista, brace yourself. It is the next OS at DND and is already in pilot.


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Jul 2009)

I find _Vista_ a very good, very stable, OS if, and it's a big IF, one has enough "power."

I loaded _Vista_ on my "test" machine (an older 486/1 Gig machine) and it was slow and unreliable. On my Microsoft box (Core 2 Duo/4 Gigs) it is just fine.

But, I repeat, Windows 7 runs just as "fine" on my old, _weak_, "test" box. That's the difference between Windows 7 and _Vista_.


----------



## meni0n (27 Jul 2009)

I dual boot between Windows 7 and Ubuntu on my laptop. The biggest beef with Windows 7 is that explorer just decided to crash on you out of the blue, more so if you got any the gadgets on. Anyone out there with Ubuntu have problems with response time of a tap on a touchpad? It's one of the things that is making me hate it.


----------



## dustinm (27 Jul 2009)

meni0n said:
			
		

> I dual boot between Windows 7 and Ubuntu on my laptop. The biggest beef with Windows 7 is that explorer just decided to crash on you out of the blue, more so if you got any the gadgets on. Anyone out there with Ubuntu have problems with response time of a tap on a touchpad? It's one of the things that is making me hate it.



I had several problems when I still used Ubuntu, ranging from lack of sensitivity to completely erratic movements that made the touchpad unusable without changing the kernel boot parameters. 

The solution seems to be (once you've identified your particular touchpad brand) changing the drivers, either from proprietary to generic, or from generic to proprietary.

Edit for spelling.


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (27 Jul 2009)

I've been using Windows 7 on my primary laptop since the RC was announced. I have to agree with Edward, it's like Vista, done right. The only problem I have seems to be Symantec Endpoint Protection 11, which occasionally bluescreens my system. Especially if I'm using my iPhone for Internet Tethering. Otherwise, solid and fast. I've gotten quite used to the new taskbar too!


----------



## meni0n (27 Jul 2009)

A quick note for anyone who wants to upgrade to Win7 RC, if you got AVG installed, remove it before upgrading or you will get a BSOD on boot.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Jul 2009)

Moody said:
			
		

> If you don't like Vista, brace yourself. It is the next OS at DND and is already in pilot.



You would think that our IT staff would be smart enough to skip Vista like we skipped Windows ME. We had a hard enough time migrating and upgrading the hardware to even run XP Pro.... I sense a gongshow on the DWAN.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> gongshow



Well at least I understood one word in this whole thread................ :-[


----------



## WannaBeFlyer (29 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You would think that our IT staff would be smart enough to skip Vista like we skipped Windows ME.


Just to be clear: it is NOT us! The techs working the floor, answering the phones, deploying software, and supporting the desktop (Baseline) agree 100% with you. We are only doing as we are told. I can't imagine some of these legacy DND apps running on Vista (shims or no shims) or with some of the current hardware that is out there. 



> I sense a gongshow on the DWAN.


 It wouldn't be the first. A lot of my colleagues, very talented techs by the way, still have to go to their happy place when the words "Baseline" or "XP" are mentioned. Let's hope that there are too many issues and it takes too long so that they have to go with 7 SP1.   :nod:


----------



## chanman (4 Aug 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I find _Vista_ a very good, very stable, OS if, and it's a big IF, one has enough "power."
> 
> I loaded _Vista_ on my "test" machine (an older 486/1 Gig machine) and it was slow and unreliable. On my Microsoft box (Core 2 Duo/4 Gigs) it is just fine.
> 
> But, I repeat, Windows 7 runs just as "fine" on my old, _weak_, "test" box. That's the difference between Windows 7 and _Vista_.



Are you sure it's a 486?  486s were marginal on Windows 95, and most came with 8 megabytes of RAM. MS DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1.

No consumer hardware marketed, certainly combined the 486 CPU with the ability to take 1 GB of RAM - an amount which would be considered a good amount until just a few years back. 

That said, I'm hoping Windows 7 is handier with dual monitors than XP is, especially mismatched ones, like mine are.


----------



## Harley Sailor (4 Aug 2009)

Moody said:
			
		

> If you don't like Vista, brace yourself. It is the next OS at DND and is already in pilot.



Word I was getting form some Airforce IT is that DND was thinking about bypassing Vista and going straight to 7.  That was the first time I had heard of 7.


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Aug 2009)

chanman said:
			
		

> Are you sure it's a 486?  486s were marginal on Windows 95, and most came with 8 megabytes of RAM. MS DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1.
> 
> No consumer hardware marketed, certainly combined the 486 CPU with the ability to take 1 GB of RAM - an amount which would be considered a good amount until just a few years back.
> 
> That said, I'm hoping Windows 7 is handier with dual monitors than XP is, especially mismatched ones, like mine are.




You are quite right, Chanman. While there is an old 486 motherboard/processor in a corner, I am running Windows 7 and Ubuntu on a _Pentium *4*_ that I got back in 2003, I think.

'Twas a _brain fart_, sorry.


----------



## chanman (5 Aug 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> You are quite right, Chanman. While there is an old 486 motherboard/processor in a corner, I am running Windows 7 and Ubuntu on a _Pentium *4*_ that I got back in 2003, I think.
> 
> 'Twas a _brain fart_, sorry.



Well, miracles could happen    I have a soft spot for the old 486's, being the first PC I put a lot of use on, and we have an original Pentium still being used at work.  Interestingly, as older hardware (the 386's, 486's, and original Pentiums) dies out, remaining examples seem to be commanding higher prices.  I think used Pentium 3's and 4's on Craigslist sell for less than the aforementioned antiques.  Whether demand is driven by companies with legacy systems or nostalgia, I have no idea.



			
				Moody said:
			
		

> Just to be clear: it is NOT us! The techs working the floor, answering the phones, deploying software, and supporting the desktop (Baseline) agree 100% with you. We are only doing as we are told. I can't imagine some of these legacy DND apps running on Vista (shims or no shims) or with some of the current hardware that is out there.



Some versions of Windows 7 look like they can run Windows XP in a virtual machine.  Whether the machines running your legacy apps can run that hardware is another matter though.  One friend working in IT is looking frantically for a 200 MHz machine as one of the legacy apps used by the accounting department is affected by the clockspeed of the CPU.  I'm sure it looked seemed like a good idea 12 years ago.


----------



## Edward Campbell (18 Sep 2009)

Slightly off topic, but see here. During a recent problem I noted that my favourite _Linux_ ditsro (Ubuntu) worked better than either MS Windows _Vista_ or Windows 7.

Those with older, slower hardware and/or those with slim wallets might want to consider _Linux_. The best most popular _Linux_ distros (releases) include Ubuntu, openSUSE and linux Mint. They are, generally, free (unless you want "support" beyond websites and help files) and they include a free, open source, office suite that is compatible with MS Office 2003 but has some additional features.

The most popular _Linux_ distros are ready for prime time. They work, they are stable (_Unix_, the core of _Linux_, turns 40 this year) and they are not under constant attack by every hacker in the known universe.

I recommend them to those who do not need to run MS specific applications - which includes about 99.99% of games, by the way.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Sep 2009)

Graphic installers?  No cryptic command line tools to allocate the hard dirve space?  There goes the neighbourhood.

Slackware.


----------



## Edward Campbell (18 Sep 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Graphic installers?  No cryptic command line tools to allocate the hard dirve space?  *There goes the neighbourhood.*
> 
> Slackware.




I know, I really miss _vi_ and dot commands.  :


----------



## dapaterson (18 Sep 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I know, I really miss _vi_ and dot commands.  :



You're just digging a deeper and deeper hole.

*Vi*?

_*Emacs*_!


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (18 Sep 2009)

Not Vi, vi! It's like The RCR but in reverse.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Sep 2009)

Mike Bobbitt said:
			
		

> Not Vi, vi! It's like The RCR but in reverse.



Hmm... The RCR never pass a fault.  In reverse, does that mean that vi! passes every fault?


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (18 Sep 2009)

I think it's an option:



> ~
> ~
> ~
> :set
> ...


----------

