Windows 7

[david]

So what are your experiences with it?

How long did it take you to crash it?

It only took me about 15 minutes, installed the latest version of the kaspersky anti virus and crashed it such that it had to go through two repair cycles and a system restore to finally boot again.

David

 

[mattbeals]

Been using it for a few days now pretty intensely and haven't had any issues. I like it. I don't like how they rearranged all my folders in C:\documents and settings\ and moved them to C:\users\ . The folder structure is all screwed up. Having to teach myself new file paths. Micro$oft could take a clue from Apple (again) and allow for copying files into C:\windows\ with a prompt to allow rather than saying you have to "run as an administrator". Subtle difference, but important. Let the function happen with a pause for authentication. No authentication, no copy.

At least it isn't as screwed up as the original vista. But I think of Windows 7 as Vista SP2 (what Vista should have been).

On my pokey little HP Pavillion laptop (dual 1.63GHz, 2GB RAM) it works great. I turned off all the Aero crap (barf) and went back to as close of an XP theme as I can. Aero ate up way too much resources even with the built in 128MB Nvidia video card I have. Nice that it had the built in drivers for the Nvidia card, FireWire controller and especially native SATA support for my HD. XP Pro didn't. A lot faster machine with the native SATA mode. The installation was a breeze, super, super, super simple.

I haven't had any problems except with callas pdfAutoOptimizer, which has a script problem. Other than that everything works pretty damned well much to my surprise. Liking it a bit more than Fedora 11 or OpenSuSE and Ubuntu.

Kind of a pain to have two hard drives and switch back and forth. We'll see which one I keep. May have to wipe the drive with XP (bigger drive) and just bite the bullet for a permanent upgrade.

 

[Cory Smith]

I purchased and installed vista a year or so ago..not quite ready to hand over another hundred bucks to M$. Feel like there should have been a larger discount to people that own the steaming pile they call vista. but that's another topic

 

[Tech]

I think they finally got it right with Windows 7. I have been running this at home. Just be sure to have a clean install (wiped out hard drive), if you are upgrading from XP/Vista be sure to install only the minimal stuffs from those prior to upgrading to Windows 7 to reduce on junk files.

And if you are still running an old PC machine, do consider upgrading some hardwares. No matter what they say, every new generation of OS always require better hardwares to run smoothly.

That said, I still hate their pricing system...they haven't learn a thing from Apple...One Price to Rule Them All.

 

[Arthaven]

I don't like how they rearranged all my folders in C:\documents and settings\ and moved them to C:\users\ .

No crazier than first having to learn OS X and their Users, Desktops and Fonts. Ugh, that took a while to get used to and know.

 

[Morning Flight]

...not quite ready to hand over another hundred bucks to M$. Feel like there should have been a larger discount to people that own the steaming pile they call vista.

My sentiments exactly, Cory. Except I had to fork over the upgrade price (twice, as it turned out) to make sure our software would run on Windows 7. All our development is still done on XP, at least until Service Pack 2 comes out for Windows 7. We never did make the switch to Vista, except to check for compatibility.

The got'cha happened because I failed to read the fine print when I ordered the first upgrade from Amazon three months ago. One of our two Vista machines runs Vista Home Premium, the other Vista Ultimate, and the upgrade was for Windows 7 Professional. Who knew Microsoft wouldn't let you downgrade from Vista Ultimate to Windows 7 Professional!?! I can see how they wouldn't let you switch from Home to Pro or Ultimate, but downgrade? So, a trip to Best Buy and another $119.99 for the upgrade box from Vista Home Premium to Windows 7 Home Premium. I'm beginning to think MS is taking a page from the bank industry's book: If you can't make money on the software, try to fleece your customers with unexpected extras.

In fairness, the upgrade went smooth and without drama. The best I've ever had. I ran the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor ahead of time (highly recommended!) to discover possible issues. Just a couple, all easily fixed. A new driver from Creative for the sound card, uninstall iTunes and then reinstall after the upgrade, that sort of stuff. The upgrade process took three hours but didn't stop for questions, a pleasant surprise. Kudos to Apply - all my libraries came back up after reinstalling iTunes.

As mattbeals said, the system itself feels like Vista without the edges, what that miserable OS should have been in the first place. My pet Vista complaint happens to be with UAC and virtualization and compatibility folders, and I expected none of those to go away with Windows 7. Sure enough, they didn't. But all in all, while I despised Vista, I think I can live with Windows 7. When the time comes, that is, and provided I get bored with XP.

Hal Heindel
Morning Flight: Print Estimating Software for Offset and Digital

 

[genomarb]

cant get drivers for any of my printers - anything from an hp laserjet to a docucolor 250 - nothing

 

[gordo]

I use a MAC so pardon my ignorance...just how many current operating systems does Microsoft have in the field that they have to support? Can someone provide a list?

Nearest I could figure was:

Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 2000
Windows 98
Windows NT

Must be tough supporting all the various configurations.

 

[kandod]

The funniest thing with the new Windows 7 to me is the full support of the WinXP (and why not Vista) via the so colled Windows 7 XP mode - that's it, you are invited in the Windows Upgrade Advisor at the very begining of the installation to "take advantage" of their "new" computer virtualization technology so you can have Windows XP inside your Windows 7. Is that an act of desperation, people in MS, have you completely abandoned hope that "the new" OS will have a destiny different than that of Vista's? At the end it might proof that the only way to make people to embrace a new MS operating system is to provide such one.

 

[Arthaven]

I use a MAC so pardon my ignorance...just how many current operating systems does Microsoft have in the field that they have to support? Can someone provide a list?

Nearest I could figure was:

Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 2000
Windows 98
Windows NT

Must be tough supporting all the various configurations.

I can still install my original Half-Life game from 1996 and play it on any Windows system. Macs on the other hand have this "upgrade or die mentality" which I can't say I hate, but I dislike the philosophy behind it for a mainstream audience. They release a computer with their new OS, then upgrade the CPU and lock your computer out of a hardware update. Or you're forced to upgrade your software to a new OS version to use a peripheral. Having legacy support is important to a lot of people and a nice convenience.

 

[Morning Flight]

I can still install my original Half-Life game from 1996 and play it on any Windows system.

You're right, Arthaven, about the life of Windows programs. Every version of Morning Flight we ever wrote will run on anything from Windows 98 to Windows 7. And we never had to change a single line of code to make that happen. On the other hand, with Macs now running Intel chips, they're moving closer to the mainstream. We didn't have to change a single line for Parallels or Boot Camp, either.

It's the Windows upgrades that can be cumbersome. While the conversion from Vista to Windows 7 is a walk in the park, upgrading from XP is not for the faint-hearted. Here is how I summed it up on the forum for our users:

The upgrade prices from XP or Vista to Windows 7 are steep ($120 to $220). If you're running Vista, you may want to bite the bullet because Windows 7 is faster, more stable, boots faster, and manages your files better. Besides, you get rid of Vista. Even with all that, you may want to wait for the first Service Pack.

If you're running XP, I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade to Windows 7, and lots of reasons not to. For one thing, your PC may not be able to handle the new OS. Run the Upgrade Advisor to find out. For another, you'll need to do a clean install, what Microsoft calls "Custom (Advanced)":

1. Save all your files and settings on an external drive, using Windows Easy Transfer. If you don't have an external drive big enough, you won't be able to use Easy Transfer.

2. Deactivate all programs that require activation, such as MS Office and Adobe Suites. Gather up all the installations disks for your programs and any associated license keys. Manually reinstall and activate all your programs after you install Windows 7.

3. Make a big pot of coffee and pray!

Hal Heindel
Morning Flight: Print Estimating Software for Offset and Digital

 

[david]

64 bit Drivers

64 bit Drivers

The biggest headache we have encountered with some of our software is the requirement for digital certificates for system drivers to the 64 bit OS versions. It is possible to install drivers to 32 bit machines without a certificate, but with the introduction of the 64 bit OS this is not possible. Some of our Rip projects require things like a USB interface to printers - and we had to rewrite these so that we could apply digital certificates to them to allow them to be installed.

In a way I agree this is a good idea as it might help to curb the spread of virus's. But I still think that Windows is certainly starting to suffer from "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" syndrome. So many warnings on things we use everyday - that when something that needs a real warning comes along - we just say OK like always.

 

[rbailleu]

I use a MAC so pardon my ignorance...just how many current operating systems does Microsoft have in the field that they have to support? Can someone provide a list?

Nearest I could figure was:

Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 2000
Windows 98
Windows NT

Must be tough supporting all the various configurations.

ms does not support nt and 98 any more. not sure about 2000.

does apple support os 7.6(1997), 8(1997) or even 9(1999) like ms supports xp. its a testament to its usefullness that it is still so popular. after 8 years and vista and win2k3 and win2k8 and win 7.

its not like I have never had a mac lock up/ freeze. or in the old days had to clear the pram. resomething the desktop(sorry its been a while since I have actually used a mac). mac people pretend the mac has never had issues. seems like I hear there is some issue with networking with every macos update. something breaks with some workflow. have to update a bunch of drivers.
but its got a cool title everytime. like snow leopard. bobcat. tiger cub( wait thats a cubscout thing)

 

[mattbeals]

As far as I know XP, Vista, Win2k3 Server, Win2k8 Server and 7 are the only supported versions. XP was scheduled for EOL, but that if I recall correctly was extended. If Vista was as good as it should have been then XP I believed would have been EOL'ed. But the backlash was so great they couldn't. Besides, XP SP3 is so damned good and proven it is hard to justify the upgrade to Vista and 7. Unless it's a forced migration off the cliff with the rest of the IT lemmings that went with Vista.

But I digress. XP will be very hard for Microsoft to kill. Windows 7 might very well redeem them too. Might...

 

[gordo]

To rbailleu;

You seem to be reading into what I posted rather than reading the post.

I wasn't trying to imply that MACs were better than PCs.

What I was trying to understand, and what I think I've learned is true, is that on the Microsoft OS side, MS sells several OSs at the same time and as a result there seems to be a large variety of OS versions and types being used by their customers. That must consume quite a bit of resources to support.

On the MAC OS side what I think seems to happen more often is that the majority of users upgrade as new versions of the OS are released. Apple offers/sells only one OS at a time. It's more of a linear process compared with MS. So Apple, I'm guessing, would theoretically have less of a support issue.

That is all.

best, gordon p

 

[mattbeals]

I'm not sure if Apple is writing software updates for 10.2. I think for 10.3 they are. That isn't very old compared to XP... And I also don't know how far back their software updates go back.

 

[rbailleu]

gordo,

sorry if I sounded like a pc lover with an attitude. I did not mean to. I guess I should not watch the news, eat lunch, answer the phone, and reply to printplanet all at the same time.

all I meant to say was ms makes a good product with xp. yes with the millions of combinations of hardware and software vista has issues. which is why the 64 bit install issues become a good thing.

should ms take a page from the apple play book and have one os. I would answer yes. but then I am not a multibillionaire. it is all about product differentiation. same os, different pricing. frankly its confusing as heck. windows 7 is better with home, professional and ultimate. but still confusing. yes I would make only 2. home and professional. this is part of the reason why you can buy a windows home pc for $399. and a mac mini for $599. infact right now I am using a fairly nice compaq/win vista home machine that I paid $299 new at walmart 2 months ago.

the support costs can be enormous for microsoft. but the cost of upsetting customers, by not supporting old systems is probably greater. I fix windows machines on the side for friends and family. it astonishes me how many windows 98/me machines are still running for people. I would put $5 on a bet that the win95/98/me installed base is largely greater than the non intel mac base. my guess would be that mac people upgrade more often due to the demographics of mac users. my opinion only is that mac people tend to have more money for their quality pc's. if the cheapskate pc users would spend an average of $1200 on a computer, windows would not have the poor reputation that it has.

come to think of it, what do I do with my mac g4. I would guess the ppc macs are quickly going to be finding a recycle bin. ebay maybe.

again sorry to sound insulting. not my intention. dont get me started on politics. whoa

 

[Arthaven]

On the MAC OS side what I think seems to happen more often is that the majority of users upgrade as new versions of the OS are released. Apple offers/sells only one OS at a time. It's more of a linear process compared with MS. So Apple, I'm guessing, would theoretically have less of a support issue.

From my experience it's Apple calling the shots and moving on instead of looking at their customer base and catering to them. Like you said, it's more linear and really makes less work for them so that they can focus on current work and keep moving forward (you can't please everyone). Most Mac sales are probably for professionals instead of "mom and pop" so those folks are already in the mindset of upgrading every two years (18-24 months).

It's only a bad thing when mom and pop starts taking a bigger chunk of Apples market share. They will have to re-think their current structure or plan around incompatibility issues (New computer with new CPU to run new OS/New computer to run new OS to run new Mouse/Current software that customer loves and doesn't want to upgrade may be unsupported on their next OS). The common person is going to pull their hair out when they come across these kinds of things. Seeing how Apple has thought outside of the box to tackle issues in the past, I'm curious to see what they do in the future (as always, good or bad).

 

[Arthaven]

Oh and the other thing that is a little crazy to me about the different OS philosophies is:

Microsoft - They release one expensive OS that continuously gets updates for "free" over X amount of years. But they have to support any and all changes throughout the version.
Example: Vista is supported until at least the next Fully Named OS is released.

Apple - Breaks incremental/point OS updates into paid updates as Full OS Versions over X amount of years. Which is why they have such a wide variance of incompatibility even within their current OS X.
Example: OS X is only supported until their next point update even though it is still OS X.