Quite frankly sir you can stick you benchmarks up your arse
Whats important to me is the real world performance of what i see before me, and the fact of the matter is Windows 7 pisses all over Vista for me in terms of boot speed, overall system snappiness and better, smoother gameplay in all of my games.(and significant FPS boosts in all of them)
You come across as someone who is looking for every excuse not to move on. Believe what you want about 7. I don't know one single person personally that moved on to 7 and not said its a lot better than Vista.
Except for a few obscure benchmarks everything else is within about 1%. And in the 4 games they tested the biggest difference was 1.2 fps. Is that the significant boost you guys are talking about?
So, quite frankly, you can stick your personal, subjective assessment up your arse, if you cannot back it up with anything measurable. If you get significant FPS boost, then you could've most likely achieved the same thing by reinstalling Vista - comparing a fresh 7 install to an old Vista setup isn't fair. UI is snappier, I'll admit that, but that's mostly it.
I don't care if all your little numbers and benchmarks say that Win7 is ten times slower than Vista, it still runs better and faster and uses less resources on my pc. And no, that's not just my impression, numbnuts. The fact that most people seem to experience the same thing leads me to believe that all your "facts" and benchmarks are absolutely worthless. You believe what you will and use the OS you want, but stop trying to convince people Win7 isn't a significant improvement over Vista because it is, no matter what figures, websites and benchmarks you come up with.
20FPS boost in FSX, one of the most demanding PC titles.
35FPS boost in netKar pro
9 seconds faster bootup.
Those results i posted were with a brand new install of Vista compared to a 6 week old install of Windows 7.
Yet again, real world performance with my own benchmarks that i can see with my own eyes is far more important than a benchmark someone else has run on another machine.
Not at all surprised by the relative numbers of XP, Vista and Windows 7 votes. A magazine article I read recently showed the results of a count done back in September, (by Micromart magazine of users of their website), which showed the following:
XP: 60%
Vista: 22%
Windows 7: 2%
Plus all the others.
Even prior to actually being released Windows 7 already had a 2% penetration of that particular user base. Compare that with 7% for Mac OS X and 1.8% for Linux.
I get the feeling that Windows 7 is going to be a big success for MS.
I've got three, and for me at least they are enough to spend the money.
1. Vista lags a lot when you ask it to do almost anything. File copying is a prime example. For god knows what reason it just sits there for anything up to 30 seconds before it starts to transfer anything. Then it does similar things when opening most applications, 3-5 second lag before the app opens. Windows 7 does neither.
2. For some bizare reason in Vista, if I open any Office document and then just close it again without making any modifications what-so-ever it asks me if I want to save the changes. It never did that when I used the exact same installation of office in XP and it doesn't do it in Windows 7.
3. Windows 7 has finally changed a behaviour of all previous versions of windows that has always annoyed the hell out of me. Namely the insistence of bringing all windows to "active" status when they finish whatever task they may have been doing in an "inactive" window status. I've lost count of the number of times I've been typing an email or word document etc only for it to switch to another application which windows has decided I MUST attend to when IT wants me to !! Windows 7 treats the user like they have a brain and lets them decide to go back and check if the background task has finished for themselves.
So there you go.. three advantages of Windows 7 over Vista for starters. At least to me they're advantages.
Agreed. But number 3 did mean an installation took a while longer to complete, as it sat there in the background waiting for me to click Finish... But that's just me being used to the old, stupid way of things demanding my attention...
Windows 7 is so much better than Vista, that I think it's worth the money even if you already own Vista. You will go from hating your computer to loving it again. Fortunately, my home PC skipped Vista (I'm no fool!), and hasn't had to suffer the worst OS MS ever released contaminating it.
I'm very happy with W7 so far. It does a lot of little things right, which is important when you're doing those little things day in day out. For example I love being able to drag windows to the left or right and have them take up half the screen. I use that constantly now to compare contents between windows.
Oh my God I'm starting to sound like those horrible Windows 7 launch party people!!!
Well so far here is what we know by looking at the numbers:
697 of the 727 users have a DirectX 9 capable system. That's 95.87% of users
377 of the 727 users have a DirectX 10 capable system. That's 51.85% of users
Of the 727 users 27 users are voting for a system that they not playing LFS on
Judging by those numbers LFS should not have DX10 (yet..) but... DX9 (oh yea)
Some what unrelated question but, Could LFS be the last DX8.1 game on the market that gets updates?
20 fps more in FSX, wow, that's like 150% more, right? :P
I believe that talking about quantities like speed and time requires a proper quantitative analysis, which is something at least some of the more reputable tech sites do. And their results are pretty unanimous. And if you follow some of the MS technical blogs/sites, you can find technical reasons why Win 7 is more like Vista SP3 than the best thing since sliced bread.
And, FYI, I preordered Win 7 upgrade back in June when it was half price and received it on Oct 22, i.e. the launch date. I'm sorry if I haven't fallen in love with the new wonder of the world that is Windows 7...
Yes, the benchmarks say it's the same speed (+- 2%), but it feels a lot quicker. Maybe the benchmarks aren't measuring the things that actually matter when it comes to how an OS feels to use.
Turning on time - who cares. I'm probably not in the room whilst it loads.
Copying a big files - who cares. I don't watch the whole process, but go on the net or play Minesweeper (the W7 version of which rocks!).
FPS in games - I can't notice the difference between 80 and 82fps, and if we're worried about the difference between 15 and 17fps then you really need a better computer (or a different game) than worrying about whether Vista of W7 is the OS for you.
The time it takes for the start menu to appear whilst a few other things are happening - important, but never measured in a benchmark I've seen...
Maybe the start menu is a bit of a poor example. But I'm sure you know what I mean.
7 is definately better - not a quantum leap, but a fair improvement. Vista was a revolution, but nothing it did would shake the negative image (look at Tristan, he's never even used it and he's throwing the mud around like so many).
Never even used it? How the hell did you reach that conclusion? Not being stupid enough to install it on my own computer doesn't mean I've not used it. As a matter of fact, I've used it extensively on computers not installed in my own living room. Vista was awful. Worse than XP in every way to the end user.
Fair enough then, tell me where it was awful compared to 7. No, that's not a "it felt bad", "my mate said it was shit". I'm asking for a genuine reason. I ask this question at work _ALL_ the time and *no-one* has an answer.
I will admit, 7 is snappier, and that UAC is handled a little better (but then again - I turn it off). Snap is also useful.
I would never recommend Vista (now), but I certainly wouldn't slag it off massively. XP was a very capable OS and for some things i'd still recommend it - but for your average desktop user, 7 is better.
Don't ask my why but I couldn't print duplex with Vista. Vista took 2 mins to start, 7 does it in 45 secs. I can use 7 right after I see the desktop and not wait another 15 secs for everything being loaded. 7 needs less space (ram and hdd).
Don't get me wrong, 7 is as annoying to use in some parts as vista was, but it's an (big) improvement (for me).
EDIT:
Also my notebooks battery lasts around 20 mins longer under 7 then it did under vista.
