#  >  > Computers Can Be Fun >  >  > Computer News >  >  Windows 7

## Fuzzy Bob

A quick impression.
Well I'm up and running on Windows 7 thanks to the people at PC Wank, and up to now I'm very impressed with it, boots up in 45 secs and shuts down in 15. Ok, there were security patches to apply after installation but that's Micro$oft for you. The layout is impressive and easy to navigate (Anything is better than Vista). WMP 12 has been improved with it's layout and has it's own codecs but it doesn't play flv files. It's a hell of a lot faster than Vi$ta and not as many "are you sure you want to run this" security prompts. No crashes (Yet). I'm running Firefox 3.5.3 without any problems and apparently Mozilla will be releasing a 3.6 beta on the 21st with improvements for Windows 7.
Installation took about 45mins on a clean install.

----------


## Butterfly

is it Oct 22 yet ? I thought you couldn't get any official version before that date,

what beta are you running ?

----------


## Fuzzy Bob

It's genuine. It must have been shipped early to beat any Royal Mail strikes on the 22nd & 23rd in the UK.

----------


## Fondles

Upgrade from RC to RTM here bout 2 months ago, it is one superb OS, i had planned on dumping the dodgy copy for a purchased legit one but fcuk me, not for the bux they want.

----------


## Fuzzy Bob

*Windows 7 delivered early to U.K. customers*
 Windows 7 delivered early to U.K. customers | Crave - CNET 
 Some lucky Brits received their preordered copy of Windows 7 earlier Monday--several days before it goes on sale--proving that there is at least one good thing to result from postal strikes. 
 One excited CNET U.K. reader--Tom Brown, from Hertfordshire--dropped Crave UK a line to express his delight that he had come home to a package from retailer PC World. It was his copy of Windows 7 Home Premium, which he preordered a couple of months ago. 
 Naturally, he was confused. "(PC World) sent me an e-mail saying that Windows 7 would not leave their warehouse until the 21 October--a day before the official release," he told us in an e-mail. 
 The reason appears to be the looming threat of industrial action at Royal Mail.

----------


## Butterfly

actually you could get it cheap online for 50 Euros, directly from MS

----------


## Fondles

> actually you could get it cheap online for 50 Euros, directly from MS


Where, 50 Euro's sounds a damn sight better than $400.00 AUD.

----------


## Butterfly

that was a few months ago, don't think the offer is still there, it was during their beta program

----------


## Takeovers

Here in Germany they sell the Home Premium System Builder Version for 89 Euro and this version is already in the stores. The full version is a lot more expensive and the only difference is three free (and also worthless) calls to the help desk.

So anybody who wants a legal copy should look for the system builder version.

I had a few problems getting the printer to work. The OS includes the printer driver, no problem there. But my ancient but reliable Laserjet 6P requires a parallel port and getting a 64bit driver for the interface card was tricky.

Now I have to wait for the official sell date. At that date they will put online a virtual machine running Windows XP as an integral part of the OS, so I can use my not so ancient Scanner on the 7 desktop as if drivers were available for it, which they are not.
This is not the same as running a virtual machine and a separate XP. The XP-OS is part of the package and available free for the professional and ultimate packages.

Added per edit

If you are interested and have access to a copy, you can use Windows 7 without a key for one month. Microsoft also provides a tool to reset the counter three times so you can run it legally for a period of up to 4 months. After that period you can enter a key to legalize the system, if you wish. No need for a reinstall.

----------


## TizMe

I think I'll wait for SP2.

----------


## Takeovers

> I think I'll wait for SP2.


Just look at Windows 7 as another name for Vista Service Pack 2.  :Smile: 


But yes, if you don't want any troubles with drivers and other stuff, waiting a bit may be wise. I still have to install device drivers from Vista because ASUS has not yet developed any 7 drivers, although the board I am using is still on sale.

----------


## daveboy

I waitng for mine to turn up.

----------


## slackula

Does winver in 7 report 7 or 6.1 now?

----------


## Takeovers

> Does winver in 7 report 7 or 6.1 now?


It shows 6.1 (Build 7600)

----------


## melvbot

read up a bit if youre upgrading from XP to 7, theres a few issues apparently.

----------


## Takeovers

> read up a bit if youre upgrading from XP to 7, theres a few issues apparently.


For hardware concerns there is a piece of software, the

Upgrade Advisor


Funny enough the general advice is:

If you have Vista, you should upgrade urgently, there would be a big improvement.

If you are running XP, you don't need to upgrade, if you don't want to.

----------


## slackula

> It shows 6.1 (Build 7600)


Thanks for that.

Odd though; since they must know they are wide open to accusations that 7 is simply a service pack that fixes Vista it's strange that they wouldn't take the time to hide that potentially embarrassing little thing.

----------


## Thetyim

> If you are running XP, you don't need to upgrade, if you don't want to.


Does that apply to 32 bit and 64 bit ?
I'm running a 32bit XP on a 64bit computer.

----------


## Takeovers

> Does that apply to 32 bit and 64 bit ? I'm running a 32bit XP on a 64bit computer.


That depends. You would need 64bit only if you want to use more than 3.2 MByte RAM, because that is the limit 32bit OS can address. Or if you use one of the few genuine 64bit-Programs. I think some video processing programs and large picture processing programs with big memory requirements are available in 64bit versions. But your 32bit Software will most likely run in the 64bit OS.

I chose to jump to 64bit because I have installed 4Gig RAM, not sure I really need that, but did it on very little extra cost. This way I am prepared for what is coming. However it is sometimes more difficult to get drivers. But with some search I was able to find everything required. For my parallel port the supplier had nothing. But I took the card out and identified the chip that was used and the 64bit driver of another supplier with the same chip worked.

BTW if you buy a 32 bit OS now, the key will work with a 64bit system later on. 

If you buy an expensive full version it will come with both 32 and 64bit OS, but you have only one license and can use only one of them at a time. The much cheaper System Builder Version will come only with the chosen 32 or 64 bit OS, but the key will be accepted if you can get a DVD with the 64bit OS later.

----------


## Fuzzy Bob

When you get Windows 7 you get both 32 bit & 64 bit dvd's so take your pick.
If you are planning to install on a xp computer you have to backup all your files and any software you're running and do a clean installation. Then you have to reinstall all your software again. It's not that bad, I did a clean install on my 32 bit Vista machine and reinstalled my software (Some don't work  :Dead1: )

----------


## Takeovers

> (Some don't work )


If you use the professional version you can download an integrated XP in a virtual machine free from microsoft. The XP license is included. The advantage of this method in Windows7 to conventional virtual machines is that you run it directly from the Windows7 without need of starting the XP first, just by clicking the program icon. I am waiting for that to go online but they won't put it up before Oct. 22. Today you could only download and run the Release Candidate version.

This will however not work for games because enhanced 3D capabilities are not included in a Virtual Machine OS.

----------


## Butterfly

> It shows 6.1 (Build 7600)


hum, that's interesting. Repacking Windows 6 as Windows 7 ?

----------


## Fondles

> Originally Posted by Fuzzy Bob
> 
> (Some don't work )
> 
> 
> If you use the professional version you can download an integrated XP in a virtual machine free from microsoft. The XP license is included. The advantage of this method in Windows7 to conventional virtual machines is that you run it directly from the Windows7 without need of starting the XP first, just by clicking the program icon. I am waiting for that to go online but they won't put it up before Oct. 22. Today you could only download and run the Release Candidate version.
> 
> This will however not work for games because enhanced 3D capabilities are not included in a Virtual Machine OS.


Alternatively you can just set the program to run under XP in compatability mode.

Compatibility Mode - Windows 7 Forums

----------


## Takeovers

> Alternatively you can just set the program to run under XP in compatability mode.


It depends. I don't get my scanner running in compatibility mode. And there is obviously some business software that will not run also. That's why they market it for businesses. Well and I want to play.

It is the 22nd now here and the XP mode is still online only as a RC. It seems they won't update their website before start of the release party 11 Eastern time.

 :ssssh: 

Edit: With play I don't mean games. Those will not work in virtual XP.

----------


## slackula

> Repacking Windows 6 as Windows 7


It is merely a very expensive service pack fixing Vista.

Windows users should be up in arms complaining about having to pay for it but apparently they are so relieved that they can get away from Vista they are lapping it up.

Clever move by MS, the shareholders will be delighted.

----------


## Butterfly

^ quite clever, actually remind me of Steve Jobs who did a very similar trick with MacOS 8 and System 7.6 and fucked everyone over for upgrades as you had to pay twice for it at the end

----------


## Fuzzy Bob

Steve Jobs = Corporate greed in a nice jumper

----------


## Butterfly

yes he is a slick bastard,

----------


## melvbot

> Originally Posted by Takeovers
> 
> It shows 6.1 (Build 7600)
> 
> 
> hum, that's interesting. Repacking Windows 6 as Windows 7 ?


Why what did you think it was? A new OS? 

Its an update on Vista if anything.

----------


## melvbot

> Originally Posted by Butterfly
> 
> Repacking Windows 6 as Windows 7
> 
> 
> It is merely a very expensive service pack fixing Vista.
> 
> Windows users should be up in arms complaining about having to pay for it but apparently they are so relieved that they can get away from Vista they are lapping it up.
> 
> Clever move by MS, the shareholders will be delighted.


Pretty true. I thinks thats why Snow Leopard was so cheap as it was more of an update than anything. Thing is Microsoft doesnt have much apart from software to gain revenue whereas Apple got the iTunes and App store etc along with the hardware.

 The Xbox must be making a profit by now, the best thing Microsofts ever done apart from XP.

----------


## melvbot

BBC NEWS | Technology | In Pictures: Windows into history

----------


## mc2

Ill be picking up my copy of windows7 pro for $30 as I qualify as an academic

apparently i dont even have to have an old version of windows as the free RC version i am running can be used as the "upgrade".

----------


## Butterfly

I guess there more MS suckers than Apple suckers at the end  :Razz:

----------


## harrybarracuda

I've been using Ultimate since RTM on three machines, and one thing I will say is that I have not yet (touch wood) seen a single blue screen of death! Makes a frigging change that does.

But yeah, it's Vista with all the crap taken out to make it work faster. No massive technology leaps here I'm afraid.

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> I've been using Ultimate since RTM on three machines, and one thing I will say is that I have not yet (touch wood) seen a single blue screen of death! Makes a frigging change that does.


I've been running XP on this PC for 18 months, 24 hours a day and have yet to see a blue screen either.

----------


## slackula

> I've been running XP on this PC for 18 months, 24 hours a day


You have an uptime of 18 months with XP?

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> You have an uptime of 18 months with XP?


No. I have rebooted when doing updates or when I had a powercut. I also moved house and I didn't have a long enough extension lead to reach from Bangkok to Udon, so it was unplugged for a day or so then.

But no blue screens of death. I think the longest without a reboot is a few weeks.

----------


## k1klass

Just as a note for anyone, i did not want to re-install from 7rc as ive just too much on at the min and did not want to spend days downloading and re-installing so with a quick edit you can get the upgrade to work to rtm which it has done perfectly with no problems what so ever.

It just got to be the same sku

windows 7rc upgrade to rtm link

----------


## Butterfly

> I've been running XP on this PC for 18 months, 24 hours a day and have yet to see a blue screen either.


blue screen are quite rare under Win2000 and WinXP,




> You have an uptime of 18 months with XP?


I have an uptime of 6 months on a Win2000 machine, very reliable

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> blue screen are quite rare under Win2000 and WinXP,


I used to get quite a few when XP first came out on an old laptop, but it's a well developed, stable OS now.

----------


## Takeovers

I have now downloaded and installed Virtual PC and XP mode.

The scanner driver is installed and works. I can now do a scan. However everytime I use it I have to activate the USB-Link so I cannot call up the scanner from the Win 7 desktop. I have to start the virtual machine instead and activate USB. I will see if I can get around that. But it is still much more convenient than rebooting to XP and it does not require a separate XP partition.

But just to be safe I will keep the old XP partition for a few more months.

The only remaining thing not yet migrated to Win 7 is the email- and usenet software. I am used to OE and cannot get it into 7. So I need to make a choice first.

Thunderbird looks nice but has a few things I don't like.

----------


## harrybarracuda

Have a look at PhoenixMail if you want an alternative to Outlook Express. I'm not sure why MS were mean enough to remove Windows Mail in this release.

Regarding the blue screens, the main reason for them is hardware support, and in my experience mostly video drivers. I've seen them on every release from 2000 onwards, but they go away as drivers are released and/or fixed.

What impresses me about W7 is I'm running it on three different sets of hardware (ASUS, Dell and HP) and it hasn't blinked on any of them. The only issue I've found is the Bluetooth hardware in the Dell, but Dell haven't provided a decent driver for that pile of crap since the original that came with the installed XP (and which was totally unreliable). Since I don't use Bluetooth on that computer, I'm not really bothered.

I've got Office 2007 on it, so I was chuffed to bits to see 447Mb of updates arrive the other day! 

 ::spin::

----------


## Takeovers

> Have a look at PhoenixMail if you want an alternative to Outlook Express. I'm not sure why MS were mean enough to remove Windows Mail in this release.


Will give it a try.

Windows Mail is the one supplied with Vista as a replacement for OE? Windows live mail can be downloded as part of the windows live package. I had only a short look on it.

----------


## Butterfly

I find it hard to understand why would anyone upgrade to Win7, with no improvement of any kind, when WinXP is functioning perfectly

is it a case of geeks being bored with their toys and need a new one ?

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> is it a case of geeks being bored with their toys and need a new one ?


That, and a slightly rounded edge to the graphics.

----------


## Bobcock

I'm gonna stick with XP for now, made that decision before and it turned out to be a good one.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Our IT Dept made the same decision as well and we all working fine, though they tell me they will go to W7 eventually and run in 64 bit mode as it will make a lot of the engineering software run faster.

----------


## Takeovers

> Originally Posted by Butterfly
> 
> is it a case of geeks being bored with their toys and need a new one ?
> 
> 
> That, and a slightly rounded edge to the graphics.


Guilty as charged.

But in my defense I like to add that I needed a license for the new laptop and why should I buy another XP?

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> But in my defense I like to add that I needed a license for the new laptop and why should I buy another XP?


Fair enough for new machines. We were discussing the needless upgrading to W7 if you already have XP.

----------


## harrybarracuda

Have a look here and to see what's new (and removed):

Windows 7 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For me, it is a much nicer interface than XP, but as a result there is a learning curve. Not much of one though.

It is much, much better when it comes to handling multimedia, and the HomeGroup feature is designed to make connecting your home PCs - and neworked Multimedia devicesm if you have them - almost plug and play. I really like this feature as I have multimedia players in two rooms and two PCs as well (plus two networked satellite decoders). I can control them all from either PC. That alone sold me on it.

It handles multicore processors much better, allegedly.

It handles virtual drives and improves remote access; Haven't tried either yet, and I still think I prefer the free Logmein for Remote Control anyway.

It's much easier to configure multiple monitors and video cards, apparently.

Windows Media Centre (ok they spell it wrong, bless them) is new and improved, but I don't use it enough to tell you if it's worth it.

There is no compelling reason to move, but if you do use home networking and multimedia, then I think you will like it enough to try it out.

There's more info on Homegroup here:

Windows 7 features - HomeGroup - Microsoft Windows

 :St George:

----------


## Butterfly

^ WinXP is already superb in terms of simplicity for Network, and all kind of Devices

I fail to see how it can be improved, or else we go into Mac territory, that is a user interface for the intellectually challenged and the idiots out there who can't even connect a USB cable without help.

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> Windows Media Centre (ok they spell it wrong, bless them)


Maybe they thought they'd use English for a change?

----------


## Marmite the Dog

> I fail to see how it can be improved, or else we go into Mac territory, that is a user interface for the intellectually challenged and the idiots out there who can't even connect a USB cable without help.


You must give Apple kudos for taking on the task of dealing with Scampy though.

----------


## slackula

> I fail to see how it can be improved, or else we go into Mac territory


Nice to see that Buttfly is finally realising that OS X is an improvement on Windows  :Smile:

----------


## slackula

> You must give Apple kudos for taking on the task of dealing with Scampy though.


Obviously the sales and marketing dept. in Cupertino had never encountered a user like him when they came up with their slogan, otherwise it would be 

"It Just Works™* 
(*not valid in all regions and if your nik is GS)"

----------


## Missismiggins

Not impressed, I downloaded the Upgrade Advisor, it tells me that my graphics card is not compatible with Windows Aero (Is it a bar of chocolate>), then if you scroll down a little further, it lists "7 Devices" as compatible - yes, the graphics card is listed.....Think I'll give it a miss until it turns up at COM plaza for 120 baht.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
> 
> Windows Media Centre (ok they spell it wrong, bless them)
> 
> 
> Maybe they thought they'd use English for a change?



No Marmite, I changed it  :Smile:

----------


## harrybarracuda

Not really Win7 only, although this is what I installed it on:

In case you never heard this, M$ actually released a free anti-malware package a little while ago. They claim that if you keep up to date with Windows patches (use Microsoft Update, not Windows Update), and use this as well, that you will never get infected (yeah, right!).

Anyway, if you want to have a look, go to :

www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

I'm a tightwad (and I know antivirus packages are all much of a muchness), so I use AVG, regularly updated. This found a trojan that had never been spotted by AVG, so now I use them both together (don't seem to conflict).

BTW, if you EVERY find a trojan or virus on your PC and even if you clean it thoroughly, remember to change all of your passwords, especially the online banking and webmail ones!

Cheers,
Harry

 ::chitown::

----------


## Butterfly

> Nice to see that Buttfly is finally realising that OS X is an improvement on Windows


I don't see how the dumbing down of computers has anything to do with improvement. It just serves a market for retards that shouldn't be let near a computer, period. 

See Scampy as example.

----------


## TizMe

99.9% of users just want to play games of surf the web.

Most of these couldn't care less what the operating system is.

The browser is probably more impotant to them than the operating system.

----------


## slackula

> I don't see how the dumbing down of computers has anything to do with improvement


C'mon BF that is bollox and you know it! If anything has served to dumb-down computer users it is the Windows family of OSs and their policies of 

'_click here to install anything you like, our helpful browser, registry and ActiveX will assist you in handing over control of your machine to some fuckhead in the Ukraine_'

Meh, I am going out for a drink. Have a good night _mon brave_  :Smile:

----------


## Butterfly

> The browser is probably more impotant to them than the operating system.


true, that's why there are many Internet Browser appliance projects, but most have failed so far, so I guess the majority of users favor a heavy weight OS instead of light weight OS, they want everything, no matter what.




> If anything has served to dumb-down computer users it is the Windows family of OSs and their policies of


only because Macs were the first, and yet that still didn't stop users from fucking it up. The truth is that most users shouldn't be let alone near a computer. Maybe Internet Appliance but that's it.

----------


## ossies

Maybe a silly question, but

What happens to the thousands of computers in stores for sale with the old Windows Vista as presumably people do not want these anymore?

Do they discount these to get shot of them or take off the old OS and load the new one? This I assume would not be feasable as there would be too many computers to swap over.

Curious as in the market for a new laptop and thought I would wait until the New Year assuming by that stage all the computers in the shops will have Windows 7 loaded.

----------


## BobR

When I bought my Sony Vaio in the USA Vista was already out, but the computer had XP loaded at the factory.  It came with a certificate in an envelope taped to the unopened box good for a free upgrade (if you can call it that).  I sent in and they sent me a copy of Vista.  Of course, I regretted installing it afterwards.

----------


## Sakeopete

I bought a HP DV2 notebook in August with Vista in Bangkok and it gets the free upgrade to Windows 7. I have already applied and sent away the form plus receipt to Singapore. I really hate Vista, so much so that I rarely use the note book. Lucky I have 5 other computers to use running XP.

----------


## lovethai

friend bought new laptop last week here in london and theres been vista preloaded. there is a free upgrade to win 7 though in the box aswell.

myself i use vista for about 2 years and cant be happier. you can customize it to your personal taste (switch off all the ''do you really want to do this'' prompts) and then it becomes nice and very reliable system to use. i dont think it crashed even once within those 24 months, thing i cant say about my previous laptop with win xp.

----------


## harrybarracuda

Then you're going to love Windows 7. Just on performance alone it beats the crap out of (even a heavily tuned) Vista.

----------


## harrybarracuda

xPud is pretty lightweight, but not very versatile at recognising hardware.

But there's actually a project to load a basic browsing OS from the BIOS before you even get to the OS. I think ASUS invented it a couple of years ago, it's called ExpressGate.

Some bloke reckons you can install it on a USB, but my French is dodgy and Google Translate is even dodgier...

How to install ExpressGate instant-on software on a USB stick

 :France:

----------


## harrybarracuda

Also known in other circles as "Splashtop"

----------


## Butterfly

^ will need to give that one a try,

Internet Appliance Box is going to be the norm eventually, people are too dumb to use computers

----------


## Takeovers

> people are too dumb to use computers


Right now I tend to think that is true for me. :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

Have just finished the transfer from XP to 7. 

Installing 7 was a breeze. Installing the applications as well. Needed the virtual XP for one but also not a big problem.

Finding 64bit drivers for some ancient hardware was not too challenging if a bit time consuming and tricky. 

But the last part took me much more time and effort than all of the above combined. Finding my favorite eMail and usenet application and transferring all the data from XP into the new application almost drove me crazy but now it is finally done. I ended up with Windows LiveMail and I like it, now that it works. Definitely a major improvement on Outlook Express.

----------


## lovethai

> Then you're going to love Windows 7. Just on performance alone it beats the crap out of (even a heavily tuned) Vista.


you think its going to run faster than vista on the same spec system? might check it out then.

----------


## melvbot

Might want to check this out if youre using Win 7

Windows 7's default UAC bypassed by 8 out of 10 malware samples | Zero Day | ZDNet.com

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
> 
> 
> Then you're going to love Windows 7. Just on performance alone it beats the crap out of (even a heavily tuned) Vista.
> 
> 
> you think its going to run faster than vista on the same spec system? might check it out then.


No thinking involved here, the company has an Enterprise agreement, so I've been running it on my own machines since they said it was finished (i.e.  when they released it to the HPs and Dells to start installing, not the "release date" as in when it went on sale). 

It runs much faster than Vista on a Dell Inspiron and an HP Pavilion. I didn't even try and run Vista on the ASUS eee (would have been pointless), but I run W7 and Kubuntu dual boot on it without any problem at all (and xPud under the W7 as well!).

 :Smile:

----------


## Wallalai

> Might want to check this out if youre using Win 7
> 
> Windows 7's default UAC bypassed by 8 out of 10 malware samples | Zero Day | ZDNet.com


Even with the "7" number it's still Windows. :mid:

----------


## Fondles

> Even with the "7" number it's still Windows.


WAT ???

----------


## Wallalai

> Then you're going to love Windows 7. Just on performance alone it beats the crap out of (even a heavily tuned) Vista.


I'll never understand why someone has to tune an OS to get good performance.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## Wallalai

> WAT ???


What ?

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
> 
> 
> Then you're going to love Windows 7. Just on performance alone it beats the crap out of (even a heavily tuned) Vista.
> 
> 
> I'll never understand why someone has to tune an OS to get good performance.


Tuning is down to features. You can tune Windows to perform optimally depending on your hardware and the applications you run.

The main reason for having that capability is that if you wanted an OS to automatically adapt, install drivers for any hardware and all the applications on the planet, you'd need about 1,000 DVDs 

 :mid:

----------


## Marmite the Dog

What advantages/disadvantages are there to installing the 64bit version of Win7 as opposed to the 32bit version?

----------


## harrybarracuda

> What advantages/disadvantages are there to installing the 64bit version of Win7 as opposed to the 32bit version?


You can use more RAM. And I believe it will support more cores or processors. 64 bit software and drivers (of which there are not a lot yet) will supposedly run faster.

But realistically, unless RAM is an issue for you with a specific application, then don't bother - yet.

 ::chitown::

----------


## Marmite the Dog

How much more RAM?

I know XP only supported 3Gig, but my mate has just got 4Gig and installed the 32bit version.

----------


## slackula

> How much more RAM?


Short answer: A f*ck of a lot

Longer answer:
32 bit OS means 2^32 available addresses: 4,294,967,296 (4GB)
64 bit OS means 2^64 available addresses: 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 (16EB, exabytes)

Longest answer: read this




/I should add that although a 32 bit system can address 4GB it can't use 4GB of RAM because other things use up some of the available addresses like graphics RAM, PCI, ACPI and stuff.

----------


## Marmite the Dog

^ Ta muchly.

----------


## Butterfly

> You can use more RAM.


right, and you need more RAM to surf TD, read your emails and watch porn ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

all you need at most is 256MB  :Wink:

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
> 
> You can use more RAM.
> 
> 
> right, and you need more RAM to surf TD, read your emails and watch porn ? 
> 
> all you need at most is 256MB


  Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, but I'm running two different browsers, flashget, spider solitaire, Outlook, a load of gadgets, a load of open explorer windows, and I've got *plenty*  of change out of 2Gb - which is why I said forget about 64-bit!

 :rofl:

----------


## slackula

> and I've got *plenty* of change out of 2Gb


That's something I've never understood about Windows memory management. Why does it start using the swap space when the RAM still has space free?

On my iMac at the moment I am switching between FireFox with ~12 tabs open, Open Office with a doc and a spreadsheet, Mail.app, TextEdit, iTunes, Skype, a terminal instance, Transmission is chugging away uploading something, iPhoto is open, Activity Monitor is open, AppZapper is open, X11 is open, GIMP is open but minimised, Calculator is open, Temperature Monitor is open and the ClamXav installer is updating me to a newer version.

The menu bar has DropBox, 5 Temperature Monitor sensor indicators, Fan control, and indicators for the UPS, Bluetooth, ClamXav sentry, network, time machine, wifi, language and time on top of all the the other normal background processes like launchd that OS X runs and the machine is completely ticking along fine.

Uptime is 17 days and this thing has 2GB RAM, a 2 GHz CPU and a pretty feeble graphics card with a 128 MB Radeon HD 2400.

It should be stressing out at these fairly low specs but it isn't, and my swapfile usage is being reported at 38%.

----------


## Butterfly

^ you should have tried that under MacOS 8 with 2Gb RAM and you will have cried for Windows instead  :Razz: 

not fair comparison, it's a unix system, even if Apple fucked it up

----------


## harrybarracuda

[quote]
That's something I've never understood about Windows memory management. Why does it start using the swap space when the RAM still has space free?[quote]

A good question, because people who use SSD devices wanted to know if it was safe to just turn off virtual memory.

Perhaps this article will confuse you as  much as it confused me.

I think the phrase is "suck it and see"

So I am sucking it and seeing. I've just disabled the paging file on my Netbook and I'm rebooting it. All Windows said was disabling it means Windows may not be able to properly record error information or something.

I'll let you know how it goes later.

 :Smile: 

Oh and here's some reading for you.

Virtual Memory in Windows XP

----------


## harrybarracuda

Interesting.

I've loaded Outlook and Word 2007, Firefox, MPCStar, and VLC media player, and it's still not gone over 1Gb of RAM used.

I think I'll leave it like this and see how it plays.

----------


## Wallalai

> Tuning is down to features. You can tune Windows to perform optimally depending on your hardware and the applications you run.
> 
> The main reason for having that capability is that if you wanted an OS to automatically adapt, install drivers for any hardware and all the applications on the planet, you'd need about 1,000 DVDs


Rubbish. Why would you want to install drivers for any hardware in a computer ?

----------


## Butterfly

> Virtual Memory in Windows XP


very interesting link actually,

sounds like memory management under Windows might be more optimized than Unix or MacOS

actually, I noticed that Linux is taking more and more RAM in the same fashion as Windows, so maybe they have copied the MMS from MS after all

----------


## bsnub

Glad I have friends at MS! It was next to free for me but it is time to build a new faster box...

----------


## harrybarracuda

Wallalai asked (or rather, sneered): "Rubbish. Why would you want to install drivers for any hardware in a computer ?"

Well, at a guess, because that's how it works in the Windows model, and that's the subject of this thread?

BTW, I am having no problems with no pagefile at all. I have to say that is another rather nice bonus of W7, especially given the (admittedly not as bad as people think) SSD "wear" issues.

----------


## slackula

> I noticed that Linux is taking more and more RAM in the same fashion as Windows


What do you mean? Linux will always use up all the system RAM before it starts thrashing out to the swap file, Windows does it even when RAM is still available.

There was an interesting article about Mark Russinovich discussing the Win 7 kernel at The Reg today:

Windows 7's dirty secrets revealed â€¢ The Register

This quote: "_The problem is that the operating system is full of internal dependencies, and as Russinovich admitted: "We don't really understand those dependencies_" stands out and I like Russinovich. He knew more about Windows than MS before he even went to work for them, but it shows how MS are still bolting patches and work-arounds onto something that needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. Still, the MinWin thing sounds interesting, if a little familiar!  :Wink:

----------


## melvbot

Just stumbled across this link, some free apps from Microsoft for Windows &.

24 best free Windows apps from Microsoft | News | TechRadar UK

----------


## Muadib

> That's something I've never understood about Windows memory management. Why does it start using the swap space when the RAM still has space free?


It's a paradox, wrapped in an enigma... Left hand not talking to the right hand and all that... 




> sounds like memory management under Windows might be more optimized than Unix


 :smiley laughing:

----------


## Gallowspole



----------


## PaulBunyon

ANy updated opinions on the quality of Windows 7? Just curious if the satisfaction is still there.

----------


## Marmite the Dog

I'm happy with it. My laptop struggles a bit now, but it needed more RAM and a larger HD whatever OS it was running.

----------


## harrybarracuda

I'm still using it on my Netbook, and I've never had a blue screenn or a freeze. It's fine and I'd recommend anyone on Vista to switch to it.

I've tried installing it on older PCs (3+years before its release) and in some cases there is no support for the onboard hardware, although in fairness if you go to the website for the manufacturers, then tend to tell you which they support and which they won't.

----------


## daveboy

I've had no problems with it works well only laptop.

----------


## Takeovers

I had some problems, all related to the use of the 64bit version. I had decided to go all the way when upgrading.

Some problems with drivers. Worst was my antique scanner. I could not find any 64bit drivers. So I installed the XP-VM for the rare occasions I need it. A few months later I found that suddenly my scanner worked in the Win 7 but have no idea where the driver came from.  :Confused: 

Also problems with software for my new NIKON camera. NIKON sees no reason to provide some of their software for 64bit. I had to go for free alternatives that do the job nicely.

Otherwise splendid.

----------


## Butterfly

> ANy updated opinions on the quality of Windows 7? Just curious if the satisfaction is still there.


it seems to be stable and very pretty. However, in terms of usability and user experience, it seems to be a nightmare, unless you are a brain dead AOL user as everything seems to be automated for you not to make any decision at all.

----------


## mc2

Im quite happy with windows7. Much better than XP.

My only gripe is that windows explorer doesn't have tabbed interface.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by PaulBunyon
> 
> ANy updated opinions on the quality of Windows 7? Just curious if the satisfaction is still there.
> 
> 
> it seems to be stable and very pretty. However, in terms of usability and user experience, it seems to be a nightmare, unless you are a brain dead AOL user as everything seems to be automated for you not to make any decision at all.


Where did you read that?

 :Smile:

----------


## Butterfly

> Where did you read that?


have you seen the "Desktop" and Windows Explorer ? it's a fucking mess, only a total retard could find such an interface usable, I suspect that they are trying to lure the Mac fans into the Windows world. MacOS X is far more superior in terms if usability than this big joke. You should try it sometimes.

----------


## mc2

Finder on MacOSX (windows explorer equivalent) is terrible. Absolutely horrid.

----------


## Butterfly

^ it is indeed, but I find Win7 Explorer equally dysfunctional if not more

----------


## PlanK

I quite like it.

There's a small difference from XP, things are not always where you expect to find them, but seem to be grouped more logically than before.

Today I had to do something with a Linux HD that required resetting the CMOS jumper to get it to work.  After that I rebooted into Win 7 and it gave me the whole "Your OS is not valid, you're a criminal" spiel, even though it's a genuine Win 7.  Anyway it seems to have gotten over that, and is working fine.

Just today also received a new processor, will install it tomorrow.  Interested to see how Win 7 handles it.  If it thinks I'm trying to double install on two different machines, it can fok off.

----------


## PaulBunyon

Seems like most people are happy with it. I bought a legal version today to install. Is there anything I should do prior to installing it. I mean do I just install it over my vista wiping out everything old after I've saved what I want? Is there any program to wipe the drive prior to the install to make it free from vista? I've installed windows before so I don't have a problem with that. I just wonder if there is some way to get rid of my old stuff on the drive.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Seems like most people are happy with it. I bought a legal version today to install. Is there anything I should do prior to installing it. I mean do I just install it over my vista wiping out everything old after I've saved what I want? Is there any program to wipe the drive prior to the install to make it free from vista? I've installed windows before so I don't have a problem with that. I just wonder if there is some way to get rid of my old stuff on the drive.


It depends whether you bought an upgrade version or a new install version. You'll know when you boot it up.

(If you can do a clean install) while you are installing it, you have the option of deleting all partitions and making new ones. This will effectively wipe them, but you also get to format them afterwards. Use NTFS.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> ^ it is indeed, but I find Win7 Explorer equally dysfunctional if not more


What do you use Windows Explorer for, which makes it more difficult in Win 7?

----------


## PaulBunyon

Thanks harry. So NTFS is better. I'll do that.

----------


## Begbie

I like they way you can switch between users without logging off.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> I like they way you can switch between users without logging off.


Be careful that there are shared folders between all users, so if you want separate users for the GM or the saucepan lids then check what they can see of yours before you let them loose.

 :mid:

----------


## Butterfly

> What do you use Windows Explorer for, which makes it more difficult in Win 7?


this question is as relevant as the mactards asking me what difference there is between Windows explorer and the Finder in OSX




> I like they way you can switch between users without logging off.


Wasn't it already the case in WinXP ?

----------


## harrybarracuda

> this question is as relevant as the mactards asking me what difference there is between Windows explorer and the Finder in OSX


Butters,

This thread isn't about OSX. How about you answer my question? Or have you just not bothered learning how to customise the Windows 7 desktop?

No point taking the piss out of AOLers if you're going to act like one.

So what can't you do in Win7 that you can do with Windows Explorer in XP? I'll be glad to help if I can.

----------


## Butterfly

^ fair point,

first the "Start" button is a disorganized mess, the "All Programs" is a collection of unorganized garbage in a small frame, it's not clear if this is actually the files and folders of the apps, or simply their reference in the Start Menu. I would assume their reference but they are so disorganized it almost files like you are navigating in the "Program Files" folder.

Second, the "Control Panel" is reorganized "logically" but only if you are a complete AOLer with no clue. I know what each function are doing, I don't need another level of retard classifications so AOLtards can find their way. Clicking 3 or 4 times through different level of classification on what used to take me simply 1 click to configure certain functions is certainly not improvement.

The whole interface is pretty and shinny, an AOL "gloss" that feels like a giant marketing ad in terms of functionality if you get my drift.

The new Windows Explorer is basically the Finder, a confusing interface for navigating between folders. I find the Path at the top to be not practical when using that interface intensively. This is a direct copy of the NeXT and MacOSX Finder interface, something that never caught trend in the last 20 years, so not sure why it is suddenly, unless the idea was to offer something new because nothing else was available.

and of course, a lot of functions and clicks have been "moved" and re-organized in a different manner for no apparent reason. You should note that MS is required per DoJ settlement in 1995 to "change" dramatically their UI and functions for MS to claim a new major in their software versioning. This could explain the dramatic change as I don't see any improvement for the user. WinXP and Win2k so far was perfectly fine, why change a winning formula ? 

and who cares if Win7 has a better memory management, that doesn't improve the desktop experience. Would make sense for a server, but for a desktop ? they are already ways to improve memory management in WinXP that make the user experience perfectly acceptable. 

Win7 is a marketing product after the failed Vista, and the Wintards are falling for it.

----------


## mc2

Your living in the xp dark ages, son.
Your still navigating through menus ? Try the windows search button.
Unless you want to be stuck in the dark ages, you should invest 1 or 2 days into learning win7 keyboard shortcuts and general usage of the system instead of endlessly moaning, which although might make you feel good for a short while, doesn't actually make things better.

----------


## PlanK

> Just today also received a new processor, will install it tomorrow. Interested to see how Win 7 handles it. If it thinks I'm trying to double install on two different machines, it can fok off.


Win7 handled it nicely, one restart and business as usual.  Most recently I've been an Ubuntu fan, and I like their latest release, but still quite impressed with Win7.

I'm gonna use it for now.


Butterfly, stop your trolling.  One minute you're a XP fan boy, next you're a MacTard.  Gotta be more subtle if you wanna fool the masses.
 :mid:

----------


## Butterfly

> Your living in the xp dark ages, son.
> Your still navigating through menus ? Try the windows search button.


let me guess, are you one of those who use google.com search function instead of typing a URL in a browser ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

why would I need a search function on a desktop to perform a task that should take one click ? that sounds not only inefficient but completely retarded,

XP is not the dark age, it might be old, but that was very usable. Unfortunately, this is incompatible with MS business model, that is to sell more stupid shit to a maximum number of people. MS created 3 great products: N4, Win2K, WinXP

looks like it's back to the old game of dysfunctional OS for MS, I see a bright future for apple

Everyone I know with a clue hated Vista and Win7, with a few exceptions

----------


## harrybarracuda

> first the "Start" button is a disorganized mess, the "All Programs" is a collection of unorganized garbage in a small frame, it's not clear if this is actually the files and folders of the apps, or simply their reference in the Start Menu. I would assume their reference but they are so disorganized it almost files like you are navigating in the "Program Files" folder.


Right-Click the button, select the Start Menu tab, and Customise.




> Second, the "Control Panel" is reorganized "logically" but only if you are a complete AOLer with no clue. I know what each function are doing, I don't need another level of retard classifications so AOLtards can find their way. Clicking 3 or 4 times through different level of classification on what used to take me simply 1 click to configure certain functions is certainly not improvement.


Then change the category to an icon view; then they're arranged alphabetically.




> The whole interface is pretty and shinny, an AOL "gloss" that feels like a giant marketing ad in terms of functionality if you get my drift.


Hang on a minute, you said it was simple for the AOLers, now your saying it's a giant ad in terms of functionality? No, I don't get your drift.




> The new Windows Explorer is basically the Finder, a confusing interface for navigating between folders. I find the Path at the top to be not practical when using that interface intensively. This is a direct copy of the NeXT and MacOSX Finder interface, something that never caught trend in the last 20 years, so not sure why it is suddenly, unless the idea was to offer something new because nothing else was available.
> and of course, a lot of functions and clicks have been "moved" and re-organized in a different manner for no apparent reason. 
> 
> You should note that MS is required per DoJ settlement in 1995 to "change" dramatically their UI and functions for MS to claim a new major in their software versioning. This could explain the dramatic change as I don't see any improvement for the user. WinXP and Win2k so far was perfectly fine, why change a winning formula ?


This is a generic and vague criticism that still fails to answer the question. *What is it you were doing in Windows Explorer pre-Win7 that is harder or impossible to do now?*

Stop being evasise; dragging up some old DOJ quote you found on Google doesn't make any sense here at all. There is so much new functionality in Windows 7 that they would have no trouble proving it is a "new" release, so why you've tried dragging that idea into it I have no idea. The DoJ anti-trust lawsuits that are relevant today concentrate on market domination, not false advertising.





> "and who cares if Win7 has a better memory management, that doesn't improve the desktop experience. Would make sense for a server, but for a desktop ? they are already ways to improve memory management in WinXP that make the user experience perfectly acceptable."


Windows XP is a *dead* product, Butters. Get over it. People didn't move from it because Vista was a bloated pig. Windows 7 is what XPv2 should have been.  Its release number is 6.1 FFS.

Better memory management = less crashes, quicker response, which is very MUCH part of the user experience!





> Win7 is a marketing product after the failed Vista, and the Wintards are falling for it.


Windows 7 is a massive improvement on Vista, and if you had experienced both of them long enough you'd know that.

You clearly haven't even been bothered to look at the customisation options in Windows 7, so there's little point in you criticising it for being in its simplest user appearance by default. I do tons of file copying and moving around, and Explorer as is useful as ever. I like having the views button and the preview button available as one click by default, that makes it dead easy when dealing with pictures and video, and so on.

None of this is rocket science; I reckon you're just a lazy bastard (as opposed to an AOLer who would get Windows 7, phone the helpline and ask "how do I get my camera photos from the Internet to my fax machine").

 :Smile:

----------


## Butterfly

> What is it you were doing in Windows Explorer pre-Win7 that is harder or impossible to do now?


too many things I can't describe in simple words, daily routines shit I can't do in Win7 anymore. Maybe you want me to make a video and demonstrate the difference ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 




> There is so much new functionality in Windows 7 that they would have no trouble proving it is a "new" release, so why you've tried dragging that idea into it I have no idea.


The DoJ address the issue of the UI, not the functions. Significant UI changes have to be performed to claim a major revision. That's the settlement, and I doubt it is ignored by MS compliance and marketing team.




> Better memory management = less crashes, quicker response, which is very MUCH part of the user experience!


how many crash did you have in WinXP in the last 10 years ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

I had 3 or 4 blue screen in the 10 years I have used WinXP. As for response, a quick optimization is possible. I have 1 WinXP PC that runs on 256MB and it is as fast as  the i5 64bit Win7 VAIO I tried the other day.




> Windows XP is a *dead* product


says who ? MS ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

you are as brain dead as the mactards  :Smile: 




> Windows 7 is a massive improvement on Vista, and if you had experienced both of them long enough you'd know that.


Vista was literally unusable, but Win7 is hardly an improvement over WinXP. Could explain why so many manufacturers are still keeping old XP on their machine as an option. I am afraid that those who upgraded to VISTA were so traumatized by the experience than anything after VISTA was an improvement, including MacOS X if it could run on PC or sold by MS.




> You clearly haven't even been bothered to look at the customisation options in Windows 7


I did, and again the whole experience was painful for something that should be obvious and simple. Too many loops to go through.




> I reckon you're just a lazy bastard


I just like efficiency and I don't want to spend hours like I used to on the Mac for every function to be fine tuned. I want something that run immediately and be efficient. Win7 is not efficient, it's a bloated "marketing" OS ala Steve Jobs. Reminds us again how much RAM do you need ? can it run on 256MB ? so much for better memory management  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## mc2

as they say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

----------


## Butterfly

^ above all when new tricks do fuck all  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

using a search function to perform a simple task, fucking lazy brain dead AOLer

----------


## mc2

you are unteachable.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> ^ above all when new tricks do fuck all 
> 
> using a search function to perform a simple task, fucking lazy brain dead AOLer


I use the search function to, er, search.

WTF do you expect it to do?

----------


## Butterfly

^ search files ? or search tasks or functions ?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

I am surprised you are not a mac user harrybarracuda, you do seem to fit the profile, or maybe it's simply a question of price and specs for you, but at the end, do you know how to use a WinPC in its full capacity ?  :Wink:

----------


## Butterfly

> you are unteachable.


you are unknowledgeable, keep up the good work with that search function  :rofl:

----------


## PlanK

> as they say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks.


You can't teach an old Frog new tricks.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> ^ search files ? or search tasks or functions ? 
> 
> I am surprised you are not a mac user harrybarracuda, you do seem to fit the profile, or maybe it's simply a question of price and specs for you, but at the end, do you know how to use a WinPC in its full capacity ?


Sorry does one have to repeat every question to you? Are you retarded or summat?

If I want to search the web, I prefer Google (with a few Firefox addons to massage the results).

If I want to search my PC, I use a different set of search tools, because I probably want a different set of results.

If I want to search for the reason God invented blustering trolls, I scratch my head and laugh it off.

And I thought you were the Ninja iTard anyway. How much of Jobs crap have you actually bought?

This thread is for Windows 7. Clearly you don't have a fucking clue about it, or you've been reading iFanboi blogs again.

Reminds me of another twat I know.....

Why do you bother?

----------


## lom

> What is it you were doing in Windows Explorer pre-Win7 that is harder or impossible to do now?


Let me turn that question around and modify it slightly:
What is it you are doing in Win7 that has become easier or even possible compared to WinXP?
Do your application programs run faster, are you getting more productive with Win7? 
No, I don't think so... 
Your application programs, with which you hopefully spend most of your computing time, will look the same, do the same job independent on if they are running under WinXP or Win7.
Your desktop may look sexier but that is of minor importance..

Windows Explorer has been mentioned a lot, are you all actually using that crap of file manager?  Maybe suitable if you are only doing a few file operations per day and like to see the documents flying in the air between two folders but not for organizing your files.
The first program that goes into a fresh os install for me is Total Commander and it is a huge relief to get rid off the Win Explorer with all its  limitations.
Windows has never had a good toolbox, you'll have to build your own and when you've done that then you don't even have to think about what changes has been made to the tools that MS threw in with their most recent Win version or where a certain setting has been misplaced in MS never ending attempt to make everything more "logical".

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Windows Explorer has been mentioned a lot, are you all actually using  that crap of file manager?  Maybe suitable if you are only doing a few  file operations per day and like to see the documents flying in the air  between two folders but not for organizing your files.
> The first program that goes into a fresh os install for me is Total  Commander and it is a huge relief to get rid off the Win Explorer with  all its  limitations.


If I want to copy files from one location to the other, I use the Send function. Most people don't even know it exists.

If I want to find files, I use the search box.

It amazes me how many people open Outlook and create dozens (or more) folders to categorise things. I use the search function to retrieve emails going back to 2003. Although it's nice I can search for emails from the desktop, I prefer to do it in the mail client, as most of the time I intend to perform a mail function with the results (quote or forward, for example).

So yes, I am more productive in Win 7 than XP because of the Windows search function. It's more accessible and it's faster.

Interesting that you use Total Commander, the few people I know that stick to this never got over losing DOS.

 :Smile: 

No, it's a nice bit of code, but doesn't really do anything I need that I can't do in Win 7.

You too have made a statement that explorer is crap, and Total commander is better, but could I ask you to give an example of a function in TC that you use regularly that you can't do in Windows explorer?

Or is it simply that you always had a way of doing things and you refuse to change?




> Windows has never had a good toolbox, you'll have to build your own and  when you've done that then you don't even have to think about what  changes has been made to the tools that MS threw in with their most  recent Win version or where a certain setting has been misplaced in MS  never ending attempt to make everything more "logical".


It's various governments that keep forcing Microsoft to remove tools so that individual ISVs aren't forced out of business. To me, it's the same as people whining about Tescos forcing corner shops out of business. It might be bad for them, but it's good for the consumer, as long as the market share isn't abused.

Why should I pay more for a tin of beans to keep a family in their little uncompetitive family business? I'm not a charity.

Also, if Microsoft put absolutely every tool known to man into the OS, it would be a disaster to navigate through them.

Do you know a Linux build that installs everything? Of course not, most people wouldn't use them.

That's why you choose to add things like a decent Telnet client, a DVD ripper, burner, converter, etc.

I'm buying an OS from Microsoft, not utility software, although for most web surfing emailers, what it has is more than adequate, IMO.

----------


## Butterfly

> And I thought you were the Ninja iTard anyway. How much of Jobs crap have you actually bought?


yes I am guilty but unlike you, I have used tools in both world and know exactly where things stand.




> This thread is for Windows 7. Clearly you don't have a fucking clue about it, or you've been reading iFanboi blogs again.


 :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):  some of us do know what they are talking about, "Signs", it's not because you are just another AOL wintard that it makes you an expert in all consumer computers.




> What is it you are doing in Win7 that has become easier or even possible compared to WinXP?


very good question,




> Do your application programs run faster, are you getting more productive with Win7?


ouch !!!




> No, I don't think so...


 :Razz: 




> Your desktop may look sexier but that is of minor importance..


exactly, which proves my point, Wintards and Mactards are the same brain dead religious fanatics. They are ridiculous.




> Windows Explorer has been mentioned a lot, are you all actually using that crap of file manager? Maybe suitable if you are only doing a few file operations per day and like to see the documents flying in the air between two folders but not for organizing your files.


bingo, and this is exactly what I am talking about. When doing actual work, not fucking around with the pretty folders, it becomes apparent that the new "File manager" is impractical.




> Windows has never had a good toolbox, you'll have to build your own and when you've done that then you don't even have to think about what changes has been made to the tools that MS threw in with their most recent Win version or where a certain setting has been misplaced in MS never ending attempt to make everything more "logical".


so elegantly said. Amen.

----------


## Butterfly

> If I want to copy files from one location to the other, I use the Send function.


you got to be joking !!!! spoken like a true computer illiterate AOLtard. Fucking knew it.




> If I want to find files, I use the search box.


oh that takes the cake. So because you are completely clueless, you use the search function for everything ?  :rofl: 

do you use Google too to find "Teakdoor.com" ???  :Confused: 




> So yes, I am more productive in Win 7 than XP because of the Windows search function. It's more accessible and it's faster.


so your definition of effectiveness is to be able to use the Search function ???  :Confused: 

do you actually know how to use any meaningful functions outside "Send" and "Search" on your Windows box ?  :Confused:

----------


## mc2

You never used spotlight search on OSX ? It was one of the best features of it.

Anyone who hasn't moved on from clicking start, programs, and locating their app , or minimising windows and clicking on an icon, to 3-4 keystroke search, or 1 keystroke shortcut would get laughed at in a room of IT professionals.

----------


## mc2

> Your living in the xp dark ages, son.
> Your still navigating through menus ? Try the windows search button.
> 			
> 		
> 
> let me guess, are you one of those who use google.com search function instead of typing a URL in a browser ?


You type URLs into the browser ?  LOL

I haven't dont that for ages. I have bookmarks, when I dont use them, I will search history in the address bar using the keyword of the website, if that doesnt come up i just press enter and it does a google search. Which almost always takes me to the domain I want.

Do you have any idea about computers at all ?  :rofl:

----------


## harrybarracuda

Hmmmm. Butters goes on an "All things Android" thread to tell us about his iPad experience. Then comes on a Windows 7 thread to say OSX is better.

Butters, you are the worst troll I've met. And you don't actually know what you're on about.

You must be very, very bored.

And a closet iTard.

To quote someone I deeply respect, "You're holding it wrong".

----------


## Butterfly

> I haven't dont that for ages. I have bookmarks, when I dont use them, I will search history in the address bar using the keyword of the website, if that doesnt come up i just press enter and it does a google search. Which almost always takes me to the domain I want.


typical computer illiterate MO, my French secretary does that all the time but she has no clue about computers  :rofl: 




> Do you have any idea about computers at all ?


do you ?  :rofl:

----------


## PaulBunyon

So far W7 is decent enough. The one thing that is irritating is the tabs for the internet explorer or things you have open at the bottom of the page. I prefer the old style to this new one. Maybe I just don't understand how to use it properly yet. THer might also be a trick to getting back the old style which has a list of pages you have open at the bottom border of desktop.

----------


## bsnub

WOW!!! There are some really stupid people in this thread.

----------


## LocalYokul

Win7 is the bee's knees
hell, I even bought a Windows Mobile I was so happy with it

----------


## Butterfly

> Maybe I just don't understand how to use it properly yet.


there is nothing to understand, you are doing it right, it's MS that doing it wrong




> might also be a trick to getting back the old style which has a list of pages you have open at the bottom border of desktop.


unfortunately, nope. Welcome to the new world of Win7, where nothing new was added except marketing non-sense.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> So far W7 is decent enough. The one thing that is irritating is the tabs for the internet explorer or things you have open at the bottom of the page. I prefer the old style to this new one. Maybe I just don't understand how to use it properly yet. THer might also be a trick to getting back the old style which has a list of pages you have open at the bottom border of desktop.


You haven't yet worked out that most browsers now use Tabbed pages?

----------


## PlanK

> You never used spotlight search on OSX ? It was one of the best features of it.
> 
> Anyone who hasn't moved on from clicking start, programs, and locating their app , or minimising windows and clicking on an icon, to 3-4 keystroke search, or 1 keystroke shortcut would get laughed at in a room of IT professionals.


Rubbish.


I haven't been laughed at once.
 :bananaman: 

Why you would leave the laid-back, lazy mouse to do manual labour on the keyboard is beyond me.

----------


## PaulBunyon

I understand the tabs. I guess I am used to opening a new page rather than tab and at the bottom of the desktop(my screen) the pages would lay out at length. Now I get a compact icon on the bottom left which shows layers. Instead of seeing each page along the length of the bottom of the screen as tabs I first have to go to the tab then choose the page from that tab. With the older xp/vista I could see the name for each page at the bottom of the screen so I could just click on the tab and I would be there. Now I can't see each page just the icon for Internet explorer. I can see the pages when I bring my mouse over the icon. It's an extra step from the old setup.

----------


## PaulBunyon

I'm not saying I don't like it I'm just saying the old pages spread on the bottom seemed easier to deal with that's all.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> I'm not saying I don't like it I'm just saying the old pages spread on the bottom seemed easier to deal with that's all.


I think I catch your meaning. IE has an option that says "Group all similar pages" or something. You can turn it off and it will have an IE icon for each page in your taskbar once more....

I have to leave the office right now, but I'll dig out the precise instruction and post it here later.

----------


## mc2

i think i know what you mean. 

right click the taskbar, go into properties and tick "small icons" then select taskbar buttons --> never combine.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> i think i know what you mean. 
> 
> right click the taskbar, go into properties and tick "small icons" then select taskbar buttons --> never combine.


He shoots, he scores!

 :Smile:

----------


## Butterfly

> but I'll dig out the precise instruction and post it here later.


make sure to use that "search" function to get the instruction,

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
> 
> but I'll dig out the precise instruction and post it here later.
> 
> 
> make sure to use that "search" function to get the instruction,


Why, what do you do when you want to research something? Print?

 :rofl:

----------


## PaulBunyon

Hey Thanks you guys. I am fixed! Yippee! That was easy enough why couldn't I figure it out. Great Thanks so much.

----------


## harrybarracuda

> Hey Thanks you guys. I am fixed! Yippee! That was easy enough why couldn't I figure it out. Great Thanks so much.


Yes we couldn't have done it without Butterfly's extensive knowledge of Windows 7.

 :rofl:

----------


## Butterfly

> Hey Thanks you guys. I am fixed! Yippee! That was easy enough why couldn't I figure it out. Great Thanks so much.


too bad you had to wait for Barra to perform a "function search" on his desktop to get the instructions, as any capable wintard could have told you what to do in a matter of seconds (fuck I even knew the answer and I have no clue in Win7)

see below  :rofl: 




> but I'll dig out the precise instruction and post it here later.


search baby, search  :mid:

----------


## harrybarracuda

> too bad you had to wait for Barra to perform a "function search" on his  desktop to get the instructions, as any capable wintard could have told  you what to do in a matter of seconds *(fuck I even knew the answer and I  have no clue in Win7)*


Yeah right; your nose is growing, Pinnochio.

Just a little reminder, eh?




> Second, the "Control Panel" is reorganized "logically" but only if you  are a complete AOLer with no clue. I know what each function are doing, I  don't need another level of retard classifications so AOLtards can find  their way. Clicking 3 or 4 times through different level of  classification on what used to take me simply 1 click to configure  certain functions is certainly not improvement.


And this is when there is a "View by:" Option right on the page in front of you.

Well, at least you're right about one thing.




> *I  have no clue in Win7*


Stick to your Apple crap.

 :rofl:

----------

