Windows 7 Is Simply A Warmed Version Of VISTA

[FudgeNuggets]

First thing I do on ANY XP machine? Set the GUI to look like Win2k....

WORD!

 

[HDCHOPPER]

Looks like it was written by a perfect candidate for the Mojave Project.

yep

been beta testing forever expect a 7 anytime now got 3 versions of beta vista and thay all were crap

but have been hearing good things about mojave

 

[petteyg359]

Aside from issues with lazy-*** manufacturers not providing 64-bit drivers, I have no problems with Vista. I've found 32-bit Vista to be annoying slow compared to XP on current hardware (just like XP was compared to 98 when it came out), but the 64-bit version is faster at pretty much everything, at least on my system. If the next version does as well, I'll be happy to upgrade, provided I don't have to pay $400 for it (Windows Feedback Program FTW!).

Um, HDCHOPPER, you do realize that Mojave IS Vista?

 

[Oroka Sempai]

Hardly

Vista had %60 of it's code written from the ground up.. that is hardly XP with a new GUI and some ends cleaned up..

So, they spent what, 6 years rewriting 60% of the code, and what do they have to show for it? A rewired XP that is bloated and not much better than XP itself. Sure, Vista has a few goodies, all that could have been added to XP. Vista needs more resources to do the same thing as XP.

Other than a tweeked GUI, a few goodies, and some security changes, what else do you have? Not 6 years, billions of dollars, and a 60% new OS.

 

[petteyg359]

So, they spent what, 6 years rewriting 60% of the code, and what do they have to show for it? A rewired XP that is bloated and not much better than XP itself. Sure, Vista has a few goodies, all that could have been added to XP. Vista needs more resources to do the same thing as XP.

Vista has some services running by default that aren't always needed / wanted. So did XP, and previous versions. Windows is designed for ease of use. Having 10+ years of drivers included can hardly be classified as bloat, considering the intended audience. Please specify what you're defining as "bloat".

Regarding "a few goodies" that could be "easily added to XP"... I think it is time you wrote your own operating system. I'm sure it would've been easy to:

• completely change the registry system in XP
• completely change the driver framework so that crashed drivers reload rather than causing a BSOD
• implement UAC without kernel changes

Then there are many other less obvious changes. You can't implement fundamental changes like that in an update, with any software.

Vista needs the same resources to do a much better job than XP, in my experience. I still occasionally have crashes with XP, some from audio and video drivers and some from buggy games. When those crashes happen in XP, it crashes hard, and causes reboots. In Vista, those same crashes happen, but I have yet to have any of them force me to reboot my system. Vista kills the app that crashed, and if it is driver-related, reloads the driver, with no issues.

If you're going to argue based on the DRM issues, people have been finding ways around DRM for years, and I doubt Vista will stop them.

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

The problem is that you wouldn't know it in most cases................


............. The 'new technology' isn't much to brag about if it's barely doing anything more than the old.

but if you wouldnt know in most cases, thn how can you say it isnt?

that is it, the code is generally, better, more secure, faster..sure not everyone will believe that but i hate seeing people say vista is nothing more but a purdy GUI onto of Xp when it is SO far from that.

Vista isnt Another ME, which was a new GUI tossed on 98 to look like 2k to make home users happy.

 

[Oroka Sempai]

I know Vista has alot of hidden updates, but for the amount of time they were working on it, you would think there would be more features. I had high hopes for the whole 'Ultimate Extras', but that just sucked.

It just seems that one day Bill decided he had enough, and said 'Stop adding crap, push Longhorn out the door, and get started on the next version'.

Dont get me wrong, I like Vista, but it should have been more.

 

[FudgeNuggets]

but if you wouldnt know in most cases, thn how can you say it isnt?

that is it, the code is generally, better, more secure, faster..sure not everyone will believe that but i hate seeing people say vista is nothing more but a purdy GUI onto of Xp when it is SO far from that.

Vista isnt Another ME, which was a new GUI tossed on 98 to look like 2k to make home users happy.

You are wrong about ME as well. ME was TRASH. I remember when I was coding a dial-in and transfer data to FTP-server type program and the methods of passing security and domain information from ME to the FTP was completely different than any of the other OSes and didn't work for th e most part. They also screwed up Active Directory in ME as well where it worked different and not well. ME was a nightmare and a joke.

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

ME's network stack was supposed to be a mix of Windows 2000 and completely new code.

I think the changes in ME were the GUI, the network stack, a faulty implementation of system restore and a bunch of utilities like Movie Maker and the new I.E.

Using windows 98lite to strip down ME and run the Win 95B GUI actually gives you a pretty good OS, but why should it take hours of work to get something that is somewhat inferior to an existing product [Windows 2000].