Windows 7 - HL2DMU Forum Archive

badinfluence

2009-10-20 20:14:51

I'm curious as to who will be switching to this straight away as soon as it is released?

I'm running Windows XP 32 Bit right now, but it's not using all my 4gigs of ram. I can get Win7 Professional 64 bit for 30 dollars, so I'm considering it.

Jelly Fox

2009-10-20 20:44:29

I'll be putting windows 7 extreme on my new system once it's built, getting it for free from friend with an MSDN account

BuckyKatt

2009-10-20 20:50:23

I have been using Windows 7 64bit RC (the release candidate) for 5-6 months. I absolutely love it. It sees all 8 GB of my RAM.

Games (well at least HL2DM and World of Goo) run smooth with no issues.

I routinely have Handbrake compressing a movie (x264) while I use a VPC (which is assigned 2GB of memory) for work, watch a movie, and have Lightroom (64 bit) and Photoshop (64 bit) open so I can edit photos all at the same time. Win7 just chugs along happy to manage it all smoothly.

I love the new taskbar (it reminds me of the one in mac osx but better). The boot from VHD feature absolutely rocks.

Win7 is, IMO, the best OS Microsoft has ever turned out.

Paradox

2009-10-20 22:31:31

I have ordered it and will use my Vista laptop as a guinea pig and if I like it I will say a prayer over my desktop and upgrade it around Christmas.

L2k

2009-10-20 22:54:34

badinfluence wrote: I can get Win7 Professional 64 bit for 30 dollars

How so cheap?

badinfluence

2009-10-20 23:08:53

L2k wrote:
badinfluence wrote: I can get Win7 Professional 64 bit for 30 dollars
How so cheap?

http://windows7.digitalriver.com/servle ... 6065634403

I'm a college student. After you enter in your email and everything, it'll take you to the next page that asks if you want Home Basic or Professional 32 or 64 bit.

Uncle Rico

2009-10-20 23:16:27

badinfluence wrote:
L2k wrote:
badinfluence wrote: I can get Win7 Professional 64 bit for 30 dollars
How so cheap?
http://windows7.digitalriver.com/servle ... 6065634403

I'm a college student. After you enter in your email and everything, it'll take you to the next page that asks if you want Home Basic or Professional 32 or 64 bit.

You have to have a .edu email address though right?
I think that is where I got MS Office. The full package was like $60.

badinfluence

2009-10-20 23:18:37

Yeah, they have to approve your email address. I recently purchased MS Office 7 for around 40 dollars also.

Although, if I do the preorder, how do I install it without a disc? Do I put the file on the a flash drive, and then how is it recognized?

CellarDweller

2009-10-20 23:19:57

more than likely i will not not be upgrading for some years.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/a ... ew_pc.html

Uncle Rico

2009-10-20 23:22:21

badinfluence wrote:Yeah, they have to approve your email address. I recently purchased MS Office 7 for around 40 dollars also.

Although, if I do the preorder, how do I install it without a disc? Do I put the file on the a flash drive, and then how is it recognized?

Burn the iso to a disk. They sometimes have the option of ordering a disk to have for backup for about $10-15 more. I got one of those with Office just in case.

lead

2009-10-20 23:22:28

i been beta testing this up t0 7600x64 rtm which i've stayed with no probs

lead

2009-10-20 23:30:10

badinfluence wrote:Yeah, they have to approve your email address. I recently purchased MS Office 7 for around 40 dollars also.

Although, if I do the preorder, how do I install it without a disc? Do I put the file on the a flash drive, and then how is it recognized?

mount iso!!
Insert your removable USB flashdrive and run the following commands from an
elevated command prompt.

ok now type following commands

diskpart

list disk (find the disk number for the removable media)

select disk # (e.g. select disk 3, is the way you should type it)

clean

create partition primary

select partition 1

active

format fs=fat32

assign letter=y (or any free drive letter)

exit

Once that is complete, run the following command.

xcopy x:\*.* /s/e/f y:\

Where “x” is the drive letter of the mounted ISO. Once complete boot off the device and install w7.

relax with some alcohol while u wait

been doing this for ages with every release and it works

badinfluence

2009-10-20 23:49:14

CellarDweller wrote:more than likely i will not not be upgrading for some years.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/a ... ew_pc.html

I already have all my important files saved to an external hard drive. My steam directory, videos, and music, is all saved to it. (I don't run steam from the external though.)

lead wrote:
badinfluence wrote:Yeah, they have to approve your email address. I recently purchased MS Office 7 for around 40 dollars also.

Although, if I do the preorder, how do I install it without a disc? Do I put the file on the a flash drive, and then how is it recognized?
Insert your removable USB flashdrive and run the following commands from an
elevated command prompt.

mount iso!!
ok now type following commands

diskpart

list disk (find the disk number for the removable media)

select disk # (e.g. select disk 3, is the way you should type it)

clean

create partition primary

select partition 1

active

format fs=fat32

assign letter=y (or any free drive letter)

exit

Once that is complete mount the ISO and run the following command.

xcopy x:\*.* /s/e/f y:\

Where “x” is the drive letter of the mounted ISO. Once complete boot off the device and install the OS.

Thanks for this.

Paradox

2009-10-21 03:09:25

Cellar you would just have to do a reformat and a clean install. Its better to do that than use an Upgrade disk anyway. I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.

Nutri-Grain

2009-10-21 04:10:21

I have a free upgrade coupon for win7 so I'll be using that when it's available. I've been told that the best thing to do is what para suggested. Reformat your comp and then install the new OS. That way you'll be backing up all your shit anyways, and every computer needs a reformat from time to time.

CellarDweller

2009-10-21 06:24:33

Paradox wrote:Cellar you would just have to do a reformat and a clean install. Its better to do that than use an Upgrade disk anyway. I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.

i understand. but the clean install is a pita.

i'll just wait until i need a new machine.

Constipator

2009-10-21 06:41:53

I'm posing as a rep from the place I work for and going to the Microsoft dev conference called The New Efficiency. As long as you stay the whole time, you get a free copy (i think its ultimate version or w/e but not sure)

Dark Soul

2009-10-21 07:04:56

i just formatted my laptop yesterday and installed the 7600 x32 version, no problems so far

i had the 7100 RC before this one.

Blasphemy

2009-10-21 08:01:43

can it be post your desktop tiem now plox?

Va|iums

2009-10-21 08:28:45

Blasphemy wrote:can it be post your desktop tiem now plox?

kay dude heres mine

Attachments

: lol3.jpg (108.02 KiB) Viewed 479 times

Ko-Tao

2009-10-21 09:57:42

Oh joy, yet another "new" operating system, how freaking exciting!

Ill upgrade when the new software i want no longer works.

Jelly Fox

2009-10-21 15:39:32

Paradox wrote:I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.

In what possible way could that be true? how can formatting your HDD and installing win7 on it be better than installing it on an upgraded piece of kit?

And as DC states a clean install can be a pita, ideally what you want to do is install win7 on a separate/new HDD and use your old HDD as a slave until you've transferred all your porn over on to your new HDD, then format you old HDD and use it as a backup drive or something....... unless you've already backed everything up on an external drive, then a clean install isn't too bad.

provost

2009-10-21 16:58:11

Jelly Fox wrote:
Paradox wrote:I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.
In what possible way could that be true? how can formatting your HDD and installing win7 on it be better than installing it on an upgraded piece of kit?

And as DC states a clean install can be a pita, ideally what you want to do is install win7 on a separate/new HDD and use your old HDD as a slave until you've transferred all your porn over on to your new HDD, then format you old HDD and use it as a backup drive or something....... unless you've already backed everything up on an external drive, then a clean install isn't too bad.

I've been using Adobe product for years and upgrade kits always fucks something up.

CellarDweller

2009-10-21 17:02:59

Jelly Fox wrote:
Paradox wrote:I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.
In what possible way could that be true? how can formatting your HDD and installing win7 on it be better than installing it on an upgraded piece of kit?

And as DC states a clean install can be a pita, ideally what you want to do is install win7 on a separate/new HDD and use your old HDD as a slave until you've transferred all your porn over on to your new HDD, then format you old HDD and use it as a backup drive or something....... unless you've already backed everything up on an external drive, then a clean install isn't too bad.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/170342/u ... other.html

Let me open up by saying though that if you're using Vista-you poor, poor person-yes, you should migrate to Windows 7. After all, Windows 7 is really just Vista without the warts. Otherwise, no, I don't see any compelling reason to switch.

I say this as someone who's also been running Windows 7 since the late betas and I'm currently running the RTM (release to manufacturing) version. I like Windows 7, but if you were to ask me what the big feature, the 'wow' that would make you want to go to the trouble of moving to Windows 7, I'd be left without anything to say. Heck, look at Gralla list, number one on the list is the new taskbar. Microsoft wants me to spend big bucks for a new taskbar!?

OK, on with the list.

1) Windows 7 still has all the security of a drunken teenager in a sports car. From Windows for Workgroups and NT 3 until today, Windows is a security joke. It used to be that running Windows just put your head into the noose. Now, millions of lazy Windows users are the reason why the Internet is a mess. If you already do all the right things to keep XP running safely, you're not going to get any safer by buying Windows 7.

2) Windows 7, no matter how you buy it, is expensive. Does your budget have the extra cash to buy a new and improved taskbar!?

3) Upgrading from XP to Windows 7 will require that you do a clean install. That means everything on your hard disk gets vaporized during the 'upgrade." Vista users have it easier. So long as they're moving from equivalent version to equivalent version or to Windows 7 Ultimate they can update without needing to rebuild their systems.

There are lots of ways, like Microsoft's own Windows Easy Transfer and I'm sure there will be many more, to migrate your data from your old system to your new one, but all of them take work. If you have a business with dozens to tens-of-thousands of Windows PCs you can count on a honking, huge upgrade bill.

4) Did you notice what I didn't say above? I didn't mention transferring your old programs and device drivers from XP to Windows 7. For that, Easy Transfer and most of the first generation of migration programs are of no help at all. You'll need to reinstall your old programs and device drivers. Then, you'll need to update all those programs and drivers. Doesn't that sound like fun? Doesn't that sound like hour after hour per PC of migration work?

5) XP already works. I can tell you chapter and verse on why you'd be better off running desktop Linux or put a Mac on your desk. Most of you though are happy running XP. If that's you, I'll be darned if I can think of a single, significant change that you'll get from running Windows 7 instead of XP.

6) If you're an XP user you'll need to learn a new user interface. Parri Munsell, Microsoft's Director of Consumer Product Management for Windows, has been fond of saying, "Our goal was to make the UI (user interface) in Windows 7 much easier to navigate." OK, I'd agree. It is a bit better.

But, I'm someone who switches operating system interfaces as often as most of you go out to get a pizza. I asked some friends who were XP stalwarts what they thought about the interface. They all thought it was pretty, but, they also all found it annoying to work with since they had to re-learn how to do XP basics. Vista users will have it easier, but XP users can expect to have a learning curve with the new UI.

And, once more, I find myself asking, "Is there anything here that's really a solid improvement on XP?" Or, to get brass tacks, if I'm a CFO or CIO, I want to know what I'm going to get out of re-training people to the new interface and I'm left thinking there's really nothing game-changing about the Windows 7 UI.

7) Finally, if you have an older PC, forget about it. I know there are people who swear that Windows 7 will run on low-powered PCs. Yeah, right. I've used Windows 7 on netbooks. It wasn't pretty. Windows 7 Starter Edition? Microsoft won't sell it to you.

Bottom line. If you want something that's really better than XP, and you're willing to go to the trouble and expense of moving from one platform to another, you'll get real improvements like better security and low up-front costs, from a desktop Linux like SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 11 or Ubuntu 9.04. Windows 7 is certainly better than Vista, but XP... not so much.

t3rribl3on3

2009-10-21 17:59:32

my retail copy of win 7 pro arrived on monday. finally finished its install and have most apps reinstalled now.

im using the 64bit version and upgraded from xp pro 32but and its a lot faster. not had chance to game on it yet but im sure dx 11 will be rather nice once games come out.

glad i built a new powerhouse pc last month for its impending arrival.

still seems strange i receive my copy before the official release date. must have been posted early due to royal mail striking in the uk this week.

i really like win 7, i tried the rc and straight away decided to order one of the pre release specials as im not a student i could not get it uber cheap but it was still a saving of around 140 gbp.

lead

2009-10-21 18:07:33

CellarDweller wrote:
Jelly Fox wrote:
Paradox wrote:I was told by a microsoft employee that a clean install is preferred and better than an upgrade.
In what possible way could that be true? how can formatting your HDD and installing win7 on it be better than installing it on an upgraded piece of kit?

And as DC states a clean install can be a pita, ideally what you want to do is install win7 on a separate/new HDD and use your old HDD as a slave until you've transferred all your porn over on to your new HDD, then format you old HDD and use it as a backup drive or something....... unless you've already backed everything up on an external drive, then a clean install isn't too bad.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/170342/u ... other.html

Let me open up by saying though that if you're using Vista-you poor, poor person-yes, you should migrate to Windows 7. After all, Windows 7 is really just Vista without the warts. Otherwise, no, I don't see any compelling reason to switch.

I say this as someone who's also been running Windows 7 since the late betas and I'm currently running the RTM (release to manufacturing) version. I like Windows 7, but if you were to ask me what the big feature, the 'wow' that would make you want to go to the trouble of moving to Windows 7, I'd be left without anything to say. Heck, look at Gralla list, number one on the list is the new taskbar. Microsoft wants me to spend big bucks for a new taskbar!?

OK, on with the list.

1) Windows 7 still has all the security of a drunken teenager in a sports car. From Windows for Workgroups and NT 3 until today, Windows is a security joke. It used to be that running Windows just put your head into the noose. Now, millions of lazy Windows users are the reason why the Internet is a mess. If you already do all the right things to keep XP running safely, you're not going to get any safer by buying Windows 7.

2) Windows 7, no matter how you buy it, is expensive. Does your budget have the extra cash to buy a new and improved taskbar!?

3) Upgrading from XP to Windows 7 will require that you do a clean install. That means everything on your hard disk gets vaporized during the 'upgrade." Vista users have it easier. So long as they're moving from equivalent version to equivalent version or to Windows 7 Ultimate they can update without needing to rebuild their systems.

There are lots of ways, like Microsoft's own Windows Easy Transfer and I'm sure there will be many more, to migrate your data from your old system to your new one, but all of them take work. If you have a business with dozens to tens-of-thousands of Windows PCs you can count on a honking, huge upgrade bill.

4) Did you notice what I didn't say above? I didn't mention transferring your old programs and device drivers from XP to Windows 7. For that, Easy Transfer and most of the first generation of migration programs are of no help at all. You'll need to reinstall your old programs and device drivers. Then, you'll need to update all those programs and drivers. Doesn't that sound like fun? Doesn't that sound like hour after hour per PC of migration work?

5) XP already works. I can tell you chapter and verse on why you'd be better off running desktop Linux or put a Mac on your desk. Most of you though are happy running XP. If that's you, I'll be darned if I can think of a single, significant change that you'll get from running Windows 7 instead of XP.

6) If you're an XP user you'll need to learn a new user interface. Parri Munsell, Microsoft's Director of Consumer Product Management for Windows, has been fond of saying, "Our goal was to make the UI (user interface) in Windows 7 much easier to navigate." OK, I'd agree. It is a bit better.

But, I'm someone who switches operating system interfaces as often as most of you go out to get a pizza. I asked some friends who were XP stalwarts what they thought about the interface. They all thought it was pretty, but, they also all found it annoying to work with since they had to re-learn how to do XP basics. Vista users will have it easier, but XP users can expect to have a learning curve with the new UI.

And, once more, I find myself asking, "Is there anything here that's really a solid improvement on XP?" Or, to get brass tacks, if I'm a CFO or CIO, I want to know what I'm going to get out of re-training people to the new interface and I'm left thinking there's really nothing game-changing about the Windows 7 UI.

7) Finally, if you have an older PC, forget about it. I know there are people who swear that Windows 7 will run on low-powered PCs. Yeah, right. I've used Windows 7 on netbooks. It wasn't pretty. Windows 7 Starter Edition? Microsoft won't sell it to you.

Bottom line. If you want something that's really better than XP, and you're willing to go to the trouble and expense of moving from one platform to another, you'll get real improvements like better security and low up-front costs, from a desktop Linux like SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 11 or Ubuntu 9.04. Windows 7 is certainly better than Vista, but XP... not so much.

mmm.... w7 is certainly faster than vista imho and i used a skinny version of w7 on my lappy and um pretty sure the fixes that microsoft released last week sorted a few issues you have noted.. yeah i love linux too (mandriva) but its not 4 everyone...lastly 1 day it may look like this hopefully http://vimeo.com/4186558

Paradox

2009-10-21 22:22:14

Good discussion here. My response to several points:

Clean install is better because you don't get a lot of left over baggage from the previous OS. You also redo your registry, which no matter how many registry cleaners you use, always eventually gets bogged up with useless shit from uninstalled programs, etc.

Yes it can be a PITA, but have installed/reinstalled an OS enough times now that I am pretty much aware of all the little tricks Microshit throws at you during the process. I've beaten it every time so far so I am not afraid it a little OS and I like the challenge. I am pretty good at learning new things and I am ok with learning a new OS.

You can buy an OEM version of Win7 ultimate for $200 instead of $300 for the retail version. $400 to upgrade 2 computers doesn't seem expensive or unreasonable to me, its just the cost of having an up to date computer. I am fortunate that I have a well paying, stable job which I realize not everyone is so fortunate to be in that position atm.

Security may be crap for an Win OS, that's true, but anyone that relies on an OS alone for security is an idiot. I purchase a very good security program (no its not POS Norton or Mcafee) for my computers and I have never had a problem. I see it as an inexpensive investment/insuance policy when compared to the cost/investment that the computer itself is.

Im doing this because I have a Vista laptop and I hate Vista. I would like both computers to have the same OS just for the sake of simplicity. My desktop is XP (DX9 technology) and since I do plan on playing DX10 (there are a few current games) and 11 games, I would like to take full advantage of the current technology for the purty graphics.

I plan on doing the laptop first and there is really nothing on there that needs backing up as its all on my desktop as well. As for the desktop, I back up my important files regularly anyway, including driver/program downloads to an external drive anyway. Ill already have many of them on the laptop, which is normally set
up near the desktop. I can use the laptop to download something if I missed it. For the desktop, the plan is to install Win7 on a brand new HD because the OS drive I have now is 2 years old and the other drive I have just like it/same age died this summer. I can even play a game on the LT in between pogram installs on the DT. Finally, Im going to do the desktop around Christmas when I have a few days off. Ill just crank up the music and work on the computer, which if you hadn't noticed, I enjoy doing. My computers are one of my hobbies. What else would I do anyway? Watch soap operas?.....ppfftt.....NOT!

Paradox

2009-10-21 22:53:52

Also, anyone formatting/reformatting a new drive for a Windows OS should be formatting as an NTFS file system, not FAT32 which is antiquated.

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS

lead

2009-10-21 23:48:33

Paradox wrote:Also, anyone formatting/reformatting a new drive for a Windows OS should be formatting as an NTFS file system, not FAT32 which is antiquated.

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS

seeing as NTFS is the file system for w7 why would you

s0iz

2009-10-22 00:55:08

CPU x64 and 4GB+ of RAM, go W7. Lower than that, go XP.

Is that so hard to understand?

Paradox

2009-10-22 03:54:02

lead wrote:
Paradox wrote:Also, anyone formatting/reformatting a new drive for a Windows OS should be formatting as an NTFS file system, not FAT32 which is antiquated.

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS
seeing as NTFS is the file system for w7 why would you

Urm your own instructions to BI said to use FAT32, not NTFS.....

keefy

2009-10-22 05:19:28

Paradox wrote: Urm your own instructions to BI said to use FAT32, not NTFS.....

Read te instructions again and you will realise why.

Paradox

2009-10-22 06:12:02

ah...lol ok. Hes downloading it to a USB drive.

Ghost Dog_TSGK

2009-10-22 06:36:14

This bores me.

DEATH-ANGEL

2009-10-22 06:57:06

s0iz wrote:CPU x64 and 4GB+ of RAM, go W7. Lower than that, go XP.

Is that so hard to understand?

Kinda weird, since I just saw a buddy of mine running Windows 7 on a Eee PC which come stock with XP because of the system specs of the micro pc's...

lead

2009-10-22 15:59:33

Ghost Dog_TSGK wrote:This bores me.

ninojman

2009-10-22 18:09:36

damn it just came out? been using it for months now...

Paradox

2009-10-23 05:33:15

You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.

badinfluence

2009-10-23 06:51:10

Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.

Well, digital river and windows fucked shit up. If you bought 64bit windows, and you have 32bit windows already. It won't unpack the package that you downloaded. Digital river should have just been provided with an iso in the first place. Unfortunately, I went through all their dumb work arounds anyways.

When I look in my computer, it says it's a"WIN_EN_DVD, but it won't boot even when the my disk drive is first in the boot order.

Fearsome*

2009-10-23 07:12:16

CellarDweller wrote:more than likely i will not not be upgrading for some years.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/a ... ew_pc.html

That guys is a moron he is a mac fan who has no clue what the hell he is talking about, he cleverly tries to hide it his entire article hints at it but like all mac evangelist he just cannot keep his load down and blursts it out near the end.

If you have vista its probably not needed to upgrade, if you have XP you are really riding an old OS you still do not need to upgrade if your computer does everything but many people are reporting Windows 7 is running faster then XP on the same hardware. If you are a computer nut though this OS is good and if you are going to buy it sooner or later then sooner is better to get the most for your money. If you build your own machines like many gamers you upgrade anytime you like. Also there are so many kicking deals for windows 7 now. For me I will be upgrading all my windows XP machines to windows 7 except maybe 1 which has a tv tuner that is about 7 years old which I cannot find new drivers for. I may test the XP VM on it in Windows 7 though. I will do it in a couple weeks when the dust settles and I actually get the item shipped right away. I do have 1 copy preordered though so maybe that will come soon.

Ko-Tao

2009-10-23 11:06:12

I am find windows xp to be very satisfactional.

provost

2009-10-23 17:34:12

Ko-Tao wrote:I am find windows xp to be very satisfactional.

lead

2009-10-23 19:09:04

badinfluence wrote:
Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.
Well, digital river and windows fucked shit up. If you bought 64bit windows, and you have 32bit windows already. It won't unpack the package that you downloaded. Digital river should have just been provided with an iso in the first place. Unfortunately, I went through all their dumb work arounds anyways.

When I look in my computer, it says it's a"WIN_EN_DVD, but it won't boot even when the my disk drive is first in the boot order.

it wont upgrade from 32 to 64...needs a clean install...if you find a copy of 7600x64 (i think it was the final testing as rtm) use it otherwise your file may be corrupted pm me if you want to

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-23 23:03:10

**** Microsofts new OS, which offers no new tech/file sytem!

I will be using XP till the last day possible and i doesn't make any sense any more.
I still believe XP is the finest OS out there.
4 gig ram!??! Like i need that!??!

badinfluence

2009-10-24 01:22:01

lead wrote:
badinfluence wrote:
Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.
Well, digital river and windows fucked shit up. If you bought 64bit windows, and you have 32bit windows already. It won't unpack the package that you downloaded. Digital river should have just been provided with an iso in the first place. Unfortunately, I went through all their dumb work arounds anyways.

When I look in my computer, it says it's a"WIN_EN_DVD, but it won't boot even when the my disk drive is first in the boot order.

it wont upgrade from 32 to 64...needs a clean install...if you find a copy of 7600x64 (i think it was the final testing as rtm) use it otherwise your file may be corrupted pm me if you want to

I am trying to do a clean install because that's what I want. I turned the folders that they provided us with into an iso, and burnt the iso to a DVD. I changed the boot order so that my disk drive is first, but it boots straight to Windows XP anyways. When I open up my computer when I get into Windows, the disc reads "WIN_ENG_DVD." I still don't know why it won't recognize that disc when it boots up.

Paradox

2009-10-24 01:58:49

Ko-Tao wrote:I am find windows xp to be very satisfactional.

Yes Ko we know you prefer living in the dark ages.
Still use candles for light too dont ya?

keefy

2009-10-24 02:54:12

badinfluence wrote:
I am trying to do a clean install because that's what I want. I turned the folders that they provided us with into an iso, and burnt the iso to a DVD. I changed the boot order so that my disk drive is first, but it boots straight to Windows XP anyways. When I open up my computer when I get into Windows, the disc reads "WIN_ENG_DVD." I still don't know why it won't recognize that disc when it boots up.

Did you make the iso "bootable"?

badinfluence

2009-10-24 04:33:02

keefy wrote:
badinfluence wrote:
I am trying to do a clean install because that's what I want. I turned the folders that they provided us with into an iso, and burnt the iso to a DVD. I changed the boot order so that my disk drive is first, but it boots straight to Windows XP anyways. When I open up my computer when I get into Windows, the disc reads "WIN_ENG_DVD." I still don't know why it won't recognize that disc when it boots up.
Did you make the iso "bootable"?

How do you do that?

Pernicious

2009-10-24 09:09:43

Everyone i know of so far who has actually used win7 say its the best by far, performance wise, aesthetically wise, evereetang. Thats a good sign.

Deathwish

2009-10-24 11:15:35

is it downloadable already, i mean the best one and fully compatible while cracked, just for information wise of course not actually like i would be one of those people downloading it illegally

badinfluence

2009-10-24 12:30:59

I got it figured out, but only after wasting 5 DVD-Rs. No worries!

lead

2009-10-24 13:47:55

badinfluence wrote:I got it figured out, but only after wasting 5 DVD-Rs. No worries!

yeah install it via usb stick mucho betta

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-24 21:09:42

I read 7 is a security joke. I also saw one of the new features are comparing windows side by side!?! Huh!??!
I do that in XP, along with embedding My Computer and all my big apps in Quick launch.
I never have any icons on the desktop. Never. Every is neatly tucked on Start, Quick Launch and Toolbar.
Why would anyone want all that stuff on their desktop, where they have to move something to find and start something else?!??

If 7 included the WinFile system that was dropped in Vista, i might consider it before XP is pried from my PC.
120 dollars? For what?

lead

2009-10-24 22:06:57

The Argumentalizer wrote:I read 7 is a security joke. I also saw one of the new features are comparing windows side by side!?! Huh!??!
I do that in XP, along with embedding My Computer and all my big apps in Quick launch.
I never have any icons on the desktop. Never. Every is neatly tucked on Start, Quick Launch and Toolbar.
Why would anyone want all that stuff on their desktop, where they have to move something to find and start something else?!??

If 7 included the WinFile system that was dropped in Vista, i might consider it before XP is pried from my PC.
120 dollars? For what?

Freetux

2009-10-25 02:55:48

Deathwish wrote:is it downloadable already, i mean the best one and fully compatible while cracked, just for information wise of course not actually like i would be one of those people downloading it illegally

Yep, the release to manufacturing version was on demonoid before that went down. This is basically the same version they are selling to people now.

Ko-Tao

2009-10-25 07:00:12

Paradox wrote:
Ko-Tao wrote:I am find windows xp to be very satisfactional.

Yes Ko we know you prefer living in the dark ages.
Still use candles for light too dont ya?

I find the light from my fire to be adequate. Candles would be both an unnecessary upgrade and a waste of resources.

Fearsome*

2009-10-25 08:21:04

My $50 home premium preorder from a couple months ago shipped so I expect I will have that soon and it will go on an athlon FX55 machine with 3GB ddr ram and an X800XL which was one of my earlier HL2DM machines.

Sacrifist

2009-10-26 08:06:55

Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.

Um, no. You are completely wrong. The full blown version has been available for about 3 months. They haven't changed version numbers since early August. Just because its not on the shelves doesn't mean the final version hasn't been available. I've also had it up and running and activated since early August

. Xp lol, Vista sp2 is better then xp as is win7. Just the way they handle the folders far outweigh the fraction of a second speed increase xp may have.

L2k

2009-10-26 08:29:28

Sacrifist wrote:
Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.
Um, no. You are completely wrong. The full blown version has been available for about 3 months. Ive been using it since early August. Just because its not on the shelves doesn't mean it hasn't been available. I've also had it activated for that long as well

MS Technet subsciber?

Sacrifist

2009-10-26 08:30:45

L2k wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:
Paradox wrote:You have been using the Release Candidate Nino as youre aware. The full blown retail version is coming out this week. I didnt want to mess around with the RC versions and chose instead to let all you guinea pigs finish testing and get the final version instead.
Um, no. You are completely wrong. The full blown version has been available for about 3 months. Ive been using it since early August. Just because its not on the shelves doesn't mean it hasn't been available. I've also had it activated for that long as well
MS Technet subsciber?

No, but that is where my version came from lol.

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-26 08:53:14

"Just the way they handle the folders far outweigh the fraction of a second speed increase xp may have."

What is so great about the folders???
A folder is a folder.

Its all very neat and easy in XP.
What does 7 do?

And Vista is on my low powered lap and it is mega slow and annoying.
So, what is better?

Sacrifist

2009-10-26 09:03:50

The Argumentalizer wrote:"Just the way they handle the folders far outweigh the fraction of a second speed increase xp may have."

What is so great about the folders???
A folder is a folder.

Its all very neat and easy in XP.
What does 7 do?

And Vista is on my low powered lap and it is mega slow and annoying.
So, what is better?

It would take way to much text and time to explain why win7 is better then xp. Google can surely help you find all the things that win7 does that xp does not. I always liked xp and I would consider Vista better then xp had it not indexed shit for hours on end slowing things to a crawl, but everything is just easier to deal with in win7 when it comes to doing things within the operating system.

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-26 09:55:28

Well thanks for no examples. I think its typical New OS BS. I haven't seen anything so far that is any feature worth switching to 7.
And you don't give any, so thanx for the google advice, for what its worth- 0 cents.

Here is one thing: Embed My Computer on the Taskbar. INSTANT scroll to any file or folders on the PC. Instant access to all the drives. Cascade open windows...

What can possibly be better than instant access to everything!??!
I smell BS.
And there is NO WAY Vista is better than XP. NO WAY!

Pernicious

2009-10-26 14:31:24

Yes way, if ur running a new rig.
If ur running old shit then dont worry.

Deathwish

2009-10-26 16:30:58

^ agreed

keefy

2009-10-26 19:25:31

Windows 7 can burn iso without any 3rd party software.

lead

2009-10-26 20:12:58

The Argumentalizer wrote:Well thanks for no examples. I think its typical New OS BS. I haven't seen anything so far that is any feature worth switching to 7.
And you don't give any, so thanx for the google advice, for what its worth- 0 cents.

Here is one thing: Embed My Computer on the Taskbar. INSTANT scroll to any file or folders on the PC. Instant access to all the drives. Cascade open windows...

What can possibly be better than instant access to everything!??!
I smell BS.
And there is NO WAY Vista is better than XP. NO WAY!

w7 has no half-open connections dunno y im explaining this find out yerself

in fact dont fookin buy it

Sacrifist

2009-10-26 20:15:05

The Argumentalizer wrote:Well thanks for no examples. I think its typical New OS BS. I haven't seen anything so far that is any feature worth switching to 7.
And you don't give any, so thanx for the google advice, for what its worth- 0 cents.

Here is one thing: Embed My Computer on the Taskbar. INSTANT scroll to any file or folders on the PC. Instant access to all the drives. Cascade open windows...

What can possibly be better than instant access to everything!??!
I smell BS.
And there is NO WAY Vista is better than XP. NO WAY!

Here is the easiest way I can explain it. There are 2 soda cans. 1 is within arms reach (win7's can) and the other is 200 feet away. Both are in the same place but it takes you 200 feet to get the same can in xp. For example, click the start button in win7 and all your programs are right there. Click it in xp and you scroll to the programs button then it opens another window set and then perhaps another. Xp is like that all over the place whereas win7 has a much smarter setup. There are tons of little features as well that just makes life better. Would I pay what Microsoft is charging for Win7? Hell no. But there are tons of ways to get it cheap or for free. And yes, After the first service pack for Vista, it was better then xp imo.

badinfluence

2009-10-26 20:16:49

Everyone who is trying to convince argumentalizer of Win7 being better. It's best to give up now. The symptoms show he is a patient of confirmation bias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

provost

2009-10-26 20:24:02

It depends on everyone's needs.

Is the top end alienware tower better than some random 300$ DELL tower at best buy?
For say, a secretary, it makes no fucking difference. at all.

What you need should decide of what is better for you or not, not what's on paper.

badinfluence

2009-10-26 20:38:33

provost wrote:It depends on everyone's needs.

Is the top end alienware tower better than some random 300$ DELL tower at best buy?
For say, a secretary, it makes no fucking difference. at all.

What you need should decide of what is better for you or not, not what's on paper.

Yeah, but what if that secretary likes to game and is really no ordinary secretary at all?

Haha.

provost

2009-10-26 21:20:00

badinfluence wrote:
provost wrote:It depends on everyone's needs.

Is the top end alienware tower better than some random 300$ DELL tower at best buy?
For say, a secretary, it makes no fucking difference. at all.

What you need should decide of what is better for you or not, not what's on paper.
Yeah, but what if that secretary likes to game and is really no ordinary secretary at all?

Haha.

Finding a new job is what happens

Fearsome*

2009-10-27 00:35:52

Even for a secretary the faster rig is better why should they sit around waiting for programs to load, after all they will use the computer more then most during a work day.

As said the start menu in windows vista/7 is worlds faster then XP and it does not require you to configure anything the programs you use most just start showing up in the list. If you cant find something or need it faster just hit the windows key then start typing the name or any part of the name of a program. I no longer go to control panel I just type mouse or programs in the start menu most of the time that is the first item and I hit enter.

Office 2007 was the same way old people complain new people adapt M$ makes some mistakes but they get more right then they get wrong and they spend tons of money actually measuring how fast people get tasks done this is what separates them from most other companies. This is why when it is important to make people productive as in the work place where it costs money to waste time most computers run M$ products.

Also one other thing to think about is that the fact that so many people sit around saying you do not need a more powerful computer for X or Y also hurts us more programs would take advantage of automated features and rendering if the majority of computers bought had at least an ATI or nVidia graphics solution instead of intel garbage.

lead

2009-10-27 01:08:11

heres the version i use on my lappy its really quick and installs all updates too

KEPT - [Accessories]
Character Map, Disk Cleanup, Game Explorer, Notepad, Paint, Snipping
Tool, System Information, Welcome Center, Wordpad.

KEPT - [Drivers]
Generic printer, QLogic Fibre Channel Adapter, Storage controllers.

KEPT - [Hardware Support] (everything is kept)
Dynamic Volume Manager, Fax Support, Firewire (1394), Floppy Disk
Support, Infrared Support, Internet Small Computer System Interface,
Microsoft Multi-Path Bus, Modem Support, Printer Support, Smartcards,
TV Tuner support, Windows HotStart, Windows Image Acquisition, Windows
Portable Devices, WLAN Support, XBOX 360 Controller.

KEPT - [Languages]
Arabic, Brazillian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch,
Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian,
Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese,
Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish,
Swedish, Thai, Turkish, Ukrainian.

KEPT - [Multimedia]
Intel Indeo, Media Metadata Handler, Photo Metadata Handler, Shell
event sounds, Wallpapers, Windows Aero Theme.

KEPT - [Network]
Distributed File System, File and printer sharing (Server), Internet
Explorer, Link-Layer Topology Discovery, Network and Sharing Center,
Network Explorer, Quality of Service, RIP Listener, Windows Firewall.

KEPT - [Services]
Application Experience, Background Intelligent Transfer Service,
Computer Browser, Desktop Window Manager, DHCP, Distributed Link
Tracking Client, Distributed Transaction Coordinator, DNS Client,
Extensible Authentication Protocol, Interactive Services Detection,
Internet Connection Sharing, IP Helper, IPsec Policy Agent,
Multimedia Class Scheduler, Network Access Protection Agent, Network
List Service, Network Location Awareness, Protected Storage, Quality
Windows Audio Video Experience, Remote Access Auto Connection Manager,
Remote Access Connection Manager, Secondary Logon, Secure Socket
Tunneling Protocol, SSDP Discovery, SuperFetch, Task Scheduler,
TCP/IP NetBios Helper, Telephony, TPM Base Services, Universal Plug
and Play, User-mode Driver Framework, Volume Shadow Copy, WebDAV
(WebClient), Windows Color System (WCS/ICM), Windows Connect Now,
Windows Event Log, Windows Remote Management, Windows Time,
Windows Update.

KEPT - [System]
16-bit Support, Beep, Component Cache, Disk Quota, Jet Database Engine,
MDAC, Microsoft Client For NFS, Microsoft HTML engine, Run a legacy
CPL elevated, Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA), User Account
Control (UAC), Windows Picture and Fax Viewer (Shimgvw), Zip Folder.

________________________________________________________________________

REMOVED ITEMS PART 1/3:
DISM

With DISM the following packages were REMOVED:

Hyper V Common Drivers, Hyper V Guest Integration Drivers, Anytime
Upgrade Results, Backup, BLB Client, Business Scanning Feature,
Clips In The Library, Client Wired Network Drivers, Common Modem
Drivers, Printer Drivers, Tuner Drivers, Win Ocr, Gadget Platform,
Group Policy Client Extensions, IIS Web Server Add On, IIS Web
Server Add On 2, Indexing Service, IE Troubleshooters, Links,
LocalPack AU/CA/GB/ZA/US, Mobile PC Client Sensors, Optical Media
Disc, PeerDist Client, Printing XPS Services, RasCMAK, RecDisc SDP,
Sample Content Ringtones, Secure Startup, ShareMedia Control Panel,
Shell HomeGroup, Shell Inbox Games, Sidebar Killbits SDP, Snipping
Tool, Sticky Notes, Terminal Services Command Line Tools, Terminal
Services Misc Redirection, Terminal Services Publishing WMI Provider,
Terminal Services Remote Applications Client, Terminal Services USB
Redirector, Terminal Services WMI Provider, Windows Media Player
Troubleshooters, WMP Network Sharing Service, XPS Foundation Client,
Networking MPSSVC Rules Ultimate Edition.

___________________________________

REMOVED ITEMS PART 2/3:

DELETED DIRECTLY FROM MOUNTED IMAGE:

About 550Mb was removed from:
Windows\System32\DriverStore\FileRepository\

About 585Mb was removed from:
Windows\winsxs\

These items were: Printer Drivers, Modem Drivers and Camera Drivers.

Other miscellaneous items were removed like the contents of the
Recovery folder and certain folders from the Web folder.

___________________________________

REMOVED ITEMS PART 3/3:
vLite

In vLite the following items were REMOVED:

REMOVED - [Accessories]
Accessibility, Inbox Games, Premium Inbox Games, Mobility
Center, Speech Support, Windows Sidebar and Gadgets.

REMOVED - [Drivers]
Diva Server, Modems, Scanners, TV Tuners.

REMOVED - [Languages]
Chinese, Japanese, Korean.

REMOVED - [Multimedia]
Media Center, Music and Video samples, Sample Pictures,
Screensavers, SideShow, Sound Recorder, Windows Media
Codecs, Windows Media Player.

REMOVED - [Network]
Connect to a Network Projector, Internet Information
Services (IIS), Remote Desktop and Assistance, Remote
Desktop Client, Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMP), Simple TCPIP services, Telnet Client, Telnet
Server, TFTP Client, Windows Collaboration, Windows
Mail.

REMOVED - [Services]
Diagnostics, Error Reporting, Offline Files, Remote Registry,
Routing and Remote Access, TPM Base Services, Windows Search.

REMOVED - [System]
BitLocker Drive Encryption, Crash Dump Support, Digital
Rights Management (DRM), Help, IMAPIv2 Burning Support,
Manual Install (Setup.exe), Microsoft Message Queue (MSMQ),
Natural Language, Parental Controls, Performance Counters,
Reliability and Performance Monitor, Remote Differential
Compression, Security Center, Software Quality Management
(SQM), Sync Center, System Restore, Tablet PC, Windows
Defender, Windows Easy Transfer, Windows SAT (Performance
Index).

works out about 700mb and installs in 15 mins:)

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-27 01:57:17

I have a healthy skepticism regarding how great Microsoft's Newest Totally awesome PC OS and asked WHY.
I have heard all this stuff before, many times.
That is all.
I found that there is one less click and a can is 200 feet away so far.
And that it has a pretty dock/taskbar thingy.
And it looks cool.
And it burns an ISO, which i have apps already that do that.
Also, you can put 25 or 30 apps on the Start Menu. Who the **** even uses all that?!?!
It WOULD be an inductive bias malfunction if i received powerful reasons and then rejected them.
I don't feel that's the case.

So, i asked and received.
If you like it, get it.
Makes no difference to me.

Paradox

2009-10-27 03:19:07

How do we know Fearsome has been in $W too long?

He makes all his "S" characters into a "$"

keefy

2009-10-27 03:51:37

Fearsome* wrote:Even for a secretary the faster rig is better why should they sit around waiting for programs to load, after all they will use the computer more then most during a work day.

As said the start menu in windows vista/7 is worlds faster then XP and it does not require you to configure anything the programs you use most just start showing up in the list. If you cant find something or need it faster just hit the windows key then start typing the name or any part of the name of a program. I no longer go to control panel I just type mouse or programs in the start menu most of the time that is the first item and I hit enter.

That is cool an it works great.

Also its easy to "pin" (drag and drop) your most used programs to the task bar then press windowskey+1 or what ever number the program is along form the left. e.g I press win'+5 for calculator or win'+4 for steam. Pressing that combination again minimises/maximises the program.

Ko-Tao

2009-10-27 06:28:57

Paradox wrote:How do we know Fearsome has been in $W too long?

He makes all his "S" characters into a "$"

Hahahaha

Didnt even notice till you mentioned it.

Pernicious

2009-10-27 06:57:58

Argumentaliser, win7 makes better use of new hardware, that is the only reason u need to use it.

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-27 08:11:25

Well thank you, that is the best reason i have heard.

Sacrifist

2009-10-28 01:40:01

Pernicious wrote:Argumentaliser, win7 makes better use of new hardware, that is the only reason u need to use it.

I dont even understand what that means. Im not aware of any hardware that win7 can make better use of more then XP or Vista for that matter. Please explain what you mean.

Pernicious

2009-10-28 08:31:43

Well, geez, theres google u know, ill paste one or 2 things 2 give u the gist of it.

Windows 7 will also do more than previous operating systems with graphics--and here, DirectX 11 stands out as the most highly anticipated technology. A recent AMD blog describes a "beast called the tessellator...which enables games developers to create smoother, less blocky and more organic looking objects in games." The blog discusses how DirectX has been redesigned "to ensure that it is much more efficient" at using multicore processors, such as the AMD Opteron chip.

Beyond games, Windows 7 has the potential to turn a graphics processing unit (GPU) from AMD or Nvidia into a general-purpose compute engine, used to accelerate everyday computing tasks like a CPU. Specifically, "the compute shader" can be used to speed up more common computing tasks. The buzz word used to describe this technology is a mouthful: GPGPU or general-purpose graphics processing unit.

In an April interview, Sumit Gupta, product manager for Nvidia's Tesla products, described GPGPU in some detail. "What that essentially means to consumers is, if your laptop has an Nvidia GPU or ATI GPU, it will run the operating system faster because the operating system will essentially see two processors in the system. For the first time, the operating system is going to see the GPU both as a graphics chip and as a compute engine," he said.

Ive also heard and read that win7 utilises multi core processors and hyperthreading better etc, and even read certain things on the nvidia website about win7. In any case, its just good, allright.

The Argumentalizer

2009-10-28 19:54:54

If 7 didn't spray files all over a HDD, had a better set of utilities, some better multi-core support, fixed user accounts, improved Registry, and more contro/settings in ONE FUCKING PLACE, that might be interesting, when XP dies.

Pernicious

2009-10-28 20:12:01

Well it uses less resources, runs less stuff in the background, and is generally alot neater over all from wat ive heard, i wouldnt be surprised if its registry entries were done better and files less fragmented/cluster fucked etc. Though not sure about that.
I will definitly be installing it at some point, ie wen i get my hands on it.

Fearsome*

2009-10-30 08:49:54

My first windows 7 install is up and running it went perfectly smooth. I was a little worried that an older system may be missing drivers but everything was automatically recognized and installed.

keefy

2009-10-30 18:06:08

Die hard XP freaks there is an answer, best of both worlds yes?

lead

2009-10-31 00:11:05

follow this http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/10/22 ... windows-7/ if you wanna make a bootable dvd from your student (29.99) w7 0S

badinfluence

2009-10-31 03:46:52

badinfluence wrote:I got it figured out, but only after wasting 5 DVD-Rs. No worries!

Lol. Also, Digital River sent me an email with a link to an iso. They also said that send me a backup disc and give me a refund.

Hahahahaha.

Fearsome*

2009-10-31 07:00:45

I find aerosnap to be a great time saving feature in Windows 7 if you want to get it for XP or Vista you can get a program here http://aerosnap.de/eng/download.htm

s0iz

2009-10-31 19:07:33

Sacrifist wrote:
Pernicious wrote:Argumentaliser, win7 makes better use of new hardware, that is the only reason u need to use it.
I dont even understand what that means. Im not aware of any hardware that win7 can make better use of more then XP or Vista for that matter. Please explain what you mean.

x64 CPU with 4GB of RAM or more.

Sacrifist

2009-11-03 09:04:47

s0iz wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:
Pernicious wrote:Argumentaliser, win7 makes better use of new hardware, that is the only reason u need to use it.
I dont even understand what that means. Im not aware of any hardware that win7 can make better use of more then XP or Vista for that matter. Please explain what you mean.
x64 CPU with 4GB of RAM or more.

Um XP and Vista are the same as Win7 in this regard. Try again.

Fearsome*

2009-11-03 10:40:21

None of the OS versions are the same with respect to the way they manage memory. If you were to imagine windows xp as being the baseline windows vista used alot more ram, tons more but it also loaded programs much faster because it was using superfetch to load programs you were predicted to use into memory ahead of time. I think all operating systems do this to some extent it is just vista took it to the next level. Personally I love it what is the point of having ram if you are not going to use it? Alot of stupid people considered this a bad thing they just think an OS which uses lots of ram sucks. Windows 7 still uses superfetch but has altered the way it does it to now use less ram total and M$ believes it is better or more accurate. People are certainly finding with laptops that windows 7 increases battery life. Also because windows 7 alters the way it uses super fetch it tends to boot faster. Like I said no OS utilizes ram the same when you buy the latest OS you are taking advantage of the latest and most intelligent approach to allocating and preloading ram that a particular company has to offer. In an effort to get you to upgrade they will not extend this to older operating systems.

That is only one example with hundreds of other little things the same is true. The question is not if you will upgrade but rather when and how far behind you want to be when you do it? Alot of people were able to skip vista because of the short time frame between its release and windows 7. Much like many could skip an OS during the 98,me,2000 days but xp was left in the pipe so long almost no one could skip it. The way I see it if you are still on XP you probably cannot wait till windows 8 to upgrade in which case if you build your own computers then you might as well buy windows 7 while it is cheap and get the most useful years out of it. Maybe you could skip from 7 to 9 depending on how tight M$ keeps their release schedule. If you buy prebuilt computers then they will most likely come with an OS in which case you may want to save money and just wait. But for me and other people who value time even a fill 100$ price is worth the time saving the new user interface offers. A few less clicks here and there add up.

Sacrifist

2009-11-03 22:32:09

Fearsome* wrote:None of the OS versions are the same with respect to the way they manage memory. If you were to imagine windows xp as being the baseline windows vista used alot more ram, tons more but it also loaded programs much faster because it was using superfetch to load programs you were predicted to use into memory ahead of time. I think all operating systems do this to some extent it is just vista took it to the next level. Personally I love it what is the point of having ram if you are not going to use it? Alot of stupid people considered this a bad thing they just think an OS which uses lots of ram sucks. Windows 7 still uses superfetch but has altered the way it does it to now use less ram total and M$ believes it is better or more accurate. People are certainly finding with laptops that windows 7 increases battery life. Also because windows 7 alters the way it uses super fetch it tends to boot faster. Like I said no OS utilizes ram the same when you buy the latest OS you are taking advantage of the latest and most intelligent approach to allocating and preloading ram that a particular company has to offer. In an effort to get you to upgrade they will not extend this to older operating systems.

That is only one example with hundreds of other little things the same is true. The question is not if you will upgrade but rather when and how far behind you want to be when you do it? Alot of people were able to skip vista because of the short time frame between its release and windows 7. Much like many could skip an OS during the 98,me,2000 days but xp was left in the pipe so long almost no one could skip it. The way I see it if you are still on XP you probably cannot wait till windows 8 to upgrade in which case if you build your own computers then you might as well buy windows 7 while it is cheap and get the most useful years out of it. Maybe you could skip from 7 to 9 depending on how tight M$ keeps their release schedule. If you buy prebuilt computers then they will most likely come with an OS in which case you may want to save money and just wait. But for me and other people who value time even a fill 100$ price is worth the time saving the new user interface offers. A few less clicks here and there add up.

That is certainly true.

s0iz

2009-11-05 18:39:51

Sacrifist wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:
s0iz wrote:I dont even understand what that means. Im not aware of any hardware that win7 can make better use of more then XP or Vista for that matter. Please explain what you mean.
x64 CPU with 4GB of RAM or more.
Um XP and Vista are the same as Win7 in this regard. Try again.

Yeah right, that's why you get a bonus of 40fps+ when using Vista SP1 x64 or W7 x64 instead of XP.

Sacrifist

2009-11-08 05:56:49

s0iz wrote:Yeah right, that's why you get a bonus of 40fps+ when using Vista SP1 x64 or W7 x64 instead of XP.

Do you get that bonus when you are using XP x64? Or is there something magically going on with 64 bit Vista and Win7 compared to 64 bit XP?

s0iz

2009-11-08 15:52:50

Sacrifist wrote:
s0iz wrote:Yeah right, that's why you get a bonus of 40fps+ when using Vista SP1 x64 or W7 x64 instead of XP.
Do you get that bonus when you are using XP x64? Or is there something magically going on with 64 bit Vista and Win7 compared to 64 bit XP?

Not magically, it is a matter of structure and architecture.

Is it magically that HL1 Source gives you a lot more fps with modern computers than HL1 GoldSource?

I like how you argue me when saying something, and when Fearsome says the same but with more words in it, you say "that's true". It's simply awesome.

BlackRaven

2009-11-08 16:44:57

in most cases 7 and vista will give you less fps than xp.

Paradox

2009-11-08 18:37:45

Ghost Dog_TSGK

2009-11-08 23:34:48

If you are counting your fps, why are you looking for a new OS anyway.

Need for argument = 0%

Pernicious

2009-11-09 00:07:56

For older games like hl2 + any dx9 or less games u only need a certain amount of frames anyways, i lock mine at 99.
For dx10 games etc u will obviously get better image qual(effects wise) and frame rate with vista + 7, and once again with newer drivers running games with sli aa profiles will most likely run better fps then xp, though none of this arguing even matters, i have heard from ppl who actually use win7 that it makes everything faster, and even if it doesnt, and ur running new hardware, why not run a OS that looks pretty and has lots of kewl features its not like it will slow an i7 down even with only dual sli/crossfire.

lead

2009-11-09 01:01:25

read pc gamer this month then decide!! eventually support will run out for xp anyway so wtf wait till 2012 for windose 8 ??http://www.pcgamer.com/pdfs/Nov09_Windows7.pdf fact is those that run it are happy those that dont w/e

s0iz

2009-11-09 03:27:26

Ghost Dog_TSGK wrote:If you are counting your fps, why are you looking for a new OS anyway.

Need for argument = 0%

When you have a x64 OS, with all your drivers x64 and the game is a new one, you have a huge bonus of fps. Trust me.

Sacrifist

2009-11-09 09:45:29

s0iz wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:
s0iz wrote:Yeah right, that's why you get a bonus of 40fps+ when using Vista SP1 x64 or W7 x64 instead of XP.
Do you get that bonus when you are using XP x64? Or is there something magically going on with 64 bit Vista and Win7 compared to 64 bit XP?
Not magically, it is a matter of structure and architecture.

Is it magically that HL1 Source gives you a lot more fps with modern computers than HL1 GoldSource?

I like how you argue me when saying something, and when Fearsome says the same but with more words in it, you say "that's true". It's simply awesome.

Because what you are saying is such a vague statement and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Fearsome was talking about how the OS manages memory. That is very true. Memory management has improved. You are talking about something that hasn't really changed at all. 64 bit is pretty much 64 bit. The only change is that more publishers is taking advantage of x64 compared to when XP was still king ding a ling. Put your games on the exact same machine that is running XP x64 and I bet you don't see that increase in fps at all.

Pernicious

2009-11-09 12:43:56

lol why should we have to, we only know wat we are told, and so wen we read things that come from ppl who do actually know wat they are talking about, all we can do is either quote or state simple facts/etc.
Why use xp, wen u can use an operating system that actually utilises all new features. Granted there is a bigger difference between dx10 and dx9 then there is between dx11 and dx10, but with that said why pick vista over win7, why pick xp at all?
Keep xp on ur shit box, no reason to put it on a new rig though.

dru99ist

2009-11-09 18:03:13

When you have a x64 OS, with all your drivers x64 and the game is a new one, you have a huge bonus of fps. Trust me.

I agree with ghostdog, I havent worried about fps in a few years. If you have a new rig you have a new gpu so that is kind of a moot statement.

s0iz

2009-11-09 18:19:32

Sacrifist wrote:Because what you are saying is such a vague statement and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Fearsome was talking about how the OS manages memory. That is very true. Memory management has improved. You are talking about something that hasn't really changed at all. 64 bit is pretty much 64 bit. The only change is that more publishers is taking advantage of x64 compared to when XP was still king ding a ling. Put your games on the exact same machine that is running XP x64 and I bet you don't see that increase in fps at all.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

And what do you think that a x64 system is? It is broader memory management.

I'm going to install Windows 98 Second Edition so I have more power in games. LOL

Dude, just quti.

I know, you are the guy who thinks he knows about computers because you know what parts pick at www.newegg.com , right?

dru99ist

2009-11-09 20:36:06

I know, you are the guy who thinks he knows about computers because you know what parts pick at www.newegg.com , right?

Yeah well my penis is 18 inches long and I used it to type this!!!!! Beat that.

lead

2009-11-10 02:45:00

dru99ist wrote:
I know, you are the guy who thinks he knows about computers because you know what parts pick at http://www.newegg.com , right?
Yeah well my penis is 18 inches long and I used it to type this!!!!! Beat that.

i used someone elses penis to type this

Pernicious

2009-11-10 03:14:49

Yea and its weirding out ya mother, ill never hear the end of it.

Sacrifist

2009-11-10 05:18:20

s0iz wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:Because what you are saying is such a vague statement and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Fearsome was talking about how the OS manages memory. That is very true. Memory management has improved. You are talking about something that hasn't really changed at all. 64 bit is pretty much 64 bit. The only change is that more publishers is taking advantage of x64 compared to when XP was still king ding a ling. Put your games on the exact same machine that is running XP x64 and I bet you don't see that increase in fps at all.
HAHAHAHAHAHA

And what do you think that a x64 system is? It is broader memory management.

I'm going to install Windows 98 Second Edition so I have more power in games. LOL

Dude, just quti.

I know, you are the guy who thinks he knows about computers because you know what parts pick at http://www.newegg.com , right?

You dont seem to get it. Im well aware x64 can handle larger amounts of memory to be used. What you dont seem to get is that x64 on Win7 is no different then x64 on XP with how it works. They both do the same fucking thing. 64 bit refers to the way a computer's PROCESSOR handles information. As I already said, your statement was vague. Fearsome was actually discussing how each Operating System managed memory. Which btw, Win7 manages memory better in 32 bit and 64 bit. Also, why would I buy parts at Newegg? They are way overpriced 90% of the time. Im done dealing with you...

lead

2009-11-10 14:06:35

Pernicious wrote:Yea and its weirding out ya mother, ill never hear the end of it.

s0iz

2009-11-10 19:01:02

Sacrifist wrote:
s0iz wrote:
Sacrifist wrote:Because what you are saying is such a vague statement and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Fearsome was talking about how the OS manages memory. That is very true. Memory management has improved. You are talking about something that hasn't really changed at all. 64 bit is pretty much 64 bit. The only change is that more publishers is taking advantage of x64 compared to when XP was still king ding a ling. Put your games on the exact same machine that is running XP x64 and I bet you don't see that increase in fps at all.
HAHAHAHAHAHA

And what do you think that a x64 system is? It is broader memory management.

I'm going to install Windows 98 Second Edition so I have more power in games. LOL

Dude, just quti.

I know, you are the guy who thinks he knows about computers because you know what parts pick at http://www.newegg.com , right?
You dont seem to get it. Im well aware x64 can handle larger amounts of memory to be used. What you dont seem to get is that x64 on Win7 is no different then x64 on XP with how it works. They both do the same fucking thing. 64 bit refers to the way a computer's PROCESSOR handles information. As I already said, your statement was vague. Fearsome was actually discussing how each Operating System managed memory. Which btw, Win7 manages memory better in 32 bit and 64 bit. Also, why would I buy parts at Newegg? They are way overpriced 90% of the time. Im done dealing with you...

I said that Win7 x64 gives you a bonus of fps if you have modern hardware and you said that I don't have idea of what I'm talking about, and now you're actually saying that Win7 manages memory better. Unbefuckinglievable. Go lick Fearsome's balls, you are doing a great job.

Sacrifist

2009-11-10 21:33:57

s0iz wrote:I said that Win7 x64 gives you a bonus of fps if you have modern hardware and you said that I don't have idea of what I'm talking about, and now you're actually saying that Win7 manages memory better. Unbefuckinglievable. Go lick Fearsome's balls, you are doing a great job.

You are a fucking idiot and you dont know what you are talking about because you also said this "x64 CPU with 4GB of RAM or more". Which doesnt make any sense when Vista and XP x64 do the same damn thing. So your dumb statement about Win7 giving you 40 bonus fps just because you can run 4GB of RAM or more makes me feel you dont know what you are talking about. Run the same hardware on XP x64 and you will get the same fps, more the likely better fps, compared to Win7. Now come and lick my balls while I continue to make you look stupid.

badinfluence

2009-11-10 22:51:45

You know what could settle this all?

Providing sources with each post. There's a possibility you guys are reading differing sources, and they could both be right some how. Links back up arguments.

keefy

2009-11-11 01:01:35

Just found out that Return to castle wolfnstein doesnt work.

provost

2009-11-11 01:47:02

keefy wrote:Just found out that Return to castle wolfnstein doesnt work.

37 persons must be furious.

Pernicious

2009-11-11 03:06:51

And ur going to run games in dx9 as aposed to dx10 just so u can compare sacrifist?
Pointless.

Sacrifist

2009-11-11 06:50:07

Pernicious wrote:And ur going to run games in dx9 as aposed to dx10 just so u can compare sacrifist?
Pointless.

No, why would I do that? I would never go back to XP. I preferred Vista and prefer Win7 over XP. I also dont remember Soiz saying anything about the 40 bonus fps being related to the game being dx10 or dx9 so that really doesnt have anything to do with my argument with him. Im pretty sure that Win7 can run dx9 games just fine though if a comparison was needed

This isnt about right or wrong Bad Influence. First off this whole thing started because Pernicious said "Argumentaliser, win7 makes better use of new hardware, that is the only reason u need to use it." and then I replied "I dont even understand what that means. Im not aware of any hardware that win7 can make better use of more then XP or Vista for that matter. Please explain what you mean." Pernicious then replied about DX 10 and 11 and that was pretty much the end of it as I didnt understand what he was actually referring to as his statement was a bit vague.

Then Soiz piped up and said "x64 CPU with 4GB of RAM or more." My reply was "Um XP and Vista are the same as Win7 in this regard. Try again." because anyone with a brain knows that XP and Vista can take advantage of 4GB of RAM or more as well. Obviously Soiz was unaware of this phenomenon. Then he pipes up with this comment "Yeah right, that's why you get a bonus of 40fps+ when using Vista SP1 x64 or W7 x64 instead of XP." Really?? And that is all because you can use 4GB of RAM or more in x64 Win7??? Sorry. It has to do with a lot more then that since XP can do the same damn thing. Then Soiz had to start being dickish because he felt his e-peen was being trampled on. QQ

Anyways, here are a couple of posts I grabbed from a quick search relating to Win7 x64 vs XP x64. Not that it really matters since Soiz will say his comments were related to modern hardware. Which ofcourse my whole argument with him in the first place was related to his first 2 stupid comments that say nothing about that...

I currently dual-boot a quad-core system with both XP Pro x64 & Win7 RC x64. I can not find any difference in performance between the two in the games and applications I use. I think that performance is determined more by the hardware, than either operating system. That said, I found that some of my old favourite 16-bit applications will not install or run (e.g. ActivePorts) on either 64-bit OS.

Windows XP x64 vs Windows 7 x64

I ran these tests to find out which is faster, I know Windows 7 is in beta and things will change, but these are the results so far.

Tested with
PerformanceTest (64-bit) 6.1
3D Mark 06

Test System (3 Years old)
AMD X2 4200 (Dual core)
4 GB DDR
2 X GEFORCE 7800GT 250MB DX9

Windows XP x64
Score 1: 588.2
Score 2: 599.6
Score 3: 625.6
Score 4: 622.5

3D Mark 06: 6412

Windows 7 x64
Score 1: 519.7
Score 2: 520.4
Score 3: 524.7
Score 4: 525.4

3D Mark 06: 6001

Conclusion
XP is faster on this system.

Paradox

2009-11-11 08:35:59

Ive heard that disabling Aero in Win 7 gives you more FPS, but I cant confirm yet because I havent upgraded either of my computers yet.

Pernicious

2009-11-11 08:56:11

Sacrifist, i only commented cause u said winxp x64 will give same frame rates if not more, but comparing an OS that supports dx10+11 to one that will only support dx9 is pointless...was my only point.
But yea, etc
yawah?

Ko-Tao

2009-11-11 09:51:38

Damn, 6 page thread dedicated to an operating system. Game threads here dont get half that most the time. Ill probably never get why an OS is so exciting / such srs bznz to so many people, but it is kind of amusing.

Btw, heres my mental chart regarding OS upgrades / purchases:

1) Do i already have a functional OS:
[] Yes
[] No

If Yes, do nothing!
If No:

2) Does [insert OS here] successfully OPERATE my SYSTEM:
[] Yes
[] No

If Yes: Install.
If No: Find another OS; gosub 2

Edit: Make that 7 pages!

Pernicious

2009-11-11 11:41:20

I dont think anyone takes this thread seriously, eccept maybe sacrifist and soiz lawl
Operating systems are more universal to everyones curiousity then most things?

Sacrifist

2009-11-12 00:41:04

Pernicious wrote:I dont think anyone takes this thread seriously, eccept maybe sacrifist and soiz lawl
Operating systems are more universal to everyones curiousity then most things?

I'm not taking it seriously either. I just felt the need to tell Soiz that his 2 posts relating to x64 were misleading and made him look like he didnt know wtf he was talking about. As I said from the get go, I've been running Win7 x64 ultimate Final for about 3 months now and I see no reason to ever go back to Vista or XP.

Pernicious

2009-11-12 04:33:28

Yea i wasnt even serious about u guys being serious )=^B

provost

2009-11-12 16:12:34

I'll just use it again here I think..