ie8 fix
madison

Windows 7 first look: More than just "Vista, fixed"

By | July 29, 2009, 1:36pm PDT

Summary: For the past 10 days, I’ve been methodically installing and testing the final release of Windows 7 on a wide range of desktop and notebook configurations in my home and office. I’ve done upgrades and clean installs, with and without the Easy Transfer utility, using different editions in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors. I’ll have a through review of Windows 7 next week, including a deep dive into its most interesting new features. Today, I want to offer some first impressions based on my initial experience with these final bits.

[Update; For my final, official review of Windows 7, see Windows 7: An impressive upgrade. For a hands-on look at the final code in action on 10 desktop and notebok PCs, see Windows 7 in the real world: 10 PCs under the microscope.]

Windows 7 won’t be officially available to the public until next week—Thursday, August 6, to be exact—when MSDN and Technet subscribers will finally get the chance to download the software legitimately and activate their copies with product keys. It’s the first step on a long rollout that will end October 22 when the software will be available for purchase in retail boxes and on new PCs.

I’ve been able to get a head start, using the official RTM build (7600.16385). For the past 10 days, I’ve been methodically installing and testing the final release of Windows 7 on a wide range of desktop and notebook configurations in my home and office. I’ve done upgrades and clean installs, with and without the Easy Transfer utility, using different editions in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors. I’ll have a through review of Windows 7 later. Today, I want to offer some first impressions and an image gallery based on my initial experience with these final bits.

Windows 7 isn’t perfect, but it is greatly improved over its predecessors in many ways. Calling it an “evolutionary” release in comparison to Windows Vista is probably a fair characterization. However, if you assume that Windows 7 is simply “Vista, fixed,” you’ll miss many small but meaningful changes and several large ones that give Windows 7 its own identity. In daily use, I continue to be impressed by the attention to detail that went into the Windows 7 iterations of features that are part of every Windows user’s daily routine. I’ve also found some hidden gems, which I’ll spotlight here.

[See my image gallery for a close-up look at key features and hidden gems in Windows 7 RTM]

From a design standpoint, Windows 7 makes the 2001-vintage XP design look downright primitive. Switching between Vista and 7 is less jarring, but the improvements in consistency and visual presentation are still noteworthy and make 7 feel more graceful and modern. The palette is softer, and many of the UI rough edges have been smoothed out.

Arguably, the visual presentation is just eye candy. The more important changes, as far as productivity is concerned, are those that improve usability. When I switch from Windows 7 to a PC running an earlier version of Windows (or, for that matter, running OS X or Ubuntu), I miss some of the window management tricks that I’ve come to rely on, including the ability to peek at thumbnails of open windows on the taskbar and to “snap” windows into position with a flick of the mouse.

Over several months of use, I’ve really come to appreciate Jump Lists, which are pop-up menus that can be summoned with a right-click on a taskbar icon (or, more easily, with a quick upward flick of the mouse. The default Jump List for a program allows you to see a list of recently used files and pin favorites to the menu.

I fully expect that some Windows veterans will grumble over a few of the changes in Windows 7. In some cases, those are just different approaches to design. In others, they reflect the Windows 7 learning curve. As I’ve discovered after six months of intense research, some new features take a while to adapt to. A few, like Libraries, which are the new default file-organization scheme in Windows Explorer, are deceptively complex and require some basic training before they can be used to best advantage.

Next page –>

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
421
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Sounds to me
rtk 15th Sep 2009
like you need an experienced IT person to have a look at your hardware and install, something is seriously wrong with your computer (not Vista, WIn7) if Wordpad is crashing on you.

Prolly bad RAM or blown capacitors.
0 Votes
+ -
I look forward to your next review
Michael Kelly 29th Jul 2009
I am far more interested in the differences between versions than an overview. We've been hearing about Windows 7 features for months, now it would be nice to know exactly which features will be present on each SKU, and how the SKUs perform versus each other (like will Starter really be all that bad, or will the extra bloat on Ultimate make it perform worse than the lesser SKUs?).
0 Votes
+ -
In answer to your questions:
Joe_Raby 29th Jul 2009
"will Starter really be all that bad"

No. It's designed for very low end netbooks and MID's as an alternate for Linux. It's like "the Windows replacement for Moblin". It's limited, but it's designed for pocket-sized but underpowered netbooks and MID's that wouldn't be able to run a fuller-featured edition.

New netbooks coming in 2010 will have Pine Trail chipsets with dual-core Atom's and Pine Trail will also support discrete graphics like the next gen Ion platform, so those systems will run Home Premium just fine.

"will the extra bloat on Ultimate make it perform worse than the lesser SKUs"

Generally speaking, no. Ultimate has extra features that require extra hardware though. For enthusiasts, Professional will be the accepted standard SKU unless you have requirements for Bitlocker, VHD boot, the Subsystem for Unix Applications (SUA), or some of the other, fairly unnecessary options IMO. Professional has everything in Home Premium but lacks a few things from Enterprise. Enterprise and Ultimate are identical. Enterprise is only sold to customers that get a volume license agreement from Microsoft and have added Software Assurance. Ultimate is sold either on "premium, exclusive" PC's or in retail boxes.

If you want a good comparison, look here:
http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_skus_compare.asp

Generally speaking, Enterprise/Ultimate is for IT professionals, high-end developers, and customers that like to tweak and play with every option they can possibly get their hands on.

If you have to ask what the difference is between Pro and Ent/Ult, I'd say stick with Professional unless you know otherwise.
i understand preliminary and introductory but that was one of the most empty articles yet.

0 Votes
+ -
You missed it read....
Millystone Updated - 30th Jul 2009
you want ot hit the "Next Page" link on the lower right...

Theres 2 more pages that talk about speed improvements, PC Tuners, Multimedia, New user-managed devices tool, Sound control panel, Cleaner more consitent hardware clean up tools, a 64 bit review, and alot more.

Like I said its the "Next Page" button on the lower right.
0 Votes
+ -
Empty? I'm not sure Ed is running on all cylinders!
i2fun@... Updated - 30th Jul 2009
I've had Windows 7 RC running on two computers
for a number of months now. Is it more stable
than Vista? Yes! Does it run faster than Vista?
Well if it didn't, I wouldn't be using it!

Does it have any better coolnest factors? ....now
on that note, it depends. Because besides
streamlining the Vista OS to the point, that it's
now actually worth what you paid for Vista, they
took out some features that are sure to cause a
ruckus in many HOMES and Businesses around the
World. Especially where they have more than a few
machines that will NOT be capable of installing
anything other than Windows XP.

Forget about connecting yours or your kid's
Netbook (w/ Win XP only) to the Home Network.
That feature is now called HOMEGROUPS and the
only computers that will be allowed to be it's
buddy, are other Windows 7 users and machines.
Your kids won't even be able to share the printer
on that XP run computer/netbook or laptop to
print out their homework that was due yesterday.

Hence some hot n heavy replugging to get it
running on their machines. Chaos will indeed ensue
w/ the inevitable Mountain Dew & Pepsi
spills on your Bills. That just to get it done &
out of your way fury will take over. While you're
fuming over the ruckus in the Office
w/ the same scenario taking place there.

Well now, but ED would say, "just install Windows 7
and it'll all be good" or even better yet, simply
move the printer into the kids room, so he spills
the Pepsi on himself. But then you can only print
things when he's home.

Well first off, my son's Netbook barely runs XP. So
installing Win 7 is not an option and the whole
idea of a HOME NETWORK is to share files,
information and access to various devices (like
printers) that will undoubtedly not all be the same
or even be capable of running NEW Improved Windows
7ista wondrous features and HOMEGROUPS! wink

The same scenario will be repeating itself as M$
unsells their Pre-ordered OS on millions computers
on millions of Home Networks around the World.
Where people would rather sit tight on Windows XP
(that never fails them), than enter into the New
and Improved Ultra Exclusive Windows 7ista Club! wink

Note: When next year rolls around w/ the Killzone
of RC installs, its hardly looking worthwhile to
upgrade, for all the special Touch Screen and
Mouse Gesturing of 7ista. So you'll probably
find me simply using my XP partition more than my
7ista partition yet again over coming months!
.....and happier for it after all! grin
0 Votes
+ -
wrong
ChrisandDarcie 30th Jul 2009
you can still share files/printers the old
fashioned way between 7 and xp/vista, I've been
doing it for several months now. Homegroups is
just a fancier version of file sharing.
0 Votes
+ -
If it's possible then HOW???
i2fun@... Updated - 30th Jul 2009
I've searched the web for the answer and
haven't found anything that can get around the
security requirement differential of these two
systems. Unless you are talking a hack of some
type and if so, Microsoft can't be too happy
that it's hacked before it's even out. SO... if
you have the answer, then share it, cuz I'm
back using XP again! grin

Note I whittled my around to at least share
files located in my XP partition by taking
ownership of everything including my own files
(which I find ridiculous to have to do). But
things are still quicker from the XP side in
search functions. So I have been
storing all files in 7, outside of user locked
directory files to share those w/o all the
hassles. Best yet for search, I use Linux's
Beagle for all OS's & file systems. I'm just
being honest on that point. :P

Linux is Super Fly compared to any other
system (including 7, even for a lamer like me)!
wink ....had Linux figured out in a heart beat,
but still working on 7 to master it!

***Oh and not talking using Vista as a go
between either. I don't have Vista installed on
anything even though I have the install disc
w/key. As above comment states, I don't want to
share printer and files from XP install on
son's puter. I want to share them from Win 7 to
XP install on son's and wife's XP machines. If
you know, please share!
0 Votes
+ -
1.) Click the Start Orb and Open Devices and Printers.
2.) Find the printer listed
3.) Right-click on the printer
4.) click on Printer Properties.
5.) Click on the sharing tab.
6.) Click the check box, give it a name. Click OK.
Note: You may need to supply Additional Drivers

Note: Since XP and Vista can't join a Homegroup, you will likely want to disable the home group and just use standard networking.

You may also need to create a user account for the printer users (the wife and kid) with a password so they can access the printer.
0 Votes
+ -
Not really....
akaralia 31st Jul 2009
I run Windows 7 RC on 2 of my PCs and with bootcamp on a Mac Pro.
Although I would not replace my Mac OS X Snow Leopard (yes the beta
runs great) I have to admit comparing Win 7 to Vista is unfair to 7.

Speed & stability is the key!

Win 7 fells at least twist as fast and a lot of the games my son plays
prove it! Large improvement there.

As for the network I did not find any problems at all (not the case for
Vista), it connects with everything much easier.

I think MS finally is up to something here.

And one machine that was running XP perfect but struggled under
Vista is running great and feels faster than the XP.

Kudos to the guys for the effort! For me my next computer is a Mac
Pro again, I love the feeling and responsiveness of the OS for my
work, but it will sure run a disk with Windows 7 for the upcoming
Need for Speed Shift! ;);)
0 Votes
+ -
To elaborate:
Joe_Raby 29th Jul 2009
Starter will only be sold on new computers. You won't be able to buy it in retail. The computers that it'll be installed on will be underpowered compared to next year's norm for netbooks. Likely it'll be on this year's equivalent of a netbook next year - a single-core Atom (likely the very slow Z series) with a 945 chipset (GMA 950 graphics) or a US15W (GMA 500 graphics). Both of those platforms are not considered to be capable of doing HD video, especially not the high-bandwidth stuff like Blu-ray. Pine Trail will be though.
0 Votes
+ -
Starter
ShadowGIATL 30th Jul 2009
as I understand it, is only available in emerging markets (undeveloped nations).
0 Votes
+ -
Getting Fresh!
Thomas Rippley 30th Jul 2009
But, will it make the upgrade. And all the Vista break down. All around...
0 Votes
+ -
What? (nt)
ShadowGIATL 30th Jul 2009
nt
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Sorry, not so
Ed Bott 30th Jul 2009
Vista Starter was available only in emerging markets, and Vista Home Basic was available worldwide.

For Windows 7, it's reversed. Starter is available worldwide, but only on netbooks. Home Basic is available only in emerging markets.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh...
ShadowGIATL 30th Jul 2009
well now that really helps fuel confusion then huh?

Oh well, personally, I'm not really in the market for either one.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
So why are you bothering with this?
Wintel BSOD Updated - 30th Jul 2009
Or are you only slumming...
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
The WOW starts now then Ed?
fr0thy2 30th Jul 2009
If MS say nothing, could this be their first ever product that actually meets the hype?
0 Votes
+ -
Do I Really Need Windows 7?
yobtaf Updated - 30th Jul 2009
Is there really any advantage to moving to Windows 7 from XP?

I'm using XP on my MacBook Pro through Boot Camp. I have a few
graphics applications that generate things like displacement maps
(CrazyBump), and elevation data (GeoControls) that is used in a Mac
based 3d animation program (Cinema 4D with Vue 7).
The Mac side does all the heavy lifting.

Would I benefit from any noticeable performance improvement?

This MacBook Pro is maxed out at 6 Gigs of ram, so 64 bit processing
is not an option.

Eye candy is useless to me and my system runs beautifully right now.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: 64-bit
Joe_Raby 30th Jul 2009
"This MacBook Pro is maxed out at 6 Gigs of ram, so 64 bit processing
is not an option."

On 32-bit Windows operating systems, you can utilize a maximum of 4GB of addressable memory space, but hardware, especially PCI Express video, will take up a considerable amount of that memory address space - usually to the tune of about 1GB. That address space has to fit in under 4GB even if RAM is already there. What happens is that the hardware memory addresses overlay over top of the RAM space, thereby making that RAM inaccessible. (Note: For any technical users, this is a simplified explanation that's easier to understand)

On many systems, it leaves you with 3 & 1/8, or 3.125GB.

If you're using high-end applications that are compatible with Windows Vista and possibly 64-bit, you'll see improvements with upgrading to a 64-bit OS because Windows will be able to utilize the full 6GB.

Make sure your programs are compatible with Windows Vista first. If they work on Vista, they should work on 7. If there are 64-bit versions of the software available, grab it. Otherwise, you won't see much difference in the programs, but Windows can still use the 6GB, which makes multitasking with RAM-intensive programs much easier than on a 32-bit OS.

Of course, if you want to go that route and still need XP for a legacy app or utility, you can always get Windows 7 Pro and use the virtualized XP mode so that those legacy apps run seamlessly with native Windows 7 apps. That situation really depends on your needs for security and flexibility, as well as the number of programs that will run in 7, vs. the number that will only run on XP.

My best advice is that if you want to try Windows 7 to test for compatibility, and want to do it before the GA date (Oct. 22nd), grab a copy of the Release Candidate in 64-bit, back up your important stuff on your computer, or else use a secondary computer, and install Windows 7 and test your applications. The Release Candidate is close enough to final RTM code that you shouldn't have any major bugs with compatibility or stability. It doesn't cost anything to try, except maybe some time.

If you want to test native compatibility of applications and you're sure your hardware is fully supported by Windows 7, you could always just run it in your favourite virtualization environment, install your applications in it, and see how well they run first, before installing Windows 7 directly on your hard drive. That way, if you don't like, you can just delete the virtual hard drive file.
0 Votes
+ -
Virtualize it...
Too_Busy_To_Be_Here 30th Jul 2009
I suggest getting VMWare Fusion (my favorite), Parallels or VirtualBox and virtualize it. I have 8Gb in my MacBook Pro and I have VMs of Win7RC, Vista, XP, Snow Leopard Server, Ubuntu, DR-DOS, etc.

The best part about it is the you can run XP or Win7 in the background but have shortcuts to Windows Apps on the Dock to launch them side-by-side as if they were Mac apps.

You can even virtualize your boot camp partition allowing you to do the reboot if you want but also be able to run applications installed on the boot camp partition without rebooting.
0 Votes
+ -
Do you *really* need Windows 7?
PollyProteus 30th Jul 2009
Honestly? If you're happy with XP on your MacBook, no, not if it fills all of your computing needs.

If your system has a 64bit processor and you're currenly running 32bit XP, you may find it a better experience to run 64bit Windows 7. I've been using 64bit for a while now and I find it much more enjoyable experience, especially since many apps are now coming out in 64bit flavors and so take advantage of what the hardware can offer.

But again, if you're truly happy with XP, then there's no *need* for you to upgrade. It's simply an option that you can consider.
0 Votes
+ -
re, Do I Really Need Windows 7?
j-mccurdy@... 30th Jul 2009
If you're a Mac person and want to keep OSX as your primary os, then it would probably be a waste of money. But if you only or mostly used XP it would be worth the upgrade imho.
0 Votes
+ -
Thank You All
yobtaf 30th Jul 2009
For the very useful information.
0 Votes
+ -
One question: did they block the OS identifying as VISTA 6.1?
0 Votes
+ -
Good stuff
Joe_Raby 29th Jul 2009
IT deployment is improved over Vista, which in itself is nearly a complete rewrite over legacy XP installs. HAL independent images are worth their weight in gold....if they could be weighed anyway.

The new DISM tool is much better than the 3 old tools that it replaces. Having support for VHD deployment via WDS in Server 2008 R2 is pretty amazing too.
0 Votes
+ -
I'm a Windows guy and even I'm disappointed
chriswilkins@... 29th Jul 2009
It plays music? It uses less resources than Vista? It does backup? My shortcuts are easy to get to? Wtf? Maybe I'm old school, but back when we went from Windows 3.1 to Windows NT 4.0 you got the following:

1. NTFS Security.
2. The ability to multi-task.
3. A 1 bizzilion improvement in stability.
4. IIS
5. A built in Browser (a big deal at the time)
6. Built in networking protocols (again a big deal at the time).

The point is, there was real advancement. This is crap. What IT department in their right mind would fund a multi-million dollar project to switch for a different interface and the ability to play iTunes? Really I want to know because I want a piece of that action.
music playing office workers are as much as -25% more productive then ordinary workers who can't find where they stashed their P2P'ed MP3's....
0 Votes
+ -
Yup, more expense, full OS reinstall at a time dictated by a foreign software vendor, beta quality code due to the lack of testing (MS use paying end users to do the real testing, a la Vista) ....
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
At least do some research before spouting fanboyisms.
ShadowGIATL Updated - 30th Jul 2009
Yup, more expense, full OS reinstall at a time dictated by a foreign software vendor
What?

beta quality code due to the lack of testing

The beta was more stable then Vista RTM. So this claim is completely unfounded in truth. Also, they did more extensive beta testing on Win7 then any other OS.

(MS use paying end users to do the real testing, a la Vista) ....

The real testing was done internal long before the first public beta released. If you had actually took the time to read before you commented, you'd notice that some people were irked that more input was taken from the internal testers then the public testers.

If your going to bash on Windows and Microsoft, at least use one of the many valid points to attack them on, and not make up fake ones.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Here's what you do...
Hallowed are the Ori 30th Jul 2009
Just pat the euro-trash on the head, say "That's a good boy.", and continue on your way...
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Vista beta testing was more extensive than Win7
directory Updated - 30th Jul 2009
Vista beta testing was more extensive than Win7.
You can't compare the stability of Win7 beta with Vista RTM, because Win7 beta is based on Vista SP1/SP2 code base.
Win7 is just a more richer edition of Vista, with new features for the user, nothing else more
0 Votes
+ -
Total BS!
ShadeTree 30th Jul 2009
While all OS's borrow code from previous versions, Microsoft completely reworked the Kernel in Windows 7. This resulted in faster execution and greater stability. I don't know why you would come on this board and spout half truths and falsehoods but that is what you are doing.
0 Votes
+ -
Why?
GuidingLight 30th Jul 2009
Could be that Apple or some competitor instructed him to?

Or it really could be nothing more then repeating incorrect information that he heard some place.
0 Votes
+ -
The new kernel was introduced in Vista SP1, along with a new servicing stack. There isn't a lot new in Windows 7's kernel. What is new is the outlying services, especially in regards to memory usage.
0 Votes
+ -
@Joe_Raby - Not quite
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 30th Jul 2009
The Win7 Kernel was not gutted and re-built, but it's also untrue to state that the kernel was only lightly polished.

The Win7 kernel has, in FACT, undergone a thorough scrub and has been re-structured in some parts. Specifically, the memory and process dispatcher locking mechanisms have been completely rewritten in Win7, moving from a monolithic lock to a granular set of locks enabling Win7 to EASILY scale linearly way beyond 512 cores and many TB of RAM on a single box.

Although every component and subsystem in the OS has been thoroughly scrubbed, few API's that 3rd parties and OEM's use have changed significantly, with a few exceptions:

3rd parties that provide ISO mounting tools (e.g. DaemonTools, Slysoft, etc) used to have to play around with internal OS data structures in order to make their stuff work. Some of those data structures have been changed in Win7 so the older ISO mounting tools broke. MS worked with these vendors and created new API's that allow 3rd parties to cleanly interface with the OS in a published, supported way and allows such tools to hook into the OS in a safe and expected way. Also, the Windows graphics driver infrastructure was extended to add Direct2D and computation shader support.

So brushing off Win7 by saying nothing has changed is unfair. Whilst it's not a radical departure, it's also not just a quick polish. Many, MANY perf, stability, reliability and security improvements have been made across the board.

At the end of the day, only you can tell if Win7 is worth the upgrade for you. Use it for a month and then try going back to XP - I think you'll find that you'll not want to!
0 Votes
+ -
@de-void
Joe_Raby 30th Jul 2009
Windows 7's kernel features are just an evolution of the existing MinWin work that started with Windows Longhorn. Most of the work was done for Vista SP1.
0 Votes
+ -
@Joe_Raby Icall BS to your BS
ShadeTree 30th Jul 2009
I believe I'll trust Windows Guru Mark Russinovich rather then you. Since he actually
works for Microsoft.

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going%20Deep/Mark-Russinovich-Inside-Windows-7/
0 Votes
+ -
The comments are irrelevant
stano360 30th Jul 2009
The fact is very few people should or will upgrade from Vista to 7. So what's the point of calling 7 "Vista".

Personally, Vista 64 on my laptop is great, HP's overheating problems are another issue!
0 Votes
+ -
@devoid
threedaysdwn 30th Jul 2009
None of the Windows 7 kernel changes are in Vista SP1. I don't know where you got that idea, but it is not true.

As the other poster above stated, the kernel went through a lot of changes in Win7. Nearly the same degree of changes that occured in Vista versus Server 2003.

Your information is just plain wrong.
0 Votes
+ -
@threedaysdwn - I think you're confusing me with Joe
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 31st Jul 2009
In my post I explained several areas of the Windows kernel that have undergone significant modification in Win7.

Joe then responded that most of the MinWin componentization was done in Vista.

He's wrong.

Whilst SOME important refactoring and separation of previously tangled infrastructure WAS doen in Vista, there wasn't enough time for MS to complete the job before it shipped. So Win7 introduces a number of further refactored components that are significantly decoupled compared to all prior versions of Windows.
0 Votes
+ -
@de-void
Joe_Raby 1st Aug 2009
Actually, what I said was that most of the work was done for Vista SP1's kernel (Server 2008's), NOT Vista RTM, which is completely different. VistaSP1/Server08's kernel was used as the basis of Windows 7's. Quit putting words in my mouth.

The other reason why Windows 7 is "faster" is because the disk cache is less agressive, and is optimized for both mainstream systems, as well as low-end systems with smaller amounts of RAM.

In essence, Windows 7's disk cache scales better to low-end machines, whereas Vista's didn't. That's why Windows 7 takes less RAM after boot on, say, a 1GB RAM system than Windows Vista does.

On standard machines, it's about the same though. Benchmarks already show that speed improvements over Vista SP1 are minimal to non-existant, and memory usage is about the same.
0 Votes
+ -
You answered your own question.
ShadowGIATL 30th Jul 2009
Win7 was beta tested more then Vista BECAUSE it was based on already tested code.

It was stable before it shipped to public testers.
0 Votes
+ -
When you don't know what you're talking about and you still post, you make yourself sound dumb. You read that somewhere and took it to be fact. Now a bunch of people who actually know what their talking about are going to let you know about it. You loose
0 Votes
+ -
I happen to dislike that kind of fanboyism from any direction. If
you can't argue factually, don't argue at all.
0 Votes
+ -
It's all I ask.
ShadowGIATL 30th Jul 2009
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but spreading twisted and purely false information does nothing to help further anyones cause. Especially if they are as transparent as some of them on here are.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Since it is obvious you have no clue
GuidingLight 30th Jul 2009
as to which you speak about, why do you even bother?

Or is the more likely explanation that you have no idea, so it is better to be notice for your childish remarks then it is to go unnoticed due to your lack of knowledge?

Fool.

  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Not a huge upgrade from Vista
LiquidLearner 29th Jul 2009
but if you're going from XP it's pretty massive. To say that search integrated into the start menu saves time is quite an understatement. Aero Peek and Snap make life much easier. Jump Lists are extremely handy. The new Win32 API and improvements to multi-core are very nice. ATI is claiming a 10% performance improvement on the same hardware just by going to 7 with their single-GPU configs, 30% on CrossFire. DirectX 11 GPUs will use the Compute Shader to speed up almost everything your PC does, not just graphics.

Not to mention stability and security. Also if you want more than 4GB of memory you need x64, and XP x64 was crap. You also have much improved support for USB, better sleep modes, optimization for SSDs, native VHD support and a slew of other features that make it a very worthwhile upgrade.
0 Votes
+ -
Pure BS.
Captiosus 29th Jul 2009
"Aero Peek and Snap make life much easier."

Say that with a straight face when you put it in front of the less-tech-savvy folks and watch their heads spin as they try to figure out why their windows are fading out or why their windows are snapping and resizing automatically.

Sorry, but my company has evaluated it since the first RC and we're not going for it. Not this year, not next year, not in 2011.

And we're not alone.
0 Votes
+ -
Sounds to me
rtk 15th Sep 2009
like you need an experienced IT person to have a look at your hardware and install, something is seriously wrong with your computer (not Vista, WIn7) if Wordpad is crashing on you.

Prolly bad RAM or blown capacitors.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix