ie8 fix
madison

Windows 7 in the real world: 10 PCs under the microscope

By | October 14, 2009, 2:37pm PDT

When the slow-motion launch of Windows 7 finally ends and it hits store shelves next week, will it erase the memory of Windows Vista? Yes, it’s gotten good reviews in the run-up to its official release, but so did Windows Vista. Harry McCracken has put together a retrospective of those Vista reviews from late 2006 and early 2007 that’s well worth reading, and he closes his analysis with a warning about the need to postpone judgment until the product has been in the marketplace for a while: “There’s never been a new operating system that didn’t cause significant headaches for a meaningful (if, in the best cases, small) percentage of the people who installed it, and there’s never been one that wasn’t significantly improved by the first major round of post-release bug fixes.”

Absolutely right.

An operating system doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It is inexorably tied to CPUs and chipsets, storage controllers, display adapters, external peripherals, drivers, and third-party programs. Give me the right hardware and well-written drivers and I can make any modern OS (even the despised Windows Vista) run with impressive performance and reliability. Throw in a flaky motherboard, a bad BIOS, or a buggy driver, and your computing experience will quickly spiral into unpleasantness. One hopes that the PC industry learned the painful lessons of Vista and that the wave of new PCs that will begin shipping next week will be properly tuned to the new operating system.

In the meantime, I’ve done the next best thing. Over the past three months, I’ve been test-driving the final version of Windows 7 in my home and office on a variety of PCs, performing a variety of roles. The 10 systems I cover in this article include six desktops and four notebooks. All of them were put into service in January 2007 or later. For each one, I’ve listed the current hardware configuration, the price I paid (including upgrades), the version of Windows 7 currently installed, and whether I did a clean install or an upgrade. The PCs I looked at represent a cross-section of the market as it exists today, minus two extremes: I didn’t include any low-powered netbooks, and I left out high-powered gaming machines and workstations.

During the research for this article, I spent a lot of time looking at two numeric measurements you can find on any Windows system. One is the Windows Experience Index (WEI), which provides a broad-brush measure of performance. (You can read some overall conclusions about these systems in last week’s preview, Measuring Windows 7 performance.) The other is the stability index, a 1-10 rating found in the Reliability Monitor section of the Windows 7 Action Center. Overall, I discovered that the WEI actually does a pretty good job of predicting how a system will perform. As the detailed discussion on the next few pages makes clear, though, the stability index can be extremely misleading because of some curiosities in the way it makes its calculations.

In this article, I don’t talk much about the features and capabilities of Windows 7. Instead, the question I wanted to answer is the one that keeps Microsoft’s product managers awake at night: Will their new OS work properly on new PCs and upgraded machines? Will it make people happy? Or will it suffer from the crashes, glitches, and slow performance that doomed Vista in the six months after its launch?

The reports I’ve put together here are anecdotal, to be sure, but I hope that the range of hardware I’ve chosen will provide some good clues as to the experience most people can expect, especially when upgrading.

Page 2: A desktop workhorse This Dell XPS 420 is nearly two years old, but it has become my preferred PC. Here’s why.

Page 3: A very small desktop PC After it failed the Blu-ray performance test, this ultra-small Dell desktop found new life as a business machine.

Page 4: Two ultralight notebooks Two review units, a Lenovo X300 and a Sony VAIO TZ2000, were built for portability, not for speed. Which one gets better battery life?

Page 5: Notebooks for everyday use How well does multi-touch work? And how well does Windows 7 work on a 13-inch notebook with fast, modern components?

Page 6: Three Media Center PCs Despite its checkered reputation, Windows Vista was extremely reliable on a trio of Media Center PCs here, from Dell and HP. Windows 7 continues that tradition.

Page 7: Windows on a Mac Last month I started using a Mac part time so I could make informed comparisons with Windows 7. With a brand-new 2009 model, Windows 7 runs surprisingly well.

Next: A desktop workhorse –>

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.

172
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Microsoft is the Rally's of software...
bbneo 1st Dec 2009
They make a big burger.

You don't know where they get the meat, and you don't have to worry about any SkyNet magic developing from their fumbling labs.

My guess is that SkyNet will become sentient and will first target Microsoft systems as too embarassing to the machine world.

0 Votes
+ -
Intel Drivers
GoodThings2Life 14th Oct 2009
The Intel drivers submitted to Windows Update (the ones Windows 7 uses by default) absolutely, positively SUCK! Go immediately to the Intel Download Center and download the latest stable drivers for your chipset for Windows 7 (which have been available since mid-September), and I guarantee your results will be better in those circumstances. The same applies to installing the latest Intel Chipset and Storage Matrix drivers.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Right, with one small correction
Ed Bott Updated - 14th Oct 2009
Two of the three systems I had problems with were directly related to (and fixed by) the latest Intel Matrix Storage drivers. So I agree on the need to update.

But the submission process you're referring to is Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL). These drivers were submitted fairly early in the process in order to be included in the RTM builds in early July. The replacements are newer and improved.
0 Votes
+ -
NO! to drivers from Windows Update
paul2011 14th Oct 2009
I do not know is the process of driver verification at Microsoft but windows update is the guaranteed way to screw up the system. Tried it few times on different systems and every time I had problems. Drivers from windows update should not be used under any circumstances.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Not true
Ed Bott 14th Oct 2009
That might have been the case several years ago but it is emphatically not true in the Windows 7 era.

At any rate, the original poster is confused slightly. The drivers in question were submitted to WHQL (Windows Hardware Quality Labs) and not to Windows Update.
0 Votes
+ -
Maybe, maybe not
bmgoodman 15th Oct 2009
Ed,

My first experience with Win 7 RTM was very negative in that my Dell XPS 410 machine, the first day I built it, would sleep and resume just fine. From the second day on, I had blue screen crashes or the machine just would NOT stay in sleep. It turns out the an Intel Gigabit Ethernet driver update I accepted from Windows Update was the blame. This update completely slipped past me and it took me days to track down the problem.

So, with an admittedly small set of data points, this is further reinforcement that I should NEVER accept hardware updates from Windows Update. YMMV.
0 Votes
+ -
Your judging WU on your experience during Win7 Beta?
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 15th Oct 2009
The drivers published on WU during Win7 Beta were ... guess what? ... BETA drivers supplied by the likes of Intel, AMD, nVidia et al.

These drivers were published via WU in order to get beta testers up and running as quickly and smoothly as possible whilst the teams at Microsoft and at its partners worked hard to nail as many bugs as possible, driving driver quality ever upwards.

From RTM onwards, WU will only host drivers that have passed WHQL test and certification. This is why WU doesn't yet host newer drivers than those initially published during the beta/RC cycle - their replacements haven't yet completed WHQL.

Microsoft fully understands the impact of publishing a driver that causes customers problems. Luckily, ever since OEM's, IHV's and ISV's started engaging with Microsoft after Vista (yes, alas, they only woke up when they saw what a mess they were causing AFTER Vista shipped), the driver quality for Win7 has been extraordinarily high.

Many vendors learned from their costly mistakes since many of them had not invested in their driver development teams since XP and treated driver issues as someone else's problem. Intel in particular REALLY dropped the ball with their network and chipset drivers - particularly in Vista.

Thankfully, most vendors I know now have good, strong, dedicated teams with the skills and resources necessary to build and test great drivers.

Coupled with new driver verification tools and techniques from Microsoft, Win7 drivers are leaps and bounds better than any prior version of Windows ... and will stay that way (modulo the occasional inevitable bug or two).

Just be patient - over the coming weeks you'll see a mountain of new drivers hit WU which will aleviate most of your driver issues.
0 Votes
+ -
RTM, not beta
bmgoodman 15th Oct 2009
I had this problem with the Win 7 RTM last month. I never said beta. Note that the RTM driver that shipped with Win 7 worked FINE. It was the "update" offered by WU that hosed everything.
0 Votes
+ -
It wasn't WU ... it was the BETA driver ...
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 22nd Oct 2009
Since Windows went on GA today, today is when support starts. Everything prior to today was in beta.

As I said before, drivers you see published from today will be the real deal. Some drivers you already have have been declared the "release version" and if you have issues with them then you are supported.
0 Votes
+ -
I am riding with Windows XP Pro past October 2010
3JG Productions Network 19th Oct 2009
I first refused the test version of Windows 7. I loaded Vista once, used it one week and then trashed it forever. Windows 7 is just like any other new product. I am suspect of all the bugs and fixes in Windows 7. I have 2005-06 Dell Optiplex GX270 PC's and one 2007 Dell Optiplex 320, all runnig well, on Windows XP SP2, SP3 and can be re-installed on each. I maintane the SP2/3 disc for re-install. I am going to ride this out until the very last minute. Windows 7 cost $299 or $399 and I need to buy new Video cards.
0 Votes
+ -
Boy are you...
Lithius 23rd Oct 2009
Cheap and I doubt that you even bought Vista in the first place. If you did try it, it was no doubt a pirated copy then.

0 Votes
+ -
WU doesn't install all the bloat
Patanjali 14th Oct 2009
Just the bare essentials to handle the chipsets.
0 Votes
+ -
Same here
Regats 15th Oct 2009
A Windows driver update recommendation for my ATI 9200SE video card threw my screen into 640x480 mode. I had to roll back to the previous driver to get back to normal. No thanks, MS.

As to Windows 7, also no, thanks. There's no reason an operating system should need 16 MB of disk space. It's obese. Trim the fat, don't keep piling it on.
0 Votes
+ -
Keep the fat...
faxmonkey 15th Oct 2009
It's all part of backward compatibility. Sure Windows can trim it like Snow Leopard did, but then we in the enterprise world would scream due to backward compatibility with legacy apps. Like a good prime rib, the fat makes it better!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Details?
Ed Bott 15th Oct 2009
You do realize that the 9200SE was introduced in 2003, right? I think it might even have been AGP only.

So I presume you're talking about something that happened long, long ago. I certainly wouldn't recommend a modern OS on that video card.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
PS, about that fat...
Ed Bott Updated - 15th Oct 2009
I think you meant 16 GB, not "16 MB of disk space," which would actually be pretty lean. wink

If I could cut that 16 GB in half, would it make you happy? OK, how about 8.3GB?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=672

Yes, that was with the beta. I'll have to retest that with RTM.
0 Votes
+ -
16 GB? W7 uses less than 10 GB. NT
lawryll@... 15th Oct 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
16 GB
Cylon Centurion Updated - 15th Oct 2009
Is nothing nowadays. You won't find a PC that has anything smaller than a 260 GB HDD. If you need more space I bought a 500 GB HDD for only $70, and have seen 1 TB drives for cheap now too.

Windows needs that 'bloat' as you put it, to maintain backward compatibility, not to mention, most of that 'bloat' is drivers included with the OS, which can be easily cut out... However you loose the ability to add devices to your PC without hunting for the driver first... Goodbye plug and play.


I fail to understand peoples beef with using up too much HDD space or using up to much RAM, blah, blah, blah...
0 Votes
+ -
Bloat is just a stupid complaint
bobiroc 15th Oct 2009
because OSes that have less hardware and software compatibility have a smaller footprint seem better in some people's eyes and they feel since they may not need the extra drivers and features that nobody needs them, but they forget that MS designs the OS as best as they can to accommodate all people that intend on using it. As far as Ram goes I am not sure what to say. If the OS required 8GB+ then I could see maybe a little complaining but 1GB - 2GB is not unreasonable. Every PC that I have seen sold came with that in the last 2 - 3 years unless they opted for a $299 special or something and it came with Windows Basic. Heck I just worked on a Low End eMachine that came with 512MB DDR2 and for a whole $20 upgraded it to 2GB. Unless your computer uses older DDR or SDR Ram I think Ram is pretty cheap these days aside from high performance and gaming ram. I am running Windows 7 on an almost 5 year old Athlon X2 with 2GB and it runs great and I can multi-task and have not seen any performance issues, but I am sure there are some that want to upgrade their $299 Celeron Specials with low end components and will complain.
0 Votes
+ -
I partially agree...
Dave32265 Updated - 16th Oct 2009
Win 7 has excellent performance and I have to say, being a Linux user and advocate, I actually like it. However, if I can use an OS just as efficient with a smaller footprint and without the limitations MS sets, why not take advantage of it? I'm not ripping on windows at all here, just posing a question.
0 Votes
+ -
Because it's a weird way to pick an OS
TheWerewolf 17th Oct 2009
If everything else is exactly the same, then the one that uses the least resources would be the better choice. But that's not the case.

Windows brings with it its own ecosystem and collection of applications and addons. To support those, it has to offer its own set of features.

The exact same situation applies to MacOS - one man's 'bloat' is the next man's 'essential feature'.

I know a lot of people who hate any kind of GUI and consider it 'bloat'. I respectively disagree with them as for me, using an OS without a GUI is undesirable.

In the same way, I've used Ubuntu and I find it *painfully* clunky. Yes, I can do pretty much the same things I can in Windows - but I find Windows vastly more elegant and easy to use. With Ubuntu, I regularly end up in terminal typing commands. Other people find MacOS vastly more elegant and easy to use and consider Windows horribly clunky.

If it takes a bit more OS to make it work, then so be it.

Then there's the issue of false economy. 2GB of RAM costs $29. 1TB of hard drive costs $110. 500GB of laptop hard drive is around $120.

If Windows is 16GB or HD and Linux is 8GB - the difference just isn't important. We're talking just $1 cost in terms of hard drive space.
0 Votes
+ -
Oooh! Windows 7 can multi-task!!!
bbneo 19th Oct 2009
More groundbreaking OS research in motion by Microsoft!!!

Linux runs *well* in about 250 Mb of working memory... its software packages are *tiny* by Microsoft standards (~ 150 Mb for Open Office Suite, for example), and... guess what!?

It runs on *lots* of hardware... more natively than some of my recent experiences with Windows.

Nice try.

0 Votes
+ -
My Pc has 6GB
hectormacias 19th Oct 2009
My pc has 6GB, windows needs 1, my HDD is 500GB, windows needs 12, CPU goes at 5.4Ghz, windows needs 2.

Nice Try.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft has it harder to design a stable OS than Apple because Apple designs their OS to work on their computers. MS has to design their OS to work on every type of computer from an OEM to a computer somebody built in their garage. All these drivers and "bloat" as people call it is needed to ensure the OS works on every possible configuration known to man. A hard task if you ask me.

I agree, HD's are cheap. Who cares if my OS takes up 8GB or 16GB, as long as it works as advertised.
0 Votes
+ -
companies yes, Operating Systems, no
tmsbrdrs 15th Oct 2009
Linux runs on virtually any hardware known to man that has some place for it to be installed.

Even the largest distro I know of has a much smaller footprint than Windows (Vista or 7), requires less system resources in general and provides most, if not all, the drivers necessary to run every bit of hardware out there.

Ubuntu installs on 8 GB and has most of that left over. Puppy installs itself into the RAM of a computer and runs perfectly well.

PCLinuxOS includes fully functioning drivers on the LiveCD for proprietary hardware, including wireless and video cards.

Add into it the fact that Linux is known to be more stable than Windows and there's no excuse. Windows is bloated. That doesn't mean memory isn't plentiful. What it means is that Windows is bloated.
0 Votes
+ -
Utter garbage.
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 22nd Oct 2009
Linux' continued lack of a standardized binary extensibility model for drivers perpetuates the need for users to compile drivers and link them into the monolithic OS.

If Linux already shipped with the drivers "to run every bit of hardware out there" then it'd need hundreds of GB of disk space.

Windows7 ships with the drivers for the most current graphics cards, CPU's, chipsets and networking cards - enough to allow the PC to boot and communicate with Windows Udpate from which it gathers just the drivers it needs for the hardware on the machine.

But, yes, you're right - you CAN get Linux to install in 512MB RAM ... but considering that even the cheapest PC you can buy today from Dell (Inspiron 546) ships with 2GB RAM and a 320GB HDD for $269 who gives a damn how small the OS is or how much disk space it takes up?

It's been YEARS since the size of the OS was even of the slightest concern.

Oh, and before you start berating Windows for being bloated, perhaps you should investigate Linus' recent comments.
0 Votes
+ -
A hard task if you ask me.
bbneo 16th Nov 2009
I think that Microsoft should just try to keep it simple... get their OS to work "as advertised" (Do they really promise you *anything*?)... on just *one* *any* piece of hardware.

If they could do that, then they could create a commercial demonstrating how well their OS can work.

It is a lot to ask, though. You are right.

0 Votes
+ -
I disagree
GuidingLight 15th Oct 2009
I used it for the first time last week (as I usually have the original drivers with me).

The 3 devices it searched for and installed drivers for worked fine.
0 Votes
+ -
An interesting Windows mounting failure.
pfyearwood 22nd Oct 2009
I triple boot with Windows XP Pro, Windows 7, and Ubuntu 9.04. on a Celeron 430 with 2Gig RAM. I have an SD USB reader/writer that Ubuntu picks and mounts every time. However, the two Windows search for and never find a driver for it each boot. I can't find one online, but since Ubuntu is my main OS, I quit looking. Now, the strange thing about that SD reader is my older Compaq PII 400 312 Meg RAM find the reader when I used the much hated Windows Me but not by XP Pro. All that extra time and drivers in XP and 7 and the SD is not mounted. I don't know about Vista, because I did not have the new system then. That was the only item Win 7 could not install. Win XP found everything except the onboard eth0, which I expected.

Paul

Spoiled by Ubuntu, Windows for those other apps.
0 Votes
+ -
What intel drivers
amasys 15th Oct 2009
Network, ChipSet, SATA, what?
And if you have a Dell where can you find the correct ChipSet, SATA, etc???
0 Votes
+ -
Windows failures and more
alokgovil 14th Oct 2009
Application failures are one thing. I see a few Windows failures too in your chart. What are those?

Does it have to be that a bad driver would result in a BSOD. Really scares me when I see one. Just like every software, drivers themselves get updated so often and I am never sure whether it would be beneficial to get the newer one or just keep using the existing one.

I do not mind downloading drivers from Windows Update. But somehow the version numbers never match what is on the hardware manufacturer's website which is what I then use. Windows update then keeps on saying that a newer version of the driver is available, even though I already have the latest from the manufacturer's website. Microsoft, for one, does not provide ANY information on where they are pulling the driver from.

I read that Windows 7 has a "Guest Mode" where any change made to the system is lost on log-off. What I like is a system where any change to C: where all the programs are could be lost, while changes to D: where all the user data (documents, pictures, etc) are maintained. Just like the bin folder on UNIX based systems being read-only. Can the "guest mode" be made to do something like this?
0 Votes
+ -
I don't think...
asdfaewf-23161102573290148203843898848973 14th Oct 2009
that the guest mode made it into RTM. I remember Thurrott had a feature on this, but then he followed up later with a post saying it was removed.
0 Votes
+ -
Drivers and going steady
honeymonster 14th Oct 2009
Since Vista (bar the first 3 months with
abysmal nVidia drivers) I have always relied on
Windows Update for drivers as a preferred
choice. Only when WU cannot find a driver will
I go to the vendor site. I have had stellar
reliability and robustness.

" Does it have to be that a bad driver would
result in a BSOD "

That's the difference between monolithic
kernels and micro-kernels. In a monolith the
drivers always execute in kernel space. In that
case a misbehaved driver can easily corrupt
kernel memory and cause instability. Whenever
the OS detects a memory corruption it has no
way of determining how widespread it is. BSOD
(Windows), kernel panic (*Nix) is the
responsible reaction to this.

With a micro kernel, drivers always executes
*outside* kernel space. They can therefore
easily be isolated and misbehaved drivers can
be contained and safely restarted without fear
of widespread corruption.

Monolithic kernels tends to have less overhead
because it will need fewer "context switches".
Microkernels tends to be more robust.

Linux is a monolith (albeit with some driver
types moving towards user-space). Windows is a
hybrid kernel where e.g. large parts of
the display driver sits in user space. Hence,
Windows can more easily recover from bugs
originating from the display driver. Ad Ed Bott
explained above, Windows will simply "reset"
the driver and no application will lose any
state or work.

" But somehow the version numbers never match
what is on the hardware manufacturer's
website "

No, I don't believe that they are supposed to
match. They are different "strands". It should
not be a cause for concern, though.

" I am never sure whether it would be
beneficial to get the newer one or just keep
using the existing one. "

If WU tell you a new driver is available, my recommendation would always be to go for it.

" What I like is a system where any change to
C: where all the programs are could be lost,
while changes to D: where all the user data
(documents, pictures, etc) are maintained."

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfa
mily/sharedaccess/default.mspx

Windows SteadyState (the disk protection part)
does exactly that. It has a wealth of other
security / lock-down facilities.
0 Votes
+ -
Thanks!
alokgovil 15th Oct 2009
Thanks so much for the informative answer! Highly appreciated.
0 Votes
+ -
WU drivers are often "behind" drivers on vendors' sites
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 15th Oct 2009
THANK GOODNESS!

The latest and greatest (?) drivers on vendors sites are rarely WHQL certified - they're the latest drivers that have yet to pass full certification and therefore are more likely to have issues.

Drivers on WU are only published after they've undergone MS' (ever increasingly) thorough testing and certification program. This takes time and effort but delivers drivers of a more predictable level of quality.

If you want to live on the wild-side and assume some risk then install drivers from the vendors' site. If you want to play it safe, go with the WU drivers.
0 Votes
+ -
Bought a Linux based netbook
tonymcs@... 14th Oct 2009
For A$399. Wiped it and installed Windows 7 Ultimate. An Atom based computer with only 1Gb ram.

Also installed the latest Office.

Performance and responsiveness exceeded my expectations. I now have a real, useful, extremely cheap computer that not only does the basics, but everything else as well.

So if you see a bargain Netbook (due to it being delivered with Linux) remember it just takes a wipe and an install to move from the 20C to the leading edge.


0 Votes
+ -
Buying 2 netbooks for Christmas
eMJayy 15th Oct 2009
But in my case it will be Windows that gets wiped. I don't need to run Windows on portable hardware anymore. The last thing I need is for my portable PCs to pick up something on the outside and bring it back to the Windows PCs on my home network. Beside, the multiple desktop workspaces feature in Ubuntu is going to come in real handy on those small screens.
Install Microsoft Security Essentials crank up UAC to max keep it patched and your chances are getting malware are practically nill.

Though the multiple desktops is a good reason.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Multiple desktops
Ed Bott Updated - 15th Oct 2009
Easy to add in Windows if you want it:

http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah right ...
n0neXn0ne Updated - 15th Oct 2009
"Easy to add in Windows if you want it.":

Easy just add more bloat.

^o^

0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Wait..
Ed Bott 15th Oct 2009
So if this feature is included in an operating system (as it is in OS X and Linux) it is not bloat. But if it's an option that you can choose to add later, that's bloat?

Just out of curiosity, what color is the sun on your planet?

(PS: The download I linked to is 403KB. If you think that's bloat, well, dang.)
0 Votes
+ -
You go Ed!!
Heatlesssun 15th Oct 2009
Thanks for the link! I'd not seen this before and just tried it on my Eee PC 1000H and it seems to work pretty well though there was an issue registry the hot keys. I'll try to look at that later,
0 Votes
+ -
re: Wait.. a minute ...
n0neXn0ne Updated - 15th Oct 2009
"Just out of curiosity, what color is the sun on your planet?"

Very witty aren't you or should I say oh, so original, heh?

You are so original with your rehash of YOUR two years ago Vista HYPE post. Find replace "Vista" with "Windows 7"

Now maybe you can tell me what color is the sun? I was never able to look into it. Pun intended.


^o^

0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
And conveniently...
Ed Bott 15th Oct 2009
You ignore the substance and go straight for the insults. At least you're consistent.
0 Votes
+ -
Bloat? Edited
Palmetto_CharlieSpencer Updated - 15th Oct 2009
VirtuaWin with four virtual desktops on my Vista system uses 664 kilobytes of my RAM. It takes up less than a meg of drive.

I've tried a dozen virtual desktop utilities for Windows. VirtuaWin is my favorite combination of features-to-footprint.

http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/

Edited to replace 'gig of drive' with 'meg of drive'
0 Votes
+ -
re:Bloat?
n0neXn0ne Updated - 15th Oct 2009
1. Only install Microsoft certified apps.
2. The download doesn't provide me with a md5 or SHA1 hash
3. Practice safe computing, hence don't trust it, trojan maybe?

^o^

0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Look at the source code
Ed Bott 15th Oct 2009
For heaven's sake, it's open source. You can review the code and compile it yourself if you're worried about it being a Trojan.

You're starting to cross into parody.
0 Votes
+ -
Your choice.
Palmetto_CharlieSpencer Updated - 15th Oct 2009
Point #2 could be overcome by looking for it from another source. Point #3 is based on Point #2. SourceForge is usually pretty safe, but I understand your security concerns.

As to Point #1, that's a philosophical issue we could debate all day. My primary point was to counter your 'bloat' objection to this app. I can understand you expecting bloat if you stick strictly to MS-certified apps.

If you know of an MS certified virtual desktop utility, let us know. I can tell you MS's unsupported, uncertified PowerToy lacks many basic features (hot key window and desktop switching) and frequently 'loses' MS Excel windows.
0 Votes
+ -
re: Look at the source code
n0neXn0ne 15th Oct 2009
I'm not a Linux geek. happy

^o^
0 Votes
+ -
re:Your choice.
n0neXn0ne 15th Oct 2009
Points well taken.

PS. I like your post. Well professional.

^o^

0 Votes
+ -
Wait a minute.
Palmetto_CharlieSpencer 15th Oct 2009
Since when did looking at source code become the sole domain of Linux users?

I can understand not being able to read the code. You stick to MS-certified apps, and by extension most of those are proprietary and you couldn't get a peek if you wanted to. That doesn't mean you couldn't learn.

Even easier, set up a free virtual machine and use it to test questionable apps. Download VMware's free but mis-named VM Server. It's actually for desktop installation, and then you can test whatever you want with no damage.
0 Votes
+ -
They make a big burger.

You don't know where they get the meat, and you don't have to worry about any SkyNet magic developing from their fumbling labs.

My guess is that SkyNet will become sentient and will first target Microsoft systems as too embarassing to the machine world.

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