Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 22:52 UTC
Windows Heck, Microsoft really weren't kidding when they said Windows 7 was the fastest-selling operating system in the world. NetApplications released its figures for January 2010, and it seems that after only three months of availability, Microsoft's latest baby has already hit the 10% market share mark.
Order by: Score:
Comment by chikahiro
by chikahiro on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 23:06 UTC
chikahiro
Member since:
2009-10-15

I'm very happy to see Windows 7 do so well. I'm quite pleased with it (been using since the public beta). I would like to see everyone else make gains, of course, but this is good. If nothing else, IE6 isn't the default web-browser on W7! ;)

Reply Score: 3

And this is surprising?
by mrhasbean on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 23:17 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

It (rightly for the main part) received good pre-release reviews and even better reviews at release so those still holding on to Win 2K felt they finally had something worthwhile upgrading to, XP was looking and feeling very tired and Vista was a train wreck.

I would have been more surprised if it didn't reach this level of adoption this quickly.

Reply Score: 6

RE: And this is surprising?
by umccullough on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 23:42 UTC in reply to "And this is surprising?"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

I would have been more surprised if it didn't reach this level of adoption this quickly.


I agree.

Windows 7 is finally something that people generally agree is "better than XP" - it's probably important to note that while W7 adoption increases, those small few who have already fled to "greener pastures" (Mac, Linux, etc.) are not switching back ;)

This would indicate that Windows 7 is finally replacing XP, as intended. Microsoft didn't build Vista well enough to make much impact, but now they've finally gotten back on track with a competitive product to compete with themselves ;)

Reply Score: 6

RE: And this is surprising?
by rockwell on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:16 UTC in reply to "And this is surprising?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//so those still holding on to Win 2K felt they finally had something worthwhile upgrading to, XP was looking and feeling very tired//

Are you saying XP was not a worthwhile upgrade from 2000?

Wow, just ... wow.

Reply Score: 1

RE: And this is surprising?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:30 UTC in reply to "And this is surprising?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I completely agree.

It's no surprise that Win7 has broken records when you also take the following into account:
* MS have a huge majority market share desktop OS installs
* more people own a computer than ever before
* Vista was one of the worst received OSs of all time
* and Vista's only major competitor was another MS product from nearly a decade ago (granted there's Linux and OS X, but they hold a fraction of the market share and OS X "requires" Apple hardware.


In fact, while we're on the subject of broken records, BT have a new record on the number of people online in the UK.
Admittedly it has nothing to do with BT's success because they're a terrible company. But they do happen to own a huge market share on the UKs broadband infrastructure and more people are wanting internet access than ever before.

Reply Score: 1

also..
by Lennie on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 00:21 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

If you look closer, you'll see, that of the people fleeing to Windows 7, 2/3 is from Vista users and 1/3 is from XP-users

Reply Score: 1

RE: also..
by umccullough on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 01:10 UTC in reply to "also.."
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

2/3 is from Vista users and 1/3 is from XP-users


I don't see that there... here's what I see:

http://www.netmarketshare.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=11

Which seems to indicate XP marketshare dropping faster than Vista...

Reply Score: 4

RE: also..
by yoshi314@gmail.com on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 07:26 UTC in reply to "also.."
yoshi314@gmail.com Member since:
2009-12-14

i wonder how many people that went from vista to linux and are planning to come back to w7.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: also..
by Devi1903 on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 10:00 UTC in reply to "RE: also.."
Devi1903 Member since:
2009-11-05

Not a lot i would think. Those knowledgeable enough to make the switch are unlikely to see any advantage of switching back. Except the gamers, who were unlikely to make the switch in the first place.

I must say i have a little laugh everytime i see these market figures come out. Is it really a true reflection?

In a market where the majority of OEMs come with windows preloaded & consumers are rarely confronted with linux at all.I would like to see more retailers take the step of stocking linux machines.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: also.. - I'll be counted a few times
by jabbotts on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 16:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: also.."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

The real question is how accurate market share estimates are and or browser/OS ID tags as I believe netcraft does it. I know I'm counted at least three times if not five or more simply by the number of platforms I get out through. Also, as a gamer, I'll be counted at least twice (Win for games, Deb for everything else).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: also..
by rockwell on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:17 UTC in reply to "RE: also.."
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

Um, maybe 20? Linux on the desktop sucks ballz.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: also.. perhaps for you
by jabbotts on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 16:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: also.."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

For me, a Linux based distro on the desktop is a natural fit that enables my computing. No problem if it sucks for you, everybody is different. Just don't assume your experience is indicative of everybody.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: also..
by Zifre on Thu 4th Feb 2010 01:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: also.."
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

rockwell,

Do you have to sound like an idiot with every post you write? It's perfectly okay to have a strong opinion about something, and it's perfectly okay to voice your point of view in a debate. But calling people "freetards" and making childish, idiotic comments just makes everyone hate you, even if they agree with what your saying.

It's okay to have a bad comment every once in a while. But I honestly can't remember you ever making a good comment that adds any value to the discussion (I'm sure I'm wrong though, but that's the impression you give people). Try to be nicer, and try not to be a troll.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[4]: also..
by rockwell on Thu 4th Feb 2010 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: also.."
RE[5]: also..
by Zifre on Thu 4th Feb 2010 21:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: also.."
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

lol, and yet you still reply, to try and prove me a pariah. If my comments are so unworthy in and of themselves, they need no response, yet you continue to respond.

I know, I'm feeding the troll, I try not to do that usually. You will probably notice that I usually do just ignore your comments, but they have started to get annoying.

I really wish OSNews had a way to ignore users (there are a couple others that I would use it one, but mainly you). OSNews without rockwell would be a much nicer place... I can dream can't I?


Is that your blog? If so, you are even more of an offensive, clueless idiot than I thought.

(I do have to say, some of the posts on LHB are valid but most of them are stupid. I could easily write a Windows Hater's Blog that would make Windows seem like the worst OS ever, but I don't. Because I have better things to do, and I'm a much nicer person than whoever writes that.)

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: also..
by rockwell on Thu 4th Feb 2010 23:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: also.."
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

Ah, little freetard, dance, dance, dance.

It's not my blog, but every word of it rings true -- this coming from someone who used to build slackware servers, compiling tons of modules from source, and was a proponent for "linux on the desktop" for quite awhile.

But then I realized what an utter and complete failure it is, and always will be -- on the desktop. Most of the articles and posts on that blog echo the clear truth of that position. But you obviously still suck the toenails of Stallman.

If you can't take the heat, then shut the hell up and quit replying to my "terrible, awful, insulting, big bad internetz bully" comments. You, like all Linux desktop users, drink the kool-aid, but don't realize that Jonestown is just around the corner.

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: also..
by StaubSaugerNZ on Fri 5th Feb 2010 04:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: also.."
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

Ah, little freetard, dance, dance, dance.

It's not my blog, but every word of it rings true -- this coming from someone who used to build slackware servers, compiling tons of modules from source, and was a proponent for "linux on the desktop" for quite awhile.

But then I realized what an utter and complete failure it is, and always will be -- on the desktop. Most of the articles and posts on that blog echo the clear truth of that position. But you obviously still suck the toenails of Stallman.

If you can't take the heat, then shut the hell up and quit replying to my "terrible, awful, insulting, big bad internetz bully" comments. You, like all Linux desktop users, drink the kool-aid, but don't realize that Jonestown is just around the corner.


Why can't you debate on merit rather than just insulting people. The insults don't show you as intellectually superior and don't re-inforce your points. In fact it could be argued that it shows emotional immaturity. You'd be doing yourself a favour if you chilled a little - I'd wager it might work better in your personal life too if you think about it a little. No, I'm not trying to insult you, just pointing something out that others can see that perhaps you are blindsided by.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: also..
by foredecker on Sat 6th Feb 2010 15:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: also.."
foredecker Member since:
2007-01-05

Dude, you are not helping. In some ways I agree with a few of your sentiments. But your delivery lacks credibility because is coarse and vulgar. It lets people ignore what you are saying.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: also..
by Barnabyh on Sun 7th Feb 2010 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: also.."
Barnabyh Member since:
2006-02-06

It's not my blog, but every word of it rings true -- this coming from someone who used to build slackware servers, compiling tons of modules from source, and was a proponent for "linux on the desktop" for quite awhile.


And then what happened? Did Mommy not love you enough? Your Head of IT not hug and appreciate you enough? If you did what you say you did, and knew how to do it correctly, how on earth can you prefer XP over both Slackware and W2K (your other post)?

But then I realized what an utter and complete failure it is, and always will be -- on the desktop. Most of the articles and posts on that blog echo the clear truth of that position. But you obviously still suck the toenails of Stallman.


Hmm, maybe you are the failure. It works extraordinarily well for me on the desktop, apart from Windows gaming of course, but for some old favourites there is dosbox and there are even native linux installers for some games. I have never experienced problems with Slackware due to it's, yes it's a cliche, clean and simple nature. You just gotta know what you're doing.
Stallman has got nothing to do with it. Slackware is not even considered truly free by him as it's taking a more practical approach.

If you can't take the heat, then shut the hell up


And you my friend. Try not to sound so bitter.

Added: that blog you mentioned is actually quite funny. Thanks for the link.

Edited 2010-02-07 13:30 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: also..
by Soulbender on Fri 5th Feb 2010 09:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: also.."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Do you have to sound like an idiot with every post you write?


If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and sounds like a duck...

Reply Score: 2

Windows 7 is pretty solid.
by Tuishimi on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 02:28 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm still enjoying it. Been on it since the Beta release last year (2008 I mean). Went back to OS X for a brief period and played with some Ubuntu in between, but decided to stick with Windows 7 in the end (for now).

I have to admit tho'... I did suffer a BOD the other day. LOL! Not sure what triggered it, I don't even remember what I was doing at the time; and I did not investigate the matter.

On the flip side (before anyone starts in on that) I've had the BOD equivalent on Mac OS X a few times.

Reply Score: 2

v My free upgrade...
by license_2_blather on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 03:58 UTC
RE: My free upgrade...
by cerbie on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 06:51 UTC in reply to "My free upgrade..."
cerbie Member since:
2006-01-02

Since nVidia got some drivers out that don't crash when it comes back from sleep, I haven't been giving Arch the love it deserves on my desktop. I can't easily Do Cool Stuff(tm) with Windows 7, where I can with Arch, but 7 pretty much just works (and, it plays old games that WINE won't).

Edited 2010-02-03 06:52 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Why is this a supprise?
by Gone fishing on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 04:52 UTC
Gone fishing
Member since:
2006-02-22

Windows 7 is quite nice, attractive modern OS that is preloaded onto almost all PCs sold.

Windows XP over a decade old, insecure, obsolete OS that maintained its dominant position because it was the only native platform or running win32 applications (which is most commercial software)

Windows Vista - Absolutely awful (I use it every day and it is an utter misery,) when compared to the expectations of the day probably the worst OS ever made).

So obviously now - post Vista - its a good time to buy a new PC or upgrade your OS

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why is this a supprise?
by cerbie on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 06:46 UTC in reply to "Why is this a supprise?"
cerbie Member since:
2006-01-02

The thing is, Windows 7 adoption is much greater than new machines. That's what really makes it impressive. MS' newest is always on the new PCs.

If the hardware supports it (FI, a good bit of recent-but-pre-HD-series Radeon chips are SOL), and you're not starved for RAM (like my notebook), there's really no downside. Just tonight, my father and I added one more to the number, convincing a long-time friend and customer to finally upgrade from Win2k. If 7 were no better than Vista, it would have been an upgrade to XP, to make it until the 2014 cut-off.

Edited 2010-02-03 06:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why is this a supprise?
by Jokel on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 07:18 UTC in reply to "Why is this a supprise?"
Jokel Member since:
2006-06-01

I tried to switch to Windows 7 from XP. It was a disaster. Not because W7 is that bad, but because a lot of (a bit) older hard- and software just wont run with W7.

You see - I use a DAW with rather expensive hardware that wont run reliable on W7 (and believe me - I tried a lot of possible solutions). I also use a lot of VST plugins that give a lot of trouble on W7. The new sound architecture of W7 also has caused huge latency problems with audio and MIDI recording, making W7 almost useless. I had sudden crashes when working with huge projects (presumably caused by plugins, driver or whatever). That's a disaster when you have to deliver work on time, but only huge latency alone is enough to give a big fat NO to W7.

So at this moment (and a long time in the foreseeable future I am afraid) my DAW is not going to be "transplanted" to W7. I going to stay with XP.

The rest of the hardware, computers (and second DAW) etc. is running Mandriva Linux and puppy. You can be sure that stuff absolutely is not going to switch to W7. That would be loosing too much functionality and a step back in my opinion.

I really not bashing W7 here, but at this moment I feel it is not ready for really serious work with the hardware I have. And spending a huge amount of dollars to buy new hardware that will work with W7 is no reasonable option, don't you think?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?
by google_ninja on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 13:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Why is this a supprise?"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

I thought linux DAWs were still in the dark ages compared to what is on mac/windows. What do you use, and how do you find it?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by Soulbender on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 13:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Depends on what you need. Ardour is quite good these days. Sure, if you're a total gearhead that just loves to fiddle with millions of different VST plugins then it's probably not for you. Is it good enough for pro's? I dunno, I'm not one but neither are most people with an opinion on the subject.
Then again, the tool doesn't make the music.

Reply Score: 3

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

I'll try giving it another shot. Last time I tried was a couple of years back, and it was a pretty terrible experience in every way.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I thought linux DAWs were still in the dark ages compared to what is on mac/windows. What do you use, and how do you find it?


Linux DAWs are terrible compared to Windows/Mac counterparts.

However, I've heard producers make awesome tracks in the most basic of sequencers and I've heard some real sh*t produced on Cubase / Logic.

So while it makes a huge difference getting the right tools - at the end of the day you're either talented or you're not.

Reply Score: 2

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Well, I am far from talented, but last time I tried things on linux there was some pretty serious setup required, and even after putting in quite a bit of effort, I still had pretty bad latency and quality issues. Same hardware on windows gave much better results, although that was with an old copy of ableton live a friend gave me

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Well, I am far from talented, but last time I tried things on linux there was some pretty serious setup required, and even after putting in quite a bit of effort, I still had pretty bad latency and quality issues. Same hardware on windows gave much better results, although that was with an old copy of ableton live a friend gave me


Ableton geared towards live performance, so smooth, low latency playback is a bigger priority than with many other DAWs.

In fact, I've found it to out perform some arguably lesser capable suites like FL Studio.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?
by Soulbender on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 16:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Linux DAWs are terrible compared to Windows/Mac counterparts.


It's not Pro-tools but it won't cost you your first-born either.

So while it makes a huge difference getting the right tools


I think it's more about knowing how to use the tools you have. People created good sounding recordings before we even had DAW's and the first DAW's wasn't exactly stellar either by todays standards. I'm pretty sure Ardour outclass the ProTools Billy Idol used back in 1993 to create cyberpunk yet that album sound good.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 19:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


I think it's more about knowing how to use the tools you have. People created good sounding recordings before we even had DAW's and the first DAW's wasn't exactly stellar either by todays standards. I'm pretty sure Ardour outclass the ProTools Billy Idol used back in 1993 to create cyberpunk yet that album sound good.

Which is exactly what I said.
In fact, the way you've quoted my post takes the comment somewhat out of context.


however, to use your specific example, I don't think it's fair to compare old technology to new as the expectations of production is much greater now.

Even with new records that are designed to sound old, if you listen carefully you notice that the mastering is completely different (the kicks have more bass, the hats are sharper, the synths have more body to them. etc)

In fact, seeming as we're already off topic, I'll mention that this is one of my pet grips with modern music.
The expected standard of production is now so high that I sometimes feel it detracts from the creative element of production.
For example, an album like The Cure's 'Pornography' just wouldn't get released by todays standards as the guitars are muddy, effects on vocals are over used so it makes the sound like they're sitting further back in the mix than they are and the bass lacks any definition.
However, I love the album. It's a creative masterpiece.


Anyway, going back to the original tangent: if you're serious about music product, then Linux tools are very immature compared to Windows and OS X counterparts. Sure, you can use Linux, but when creativity is hard enough already, why make life harder using the sub-standard software?

I know this is a very negative comment to make, but it's the sad truth. I use Linux in nearly 100% of my life (even have Android on my phone) but every time I try and produce in Linux I always end up falling back into Windows XP as the software I have on there is just better. My hardware works better (some of my kit doesn't even work in Linux), the interface is better, the sound quality is often (but not always) better and the tools are better.
And it's literally the only reason I keep XP on my laptop otherwise I'd have wiped XP and have a Linux only set up.
I've even debated with coding my own DAW for Linux, but sadly I just don't have the time and it's probably better that existing ones were improved.

So yes, you can product in Linux but it's not worth the hassle if you plan to take producing seriously.

Edited 2010-02-03 19:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Why is this a supprise?
by Soulbender on Thu 4th Feb 2010 02:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Which is exactly what I said.


Heh, yeah I noticed that now ;)

So yes, you can product in Linux but it's not worth the hassle if you plan to take producing seriously.


The previous poster seem to disagree with you.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Thu 4th Feb 2010 10:43 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

The previous poster seem to disagree with you.


Who? google_ninja?
He echoed the same points I had.

Or do you mean Jokel, who repeated on a number of occasions that his main DAW was running on XP?
Ok, granted he's running Linux too, but as secondary systems and the whole bulk of his comments were about his progress in migrating is studio over to Windows 7.



As I said before, I know I'm being negative and I really do want Linux DAWs to succeed but FOSS just can't compete with commercial professional packages that often retail for hundreds of $$$s.

So, if you're only producing as a hobby and don't mind spending time tinckering with your system or not having certain tools at your disposal, then I think it's great that people are considering Linux.
However if you want to take music production seriously, then Windows and OS X are simply the better choices.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 19:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26



It's not Pro-tools but it won't cost you your first-born either.


FL Studio costs about as much as a copy of Windows7 and can stll create some professional sounds.

Sure, it's not the best DAW on the market, but it still outclasses every sample-based sequencer I've used on Linux.

So I think you're being a little unfair comparing the upper most top end of studio gear with open source.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Why is this a supprise?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I tried to switch to Windows 7 from XP. It was a disaster. Not because W7 is that bad, but because a lot of (a bit) older hard- and software just wont run with W7.

You see - I use a DAW with rather expensive hardware that wont run reliable on W7 (and believe me - I tried a lot of possible solutions). I also use a lot of VST plugins that give a lot of trouble on W7. The new sound architecture of W7 also has caused huge latency problems with audio and MIDI recording, making W7 almost useless. I had sudden crashes when working with huge projects (presumably caused by plugins, driver or whatever). That's a disaster when you have to deliver work on time, but only huge latency alone is enough to give a big fat NO to W7.

So at this moment (and a long time in the foreseeable future I am afraid) my DAW is not going to be "transplanted" to W7. I going to stay with XP.

The rest of the hardware, computers (and second DAW) etc. is running Mandriva Linux and puppy. You can be sure that stuff absolutely is not going to switch to W7. That would be loosing too much functionality and a step back in my opinion.

I really not bashing W7 here, but at this moment I feel it is not ready for really serious work with the hardware I have. And spending a huge amount of dollars to buy new hardware that will work with W7 is no reasonable option, don't you think?

If music is your business then there's nothing to be gained from upgrading from XP simply because DAWs plus VST(i)s are power hungry so you're going to want as small footprint on the OS as possible.

If your studio PC is also your home PC, then the best option is to run 2 OSs. One dedicated for music (so doesn't even have an anti-virus installed) and one for the web, games, or whatever else you choose to do with your computer.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why is this a supprise?
by rockwell on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:19 UTC in reply to "Why is this a supprise?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Windows Vista - Absolutely awful (I use it every day and it is an utter misery,) when compared to the expectations of the day probably the worst OS ever made). //

If Vista SP2 with full patches and driver updates (of course, you have those, right?) ... is "utter misery" ... than you're either a troll, using shit hardware, or a retard.

Edited 2010-02-03 15:19 UTC

Reply Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Well, this specific person your responding too may be a skill or troll issue but again, not indicative of everyone. I've a co-worker who's had no end of troubles with Vista. Blue screens before. After a rebuild; freezing during the update process. He can't even get updates to patch the bugs causing the problems because the update is buggy. This is a developer who's been doing code and computers since the days when motorola chips where used for desktop CPU.

It's simply not a universal experience that the only reasons for problems with Vista where due to user ignorance.

(I'll try to let you know the outcome. We're testing the hardware with a different OS currently.)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?
by Devi1903 on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 19:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Why is this a supprise?"
Devi1903 Member since:
2009-11-05

//If Vista SP2 with full patches and driver updates (of course, you have those, right?) ... is "utter misery" ... than you're either a troll, using shit hardware, or a retard.


I really do wonder why there are people out there still defending Vista as a good operating system. Is the only OS you have ever used Vista? Vista was and is a truely shocking OS, which ever way you look at it!

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by nt_jerkface on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 20:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


I really do wonder why there are people out there still defending Vista as a good operating system. Is the only OS you have ever used Vista? Vista was and is a truely shocking OS, which ever way you look at it!


And yet there has been a clear lack of specific complaints after SP2.

I have 2 Toshiba laptops and one is running Vista, the other 7. The performance differences are minimal. I can take pictures of them if you would like.

Various benchmarks around the web show the same. Vista was bad at the start but was fixed with service packs. XP often still wins (but barely) in various cpu-dependent benchmarks.

Try thinking for yourself instead of just following the crowd. The crowd is often wrong from its natural resistance to re-analyze established positions.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?
by Soulbender on Thu 4th Feb 2010 02:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I'm surprised some of you reasonable Windows proponents keep defending morons like rockwell.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?
by nt_jerkface on Thu 4th Feb 2010 03:03 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

I wasn't defending anyone, I was responding to deviwhatever.

I'm not a Windows proponent, but I do prefer it on the desktop to the alternatives. I am a fan of Anders Hejlsberg though.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?
by rockwell on Thu 4th Feb 2010 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why is this a supprise?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

And I'm a moron, for calling him out? You're a dumbass. Please package up your computer and send it back, because you're too stupid to use one.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Why is this a supprise?
by Soulbender on Thu 4th Feb 2010 16:54 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Why is this a supprise?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Thanks for proving my point.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Why is this a supprise?
by rockwell on Thu 4th Feb 2010 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why is this a supprise?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

And thank you, for proving mine. Troll.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why is this a supprise?
by boldingd on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 18:37 UTC in reply to "Why is this a supprise?"
boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

Windows Vista - Absolutely awful (I use it every day and it is an utter misery,) when compared to the expectations of the day probably the worst OS ever made).


I think you're exagerating a little. IMHO, Vista's greatest flaw, and the biggest improvement in 7, is basically just speed (and mainly start up speed, so far as I can tell). It may be slow to log you in... but that's not exactly torture.

Compared to the difference between OS families -- like, Windows vs. a Linux distro, or Windows vs. Os X -- the differences between Vista and 7 are minor. People blow waaaay out of proportion how bad Vista was, and how incredible Win7 is.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why is this a supprise?
by nt_jerkface on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 21:49 UTC in reply to "Why is this a supprise?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Windows Vista - Absolutely awful (I use it every day and it is an utter misery,) when compared to the expectations of the day probably the worst OS ever made).

So obviously now - post Vista - its a good time to buy a new PC or upgrade your OS


What exactly is causing you utter misery? Please provide specifics in comparison to what in Windows 7 would reduce your pain and suffering. Would it be the slightly improved Aero glass or the simplified taskbar? Is the the lack of a new logo that causes you stress?

Here's that absolutely awful Vista running nearly the same as XP on an EEE PC 900 which has a 900mhz celeron:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXw7v1bxpSs

I would like to think that OSnews readers are a little more astute and are aware Windows 7 is mostly a service pack and a marketing campaign. However it seems that half the people here would have fallen for the Mojave experiment.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?
by Devi1903 on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 22:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Why is this a supprise?"
Devi1903 Member since:
2009-11-05

What exactly is causing you utter misery? Please provide


Ok Specific. Me and gonefishing tried to setup a printer on Vista the other day. HP Laserjet P4015N.

It was a pain to setup. Vista kept on crashing. Spooling was taking an age! Vista would not work with the vista driver supported.

About to give up and downloaded another Vista driver from HP. Now after 15minutes of install this driver finally it worked!

Why did it not work with the other driver? Why everytime we restarted the print spooler to empty the que did vista freeze up and have to hit the reset button? Why did it take 15 minutes to install a driver that was 15 meg?

You tell me if this is acceptable performance!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by umccullough on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 23:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Ok Specific. Me and gonefishing tried to setup a printer on Vista the other day. HP Laserjet P4015N.

It was a pain to setup. Vista kept on crashing. Spooling was taking an age! Vista would not work with the vista driver supported.

About to give up and downloaded another Vista driver from HP. Now after 15minutes of install this driver finally it worked!

Why did it not work with the other driver? Why everytime we restarted the print spooler to empty the que did vista freeze up and have to hit the reset button? Why did it take 15 minutes to install a driver that was 15 meg?

You tell me if this is acceptable performance!


Wow, sounds like a problem you should be complaining to HP about ;)

Seriously though, printer drivers and associated "management" software have become some of the worst software I've ever seen...

Reply Score: 2

Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

It could be a crap HP driver that meant it didn't work?
However, it is Vistas fault if:

1 stopping the spooler crashes the box
2 It is impossible to remover the printer (OK we did manage to remove it after unplugging the printer rebooting the box and clicking delete repeatedly for 10 minutes.
3 Once the non functional driver is installed it is impossible to select another you plug in the USB and come hell or high water it WILL use the non working driver unless you format and reinstall.

4 You cannot manually install a USB printer

5 And every reboot takes about 5 minutes on fair hardware. Dual core 2 gig ram nvidia card PCBSD Opensuse, Ubuntu or any Linux (let alone Haiku) would fly on the Box.

6 Why does MS have to release an OS (Vista) that almost manages to be usable after 2 service packs is this acceptable?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by nt_jerkface on Thu 4th Feb 2010 04:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


Ok Specific. Me and gonefishing tried to setup a printer on Vista the other day. HP Laserjet P4015N.

It was a pain to setup. Vista kept on crashing. Spooling was taking an age! Vista would not work with the vista driver supported.

About to give up and downloaded another Vista driver from HP. Now after 15minutes of install this driver finally it worked!

Why did it not work with the other driver? Why everytime we restarted the print spooler to empty the que did vista freeze up and have to hit the reset button? Why did it take 15 minutes to install a driver that was 15 meg?

You tell me if this is acceptable performance!


Why is this the fault of Vista and not HP? I always try to download and install the driver directly first before messing with any wizards. In fact when installing a printer with Vista or 7 you should always just plug in the usb cable first to see if Windows recognizes it. I've installed over a dozen printers in Vista so I really don't think the problem is its printer management system. It sounds like you loaded some HP crapware that didn't run properly. Some of the worst install wizards I have ever used were from HP. D-link is pretty bad too. Oh and don't get me started on the crap that Sony comes up with.

Edited 2010-02-04 04:32 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why is this a supprise?
by nt_jerkface on Sun 7th Feb 2010 02:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why is this a supprise?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

You said you use Vista every day in 'utter misery' and didn't explain this other than a printer problem you had which can happen with any OS. At the very least you should explain how the experience was improved in Windows 7.

Most of the complaints before SP1 centered around opengl and network transfer performance. Complaints related to printers had more to do with unsupported devices. I see no reason to believe that Vista has more of a problem with printing than XP or 7.

Reply Score: 2

Big deal
by Sabon on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 15:19 UTC
Sabon
Member since:
2005-07-06

What percent of physical retail space does Windows 7 take up as far as operating systems and computers on shelves? I'm guessing more than 10%. So if you think about that, and that Windows 7 is finally starting to be the first actually good version of Windows, it surprises me that the number isn't higher. But then Microsoft hasn't had too many successes as far as good products in the last five years. The list of mediocre ones is long.

It's not going to happen, but I would be VERY curious to see what happens with market share for Windows as a whole if every computer came with 5 OSs and people got to choose which one or ones they used. My guess is that in much less than five years time the market share for Windows would be down to around 65 to 70% or less. Maybe much less.

Inertia has a way of keeping a huge boulder rolling and in the same direction. Pebbles can break boulders if they hit in the right spot.

Reply Score: 1

10% vs what?
by StaubSaugerNZ on Thu 4th Feb 2010 05:19 UTC
StaubSaugerNZ
Member since:
2007-07-13

What is the replacement rate for computers. Is it also 10%. If the rate is less, then Win 7 is doing well. If it is higher, then MS is actually losing overall market share to Apple. Linux etc. Not that marketshare really matters, except to advertisers and clue-less band-wagon jumpers.

What is the replacement rate of computers relative to 5 years ago? is it down? up? steady? Are all those iPhones and Androids encroaching on the replacement computers ordinary folk used to buy? In that case the 10% market share would be alarmingly low compared to what would be expected for a 3-year PC replacement cycle.

The 10% marketshare statistic is quite meaningless if it is not put in context. It's a shame some of the turkeys that report this stuff can't analyse statistics critically and provide meaningful facts.

Edited 2010-02-04 05:22 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Balkanized
by StaubSaugerNZ on Thu 4th Feb 2010 05:31 UTC
StaubSaugerNZ
Member since:
2007-07-13

What is interesting looking at the statistics referenced in the page is that the desktop market is becoming balkanized. That means that while it might have made sense to develop for Windows XP when it made the bulk of the market it now no longer makes sense to target a single platform. Designing software to run on more than one platform makes sense.

In fact, this trend is emerging elsewhere. Which version of DirectX should I develop for? Well 9c used to make sense but with 10 and 11 out there it actually makes some sense to use OpenGL instead since you get most of the Direct3D 10 and 11 features on multiple platforms (which Maddox Games reaped the benefit of when they recently released [the mostly Java and OpenGL] IL-2 Shturmovik on PS3 after a long profitable life on the PC).

Once upon a time people developed web-sites only for IE6 (or even before that, Netscape-only) and it was hard to argue with management that in fact W3C standards compliance should be the target. Now those IE6 adherents are eating crow while people who targeted multi-platform standards-compliant sites are able to adapt easily with the times.

Looks like the same thing is happening with application software for operating systems. Targeting a single platform doesn't make sense anymore and multi-platform/multi-windows versions makes the most sense if you want to actually sell to customers. Of course, the best developers have always been doing this. Java may not be making waves for shrink-wrapped software but at least all my own programs (with years of development effort) will run no matter what the marketshare of any major platform (or variant) is.

Edited 2010-02-04 05:36 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Windows XP Mode
by Dano on Thu 4th Feb 2010 14:08 UTC
Dano
Member since:
2006-01-22

I wonder how many corporate customers have switched to Windows 7 due to the inclusion of Windows XP Mode? We have accounting software that does not run with full compatibility under Windows Vista/7 and XP Mode was the way to make it happen. If XP Mode was not available, we would have just stayed with XP until we got around to upgrading Peachtree 2008.

Edited 2010-02-04 14:09 UTC

Reply Score: 1

run away!
by 2501 on Thu 4th Feb 2010 18:02 UTC
2501
Member since:
2005-07-14

After years of frustrations, a lot of Windows Vista users could not wait any longer for this moment. My wife was one of them. She was looking for an alternative and Windows 7 was the perfect one, of course.

-t


ps: I am keeping my Linux

Reply Score: 1

From OS X -> Win7
by MasterBlaster on Fri 5th Feb 2010 15:38 UTC
MasterBlaster
Member since:
2009-01-30

I've been a devout OS X user since it premiered about 9 years ago. I'm voluntarily typing this comment from 64-bit IE on Win7 on my new MacBook Pro if that tells you anything about my current opinion of OS X vs. Windows. Note, *no* form of Linux will ever appear on my MacBook Pro even in Virtual Machine form!

Reply Score: 1

RE: From OS X -> Win7
by StaubSaugerNZ on Fri 5th Feb 2010 17:34 UTC in reply to "From OS X -> Win7"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

I've been a devout OS X user since it premiered about 9 years ago. I'm voluntarily typing this comment from 64-bit IE on Win7 on my new MacBook Pro if that tells you anything about my current opinion of OS X vs. Windows. Note, *no* form of Linux will ever appear on my MacBook Pro even in Virtual Machine form!


On IE7? why, it's a heap of junk best left to n00bs. I run Ubuntu and WinXP on Parallels VMs on my shiny new MacBook Pro and I have to say I miss many things from Ubuntu when on OS X but nothing really from WinXP.

Incidentally, also using Vista Enterprise at work. Why does your machine have to be unusable for half-an-hour and be rebooted to get critical updates. That is just pathetic in an Enterprise environment.

Win7 is ok and I'm using it as a game server for LockOn: Modern Air Combat where in some ways it does a better job than XP, but there are times when it becomes completely unresponsive. I don't dare update it as it will be out of action for an hour or two while the system is unusable while the crappy update system does its work. Again, a very poor desktop design when you try to do something a bit more than surf the web or mangle documents in office.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: From OS X -> Win7
by rockwell on Sat 6th Feb 2010 06:19 UTC in reply to "RE: From OS X -> Win7"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

http://tmrepository.com/fudtracker/ again, for you, you massive freetard fud spreader.

If you have that much trouble (a system being "unavailable for 30 minutes due to patches? What the hell?) with ANY OS (much less Vista fully patched and Windows 7) you're a complete and utter moron.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: From OS X -> Win7
by StaubSaugerNZ on Sat 6th Feb 2010 06:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: From OS X -> Win7"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

http://tmrepository.com/fudtracker/ again, for you, you massive freetard fud spreader.

If you have that much trouble (a system being "unavailable for 30 minutes due to patches? What the hell?) with ANY OS (much less Vista fully patched and Windows 7) you're a complete and utter moron.


You don't actually know what you are talking about. Actually I have a PhD in astrophysics and an IQ that's a damn sight higher than yours. Plus it's clear your emotional intelligence is even lower than your pitiful IQ. You get the wrong end of the stick and rather than being intelligent about it and asking about what you or I may have different in our views of the situation you lash out with the same lame insults again and again. I feel sorry for you pal, you are quite a loser.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: From OS X -> Win7
by rockwell on Sat 6th Feb 2010 19:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: From OS X -> Win7"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

lol, and like a typical freetard neckbeard, you lose the argument, and resort to claiming superiority due to your worthless scrap of paper that has "proof" of your "intellect."

Please, stick to your lab, and let the adults run business. Thanks.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: From OS X -> Win7
by StaubSaugerNZ on Sun 7th Feb 2010 00:40 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: From OS X -> Win7"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

lol, and like a typical freetard neckbeard, you lose the argument, and resort to claiming superiority due to your worthless scrap of paper that has "proof" of your "intellect."

Please, stick to your lab, and let the adults run business. Thanks.


You really are a presumptuous git. Actually I do have my own business now and I bet you my turnover is a lot more than yours - if that is your only measure of success. That's why your insults are so hollow they make me laugh. You think you're so damn clever but it is in you're too dim to see what others are trying to say. You'd prefer to stop listening and throw insults around. I guess that is a strategy that works for you in most places, sure beats thinking with an open mind.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: From OS X -> Win7
by SReilly on Sun 7th Feb 2010 01:04 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: From OS X -> Win7"
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

Lol! Well said! I'd vote you up but comment voting is already finished on this story.

Rocckwell is the worst kind of troll and he doesn't have the intelligence to realize it. He loves spouting out assumptions as facts and then resorts to name calling when you put him in his place. Funny thing is, he's done a bit of load sharing configuration for a few Linux webservers and now he thinks he knows more about IT than anybody else. If he ever had to work with the kind of systems I do, he'd be completely out of his depth yet he seems to think that his measly little configuration antics means he has more infrastructure knowledge than a UNIX systems engineer and architect like myself. Truly pathetic.

I've come to the conclusion that he has an abnormally low IQ and all his blustering is a shallow and transparent attempt at hiding it. He really should do himself a favour, realize his weaknesses and stop talking, that way he won't end up looking like such a fool but just like his IQ, his wisdom is also lacking. Someday we might be able to get it through his thick skull that we can see right trough him but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: From OS X -> Win7
by StaubSaugerNZ on Sun 7th Feb 2010 01:12 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: From OS X -> Win7"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

Lol! Well said! I'd vote you up but comment voting is already finished on this story.

Rocckwell is the worst kind of troll and he doesn't have the intelligence to realize it. He loves spouting out assumptions as facts and then resorts to name calling when you put him in his place. Funny thing is, he's done a bit of load sharing configuration for a few Linux webservers and now he thinks he knows more about IT than anybody else. If he ever had to work with the kind of systems I do, he'd be completely out of his depth yet he seems to think that his measly little configuration antics means he has more infrastructure knowledge than a UNIX systems engineer and architect like myself. Truly pathetic.

I've come to the conclusion that he has an abnormally low IQ and all his blustering is a shallow and transparent attempt at hiding it. He really should do himself a favour, realize his weaknesses and stop talking, that way he won't end up looking like such a fool but just like his IQ, his wisdom is also lacking. Someday we might be able to get it through his thick skull that we can see right trough him but I wouldn't hold my breath.


Cheers. The more I personally learn about the world the more I realise I've needed to listen to others. Not always because I was wrong (which I was often enough) but also because if you don't listen you won't understand where their misunderstanding my lie. Was just trying to point that out to him as it'll help him in life to go easier on the vitriol. He may well be right about some things but being excessively insulting never helps as people don't want to hear what he has to say when he can't couch it in a reasonable manner. It is a shame some people are like this. Anyway, thanks for explaining the past to me.

Reply Score: 2