Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Jan 2009 12:58 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 342226
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by darrelljon
by google_ninja on Mon 5th Jan 2009 01:50
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by darrelljon"
Depends what field you are in. Last week my whole team got upgraded to quad cores with 4 gigs of ram and dual 7200rpm hard drives (which everyone promptly put into raid 0)
You are basically arguing that any benchmark is irrelivent unless it is done on hardware that is impossible to buy now because it is so obsolete. we are talking about a 3-400$ machine and a 5-600$ machine, not some crazy gamer rig with bleeding edge components.





Member since:
2006-06-01
Hmm... I don't know...
Given the economic climate at this moment and in the foreseeable future, it is very unlikely even a small company will purchase new hardware very soon.
Given the fact that most company's are still using hardware that is capable of running Windows XP but absolutely not capable of running Vista or something similar (an not going to upgrade as I explained above).
Given the fact that Windows 7 is tested on-, and designed for- new hardware, and this test was done on this hardware that is obviously not representative for the huge majority of company's
Then... I think this test are nice, but no indication if Windows 7 is usable in anything but this test environment. If you include the factors given above a very different image will appear. I really would like to see some test on equipment that is going to used at this moment and in the near future. That is in my opinion the only test that give a real indication of usability...