Windows 7 RTM Reviewed & Benchmarked 792
An anonymous reader writes "The code is final, and CNet has reviewed the final version of Windows 7, with benchmarks to support the case that it's not only the fastest version of Windows to shut down, but also looks like 'the operating system that both Microsoft and its consumers have been waiting for.' The review continues: 'By fixing most of the perceived and real problems in Vista, Microsoft has laid the groundwork for the future of where Windows will go. Windows 7 presents a stable platform that can compete comfortably with OS X, while reassuring the world that Microsoft can still turn out a strong, useful operating system.'"
Re:Fast way to shut down! (Score:5, Interesting)
Pull the plug!
Seriously.... they claimed all this same stuff for vista. and we all found out they were full of crap.
7 might be better than vista. but i still dont believe it's the fastest ever or any of their other bs.
This isn't news. it's an ad.
You might like to actually test it, people have been telling good things about Windows 7, and the interface and updates do look quite nice. Personally I'm using Vista as I never bothered to replace it with XP, so I should notice it even more.
Judging from the article and what I've read before, they've spend time on making sure interface and the system responsiveness improves a lot. That is what people usually consider as "fast", even if its fake-fast it looks faster. Its pretty much the only thing OS can do to appear faster anyways - You cant magically get more CPU power.
Re:The competition is OSX (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fast way to shut down! (Score:5, Interesting)
This is one thing benchmarks unfortunately do not show, but is where Windows 7 (and FreeBSD as well) excel - responsiveness.
On a modern multitasking machine, I (for one) don't care so much if a task takes a little longer to complete in the background so long as I can carry on working in the foreground.
7 Multitasks better than any previous Windows OS bar none, and I think this is why it "feels" faster. It responds to user input a lot better.
Free ugrade for Vista sufferers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Free ugrade for Vista sufferers? (Score:2, Interesting)
OMG YOU USE WIN.. wait, that wasn't why I replied....
Anyway, with that out of the way, I kinda agree. Vista was such a failure at release, and for such a long time, that Vista owners should indeed get a free Windows 7.
At least a home edition.
But from what I've been told, since the latest service pack to vista, it's actually quite ok, and not that far from Windows 7 in terms of driver compatibility and stability.
Not that I know it for sure, haven't touched Vista for more than "install.. omg craponastick...format".
Re:Great goals (Score:1, Interesting)
So, you're saying you want the computer to shut down and kick any running applications out of memory, potentially corrupting any files you may be working on? Ok, you can do that.
Option A:
Hold power button for >3 seconds
Option B: /s /t 1 /f
start
run
shutdown
One of the reasons I hate Windows so much is that I can't even rely on the piece of crap OS to shut down if I tell it to shut down and then walk away. It literally expects me to sit there for up to five minutes while it 'saves my settings' and stops all the processes to ensure the bloody thing turns itself off.
Sounds like you hate computers in general and have likely chosen the wrong profession.
Re:Start-bar aka Dock! (Score:5, Interesting)
I've used KDE before and the problem with KDE was (is?) the sort order is wrong when you have a double/multi height taskbar - the items are organized from top to bottom then only left to right. This is bad because if one item is removed, everything to the right of it gets shuffled up or down. So you lose track of where stuff is. Windows does it right - right to left then only top to bottom. Perhaps I should put the taskbar on the side to sidestep the problem.
The other problem with KDE is "everything" is named starting with a "K" which makes it harder to scan to find stuff quickly.
SMB still sucks (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows network file service is just as slow and as network-chatty as ever.
When you compare it to NFS4, it is most miserable. With SMB, the client and server shoot packets at each other all day and barely any data gets transferred. NFS4 will totally saturate my gigabit ethernet and it's almost all data in those packets.
Microsoft should just embrace NFS4 and drop SMB like a hot potato. It serves noone's interests to have such a crappy file service system in this day and age.
Re:Not faster than XP, not faster than Vista (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The competition is OSX (Score:4, Interesting)
This interests me greatly. I just had to install Ubuntu (9.04) on my gaming computer because my wireless card "just works" with it and I don't have a way to get it up near enough to the router to plug it into the intertubes.
Downloading wireless drivers for windows on Linux ftw. :-)
I have been running Ubuntu on my other (non gaming) computers for over a year, as well as setting up my parents with Ubuntu, and have so far used a CLI about 4 times.
Installing flash was interesting, and was the biggest pain. However it should be noticed that I was installing a workaround to allow flash to run in an 64 bit browser and that's not even possible in windows as far as I know.
meanwhile I am constantly having to kill the explorer process and restart it from the task manager in windows. I'd personally much rather have a CLI to fall back on.
Re:16GB? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have no idea but it usually just cruft and poor programming... you'll probably find that it only peaks at 16Gb during installation but uses 5-10 Gb for a "final footprint" after the installation is complete. They might even take into account drive formatting, swapfile, etc. into that which will give quite a hit.
To be honest, the initial install for Windows was always stupidly large for what you got - you can nLite and UPX and do all sorts of stuff and still get a working Windows installation in half the space. And even then, the Windows folder will grow dramatically over time and you install more and more. Every Windows installation I've ever had has hit the partition limit I set (generously, or so I thought on installation) and I've had to play "Program Files Folder Shuffle" to get space back on the boot/Windows drive - it's not even like it's my data or profile - that's stored somewhere else entirely.
However, drive space is going to take a hit in the next few years on Windows 7's main target - netbooks... wasn't everyone planning on using smaller but faster SSD drives?
Re:Free ugrade for Vista sufferers? (Score:2, Interesting)
Vista is sufficient punishment in itself.
Complaining about how bad your OS runs and demanding handouts while actively refusing to take the free upgrade path already there... can't say you don't deserve it.
Re:The competition is OSX (Score:4, Interesting)
Well let's put it this way: I simply disagree with everything you say, but I guess that's personal.
When I have to do stuff in Windows it takes me 10 minutes of mucking around all the stupid settings windows, tabs and icons, every Windows version shuffles all that around, and eventually I find out I have to edit some obscure registry key just to stop some stupid program I didn't install consciously from loading on startup. The fact that you remembered what icons you have to click to get somewhere doesn't mean it's easier to remember or anything, most likely you've had so many stuff to fix on your windows machine that you now know what is where from the top of your head. Most non-geek people I know who use Windows don't even know they have a control panel.
I also don't really get why you think you have to remember any commands for everyday linux use, like many people alread posted a fully working linux system doesn't need the CLI, and it just keeps working unless you deliberately screw it up. It's sometimes a hard way to get there, especially on new hardware, and that's what the CLI is really useful for, much more useful than the Windows GUI (you know how to see the system log for example? Or the boot log? Or the PCI ids of that 'unknown device' on your system).
Last but not least let me add that people often view Windows as 'much easier' because they are used to it, and they bought the machine pre-installed and ready to go. Most people wo think Windows is easy would be completely lost if you gave them a generic installation CD and told them to get the machine up and running with all the hardware working properly.
Re:Great goals (Score:5, Interesting)
>>Ah, but you didn't know that Windows has "shutdown -f -r" you say. Well, stop blaming the OS for your own ignorance then!
I seriously hope you're making a joke there. No normal user should ever need to know command line flags to TURN OFF HIS COMPUTER. This functionality has always been broken in windows, forcing a user to babysit his machine to make sure it successfully turns off, something you don't always have the time to do (at an airport, or you're running late for something).
Besides, the bigger problem is the immense amount of astroturfing going on for Win7. If you hated Vista (and nearly everyone does - I do tech workshops for a living) you'll hate Win7. They didn't fix the broken Vista file browser or windows explorer, and so *nothing else they did* matters.
But when you read things like this (from TFA):
"Although the look of Windows 7 may seem to be nothing more than some polish applied liberally to the Vista Aero theme, make no mistake: this is a full replacement operating system, and more than just 'Vista done right'. From driver support to multitouch groundwork for the future, from better battery management to the most easy-to-use interface Microsoft has ever had, Windows 7 is hardly half-baked."
Then you know that there's something seriously screwy going on. It sounds like all the press outlets are creaming themselves for Win7, and I can't figure out why. Usability is the most important feature they should be concerned about, and both Vista and Win7 are steps backwards in usability.
Re:Fast way to shut down! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fast way to shut down! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The competition is OSX (Score:3, Interesting)
"Well let's put it this way: I simply disagree with everything you say, but I guess that's personal."
No problems there ;)
"When I have to do stuff in Windows it takes me 10 minutes of mucking around all the stupid settings windows, tabs and icons, every Windows version shuffles all that around, and eventually I find out I have to edit some obscure registry key just to stop some stupid program I didn't install consciously from loading on startup. The fact that you remembered what icons you have to click to get somewhere doesn't mean it's easier to remember or anything, most likely you've had so many stuff to fix on your windows machine that you now know what is where from the top of your head. Most non-geek people I know who use Windows don't even know they have a control panel."
Perfectly true. I've been using Windows all my life (since 3.11), so I'm pretty used to it.
However, when there's a new Windows version and everything gets shuffled around, I can still easily find stuff because I'm capable of reading. Most people who have trouble navigating GUIs (I'm talking about the average Joe here, not CLI gurus who just don't WANT to use GUIs) just seem to be incapable of reading what's on the screen before deciding to hit the OK button...
"I also don't really get why you think you have to remember any commands for everyday linux use, like many people alread posted a fully working linux system doesn't need the CLI, and it just keeps working unless you deliberately screw it up."
Possibly - IF you have hardware that is 100% compatible, and are satisfied with a web browser, mail client and a half functional media player. If you want to setup anything more, however trivial it sounds - WiFi, sound cards, multi-monitor setups... well, it gets pretty difficult.
Sure, once it's running it's (usually) rock solid, but getting there on non-standard hardware is a pain in the ass, and pretty much not possible without CLI.
"It's sometimes a hard way to get there, especially on new hardware, and that's what the CLI is really useful for, much more useful than the Windows GUI (you know how to see the system log for example? Or the boot log? Or the PCI ids of that 'unknown device' on your system)."
So why would you not know that that "unknown device" is? Just install all the drivers that came with the machine, and if it's still showing up as unknown, call the manufacturer (if it's a pre-built machine - You won't get a lot of "unknown device"s in machines you build yourself... unless you forgot what you put in there).
If I have a problem like that on Ubuntu, I can either post on the forum and get jack shit for an answer, or wallow in my own misery.
"Last but not least let me add that people often view Windows as 'much easier' because they are used to it, and they bought the machine pre-installed and ready to go. Most people wo think Windows is easy would be completely lost if you gave them a generic installation CD and told them to get the machine up and running with all the hardware working properly."
I'm guessing that if you give a reasonably smart person a Windows CD and a CD with all the correct drivers (either as executables, or just a big folder with inf files that they can point the Device Manager to), they can figure it out. It's just a matter of navigating through very familiar GUIs - Next, next, install. If you can install software on Windows, you can install drivers.
Of course, if you don't give them the drivers, they might have a few problems, especially with older versions of Windows where stuff like Ethernet or WiFi doesn't work without third party drivers, but most manufacturers provide a driver CD. If not, you can always hop on the net somewhere else and put the files on a thumb drive...
On Windows 7 it's even easier - the drivers for most system components are installed right away or downloaded automatically...
Re:The competition is OSX (Score:3, Interesting)
Never having seen a Windows PC before, using common sense and your ability to read, you can figure out how to get (almost) anywhere.
In as much as this is true of Windows (not very) it's equally true of Linux. I've plonked naive users down in front of a PC running Linux with a Gnome desktop and they find it just as easy to use as beginners on Windows. People who have previously learnt to use Windows (and believe it or not - learning to use Windows also takes time) tend to find it slightly harder because they think they know where things should be and then are surprised to find them somewhere else.
When it comes to *administration* (which is what I think was under discussion) neither system is the slightest bit intuitive. Fixing a Windows PC if you don't already have a lot of experience of doing it is a positive nightmare. Nothing is where you would expect it to be, and the system will persistently think it knows better than you and refuse to do what you tell it. Yes, both Linux and Windows require quite a bit of study before you can administer them successfully, but once you've got the experience I find Linux by far the easier, precisely because you can see what's going on and the system doesn't keep trying to second guess you.
How does it compare to XP? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's slower than XP for everything but the critical "shut down" benchmark.
No, I'm not making this up. That's straight from the article.
Windows 7 is Vista R2.
The server version even makes that explicit. Vista's server version is Windows 2008. Seven's server version is Windows 2008 R2.
Re:Great goals (Score:3, Interesting)
XP shutdown actually destroyed my laptop. I hit shutdown, waited a minute to start shutdown, closed the lid and put it into my bag. The next morning I opened the bag and heat was pouring out of the bag, some warning message about serial port still in use or driver failed, but XP had disabled power savings, and it wouldn't shutdown until the only choice "OK" was clicked. How valuable was that dialog? The hard drive didn't work a lick, and the screen was discolored after that.
With netbooks shutdown time is important. Battery gets down to 1% on my eee with linux, and a 5s boot 3s power down (had to change power button default) I can do a email check cycle in about 30 seconds. so 5 minutes of battery remaining gives me 10 email checks.
With XP it may be 2 minutes, so I should be able to get 2 email checks, but its longer than my attention span. So I hit boot, close the lid to keep the screen off, get distracted, and the last of my battery is gone before I even saw my email. Now if I find a plug in to check email right before the flight, I gotta watch to interrupt the disk checking or it will be 5 minutes to get to that email and my flight will be gone.
Re:The competition is OSX (And .net) (Score:3, Interesting)
And how could I forgot .net. The system where Microsoft once again wrote an entire widget system to replace the widgets in win32. A .net button is not a win32 button.
It seems to me that the standard way(As in: done by most) to develop a gui for Windows is to first find an alternate for the win32 widgets. And I don't see the difference between using the hellspawn that Adobe/Microsoft/Adobe use, or using Qt. It's all just a new gui system, which use gdi+ (And a few win32 calls) as a backend.