Fido, have you actually tried to use the Windows 7 RTM? It seems you've basically experienced problems with software that isn't fully ready (i.e. using the Office 2010 Technical Preview, something that's not even close to release). I want to see what you think of the actual retail software. Also, are you saying that Microsoft writes major programs in Basic? There is no way this is true. I'm pretty sure they primarily use Managed C++. As for your claims regarding the registry, it's true that it definitely has disadvantages, but Microsoft itself is starting to move away from it, so we'll probably see some changes in the next few releases of Windows.
Personally, I've experienced no problems on Windows 7 (using Boot Camp) aside from low audio volume, which is more due to the fact that Apple has some ****ty drivers. This problem might be because I used a OS X 10.5 disc to install Boot Camp, though, so I will have to see if Snow Leopard's drivers are any better. On the whole, I think Microsoft's done a really good job with 7; it's certainly faster than Vista and XP. A lot of the fabled "bloatcode" was removed for this release as well.
As far as the other major OS platforms go, both have their pros and cons. OS X is undoubtedly extremely polished, and Apple's hardware is really very nice as well as price-competitive with a student discount. The large trackpad with multi-touch on the new MacBook Pros is something that I now cannot live without. Thankfully, larger touchpads seem to be something that other manufacturers are interested in implementing as well; HP released a laptop recently with just such a feature. But I digress; all in all, I think that OS X is really nice to work with. I haven't encountered any major difficulties so far, and everything's been really easy to do.
Linux cannot really be generalized due to the myriad of ways one can run it, but if you just take Ubuntu, one of the more user-friendly distros, you'll see that it's a great OS to use that offers almost too much customization. The main problem is that it has a steep learning curve once you move past the basics. The command line is still very prevalent for more advanced uses, and compiling is sometimes a bitch, especially when you need to find obscure dependencies. If your Google-fu is not strong, you are screwed. The good thing is that there is a huge community that can help you, but the fact is that you will need help more often than you will in Windows or OS X. Finally, while there are exceptions here and there, I think that a lot of Linux apps are ugly and have crappy design. There aren't very many examples of really great Linux-only apps. I loath KDE, and while GNOME's simplicity is a lot better than KDE's cluster**** of options, GNOME could still use a bit of refinement and better visuals. GNOME 3 looks awesome, though; I can't wait until it's included with Ubuntu (10.04, for those who care).
Overall, I like this new generation of OS releases...I honestly don't have a preference (beyond liking multi-touch for OS X) and would be happy with anything. The truth is, I mostly just need a browser that will survive the onslaught of at least a hundred tabs...that's 90% of my computer usage, anyways.
Edit: One more thing: Windows can't be nearly as awesome as Linux in the areas of package management and included software because of legal risks. Because it controls a majority of the OS market, Microsoft has to tread very carefully to avoid being sued by someone or fined by the EU. This is also one reason why it removed a bunch of software from Windows 7 and packaged it as Windows Live Essentials. It would definitely be great if Windows had a proper package management system, though, so I hope they have something in the works that will satisfy consumers, software developers, and the government. Also, to address Sprite's desire that Windows have more customizability and less built-in stuff, all I have to say is that Windows is pretty customizable as it is. The difference is that all of these customizations and extensions are provided by third parties. Microsoft's position on this (as I read from something a Windows developer wrote) is basically that this sort of stuff is demanded by a minority of users, and that third parties provide what these users want. Microsoft has no reason to interfere in this niche; its first priority is to cater to the large mass of normal users. Linux, on the other hand, doesn't really have this issue since its userbase is comprised mostly of those who are technologically adept.
As I've stated, I've only tried the RC, and if any of these problems carry over, I'll be using XP. My RC is already getting really hard lag when playing WoW where my computer will lock up, and I'm not running any extra processes, I garentee no malware, and none of my components are getting to hot. But yeah again it's the RC. I'll be looking for a torrent tonight to upgrade. Also from what I have been told by my high school's IT guy, as well as from what I've read is Microsoft does program a lot of their components, and applications especially such as MS Word using BASIC. Microsoft was the company that picked BASIC up and made it popular. I agree with pretty much everything you say,
EDIT: Can somebody PM me the link for that torrent?
Also from what I have been told by my high school's IT guy, as well as from what I've read is Microsoft does program a lot of their components, and applications especially such as MS Word using BASIC. Microsoft was the company that picked BASIC up and made it popular. I agree with pretty much everything you say,
Huh...that just sounds so crazy, but I'll take your word for it. I just hope that any BASIC components are non-critical (and mostly restricted to macro-esque functionality), because otherwise that's really dumb.
There's no way they would write any major OS components in Basic. Considering how they reuse a lot of code from previous OS's where basic didn't even exist it seems unlikely.
I've got W7 all set up and good to go. So far I can't detect much difference between Vista 64 and W7 64 -- my benchmarks are only slightly better, but not by much.
Oh, and my W7 performance benchmarks.
Which sucks because the HDD's are the bottleneck due to the fact that they're not solid state (if they had 1 TB SSD's, I'd be all over that ****).
My processor is an i7 920 overclocked to 4.2 Ghz -- I'd get a 7.9 if I were hitting 4.2 with an i7 975, which has a faster QPI link speed than the i7 920. However, the 920 has a MUCH better performance to price ratio and chews through anything.
My hard drive is not a solid state -- magnetic drives are capped at 5.9, so that's good at least. Supposedly you hit higher marks by putting SSD's in raid0.
My 3dMark score improved by 200 or so points from Vista to Win7.
I think the main difference is that Win7 greatly outperforms Vista on crappier hardware...that's why it runs well on netbooks. Vista on a netbook would be a nightmare.
Comment