Vista vs Windows7

Hi guys...

I tried the Win7 beta on my pc, and it seems to me that it's just "Vista without noise" to paraphrase Steve Gibson.

Do you agree that it's basically the next version of the same OS, if not why not, and if yes, how come people are so enthusiastic about this pseudo-new OS?

Thanks for comments.

 

It's basically Vista yes, with some interface changes, hardware requirements toned down SOMEWHAT (maybe, we'll see) and UAC a bit more controllable (pretty sure at least). MS was going to get people to use Vista come hell or high water, lol, so, they "repackaged" it, IMHO. To answer your second question, it's because people are gullible. With the way things are going now with the different versions of 7, people will end up paying more for this "repackaged" Vista than they would Vista itself.

 

all most users will notice is the tweaked UI.
alot of work has been done to majorly optimize everything.
trigger services are now used. these are services start start based on certain parameters and stop when finished. this leads to a lighter system.
plus upgraded wddm which is the Windows Display Driver Model.
there is quite alot more under the hood changes but i thought i would list a few.

I found windows 7 to be quite alot faster.
If by "noise" you ment lots of uac prompts then you probaly havent setup vista properly. I hardly ever get uac prompts on vista.

windows xp was windows 2000 with some advancements. windows 7 is windows vista with advancements.

the main reason people are liking windows 7 so much is that it is faster than xp and even at beta stage 99percent of stuff works.

the next release of OSX "snow leopard" from apple is just optimization of the operating system plus a few bit of software support. such as microsoft exchange support.

what im trying to say is that the next version doesnt need to have tons of new features.

if the vista haters like windows 7 they have got windows vista as the base so they should also like vista.
since SP1 havent reallly had any problems with vista. its just very slow.

 

It'll be cool to see all the Vista haters move on to Win7 and boast about how awesome it is. Hypocrisy (or better it, sheep mentality) FTW!


I for one won't be "upgrading" anytime soon. I just bought Vista in the Summer so it'll have to last some more time. Hopefully Microsoft will release some of 7's apps to Vista like they did to XP when Vista was out. That and hopes of an improved SP2 will keep me away from the temptation of wasting money on 7

 

Hey,
well if your happy with vista then keep it.
i will be willing to get windows 7 due to proformance enhancements,trigger services and the new superbar.

directX11 will be included with vista service pack 2.
Internet explorer 8 will work on both xp and vista.
all the windows live apps will work on vista.

on my coputer vista works but its slow even on my decent hardware.
windows 7 is quite alot faster on the same hardware.

 

The paradox is that 'Vista haters' are usually 'XP lovers' feeling betrayed by MS for having another baby growing up; almost like saying XP is doomed, no joy announcing its imminent death. If you really dislike MS, why not change to Linux or Mac? The truth is that we get attached to our computers and all its software, and we forget that private companies exist to make a profit out of innovation, for good reasons (MS will have to reduce its workforce by thousands, because of the current global financial crisis).

I like Vista, and I think Windows 7 will have some improvements for sure (my test of Windows 7 only gave me a little bit more speed, nothing else so far).

Life goes on, and change is absolutely necessary. I would never pay for an upgrade though. A new computer with Windows 7, why not.

 

You mean the same "XP lovers" who whined on about how Windows XP sucked and Windows 98 was 10x better? Eh, like I said, they must have really SHORT memories. People always have to whine and complain about something. OK, but when that whining and complaining comprises of spreading FUD and nothing else, that isn't cool. And that's what people did with Vista. Whatever, I'm happy about it, I mean, sure it has its share of problems but which OS doesn't? I just hope Microsoft doesn't drop the ball and leave us Vista users hanged up to dry. XP got IE 7, WMP 11 and Windows Defender from Vista. I'm just asking for the same treatment, or a free upgrade *wink*

 

Win7 is Vista2

 

I don´t like the send feedback text in Windows7 beta in all apps, I think it is enough that everyone can read only for testing purpose. Windows 7 = Vista 2 same opinion like meriadoc, no more no less, another security through obscurity act.

 

That feedback link is there for a reason.

 

I have an OEM copy of Vista. I might buy a retail copy of Windows 7, if the price is reasonable. I am certainly not going to pay $200 or more.

 

There's no way you're going to get 7 for less than that. I bet even the "Starter" edition (which I believe will only be sold in the "developing" countries) is more than likely going to cost $100.

 

Everything I've read so far has been positive on Windows 7. Here's a recent article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090204.wgtwindows0204/BNStory/Technology/home

 

Probably so. Still, that will make or break a sale for me. And with the economy being what it is, probably a fair number of others as well.

 

I just do not get some people...You are saying its just a "pseudo-new OS" yet you didn't take the time to view it in depth..because if you did,you must have seen the changes..hell i can tell you about 30 reasons why its better than vista and like a fragzilionth from XP(yea except if you are one of those that cry the 15$ for the extra ram)..Hell, its in beta and runs more stable on my machine than the 10 years old XP does(and with compatibility mode it runs anything that XP does,managed to install tomb raider 2 ^_^ ).
I love the fact that i won't have2 look for drivers,incompatible apps ,forget service tweaks e.t.c

I certainly hope it does not fail as much as vista did at its pricing,but i will still take the free upgrade(should be one from vista,as there was from xp>vista).

 

Hey Chris,
I completely agree.
I hope microsoft include wireless drivers with the final.
If not i know where to get the drivers for my wireless card and it does pickup most of my other drivers.
I will definatly be buying it.
I dont use service tweaks anyway.
I hope third party companies make use of trigger services.

I do admit vista is slow but other than it is the best version of windows ever. infact i hate using xp at college.

 

It IS a "pseudo-new" OS, just very tweaked in quite a few places. In its core, it IS Vista. There won't be a free upgrade either, that's already been pointed out. Will it perform better than Vista? It looks that way, but wait until it gets out in the world first. As far as pricing, don't expect prices less than the original Vista, especially as there is only Premium and Professional that will be available retail.

 

Now THAT I like. Heck, that means on my piddly 1Gb ram system it should work pretty well....of course between now and final that could all change.

 

The core is NT,and it is dated waaay longer than even before XP.The kernel has almost been 100% re-written..they were just based on some of vista's aspects as xp did with 2000 e.t.c..It most certainly will perform better than vista since even indexing will not be used unless you actually search for something..It is still too soon too judge though,as it is still unborn.

@lodore : i really hope so too about trigger services capabilities and 3rd party vendors..would be lovely if microsoft had it as a prerequisit to give them the win7 compatible certification

@dw426 : i really really really hope this will not be the final case with pricing..i still will get a free copy because my univercity has msdnaa partnership , though..

well...time will tell,but so far it gives me a good feeling.

 

Calling 7 a "pseudo-new OS" is a little silly, every new OS is based on prior work to one extent or another, so none of them are truly new. Your comment that it's "pseudo-new" is merely based on visual appearances. You're ignoring the under the hood changes and non-obvious improvements. Inside, it may be a whole lot newer than it's predecessors....

 

I'm not ignoring anything, but at the same time I don't KNOW everything about it either. I'm simply saying that it's not so "new", it just contains many, many changes. In its basic idea, it is Vista with a lot of performance improvements. I'm not gonna go jumping on any fanboy wagons yet because I know enough about MS not to do so. I've already seen it happen elsewhere, "Windows 7 is God" and other such idiotic crap.

This thing is in Beta, MS already had to turn around and change the UAC deal because of complaints they made it insecure. Things are going to get left out, and a couple of months from the release of final, the Windows Updates will start chugging along as they always have. Performance seems to be the name of the game for Windows 7.

 

Hi all... Thanks for all your replies...

When starting this thread, I was precisely interested in the true differences between the two Os's. I suggest we go on trying to specify those differences/improvements if we can, shall we? I don't know much about 7, but am eager to learn as much as possible before making my own opinion.

I admit I am an XP fan and Vista non-fan for the time being...

 

Hey Chris,
ye that would be really good.
I wish microsoft would be stricter in some areas such as unnessacary usage of autorun entries. the problem is microsoft uses autorun entires at the wrong times as well. such as the intelli point autoupdater is an autorun entire yet only checks for updates once a weeek. why isnt it a schduled task?
same goes for the sun java update autorun entrie as well as hp,quicktime etc.
do you agree?
I also wish microsoft would also be stricter with clean installs and uninstalls.
this includes cleaning out the temp folder once its finished installing. quicktime,itunes, ati drivers,nvidia drivers etc all leave the temp extraction folders after the install has finished which takes up quite alot of disc space.
also unnessecary usage of services.
I think all the major companies should be forced in to getting the certifications which includes the above points.
major companies like dell,hp,epson,creative,symantec,mcafee etc etc.

 

The one thing I DO see as a huge improvement is trigger services. No more unneeded (and sometimes risky) services churning away in the background eating up resources. Instead, they'll (as far as I am understanding this) "fire" when needed, and go back off when they aren't.