your win7 experiences?

[Syri]

Been very impressed with windows 7 so far. Been using it since RC1, and not had any major issues. Creative's drivers suck, as usual these days, but once I ditched the x-fi all was good.
Had a couple of mysterious crashes when I first got my new pc set up with it, but after that been perfect. Just need to get some cash, and then I'll gladly buy a retail copy.

 

[Ch3tan]

Been very impressed with windows 7 so far. Been using it since RC1, and not had any major issues. Creative's drivers suck, as usual these days, but once I ditched the x-fi all was good.
Had a couple of mysterious crashes when I first got my new pc set up with it, but after that been perfect. Just need to get some cash, and then I'll gladly buy a retail copy.

Buy my retail copy! Seriously it's well hard to shift a retail copy, no fucker lets you sell it on their websites. Even gumtree get all funny about it.

 

[Ch3tan]

Installed win7pro on my ickle Lenovo thinkpad. Installation was flawless, boot times are slightly longer than with XP, but once you are in it is a lot quicker. most of my drivers were installed by win7, and the rest including all my laptop quickkeys and fingerprint recognition were done by a lenovo driver updater.

Smoothest windows installation ever, and for it to run faster than a streamlined XP on a tiny laptop shows how good it is.

 

[Ctuchik]

Buy my retail copy! Seriously it's well hard to shift a retail copy, no fucker lets you sell it on their websites. Even gumtree get all funny about it.

so why'd you buy it in the first place?

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Been using Win 7 for many months now as part of Technet. I find the OS itself excellent, best thing MS have done in years.

What I find is (unsurprisingly) lagging behind is 3rd party app support, even when they claim to be compatible and even when that includes supposed 64bit versions. For example, Adobe's CS4 is rather flaky in some ways and you have to tweak processor affinity manually sometimes depending on what you are doing. I find many of the music apps (production, not MP3 player/ripper etc) have become somewhat eccentric. Often 32 bit apps do odd things, even when you make sure they are not installed in folders with elevated security.

I've broken my machine down into 3 areas. Previously I would install OS and apps on C: and put data on D:
I've changed this so OS on C:. Apps on D:, data on E: to avoid security problems. If I want to elevate the security on an app I'm quite happy to do it myself. This solved 90% of my problems with 32bit legacy apps.

My advice to anyone thinking of upgrading is, as usual, check that your main apps will work on the upgrade. 3rd party apps are not entirely there yet for 64bit support and won't be for quite some time. I had a hellish time with CS4 and Cakewalk Sonar but part of the reason for upgrading for me was to get my hands dirty soonest as it benefits me a lot as part of my work.

 

[MYstIC G]

Very well balanced view and I agree. What I found most shocking is that there isn't a Mozilla released 64-bit firefox for Windows.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Actually that reminds me. Although Win 7 includes 32bit and 64bit versions of Internet Explorer, many websites have ActiveX controls and such that will not work in the 64bit browser so for maximum compatibility you are still stuck with 32bit IE.

 

[TdC]

um, without starting anything what is the point of a 64b browser except coolness ratings? that's like having a 64b mail client or something.

 

[MYstIC G]

Just FO back to 8-bit dos then, fss!

 

[Kryten]

Whats the point of it? The same point in having memory accessible beyond 640k, the same point as having a BIOS clock that will pass the Millennium (in past tense) without having a hissy fit. No excuse to stay 64bit and the only reason some people have to is because of shoddy 3rd party support, as mentioned above - typically by clueless cocks such as Adobe, Apple etc.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

um, without starting anything what is the point of a 64b browser except coolness ratings? that's like having a 64b mail client or something.

I mention it as an observation, not a judgement on merits or otherwise

 

[Embattle]

The point is nothing more than starting to shift more towards 64bit.

 

[GReaper]

um, without starting anything what is the point of a 64b browser except coolness ratings? that's like having a 64b mail client or something.

Performance, especially with Javascript. The Safari benchmarks show a performance boost between the 32 and 64 bit versions, it's something like a 30% boost on SunSpider (which only tests js and not the DOM/browser performance).

Don't just dismiss it.

 

[TdC]

Performance, especially with Javascript. The Safari benchmarks show a performance boost between the 32 and 64 bit versions, it's something like a 30% boost on SunSpider (which only tests js and not the DOM/browser performance).

Don't just dismiss it.

well because there really is no reason for anything to be in full 64b space other than your kernel and drivers (imo). ofc, it is natural for everything to move towards the larger address space because you can, not particularly because you need to.

I will certainly allow something like java, or the other programming environs to benefit from it, but I'd be very interested in finding out why the performance hike is so dramatic. my argument is that many of your everyday features won't see much of a performance boost at all. (imo)

 

[Kryten]

I'm not speaking as a programmer or anything - I'm just not that good, but from logic I can only assume that on an 64bit OS, any program running therein, unless there's a layer between it and the OS (which there is in most cases) the application MUST be aware of the address space otherwise it's going to be in danger of conflicts/overwrites, or whatever the technical term for that is.People are free to correct that if it's inaccurate or complete bollocks

 

[TdC]

I'm not a programmer or anything either, but I know a little bit about systems, and I really can't come up with a reason why all programs should be rewritten for the 64b space.

I am not saying that there is no possible benefit, I am saying that certain programs just don't seem to have a point for having the larger space.

 

[MYstIC G]

Shut up and give 64bit Firefox

 

[Wij]

Actually IE8 is way quicker on Win7.

 

[dysfunction]

Google Chrome is even quicker!

 

[MYstIC G]

Google Chrome is even quicker!

I actually disagree with that, I find IE8 faster. I'm staying with Firefox though.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Google Chrome, in my experience so far, is shit at handling IP6.

 

[TdC]

I'm not using Chrome on general principals. Anyone say I should?

 

[MYstIC G]

Not really. Firefox is more usable and it does nothing for me in terms of user interface, etc.

 

[dysfunction]

Google Chrome, in my experience so far, is shit at handling IP6.

I dont even know what that is

Not really. Firefox is more usable and it does nothing for me in terms of user interface, etc.

I find Firefox very clumsy in comparison to Google Chrome
Ive not had any problems with Chrome at all...

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

ipv6 i presume

instead of ipv4 which we use now



IPv6 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


IPv4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


we were going to run out of allocatable ip address's so they came up with this

 

[Trem]

I tried Windows 7 for an hour or 2 then went back to Vista. Why in the name of jesus would they do away with the quick launch? I have all my icons on the quick launch bar to keep my desktop nice and tidy. I did find a way to get it back on but it put them all in a pop up folder thing. Yes I can pin stuff but that leaves whopping great spaces between each icon. Also I couldn't be arsed to find where stuff was and it still didn't fix my permissions bollocks

I have been happy with Vista, it has never crashed and on my main pc the 64bit version simply flies, W7 seemed no quicker.

Having said that is your W7 the 64bit version Ch3t and how much do you want for it?

 

[MYstIC G]

You'll have to nosh him off

 

[Ch3tan]

I tried Windows 7 for an hour or 2 then went back to Vista. Why in the name of jesus would they do away with the quick launch? I have all my icons on the quick launch bar to keep my desktop nice and tidy. I did find a way to get it back on but it put them all in a pop up folder thing. Yes I can pin stuff but that leaves whopping great spaces between each icon. Also I couldn't be arsed to find where stuff was and it still didn't fix my permissions bollocks

I have been happy with Vista, it has never crashed and on my main pc the 64bit version simply flies, W7 seemed no quicker.

Having said that is your W7 the 64bit version Ch3t and how much do you want for it?

Pinning icons is far superior, you just need to give it more time to get used to it. You can mess with the visual settings to make the pinned icons take up less space iirc. It is quicker than vista on low end systems, you probably won't notice on a good PC, but it does some things so much better (file transfer and networking) and faster.

£90 mate + whatever the shipping is (shouldn't be mroe than a fiver for special del)

 

[Trem]

You'll have to nosh him off

He gets that anyway.

£90 mate + whatever the shipping is (shouldn't be mroe than a fiver for special del)

Is it 64bit?

I am just thinking of getting a legit one, my Vista is legit but the W7 I tried was not, I always try before I buy. I know for sure I didn't give it enough time but I was in a rage because of my folder permissions thing.

 

[Ch3tan]

Yes, it is the retail version, it has both the 64 bit and 32 bit DVD's in the box.