Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: persia on January 10, 2009, 12:40:32 AM
-
Anybody bother to download the trial version?
-
Yeah. I wanted a decent coaster for my coffee cup, when I'm working in Photoshop. :lol:
-
Installing it in Virtual PC and VirtualBox tonight. Gotta stay up on things, ya know.
-
@ persia
HEY!!! Change that signature. I punched my monitor! :whack: :admonish:
Back to topic. I'll never do that. I think that Windows XP is the best even nowadays. Well, not better than AmigaOS, but this is another story. :-D
-
/
-
I'd try it, but Ubuntu does everything I need and is more painless than any version of Windows I've used (I haven't tried Vista as we have XP at work and I only use Windows at home for Ebay Turbolister. The only other Windows apps I need work in WINE :-) )
-
Working on it. Servers were busy this afternoon then down. Waiting for the page to be back up after they add more servers.
-
I got the download, but need to get a key. So far things look really great.
-
If it will work on an XP spec'd machine then I like it.
-
@trekiej
It's supposed to. I only have a lowly Pentium 4 550 with 2GB RAM and it's looking really snappy. I still need to load it up to see if it stays that way but I'm waiting to get a real key before I do that. (Don't want to have to re-install, or be limited to 30 day eval...)
-
/
-
I might try it in a VMWare virtual machine on my Mac Pro, although I'm not sure how many TB of RAM it requires. We have a few non-conformists here at my department that insist on using PCs rather than a standard OS X or Linux box...
(http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/beach.gif)
-
The beta download is "Ultimate" which AFAIK, has an 1GHz CPU, 1GB RAM requirement (plus dedicated video to use Aero).
But, who expects to run a modern operating system on a 10+ year old hardware?
-
It looks just like Vista!!! :roflmao:
-
Windows 7 requires 16 TB of RAM persia, LOL!
-
16 TB Ram :lol:
-
I have Windows 7 in a Virtual machine right now, and even though its only 'Virtual' it runs quite well.
I am in two minds however, if i should wipe XP from my laptop to give it a run.. (Core2Duo, 2GIG ram)
Or... If it aint broked.
-
It took how many years for Vista to come out? Now Windows 7 is out in a matter of what, months? right. What is this, Vista service pack 2 with some new eye candy? I'll test it on my linux box under VirtualBox, some dumb-arsed person will hose up their system and I'll end up making some $$ fixing it. lol
-
TheMagicM wrote:
It took how many years for Vista to come out? Now Windows 7 is out in a matter of what, months? right. What is this, Vista service pack 2 with some new eye candy? I'll test it on my linux box under VirtualBox, some dumb-arsed person will hose up their system and I'll end up making some $$ fixing it. lol
Nah, its a Vista Service pack to make it *WHAT VISTA SHOULD HAVE BEEN FROM DAY ONE*, But Microsoft were too in a rush to get more suckers to pay more money.
-
Lorraine wrote:
adolescent wrote:
@trekiej
It's supposed to. I only have a lowly Pentium 4 550 with 2GB RAM and it's looking really snappy.
It'll be interesting to see if it could run on machine specs with:
300 - 500 MHz CPU
128 - 256 MB RAM
and Integrated Graphics
.. which XP is supposed to be able to do.
XP *runs* on that system, but uses swap files a lot. I have a clean install of Vista business on AMD X2 4800+ 2 gig RAM with MS Office, photoshop, mplayer, it flies...never crashed, starts up like xp.
i've read that Win 7 only loads a lot less services at boot, meaning it boots faster and needs less ram than Vista. most PC's will probably boot off SSD's in the next 18 months, so Win 7 will seem like a speed demon..
-
TheMagicM wrote:
It took how many years for Vista to come out? Now Windows 7 is out in a matter of what, months? right. What is this, Vista service pack 2 with some new eye candy? I'll test it on my linux box under VirtualBox, some dumb-arsed person will hose up their system and I'll end up making some $$ fixing it. lol
No way is Win 7 as radical change to the OS as Vista was. It is just a service pack, but Vista has been nothing short of a disaster, MS wants to wash its hands clean of that name so as not to deter people wanting to shift from XP
-
adolescent wrote:
...need to get a key...
What is the arrangement with real keys for this beta? I had expected that this wouldn't be a full software offer, so I wasn't going to bother with it.
I am going to buy a new PC sometime soon (probably buying components), so wouldn't mind grabbing a freeby Win OS for it.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
...MS wants to wash its hands clean of that name so as not to deter people wanting to shift from XP
If that is really the case, they may have a hard time selling Win 7 to people bought Vista. Perhaps they will do a discounted upgrade.
-
Oliver wrote:
stefcep2 wrote:
...MS wants to wash its hands clean of that name so as not to deter people wanting to shift from XP
If that is really the case, they may have a hard time selling Win 7 to people bought Vista. Perhaps they will do a discounted upgrade.
MS has gone on the record as saying the Win 7 OS upgrade is NOT "revolution" as Vista was, and that its built on the Vista kernel. MS has said that to do more would break existing software and hardware. They have called WIN 7 "more evolution, than revolution".
Win 7 has come about because the "old trick" has failed: upgrading your hardware to run new OS as fast as your old one has worn thin with Joe Average PC user, who is more computer savvy and probably already on at least his second version of Windows.
Users haven't given a rats about aero, or the other eye candy, when it takes them longer to do what they used to do in XP on hardware that ought to be faster but isn't.
The best way to protest against corporations is not to give them money by not buying their product. In effect thats what has happened to MS with Vista. MS simply can't afford another failed OS, they HAVE to make Win 7 run faster than Vista, people have to see the benefits, otherwise they are screwed, especially as Apple's new OS is said to need less resources and is faster than the previous OS's running on the same hardware,
IMHO what is hobbling current hardware is a lack of multithreading at the OS and app level, that would allow different CPU cores to perform different tasks simultaneously. Its ridiculous that my start menu won't pop up instantly and then leaves behind screen garbage when I close it just because a web page is loading at the same time, this on 2.4ghz Core2Duo with 4 gig ram laptop
-
Oliver wrote:
stefcep2 wrote:
...MS wants to wash its hands clean of that name so as not to deter people wanting to shift from XP
If that is really the case, they may have a hard time selling Win 7 to people bought Vista. Perhaps they will do a discounted upgrade.
no actually there are a lot of people so disappointed with Vista that they can't wait to get their hands on Win 7 so that they can get rid of Vista. W
-
Well all yopu guys do know that AOS5.0 is light years ahead of anything MS can ever concive.. :) LOL...
good thing MS decided to get rid of Vista...
-
stefcep2 wrote:
no actually there are a lot of people so disappointed with Vista that they can't wait to get their hands on Win 7 so that they can get rid of Vista. W
Granted, but if I had just paid money for Vista, then I would not be very happy about having to pay again for the 'SP update version'. If it were a freeby, or at least discounted, I would be less unhappy about it.
I think many customers are willing to look at alternatives to buying a particular OS when unsatisfied with the vendor.
-
Phantom wrote:
@ persia
HEY!!! Change that signature. I punched my monitor! :whack: :admonish:
Back to topic. I'll never do that. I think that Windows XP is the best even nowadays. Well, not better than AmigaOS, but this is another story. :-D
I agree
A new MS product means slower and more bloated than the last
Sticking with XP :-D
-
adolescent wrote:
The beta download is "Ultimate" which AFAIK, has an 1GHz CPU, 1GB RAM requirement (plus dedicated video to use Aero).
But, who expects to run a modern operating system on a 10+ year old hardware?
Me!
An OS should be the foundation not the resource-hog M$ have made it out to be
1Gb just to run an OS is unjustifiable.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
Oliver wrote:
stefcep2 wrote:
...MS wants to wash its hands clean of that name so as not to deter people wanting to shift from XP
If that is really the case, they may have a hard time selling Win 7 to people bought Vista. Perhaps they will do a discounted upgrade.
no actually there are a lot of people so disappointed with Vista that they can't wait to get their hands on Win 7 so that they can get rid of Vista. W
I know a lot of people who have switched back to XP from Vista
-
You guys are bored...
Instead of trying new bloatwareOS, try HAIKU if you need a new OS on your X86 machine. It boots directly in my eeebox:
http://forum.eeeuser.com/viewtopic.php?id=15104
It's fast, seems stable in the current pre-pre-alpha state, it's open-source so you can't complain if you don't like something (because you can actuall CHANGE it), and it feels like BEOS, the X86 OS that should have been. It's in fact a BEOS re-implementation.
-
vista has been in use since Jan 2007, Win7 due in late 2009 or Jan 2010. MS would think you've got your money's worth. But if you bought Vista few months before Win 7 was released you might get a free upgrade to vista voucher. Most users i know only got Vista with their new PC all laptops incidentally.
-
Microsoft has taken a page from Apple yet again and are selling a heavily bug fixed version of their OS under a new name and with great fanfare.
(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-064.gif)
-
persia wrote:
Microsoft has taken a page from Apple yet again and are selling a heavily bug fixed version of their OS under a new name and with great fanfare.
(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-064.gif)
Agree....alot of the new user interface reminds a lot of OSX Leopard
"How unexpected" ;-)
(Running Vista X64 Ultimate here)
-
gaula92 wrote:
You guys are bored...
Instead of trying new bloatwareOS, try HAIKU if you need a new OS on your X86 machine. It boots directly in my eeebox:
http://forum.eeeuser.com/viewtopic.php?id=15104
Yep. Haiku isn't hindered by bloat like... working network, sound, or chipset drivers. :roll:
-
HopperJF wrote:
adolescent wrote:
But, who expects to run a modern operating system on a 10+ year old hardware?
Me!
An OS should be the foundation not the resource-hog M$ have made it out to be
1Gb just to run an OS is unjustifiable.
Then you really shouldn't upgrade.
1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Plus, we're not talking AmigaOS here. It's not just the "OS" that is running on the 1GB of RAM (think extras that you add to the OS like networking, USB stacks, filesystems, etc.). If you want to see what a stripped down Windows OS really needs look at XP FLP, or XPE.
Plus, 1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Seriously?
-
Oliver wrote:
adolescent wrote:
...need to get a key...
What is the arrangement with real keys for this beta? I had expected that this wouldn't be a full software offer, so I wasn't going to bother with it.
I am going to buy a new PC sometime soon (probably buying components), so wouldn't mind grabbing a freeby Win OS for it.
The public beta keys are only good until August 1. So, it isn't really a full free copy. Registered beta sites probably get a full copy after the beta is done. (Although, I haven't been beta since Windows 2000 so this may have changed).
-
I am running the beta now. Don't expect anything innovative, compared to Vista. It's basically an incremental update to Vista, fixing some of the more annoying existing "features".
Otherwise it's pretty boring and very very similar to Vista.
Check out the Wiki page on Windows 7, it gives a very good run down of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
-
But, who expects to run a modern operating system on a 10+ year old hardware?
:roll:
-
@Fransexy_
Since you gave me the :roll:, how about an example of ANY 10+ year old hardware running a modern OS (usably). Can't be done on Windows and Mac for sure. Maybe a BSD/Linux might get close, but even the major distros have gotten bloated.
-
adolescent wrote:
@Fransexy_
Since you gave me the :roll:, how about an example of ANY 10+ year old hardware running a modern OS (usably). Can't be done on Windows and Mac for sure. Maybe a BSD/Linux might get close, but even the major distros have gotten bloated.
I expect you could use Xpostfacto, to install Leopard on a top of the Line 1998 Mac... Wouldn't be my idea of fun though :-D
-
bloodline wrote:
I expect you could use Xpostfacto, to install Leopard on a top of the Line 1998 Mac... Wouldn't be my idea of fun though :-D
Nope.
1) XpostFacto only supports up to Tiger.
2) In 1998 the top of the line was the "Beige" G3 running at a mind-blowing 333MHz! (Even if we go to 1999 the fastest was a G4/350 which is far less than the minimum required for Leopard)
BTW, I had Panther on my G3/400 and it ran okay... Until you opened an app. :lol: Same machine absolutely flies with OS9.
-
adolescent wrote:
bloodline wrote:
I expect you could use Xpostfacto, to install Leopard on a top of the Line 1998 Mac... Wouldn't be my idea of fun though :-D
Nope.
1) XpostFacto only supports up to Tiger.
2) In 1998 the top of the line was the "Beige" G3 running at a mind-blowing 333MHz! (Even if we go to 1999 the fastest was a G4/350 which is far less than the minimum required for Leopard)
BTW, I had Panther on my G3/400 and it ran okay... Until you opened an app. :lol: Same machine absolutely flies with OS9.
Ahhh... ok, well I still run Tiger on 2 of my Macs here... so it is still a modern OS... sort of... :-)
-
Got the X64 and x86 versions with keys. Debating on dual booting on my only X64 system, as it is my main computer. So, I have the x86 version running in Vitural PC as of last night. This afternoon I got it on an old 1.86 GHz , 1Gb ram box I keep around for playing with stuff like this. Have to say it's faster than when Vista was on it and more responsive than the emulation. Now to run it through the paces.
Just have to say, at first glance it looks and feels like a modified and fixed up Vista. I haven't had any problems with Vista so I don't see it as much of a bad thing. Though I'm thinking that abit of XP and some Vista programs may not be compatable, just as some XP programs did not work on Vista.
-
@ adolescent
Then you really shouldn't upgrade.
1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Plus, we're not talking AmigaOS here. It's not just the "OS" that is running on the 1GB of RAM (think extras that you add to the OS like networking, USB stacks, filesystems, etc.). If you want to see what a stripped down Windows OS really needs look at XP FLP, or XPE.
Plus, 1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Seriously?
Tell me how to get 1 GB Ram for $10 for e.g. my 7 years old PIII laptop which still is fine and running?
Don't tell me about cheap prices, Lucky me has enough funds to purchase all this stuff. But I don't like to. It is just a resource wasting. It's exactly that attitude which is driving the global ecologic crisis.
Furthermore I'd like to point out that e.g. MorphOS runs quite well on my 400 MHz/128MB RAM Efika (and tell me how to get 1 GB for that for $10). It starts usb stack, network, 3d accelerated gfx, some file systems and a lot of other stuff. And since many of you don't consider an Amigaish system as a serious system, let me tell you that my QNX setup also requires very low resources.
The way to compensate for bad system design by increasing hardware power is not curing the prob, but dealing with its symptoms. And that is simply not sustainable nor a smart way.
-
zylesea wrote:
@ adolescent
Then you really shouldn't upgrade.
1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Plus, we're not talking AmigaOS here. It's not just the "OS" that is running on the 1GB of RAM (think extras that you add to the OS like networking, USB stacks, filesystems, etc.). If you want to see what a stripped down Windows OS really needs look at XP FLP, or XPE.
Plus, 1GB RAM is <$10 these days. Seriously?
Tell me how to get 1 GB Ram for $10 for e.g. my 7 years old PIII laptop which still is fine and running?
Don't tell me about cheap prices, Lucky me has enough funds to purchase all this stuff. But I don't like to. It is just a resource wasting. It's exactly that attitude which is driving the global ecologic crisis.
Furthermore I'd like to point out that e.g. MorphOS runs quite well on my 400 MHz/128MB RAM Efika (and tell me how to get 1 GB for that for $10). It starts usb stack, network, 3d accelerated gfx, some file systems and a lot of other stuff. And since many of you don't consider an Amigaish system as a serious system, let me tell you that my QNX setup also requires very low resources.
The way to compensate for bad system design by increasing hardware power is not curing the prob, but dealing with its symptoms. And that is simply not sustainable nor a smart way.
But it IS the microsoft way..
-
adolescent wrote:
The public beta keys are only good until August 1. So, it isn't really a full free copy. Registered beta sites probably get a full copy after the beta is done. (Although, I haven't been beta since Windows 2000 so this may have changed).
Cheers mate.
-
zylesea wrote:
Tell me how to get 1 GB Ram for $10 for e.g. my 7 years old PIII laptop which still is fine and running?
True, antique memory is more expensive, which is why I said "these days". Chances are A) your system maxes at or below 1GB of memory, B) your system doesn't meet the other requirements, and C) you wouldn't be updating to a newer operating system anyway.
Like I said... "Then you really shouldn't upgrade."
Don't tell me about cheap prices, Lucky me has enough funds to purchase all this stuff. But I don't like to. It is just a resource wasting. It's exactly that attitude which is driving the global ecologic crisis.
Huh? Newer, more power efficient computers are causing global warming. :lol:
Furthermore I'd like to point out that e.g. MorphOS runs quite well on my 400 MHz/128MB RAM Efika (and tell me how to get 1 GB for that for $10). It starts usb stack, network, 3d accelerated gfx, some file systems and a lot of other stuff. And since many of you don't consider an Amigaish system as a serious system, let me tell you that my QNX setup also requires very low resources.
The way to compensate for bad system design by increasing hardware power is not curing the prob, but dealing with its symptoms. And that is simply not sustainable nor a smart way.
Efika isn't a 10+ year old system, nor is it a candidate for Windows 7 installation, which was what the argument was about. (Read the rest of the thread if you will...)
That said, I know that QNX, Xubuntu, etc. are really thin, and might run well on old hardware. But, the user experience is usually not on par with what OS 10 or Windows delivers.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
zylesea wrote:
The way to compensate for bad system design by increasing hardware power is not curing the prob, but dealing with its symptoms. And that is simply not sustainable nor a smart way.
But it IS the microsoft way..
I don't think that's quite fair. Are you saying that software makers should not use available CPU resources? Even in the Amiga world people who want the newest OS are expected to upgrade. (AmigaOS 4.1 on an A500/512k chip only machine? No!? Lazy programmers! :crazy:)
-
Back on topic.
Windows 7 is very nice. I've got a couple of apps; A/V, Firefox, etc. and all my drivers installed and it feels just as fast as my XP install (and much faster than the Vista install I had last year).
My system is nowhere near cutting edge (think "$100 PC" here). IIRC, it scored a 4.4 on the Windows Experience Index when I had a 6600GT in it. I think with the Intel GMA it would be about a 3.5. :-D
Pentium 4 550 (3.4GHz)
Intel 915GM chipset
2GB DDR-400 RAM
500GB WD
If the speed and compatibility keep up, then I think Microsoft might win back some customers that left because of Vista's teething problems.
-
One more observation. I have my case open right now (Shuttle XPC, SB83G5) and I notice Windows 7 pages less than even XP did. I haven't even needed to put in my ReadyBoost USB key in yet.
-
I wonder how the viruses are going to enjoy windows 7? :P~
-
Amithony wrote:
I wonder how the viruses are going to enjoy windows 7? :P~
There is a security update for the beta. KB958644, which relates to MS08-067, Server service remote code execution. This allows an authenticated user to break the Server service and execute code. I have been hired to clean up several installations affected by this particular vulnerability. (In all but one case, these are unpatched servers which get taken down by a workstation infected by a worm from a social networking site. The primary vector is old Flash installations.)
Anyway, I have spent some time with Seven today in Virtual PC 2007 SP1 (SP1 is required if you want to use the Virtual PC Additions, otherwise you will crash 7.) I originally installed using Microsoft's Pre-Public Beta Release... uh, excuse me, I mean the "leaked" ;-) BitTorrent ISO. This version is a multi-installer from which I selected Business.
Pretty snappy, even in a VPC. Although I have three gripes at this point: no "Classic" theme, cannot get that damnedable ClearType to actually turn off, and finding many settings still requires navigating menu trees.
I will not be able to use 7 if that ClearType "feature" cannot be turned off. It gives me horrible headaches, and viewing it on an LCD monitor is like watching white vertical lines scroll on graphics displayed from the likes of the Apple ][ and the TI-99/4A (anyone who has ever played "Parsec" on the TI knows exactly what I mean.)
Using the official beta release, which is ultimate, performance dropped significantly, and I really do not know why. I am about to dump the official release and go back to the unofficial if the performance does not level off.
As for problems with viruses, I am happy to report that AVG v8 runs just dandy in 7. Before reloading the system, I purposefully injected a couple of viruses into the system, and visited some pages which attempt trojan installations (IE hijacks.) I had to bypass IE8's warnings first, but AVG works.
Other than that, Vista's side bar is gone. There is a new "Action" center which gives special alerts from a little golf flag in the clock.
The Quick Launch has been replaced with the "Pin to Task Bar" option, but the icons do not appear to be resizable -- a shame, since I generally like a couple of rows of icons. An interesting change to the Task Bar is how programs are now grouped by the programs icon. As well, if the program is pinned, then that pinned icon now becomes the program's anchor on the Task Bar.
A "Show Desktop" function has been placed to the right of the clock. This replaces the old Quick Launch icon while still giving a GUI option for the Windows-D shortcut key.
I cannot think of much else right now. If you have used Vista, you are pretty much ready to use 7. It is still butt-ugly, still uses up stupid amounts of screen real estate, but is a little less sluggish.
For my performance comparisons, I have run Vista Business 32-bit and 7 Business 32-bit in VirtualPC. 7 feels much more responsive. It also installed much more quickly -- I was able to get 7 installed in a little over two "Family Guy" episodes, versus a little longer than "Airplane" for Vista. (Really, what makes the difference??) I am suspect of these results, so I am going to try again. Thankfully, the installation is largely hands-off.
I am still not feeling compelled to switch from XP. Though, given the apparent performance difference, I may load it up on my primary machine once it hits RC1. My workstation will continue to run XP x64 for as long as it is supported by proxy of 2003 x64.
I may play with it in VirtualBox just to see if there is any performance difference. I expect there to be a little difference as you can adjust the amount of video RAM available in VirtualBox, versus the static 8MB in VirtualPC.
My machine: Core2Duo 1.8GHz, with 1GB of RAM assigned to the VPC.
[EDIT] I believe the sidebar is still available, just not turned on by default like in Vista. ISTR seeing the icon for it, but since I do not use it, I did not go hunting for it.
-
LoadWB wrote:
An interesting change to the Task Bar is how programs are now grouped by the programs icon.
In XP, right-click on taskbar, choose Properties, select the checkbox "Group similar taskbar buttons". Was that removed for Vista?
A "Show Desktop" function has been placed to the right of the clock.
In XP, right-click on taskbar, choose "Show the Desktop". Does Vista not do that?
-
meega wrote:
In XP, right-click on taskbar, choose "Show the Desktop". Does Vista not do that?
I think LoadWB was refering to the 'show desktop' icon in the quicklaunch toolbar of the taskbar.
-
TjLaZer wrote:
It looks just like Vista!!! :roflmao:
Which if I was Microsoft, I'd think twice about. They really should be aiming to distance Windows 7 from Vista as much as possible. A new theme, even if it is only superficially tweaked and the removing of that {bleep}ing awful green-blue aurora crap would do it.
-
Vista went RTM in Nov 2006. If Windows 7 makes Nov 2009 it will have been 3 years. Its not even at RC yet.
I have had Vista 64bit installed since June 2008. It is slower than XP for sure, and I actually dual installed XP to run my Wintel based games. I have found it very reliable but for 1 driver issue it has never crashed.
The biggest issue 4 me with Vista is when it starts up once the os desktop appears you cant really do anything until it has settled. Which can take a good minute or so after the desktop has appeared. On the same PC Win XP is up and ready in 30 secs. (Much more Amiga like OS boot times)
If Windows 7 has XP speed and Vista nuances its got my vote. I remember seeing a quote somewhere at the end of last year that the only good thing about Vista is that it will have a reduced upgrade cost to windows 7.
Don't know if I agree but roll on the RCs and Retail.
:-D
-
uncharted wrote:
TjLaZer wrote:
It looks just like Vista!!! :roflmao:
Which if I was Microsoft, I'd think twice about. They really should be aiming to distance Windows 7 from Vista as much as possible. A new theme, even if it is only superficially tweaked and the removing of that {bleep}ing awful green-blue aurora crap would do it.
Microsoft are in the unenviable position of having to get past Vista, without admitting Vista was a huge failure and mistake... I know only one person who regularly uses Vista... everyone else I know, who doesn't use a Mac, either has stayed with XP, or downgraded their machines (which came pre-installed with Vista) to XP...
XP works... it's a know quantity. Operating systems aren't sexy... they just need to work.
-
That's called the Mojave Project.
bloodline wrote:
Microsoft are in the unenviable position of having to get past Vista, without admitting Vista was a huge failure and mistake...
Windows 7 is Vista without the Vista name, a major bug fix and some of the bloat removed. I suspect Windows 7 SP2 will be quite usable...
(http://www.smiley-channel.de/grafiken/smiley/gewalt/smiley-channel.de_gewalt039.gif)
-
Windows 7 Beta download seems to be borked at the moment. I tried on two different machines with no luck. I've got a spare P4 w/ 3GB of ram I'm going to try it out on.
-
OK Nevermind! The download works fine but it only works with IE!! Big freaking suprize there! God I hate that company!.
If I didnt do IT work I would never use there products ever. :madashell: :madashell:
-
just downloaded the beta and some sort of "helper" application to extend its usage. Lets see how it runs under VirtualBox.
-
"IMHO what is hobbling current hardware is a lack of multithreading at the OS and app level, that would allow different CPU cores to perform different tasks simultaneously. Its ridiculous that my start menu won't pop up instantly and then leaves behind screen garbage when I close it just because a web page is loading at the same time, this on 2.4ghz Core2Duo with 4 gig ram laptop ".
Are you serious ?!
-
bloodline wrote:
Microsoft are in the unenviable position of having to get past Vista, without admitting Vista was a huge failure and mistake... I know only one person who regularly uses Vista... everyone else I know, who doesn't use a Mac, either has stayed with XP, or downgraded their machines (which came pre-installed with Vista) to XP...
XP works... it's a know quantity. Operating systems aren't sexy... they just need to work.
I use Vista every day at work and have done since last May, and to be fair, I haven't noticed anything majorly wrong with it compared to XP. Although saying that, I do have quite a hefty machine. People seem to curse it as if was the devils own OS compared to wonderful, reliable XP. And yet how people forget how much XP was complained about 8 years ago. I wonder how many here vowed to stick with Windows98SE rather than using the 'Fisher-Price' XP. Quite a few I'd imagine.
Anyway, I thank that distancing itself is far more beneficial than trying to save face on a failure. Any changes could be touted as an improvement. Besides, dropping the aurora and the silly line motif is hardly an earth shattering admission of defeat. Design languages change all the time. They need to give Windows 7 its own identity.
-
uncharted wrote:
TjLaZer wrote:
It looks just like Vista!!! :roflmao:
Which if I was Microsoft, I'd think twice about. They really should be aiming to distance Windows 7 from Vista as much as possible. A new theme, even if it is only superficially tweaked and the removing of that {bleep}ing awful green-blue aurora crap would do it.
2000 "looked just like" Win95/98 and NT 3.51/4.0 - it fared just fine.
-
@LoadWB
Classic theme is there in the "Ease of Access Themes". Looks just like Windows 2000, except with the new taskbar.
ClearType can be turned off. Keep in mind you also have to switch from the Calibri font to something non-aliased like Tahoma (or use the Windows Classic theme).
Sidebar is gone. You can now put gadgets anywhere on the desktop.
(http://lh4.ggpht.com/_qA-3-0Xxa7s/SWot82MSbgI/AAAAAAAABFg/X0iNpp_oHao/s800/classictheme.png) (http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Ee3kUP3ksIy-BU4_GYyhGg?feat=embedwebsite)
Edit: Added full size link for thumbnail.
-
TheMagicM wrote:
just downloaded the beta and some sort of "helper" application to extend its usage. Lets see how it runs under VirtualBox.
I ran it under vmware last night, it went swimmingly. Note that this is on an AMD Athlon64 with a gig of RAM, so halve that for the VM and you've got an idea of what kind of system it was on (I also only allocated 16gb of virtual drive space). I say "I ran" and "went" because I tried to hack the .VMX file to force 3d support. VM fall down go BOOM! :-D That's a vmware problem and not a Win7 problem; I'll rebuild the vm tonite and not try to turn on 3d this time. :-)
-
Personally I have used Vista since 2006, the 64-bit version and had no problems with reliability or speed or any of the accusatory stuff being lobbed here.
I run Vista ultimate 32-bit on a Netbook at home with an Atom processor running at 1.6 ghz with 1 gig of physical RAM. No problems there either..
Most of the people who have complained about Vista never tried the release version or Service Pack 1. The thing in my opinion that killed Vista was the nasty Apple advertising with false to fact accusations. Most people that I know who had problems tried to install it on their Pentium IV or less unit and didn't even have enough of a modern graphics card that could do glass windows (even though no OTHER software wouldn't run because of the lack of that support).
I have installed Windows 7 on three machines so far and I don't find it any less snappier or better than Vista Service Pack 1 personally of which I never have had any problems with. There are some neat new features in Windows 7 like a new tool that fixes the startup on your machine should any of the files go bad or get delete. It does this automatically.
Media Center is now complete with PlayReady DRM that should allow you to record (with proper hardware) copy protected HD TV shows that are protected. In other words you can now record shows from cable and over the air that you couldn't before.
Other features include the new start bar.. which has live previews and extended menu functions. Anytime you pull a windows to the top of the screen you can have it automatically maximize..
The background can now change automatically, but the really cool feature where you can play a movie in the background on your desktop as a living moving graphic (DreamScene) seems to be gone..
On the laptop I installed it on, it let me know my battery was bad (which I knew but vista didn't tell me)..
The device stage is a bit difficult to get used to but it's a nice way to see everything you have plugged in, including cameras etc..
The libraries feature lets you coral all your files from multiple machines into one shared area. For instance if you have multiple computers all of your pictures, documents etc can show up in each of the computers as if it were in one folder (when in reality multiple folders).
This file sharing is also now associated with HomeGroups (a feature I know Amiga Samba users are just gonna love (LOL)..
Files are also now more living and breathing. Metadata now seems to have taken on a whole new life with this. You can search index contents of files now, not just file names attributes and metadata.
Anyway, Microsoft seems to be getting a lot of approval for this new Windows. I look forward to seeing it progress. Oh and yes virginia the multithreading is better.. If you are still stuck with Vista, I suggest something called "Process Lasso" it's public domain and will keep your machine from ever having freeze ups or other problems..
Hope that helps some folks here.. I am not sure a P4 is the best machine to be using the new OS or Vista on either..It's gonna be slow no matter what you do or how much RAM is there. Virtually no games on the market really run even now on a P4..
-
@DonnyEMU
Libraries are my favorite new feature. I've used Picassa as my picture library for a couple of years now, now I can do it for all my files and media.
The new taskbar takes a little getting used to, but so far it's a welcome change from the traditional bar.
-
meega wrote:
In XP, right-click on taskbar, choose Properties, select the checkbox "Group similar taskbar buttons". Was that removed for Vista?
I do not believe so. But in this case, ONLY the program's icon is used as the Task Bar anchor, not the icon and window name.
In XP, right-click on taskbar, choose "Show the Desktop". Does Vista not do that?
I believe that is still there. However, there is now a Show Desktop button about maybe 32 pixels wide to the right of the clock. It looks like a darkened area of the task bar.
bloodline wrote:
Microsoft are in the unenviable position of having to get past Vista, without admitting Vista was a huge failure and mistake... I know only one person who regularly uses Vista... everyone else I know, who doesn't use a Mac, either has stayed with XP, or downgraded their machines (which came pre-installed with Vista) to XP...
XP works... it's a know quantity. Operating systems aren't sexy... they just need to work.
How quickly people forget "ME". I know an even mix of people who use Vista and XP. The reactions have been "Vista is OK" or a demand to return to XP after a violent reaction to Vista, something akin to swallowing Dran-o.
Jose wrote:
"IMHO what is hobbling current hardware is a lack of multithreading at the OS and app level, that would allow different CPU cores to perform different tasks simultaneously. Its ridiculous that my start menu won't pop up instantly and then leaves behind screen garbage when I close it just because a web page is loading at the same time, this on 2.4ghz Core2Duo with 4 gig ram laptop ".
Are you serious ?!
I cannot tell if you are implying that his request is unreasonable, or if you are surprised that this system lacks the performance he demands. In both cases, I say "Yes."
uncharted wrote:
I use Vista every day at work and have done since last May, and to be fair, I haven't noticed anything majorly wrong with it compared to XP. Although saying that, I do have quite a hefty machine. People seem to curse it as if was the devils own OS compared to wonderful, reliable XP. And yet how people forget how much XP was complained about 8 years ago. I wonder how many here vowed to stick with Windows98SE rather than using the 'Fisher-Price' XP. Quite a few I'd imagine.
I do not forget, but I also remember that I was one of the few people in my circles using XP starting with the first release candidate. I installed Windows XP Pro RC1 on my Inspiron 8000, which previously ran Windows 2000. I was instantly amazed with the hardware support and stability out of the box (no, seriously.) I also found that a great many applications launched and ran faster in XP (to my shigrin, a couple of games, "Incoming" and "Balls of Steel," no longer played properly.)
Mind you, my move away from Windows NT 4.0 to Windows 2000 was reluctant. Suffice to say, I do not jump on new stuff just because it is new. To be fair, I tried the first release candidates of Vista, and I was disgusted and frustrated with the performance.
About nine months after its final release, as it started sliming its way into my customers' pants, I gave it another try. No kidding, it took three hours to load on my laptop which, other than the Intel graphics decellerator, is a hefty machine, though not a beast. I left that hard drive to languish until right after the release of SP1. It took a total of four hours to install SP1 and to wait for the machine to become usable after the installation. Then it took 28 minutes (I timed it) to shut down.
Now, I know about the Intel chipset debacle, and I had heard about it by then as well. So just to be sure, I tried it on both an Athlon XP 2800+, 2GB RAM, Radeon 7000, as well as my Intel DQ, 1.8GHz C2D, 8GB RAM, and a GeForce card of the same vintage. The Athlon system saw similar performance compared to the laptop, while the C2D system installed much more quickly but still suffered aggravatingly slow performance after the installation.
Anyway, I thank that distancing itself is far more beneficial than trying to save face on a failure. Any changes could be touted as an improvement. Besides, dropping the aurora and the silly line motif is hardly an earth shattering admission of defeat. Design languages change all the time. They need to give Windows 7 its own identity.
What Microsoft needs to do is give us a way to do advanced tasks without jumping through hoops. EVERYBODY hates a phone tree which takes forever to tell you your options, and multiple levels to reach your goal. And we hate to RTFM. Put that together and you see where Vista has what I feel is its biggest failings. And these move right into 7. In XP, changing appearance options was as little as three motions away that did not require an entire web-app-alike window to load. Now it is five, and requires bloated windows. (Not to say that some options are not buried in XP, like changing monitor refresh rate.)
Bottom line, as it was said before, we really just want shyt to work, and work well. I think we miss that response time is very important to the perception of system performance. What I see ALL the time is a user double-clicking an icon and not seeing anything on the screen, even though the system is giving some indication, such as a blinking hard drive light or the hour glass icon, and within a couple of seconds double-clicking the same icon again, and maybe again. Now Windows is trying to open the same application two, three, or more times at once. That REALLY causes a slow down.
To be fair, Windows Vista has some really neat technology under its hood, much of which is intended to improve performance. But all that new stuff apparently was overcome by additional bloat. And I cannot see that the eye-candy did it, frankly, for two reasons. One, the OS supposedly offloads much of the graphics duties to the GPU (a great idea that I think we have heard of before,) and secondly as I have seen the Windows Vista Transformation Pack for Windows XP which gives the same eye-candy with barely any additional overhead.
Anyway, that is all I have for now. I will not be playing with 7 any more today as I have a date this afternoon and tonight. Bugger Microsoft and Windows.
-
/
-
B00tDisk wrote:
2000 "looked just like" Win95/98 and NT 3.51/4.0 - it fared just fine.
Yes because all those OSes were massive flops - oh wait! :roll:
-
Lorraine wrote:
adolescent wrote:
@LoadWB
Classic theme is there in the "Ease of Access Themes". Looks just like Windows 2000, except with the new taskbar.
ClearType can be turned off. Keep in mind you also have to switch from the Calibri font to something non-aliased like Tahoma (or use the Windows Classic theme).
Sidebar is gone. You can now put gadgets anywhere on the desktop.
*looks at pic
Cool, I'm glad the Classic theme is still there - one of the few Windows features I'm alright with.
I only have the Classic theme for my NLited WinXP SP3 and it's my main machine.
Out of interest, has anyone here tried VLite on Vista to try and improve things? (Like a quick-fix until Windows 7)
Ah, thank both of you. "Ease of Access" eh? heheheh So, are they trying to imply that I am "special need" if I want the Classic Theme? I feel discriminated against. Anyone for a class-action? :crazy:
Dammit, quit distracting me, I told you I have things to do today!
-
Well... I though I would give Win7 a go then... Great M$ won't let me download it with Safari... ok fine, I'm using IE in Parallels... :roll: Stupid M$...
-
LoadWB wrote:
Ah, thank both of you. "Ease of Access" eh? heheheh So, are they trying to imply that I am "special need" if I want the Classic Theme? I feel discriminated against. Anyone for a class-action? :crazy:
Yep. You're a retard for wanting to use the classic theme on Windows 7. (Actually, I think they're just there for quick presets, because the Windows 7 Basic theme and a couple high-contrast themes are there too.)
BTW, to correct some information in the thread. Windows NT 3.5x had the same interface as Windows 3.x, not the newer Windows 95/NT4 "Explorer". And, Windows 2000 theme WAS different than 95/NT4, it had gradiant colors in the title bars. :-P
-
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png)
-
@all
Posting this from inside Windows 7 Public Beta running inside VirtualBox! It's pretty good actually, RAM usage is 316MB here ... (So were back to XP amounts of RAM usage)
Installed Firefox and Windows Live Messenger...
Heres a few screenshots:
http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/3/1/11/f_Win7MemUsagm_bbf6bbe.jpg (http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/3/1/11/f_Win7MemUsagm_bbf6bbe.jpg)
(Link due to large image size)
(http://img19.picoodle.com/img/img19/3/1/11/f_Win7InVirtum_5ff9ca0.png)
Also, I did have a picture with the Windows Classic theme but i've lost it, but Windows Classic is still there (I was worried MS would completely remove it...)
Startup is quite slow but i'm pretty sure thats because i'm using a VM. To install I set 800MB as the RAM size but now it's installed i've reduced that to 512MB and it runs very comfortably... it's definitely an improvement on Vista, i'm sure on real hardware with Aero enabled its even better.
Now I better stop, giving MS too much praise isn't healthy. ;-)
-
Also IMHO they sort of ruined the taskbar... when you "pin" items to the taskbar when you launch them they launch at that point, so if you want to launch another instance of the app you either have to go to the start menu, the desktop, or the application window (E.g. File -> New) Whereas before (In all previous versions of Windows) you just clicked the Quick Launch icon again.
I know its supposed to be a new way of launching programs in Windows 7, i'm just not sure its the right one.
I think it going to lead to alot of shortcuts on the desktop, or excessive use of the inbuilt search (Which I admit is good)
Alex.
-
Ok, I've had a play with Win7... The install was really nice, much like the MacOS X install, quick and simple.
But the whole system architecture has changed from XP, ok I missed Vista so I'm a Win generation behind... But this is too far for me... I'm too old to be bothered to learn "yet another OS"... I'm bored enough by the infinite Linux distributions...
I struggled though the various options, but could't get it do do anything that I wanted... 15 min to find a command line is too long!!! I don't have any Windows Apps anymore, so I don't really feel the need to continue with this experiment any longer. Back to my OSX 10.5 :-)
-
@DBAlex
To launch another copy of an application you can right click, then select the application name (same way you pin/unpin and close all windows)
You can always create a new quicklaunch style toolbar. Just create a new toolbar (which is just a folder), and put your shortcuts in there as below (see bottom corner).
(http://lh4.ggpht.com/_qA-3-0Xxa7s/SWp2v1NmiCI/AAAAAAAABGA/wr023z-VL5g/s800/quicklaunch.png) (http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/nrnGrrkYkufFxaZPC8vTPA?feat=directlink)
Note: You don't have to use small icons, or show the title of the toolbar. I just left it there so you could see.
-
@bloodline
It took you 15 minutes to click the Windows button, type CMD, and press enter? Mac users... :-P
(Actually, it took me about as long to find the shell in OSX the first time, I kept clicking on Console and wondering why I couldn't type anything! :lol:)
-
adolescent wrote:
@Bloodline
It took you 15 minutes to click the Windows button, type CMD, and press enter? Mac users. :-P
(Actually, it took me about as long to find the shell in OSX the first time, I kept clicking on Console and wondering why I couldn't type anything! :lol:)
First I had to activate the "Run" option in the start menu... There are so many options which seemingly do nothing :-? The interface is very busy, and the default colour scheme kinda sux for me :-(
I struggled with OSX when I first tried it... but my problems were all related to no knowing where stuff is, and moving from Tiger to Leopard required no re-learning... with Win7, I actually just don't know what I'm supposed to do to get stuff working... My 8 years with Win98/2000/XP seem to count for nothing. :-(
-
So does this new task bar essentially work like the OS X dock? The descriptions I've seen so far seem to lean that way.
-
@bloodline
You actually didn't. Anything you would type into the run dialog you can just type into the search box now. (ex. CMD, C:\, http://www.amiga.org, etc.)
-
adolescent wrote:
@bloodline
You actually didn't. Anything you would type into the run dialog you can just type into the search box now. (ex. CMD, C:\, http://www.amiga.org, etc.)
Oops! I didn't think to search for it! :oops: Old windows search was so terrible I avoided...
-
@adolescent
Ok, Cool... I just like the way the old taskbar worked...
Also have you noticed this with the new taskbar: if you click on an window title from the taskbar and there is more than one instance then clicking it doesn't minimise (XP and Vista DO do this even when applications are "Grouped")...
Hope that can be changed too, I am used to clicking on window titles in the taskbar to minimize/restore windows.
and, @bloodline, 15 mins to find the Command Line?!?!?!?@@@!@!@!@!@
PEBKAC "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair". :lol: :-P (Hehe, just kidding)
-
@uncharted
Yes. It's similar in the way you can keep things on the task bar. Also, items that are aware of the new task bar have some special features (i.e. showing recent items, history, etc.). Otherwise, it's an evolution of the previous application grouping found in XP.
@bloodline
You don't need to let the search finish (if you know what you're looking for). I just type in what I want and hit enter.
-
@uncharted
Yes but not everyone wants it to work like that...
:-(
-
adolescent wrote:
@bloodline
You don't need to let the search finish (if you know what you're looking for). I just type in what I want and hit enter.
Yes, I've just tried it, it works just like the MacOSX search... thank goodness... the XP search was HORRIBLE!!!
-
@DBAlex
Haven't worked out all the new shortcuts yet. But, it does look like group minimize is not there. Turns out Shift-Click opens another copy of the application (like the right click I mentioned before), and Ctrl-Click cycles between group windows.
One thing to note is that the help is from Vista, so it isn't 100% accurate.
-
@adolescent
Also I've noticed on systems where aero isn't available (such as my VirtualBox install at the moment) Windows Classic is much faster to use (just like on Vista).
Glad MS didn't get rid of it all together (I heard from somewhere that it wouldn't be included)
And thanks for the two tips, useful. But I don't mean "group minimise" I just mean clicking an app in the taskbar and it showing its windows in a vertical list and you selecting one (left clicking once) -- in XP and Vista the default action is to minimize or restore the application depending on it's current state. On Windows 7 it just selects that Window.
What I really mean is, clicking one of these 4 (http://img37.picoodle.com/img/img37/3/1/11/f_Groupedm_b6bd6af.png) in XP/Vista restores/minimizes the window depening on its current state. In Windows 7 it doesn't and thats inconsistent.
I'm guessing that will throw a lot of people.
It will certainly slow down my usage of Windows until I get used to it...
-
@B00tDisk
Works fine here using vmware Fusion on OS X. Direct X 9 emulation is turned on too.
@DonnyEMU
Vista did not run well for millions of people and played nasty with video editing software. It is a turd that M$ is getting away from very fast. If you love Vista you just might be one of the last ones on earth. Even M$ hates Vista, it has cost them dearly. Look stock price before Vista and now.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=MSFT#chart1:symbol=msft;range=2y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined
-
@Pyromania
Do you know of any VM system for Windows where Aero works in Windows 7?
-
@DBAlex
You need Direct X 10 for that, no virtual machine supports Direct X 10 since Vista has been a failure in the marketplace no too many things use it. M$ could make it work with Direct X 9 but they don't want too.
-
@Pyromania
You don't need DX10 for Aero, just 9.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Aero#Requirements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Aero#Requirements)
-
@DBAlex
Whoops, shows how excited we were about Vista, gave up using it long ago.
-
I hope you all are using the Send Feedback link that is on every window. It's not going to change unless we bug them about it.
-
@Pyromania: Microsoft doesn't hate Vista, Windows 7 is built on it.. But just what is the aero interface anyway besides a theme with pretty glass. No WPF application requires it to run no windows app does either.
It basically is just another theme that can be turned on and off.. The fact is not having Aero doesn't mean software will run or not run at all. No one really calls any of that in their software. It's either there or not, in the case of not it works just like XP.
By the way I have done plenty of HD editing on Vista, I never had it play nasty with ANY editing, including Adobe software.
This summer Microsoft threw an event to give back to local community charities and I volunteered time to edit the event footage, in full HD on Vista on my home quad core machine. It was a great event that brought together many community charities, here in Michigan and the entire IT community to help others, including the Red Cross and others..
if you are curious about the event check out:
Ann Arbor Give Camp (http://annarborgivecamp.org/)
I also know Microsoft pretty well, I am a Community MVP for Expression Studio (and Expression Blend) for 2008-2009.. For those who note it's not something Microsoft pays me for. It's an award given for someone who helps out others in the user community. There are about 4000 given out a year in various disciplines.
I know lots of people at home and enterprise who work happily with Service Pack 1 of Vista and the comments you have made really reflect someone who played with Vista Beta and RTM, but haven't really used it since or even have had a Service Pack 1 experience. It's not really a fair assessment.
Just the same the improvements to Win 7 are nice and wether you'd admit it or not, Windows Server, Vista, and Windows 7 all come from the same family tree They really aren't any different at all at the heart of things.
I have been doing Windows programming including MFC, DirectX, etc. stuff since 1994.. I know the OS quite intricately and I was a CATS developer on Commodore-Amiga's before that.. So believe me when I say I know what makes that software tick (down to the millisecond)..
The reason Vista didn't do well was public opinion and those funny and cute but so wrong Apple commercials which planted this seed in people's minds. The mojaveexperiement.com really proved that it was more fallacy than fact. I don't think Microsoft will go without responding to those kinds of tactics ever again (IMHO).
Windows 7 is getting great response and this beta is open to the public, so they can get early feedback and make it what their customers really want and they are listening to them very carefully. To me the changes are mostly cosmetic, but it's important if you look at the beta to note just how much they have listened to customers over the past few years. This is a really nice customer driven product so far.
@adolescence as for setting the start bar tasks if you drill down into the win 7 start taskbar setup (right click on it and select properties) you can completely customize how that works and is setup, so you can make it like the old days or the new way of doing things..
By the way the old start bar from vista exists in the preview and you had to turn the new one back on in the pre-beta. So I suspect there might be a way to go back to the OLD start menu (just like you can select the windows classic theme) by setting some internal registry option if you really need to do it.
-
adolescent wrote:
stefcep2 wrote:
zylesea wrote:
The way to compensate for bad system design by increasing hardware power is not curing the prob, but dealing with its symptoms. And that is simply not sustainable nor a smart way.
But it IS the microsoft way..
I don't think that's quite fair. Are you saying that software makers should not use available CPU resources? Even in the Amiga world people who want the newest OS are expected to upgrade. (AmigaOS 4.1 on an A500/512k chip only machine? No!? Lazy programmers! :crazy:)
no what we are saying is the damned thing should do a hell of a lot more with the hardware resources available to it, but it doesn't.
-
/
-
I'm still using W2K :lol: It does what I need, and I don't play games much...
I'll only trash my 800Mhz Athlon when DDR4 memory based Athlong get cheaper and exist... 8-)
-
bloodline wrote:
adolescent wrote:
@bloodline
You don't need to let the search finish (if you know what you're looking for). I just type in what I want and hit enter.
Yes, I've just tried it, it works just like the MacOSX search... thank goodness... the XP search was HORRIBLE!!!
MS does have a new search tool for XP which is supposed to work better. i haven't tried it though
-
@DonnyEMU
Sounds like you and M$ are very close. Are you sure they don't pay you to promote Vista on amiga.org?
:-D
We will never buy or use Vista but we might use Windows 7, beta seems ok.
Do you ever see McBill picking up his monthly check to keep Amiga down when you visit M$?
:getmad:
-
the sad thing is that even if Win7 is good, it'll get spywared/virused/bloated to death. methinks its just a pretty gui over a old product. I'll try it out though.
-
And now, what everyone was wondering... YES! WinUAE works fine on Windows 7. :-D
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_qA-3-0Xxa7s/SWqxMLk6yoI/AAAAAAAABGI/zd3CW9UW6EE/s800/pang.png)] (http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Up6so_wStMeywv4DPrDv9A?feat=directlink)
-
Pyromania wrote:
Do you ever see McBill picking up his monthly check to keep Amiga down when you visit M$? :getmad:
Most stupid thing I've read so far this year. :crazy: I sure hope you don't believe this rubbish.
-
@B00tDisk:
how did you get virtualboxtools to work under it? (networking stuff etc)
EDIT:
nevermind..got it.
-
adolescent wrote:
And now, what everyone was wondering... YES! WinUAE works fine on Windows 7. :-D
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_qA-3-0Xxa7s/SWqxMLk6yoI/AAAAAAAABGI/zd3CW9UW6EE/s800/pang.png)] (http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Up6so_wStMeywv4DPrDv9A?feat=directlink)
that Windows task bar looks very very like KDE 3 as used by PCLOS and Mandriva
-
For the record, I haven't been to the Seattle since 2003 when I attended a game developer conference.. I just won the award this last year for starting a user group in Michigan USA (home of the endangered auto industry). I do make money going out and consulting to enterprise and give individual training in WPF and XAML for mostly interactive advertising companies. And I do create custom controls for businesses that pay me to do so.
Before that I did a lot of Macromedia based web development and before that I worked on several CDROM storybooks for Disney Interactive (Lion King, Winnie the Pooh, and Pocahontas)..
As far as McBill goes, I tried to visit Amiga Inc. back in 2003 when it was in Snowqualmi Falls or supposedly. The old saying "The lights were on but no one was home".. It looked like an abandoned building if you ask me..
I tried to get back into Amiga development also when they called for developers but I got a really nasty snubby response back. Considering my actual Amiga background I expected quite a bit different response than I got..
I really don't think Microsoft would really even see the product as competitive based on marketshare etc..
I still have a fondness for the product and even AOS 4.1. I am just getting more and more disappointed with the community and the realities involved with people who even think you could eek out even a meager living at the moment creating Amiga software.
If you look at the "community bounties" the work isn't commensurate to the amount of work required to produce something. What's there is out of love for the product.
Of course there are a lot of people on this forum who are negative about other platforms, but in the real world people have to eat work and live no matter how much they are diehard Amiga folks or fans of other platforms. I remember and still know people who made a living writing Amiga software. Most of that ended for them about 1994. It's 2009 today and while I'd like to see more, I think we are just about where it can go.
In my mind the folks at Hyperion who did OS 4.x are COMMUNITY HEROES, and they certainly didn't get anything out of doing it so far (except maybe lawsuits.)
To be honest the world is a free place we should all use what works for each of us the best.. I just don't like misinformation spread about anything.. I spent many years close to ten defending Amiga. I still am happy to do it with anyone, it was way ahead of it's time. The world moves on though too..
-
@adolescent
You did know we are kidding right?
:-D
Bill Gates spends most of his day keeping Amiga down, LOL.
-
DonnyEMU wrote:
In my mind the folks at Hyperion who did OS 4.x are COMMUNITY HEROES, and they certainly didn't get anything out of doing it so far (except maybe lawsuits.)
I've thought that too: just a few programmers were able to write a PPC OS that couldn't be done by bigger players in the past eg escom Gateway, phase 5, Amiga international
-
@stefcep2
Yeah, that's it, I knew it looked familiar, looks like M$ is an equal opportunity copier....
It does remind me of KDE.
-
@persia
M$ has been an equal opportunity copier for many many years now.
-
/
-
@Lorraine
I'm at 29% with only Firefox loaded. Note: I'm not using Aero Glass because of my bad onboard video.
-
adolescent wrote:
Yep. You're a retard for wanting to use the classic theme on Windows 7. (Actually, I think they're just there for quick presets, because the Windows 7 Basic theme and a couple high-contrast themes are there too.)
HA! I can come up with MUCH better reasons to call me a retard, thank you :-P
Cool to see all the information here on 7. Glad you guys all got to play some more today. I'll be futzing with it a little here and there throughout the week. If my new laptop didn't have a 2.5" hard drive and what I think is a special Dell connector, I would put it on the laptop on a spare hard drive just for shyts and giggles.
[EDIT] Does anyone else using VirtualPC to host 7 have a problem with drag and drop from the host to the guest not working?
-
LoadWB wrote:
Cool to see all the information here on 7.
ditto. It's good to read some different perspectives.
For what it's worth, the few people I know who use Vista are happy with it, though they use it with pretty high spec hardware. It seems to be a telling factor.
I probably will use Win 7, when I buy my next PC. I've been working from home this last week, and had one CRT monitor die, and one powersupply die. Damn, my hadrware is really bloody old!
-
Aaaarghh...what a terrible Topic this is.
Why do we discuss Satans work here on amiga.org ...why....whyy...WHYYY :-)
(no, really...why?)
Wasting the poor amiga.org´s harddisk space to this ?
Regs,
Espen
-
I n have tried an earlier beta on my old pc an amd athlon 2400@2.ghz with just 512mb of memory and have to say it run quite well seemed quicker than any vista machine i have tried I will be getting the 64 bit version to test it on my currant machine an amd 64x2 6000 with 4 gig ocz memory xp see,s 3.2 gig of that 32 bit version and xfi soundcard with a geforce 8800gts 640mb more than enough .At the moment i have 14 percent downloaded out of 3.2 gig.I got to be careful as virgin cut my speed in half if you download to much within a certain time they done that when i upgrade ubuntu 8.4 to 8.10 and that was only a 2.9 gig update i have lots of software on my ubuntu.I have heard that is faster than both vista and xp.Might as well try it and see find out what games and software work with it .
-
LoadWB wrote:
If my new laptop didn't have a 2.5" hard drive and what I think is a special Dell connector, I would put it on the laptop on a spare hard drive just for shyts and giggles.
Take a closer look, it might be SATA. The cable, if it has one might combine the power and data cables into a big connector. It's okay, the connectors are now all the same for 2.5", 3.5" and 5.25" drives.
-
adolescent wrote:
Take a closer look, it might be SATA. The cable, if it has one might combine the power and data cables into a big connector. It's okay, the connectors are now all the same for 2.5", 3.5" and 5.25" drives.
I wish it were a standard SATA connection. I see those daily. No, this one has some kind of ribbon connection. I'll post a picture up if I get around to it.
-
/
-
Well, downloaded and installed it doing the good old "upgrade test/ route". Haven't played all that much with it on an Athlon 3700, 2 gigs ram, but I can't get into the control panel yet. The shortcuts do nothing (either on desktop or start menu). Runs a bit faster then Vista though. I still have not found a way to disable my touchpad in Vista or W7.
Touchpads are the most vile, evil, and demonic inventions on laptops for people with big hands and fat fingers. I might just have to rip apart this $7000 laptop and disable the fricken thing forever manually.