Good news for MS haters?(17 posts)
Hey if they can pull it off better then M$ I am all for it especially with M$ pushing unfinished buggy assed OS ( hint: Vista)
It'll be great, if you like to use your apps in browsers anyway.
I still really don't get the Vista hate. Most of the issues with it on release were because hardware manufacturers couldn't be arsed working on updated drivers which meant half the stuff didn't work properly.
Now Windows ME... if you were to call that a buggy OS you'd have a point. :)
Old fogey s like myself will probably just stick to what they are comfortable with.
I have personally always been happy with the windows OS.
The Google OS is a step towards cloud computing - and I really don't think it's "there" yet.
I've used some thoroughly impressive web apps, but do I think they're good enough to fully replace my standalone software? No I do not (with the exception of Gmail, which is the bees knees).
I can see how this might work for netbooks, but unless the quality of web apps drastically improves then it'll have zero success in the desktop/laptop market.
i use the Google browser and it`s soo good.
i think it`s big step forward for google in OS.
PT, the problem with Vista that it consume alot of the RAM and make you computer so Heavy, after i change My windows to Xp in my Laptop , it`s
big Different, any programme i use it was slow to open on vista, and now
everything it`s good, yeah the vista have incredible Style for my opinion,
but the problem as i say before. :)
Monk, common complaint from someone who doesn't understand the way Vista handles RAM.
Vista uses the majority of available RAM at all times because it caches information about your most frequently used programs and keeps it in active memory so that your system will on average load things faster giving you better overall performance.
it stems from the philosophy that unused RAM is wasted RAM, most systems ship with 4GB memory these days, but your typical average memory load comes in shy of 1GB, Vistas memory management puts that other 3GB to use - it's a more efficient way of using memory.
Just admit it freedoms_stain.... vista failed and so will windows 7.
@JesteR, what makes you think Windows 7 will fail?
Because MS makes the same mistakes again. The price is too high, nothing new that you really need as a normal customer. MS really needs some competition. They really have no useful need ideas since XP.
Actually, I only started using Vista about 1 year ago. I certainly prefer it to XP on the whole at the moment.
I've usually only ever taken on the latest Windows release a good year or two after it's come out anyway, and by then most, if not all, of the inital problems that people had have been fixed.
I have no problem with it, or with MS having a monopoly on PC OS's.
I'm probably in front of a PC for the vast majority of the day from monday to friday, at work and at home, and I've never really seen the need to whinge and hate on MS for delivering a system that IMHO works very well.
My problem with vista is exactly that that was outlined as it's plus. The way it uses RAM is a big problem if you are a regular user of imaging software. In my job I use photoshop and other imaging packages plus quite often have the software who's interface I'm helping design running in the background. Result: slow running PoS. And i have a ton of RAM. We've had a lot of problems in our office, almost all to do with the way Vista likes to do things.
At home I use photoshop for my own personal work ( mainly photography ) and Vista will crawl along with a piece of software like Lightroom. Stick Windows 7 on the same machine and it flies in my experience. I don't mind it as much as i used to but it's certainly equivalent to windows ME imo.
@JesteR, I think you will be surprised by Window 7's success, it addresses the complaints about Vista and is currently in good standing with the majority of the tech community who were essentially the course for the general bad opinion of Vista by the public (a lot of whom haven't ever used Vista and just 'heard' it was terrible).
The price isn't really that big of a problem, only about 5% of Windows sales are made as a standalone purchase, the majority are OEM copies preinstalled on computers. - Also for anyone who wants to go and buy Win7 when it launches they can preorder it now for a very reasonable price.
JestR, in what way has Vista failed exactly? It comes on the vast majority of new computers, most people are perfectly happy with it now the teething problems have been ironed out.
Having actually had a go on 7 beta it looks like a competent enough system to me- and better.
As for price the pre-order deals make the software very affordable, you may as well pre-order now whether you need it or not.
MS has competition - Linux, however most people are too pussy to even try it, and on almost every count Linux pwns windows, particularly for casual users - obviously the google target market.
I comes to a vast majaority of new computer because MS is forcing the PC makers to install always the latest windows. Anyway no one needs Windows 7. Its useless. Thats why you cant tell me any major improvement that a normal user needs. Its rediculous that MS took like 5 years to make Vista ( which is basically Windows 7 beta ) and now they gonna sell it again.
About the price. Yeah the OEM version comes with new computers. Do i need a new computer? No. Why not charging 50 Euro and stop making different versions. One version for everyone. Just Windows 7 and sell it for 50 Euros.
Linux is not real competition. An OS that could really compete would need to be windows software compatible. Otherwise Windows would have huge advantage.
Why do you think the IE is loosing more and more market share? Because MS is so great? No because there are other companies who can just make it better then MS. That just the way it is and competition is the best for innovation.
@JesteR, A few people moan about the different versions of windows but that's mainly out of ignorance about the reasons/uses for the different versions, and by having different versions it actually helps reduce the cost to the average person.
For example as an average home user do you need to connect to a domain, run legacy applications in a virtual XP environment or have active directory support? I'd guess NO, in which case by having a Home version these business features can be excluded and sold to business users at a higher price, thus saving you from having to pay for parts of the OS you don't need.
As for selling it at 50 Euros for everything you have to consider that MS are a company which spends billions on research each year, they employ about 100,000 people and have offices in most countries world wide. In addition to this a lot of people put a lot of work into working on Windows and they therefore need to be paid for that. Selling at 50 Euros would not form a feasible business plan. If you aren't willing to pay then go and use open source software, if you believe that would meet your needs.
JestR, Many computer manufacturers have been offering free downgrades to XP- not many takers though.
How is windows 7 an improvement? In every single way. Have you used it? Because everyone who has comes to that conclusion.
There are different versions of windows for the same reasons there are different versions of cars, xbox360's, tv's, photoshop and millions of other things- different products for different needs.
No OS is ever going to be compatible natively with windows software. Linux however does have a program called wine which provides a windows-like structure for windows based software to run in- it's not perfect but thousands of windows applications and games run on it flawlessly, others may require tweaking, therefore Linux more or less satisfies the requirement you have placed on a proper windows competitor.
So what if ms make a crappy internet browser? This says nothing about their abilities in building a good os
You must log in to post.