<p>I just wanna know everyone thoughts of windows 7. I myself have beta tested all versions and found 7 to be the next XP. what do you think?</p>
<p>It’s snappy, it runs well (better than XP in many cases), and in my experience it even runs well on below spec machines. I love it. Well, as much as I can love a M$ product.</p>
<p>
Yeah, windows 7 is configured to run like XP, using much less system processes and general requirements. In addition, if you get your hands on professional, you can run any program in XP-mode.</p>
<p>So-so. Most of the big problems with Vista have been ironed out and it’s a pretty solid system. I wasn’t impressed at all with the performance though.</p>
<p>love it.</p>
<p>10chars</p>
<p>AM2+ motherboard all solid caps.
4gb dual channel g.skill high performance
AMD 6000+ AM2 3.0ghz oc’ed to 3.6ghz
GeForce 8500 GT oc’ed edition dual core
140GB sata 3.0
80Gb ide
Sound blaster audigity 2 se sound card
Windows 7 RC 64Bit (build 7100)
sata 3.0 DVD-R drive</p>
<p>Gave the RC a whirl in VirtualBox. Verdict: meh</p>
<p>Vista was terribly slow and underperforming.</p>
<p>I have a Mac, but I’ll definitely consider dual booting windows 7 on it.</p>
<p>favorite feature: start->shutdown. Need i say more?</p>
<p>
[QUOTE=LordMango]
favorite feature: start->shutdown. Need i say more?
[/quote]
Win-U-U in XP is much faster (don’t know if it’s still in 7)</p>
<p>love it. runs quickly, although I wouldn’t use it on a machine with less than 1GB of RAM - Then it becomes nightmarishly slow as it was on an HP laptop with 512 MB of RAM…although I must say in today’s market there really is no reason to by a computer that doesn’t have at least 1GB of RAM. The aforementioned computer was 4 years old though.</p>
<p>When i first started using windows 7, I kept hitting win-u-u. It just searched for things starting with “u” :[</p>
<p>but start->shutdown just seems much more…complete & wholesome…</p>
<p>Question! If I buy microsoft office for Vista, it works for windows 7 right? sry if this is a trivial question ><</p>
<p>yes</p>
<p>10chars</p>
<p>Beta tester (official) has had Windows 7 for more than a year on our home LAN as well as on a computer at work. “If it runs on Vista it will run better on Windows 7.” Win 7 seems to be a very stable platform and is inherently more secure than the Unix-based Mac OS. I’m not knocking Leopard, which is excellent, but I found it reassuring when “Beta tester” wanted to try Win 7 on my new Mac.</p>
<p>Windows 7 is definitely “good enough” unlike Vista to be a much cheaper substitute for a Mac (with greater hardware choices too)</p>
<p>I am a very happy Mac user, but I have more money than you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not dissing windows 7, either (in fact, 7 stands to be by far Microsoft’s most secure OS) but what makes it “inherently” more secure?</p>
<p>Leopard vs. 7 isn’t really a totally fair comparison, either, since Leopard (10.5) is vista-era; the new version, Snow Leopard (10.6) is what competes directly with 7.</p>
<p>I’m also quite curious as to why paradoxical thinks that it’s inherently more secure than the Unix-based systems.</p>
<p>I run Linux and have found nothing to be nearly as stable, and the security paradigm in Unix/Linux is far better than the one in Windows.</p>
<p>Windows 7 runs great after reverting the taskbar to the good and true original one with titles(Taskbar settings, uncheck automatically group apps, and uncheck big images). It’s impossible for me to do any development work with the big icons.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I second modestmelody. (except I only toy around with Linux, and run Mac OS X). I honestly cannot for the life of me remember the last time I had it crash (apps have crashed (basically Safari everytime it has to deal with Adobe’s pi$$-poor Mac Flash plugin), but no kernel panic).</p>
<p>That being said, were I poorer I’d definitely be happy with Windows 7 (with Vista I most certainly would not have been 7). I really like what the Win 7 shell has done vis-a-vis multitasking and window management.</p>