ClareJonsson Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 The only problem is compatibility issues. Some games and programs that worked on XP and Vista will not run on Win7 beta. In the worst case, your graphics card will not support Windows 7 at all. Also, if you use cracked "no-CD exes", expect a lot of problems, rendering issues, or the application not starting up at all etc. It's odd you should say that, but so far what I have found is more programs work on Windows 7 than on Vista. I feel Windows 7 is more backward compatible than Vista. I am rapidly resigning Vista to the same box as Dos 4 and Windows ME. [Assist-X] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLancer Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 It actually has better overall compatibility with earlier Windows platform programs, like ones designed for Win98, XP, etc... The worst problem is probably that if you have an older graphics card (which still performs adequately under Vista) that has nVidia/Catalyst drivers that don't run under Windows 7 (which needs specific drivers, old Catalyst ones for example may not support Radeon X800 and older cards), you'll be unable to game at all & the desktop will look horrible at 800x600. You would have to wait until they release Windows 7 drivers for it. Here's one such typical thread from another forum I occassionally visit http://www.overclock.net/ati/441736-win ... alyst.html Especially for laptops it can be a pain in the behind, you'll first have to install XP drivers (on Windows 7), and even then, installers, games & applications will freeze or crash often Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 ^ Once W7 is released possibly at the end of this year, I'm pretty sure that they'll be done with the graphics drivers. The beta obviously isn't meant for normal use, so it's no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blade995 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 ^ Once W7 is released possibly at the end of this year, I'm pretty sure that they'll be done with the graphics drivers. The beta obviously isn't meant for normal use, so it's no big deal. I would think they should be released even before that. They should have learned from the Vista driver problems that you have working drivers for your products before the operating system is released. The drivers should take a shorter time to port because Vista and Windows 7 are a lot more similar than Vista to XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky1_2007 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 ive been having issues like no other with windows 7 :( ATI vid drivers have been failing on loading a new portion of the RS world and the windows installer wont re-install java for me :| im going to be re-installing vista x64 bit business in a bit. ohh, and my specs: Core2Quad Q6600 @ 3.0ghz 8gb ddr800 Gskill ram Asus Maximus formula x38 mobo Powercolor HD4870 1gb 2x74gb raptors in raid 0 thats about it. moral of the story is dont touch it with a 10ft. pole till they come out with a new build :) retired 12-31-09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbrideau Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Wait, how did you get Java to work on W7? I tried, installed, but can't load it on Firefox or IE64bit =\. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furah Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Wait, how did you get Java to work on W7? I tried, installed, but can't load it on Firefox or IE64bit =\. I am pretty sure you don't need to install Java, I didn't, and not only that but I didn't have to update any drivers, or download anything apart from an AV program (I chose Kaspersky, annoying me) Steam | PM me for BBM PIN Nine naked men is a technological achievement. Quote of 2013. PCGamingWiki - Let's fix PC gaming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavi Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 ive been having issues like no other with windows 7 :( Chill out, it's just a beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSBDavid Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I officially tried it out today. Advantages: -Loads faster then Vista Home Premium. -Cool start up logo. -Color of the windows Aero changes with the background. -You can set the background to change periodically. -Plays older games and newer games better then VHP. Cons: BETA I would recommend it. [software Engineer] - [Ability Bar Suggestion] - [Gaming Enthusiast] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I hope this is better than Vista. I despise Vista with a passion. Other than the media centre, the whole thing is a beautiful piece of crap. My laptop that runs XP is so much more fluid than the PC with home premium (w/c has quad core and four gig ram). :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pryomancer Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I hope this is better than Vista. I despise Vista with a passion. Other than the media centre, the whole thing is a beautiful piece of crap. My laptop that runs XP is so much more fluid than the PC with home premium (w/c has quad core and four gig ram). A pc with a quad core and 4gb ram could run vista with its eyes closed, it must be something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavi Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I hope this is better than Vista. I despise Vista with a passion. Other than the media centre, the whole thing is a beautiful piece of crap. My laptop that runs XP is so much more fluid than the PC with home premium (w/c has quad core and four gig ram). There is definitely something wrong with your computer. I'm running half that (2GB DDR2, AMD X2 64 5000+) and Vista runs great, not only that but makes great use of my RAM and processor. Check your boot settings, services and startup programs. If you want to have a bit more power while doing that, I suggest you (Carefully) use msconfig, just type it in the start menu and hit enter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I know, I trimmed my XP all the way down. That's why it's so sexy. But the PC I'm talking about is for family use. I don't wanna remove a program and end up rendering the scanner useless (just an example). Honestly, if people need to do that to make Vista decent, what does that mean for people who just buys PC from BestBuy and wouldn't know where the hell to type msconfig to begin with? :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavi Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 It's not just decent, it's fast as anything once you're done tweaking it. And you're not removing any programs by using msconfig. You're removing programs and services from the startup and tweaking the boot. You can run any of those programs later if you like. I could help you identify the ones to lose if you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbrideau Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I know, I trimmed my XP all the way down. That's why it's so sexy. But the PC I'm talking about is for family use. I don't wanna remove a program and end up rendering the scanner useless (just an example). Honestly, if people need to do that to make Vista decent, what does that mean for people who just buys PC from BestBuy and wouldn't know where the hell to type msconfig to begin with? People don't need to do that. It just makes the computer faster if you know how to do that. Honestly, on my computer, Vista without even tweaking it is faster than a fully tweaked XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgelemmons Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I know, I trimmed my XP all the way down. That's why it's so sexy. But the PC I'm talking about is for family use. I don't wanna remove a program and end up rendering the scanner useless (just an example). Honestly, if people need to do that to make Vista decent, what does that mean for people who just buys PC from BestBuy and wouldn't know where the hell to type msconfig to begin with? People don't need to do that. It just makes the computer faster if you know how to do that. Honestly, on my computer, Vista without even tweaking it is faster than a fully tweaked XP. Absolutely. I basically have the same setup as ShadowFax does, and Vista runs awsome. I have yet to get above 50% RAM usage and 60% CPU usage when not gaming, although it ddoes go higher when I'm gaming. (I can listen to music, run a video converter, have 20 internet tabs open, and be editing pictures in Gimp with about 1Gb ram usage). I'd like to know about tweaking it; I've done a little, but nothing much. Thanks to Uno for the awsome sig <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 People don't need to do that. It just makes the computer faster if you know how to do that. Honestly, on my computer, Vista without even tweaking it is faster than a fully tweaked XP. No offense, but what kind of fanboy BS is that? Great, your awesome computer can run Vista fast. But I'm talking about Vista and XP in general. http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1332&page=6 So, onto conclusions. Looking at the data theres only one conclusion that can be drawn - Windows XP SP2 is faster than Windows Vista SP1. End of story. Out of the fifteen tests carried out, XP SP2 beat Vista SP1 in eleven, Vista SP1 beat XP SP2 in two of the tests, and two of the tests resulted in a draw. The best result for Vista SP1 was in the single file drive-to-drive copy, while the best result for XP SP2 was extracting multiple files from a compressed folder. Given these results and taking into account the improvments that SP1 bought to Vista, if I was to go back and compare XP SP2 with Vista RTM, XP would have hammered Vista even harder. :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbrideau Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 I can install XP back, and have it in dual boot with Vista and then make you videos if you want. And your site is too old and not a good source of reference, I don't take blogs as reference. Anyway, most of the computers now run Vista better than XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
easonadam Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Any pointers as to how to tweak vista to make it even faster? I'm not having any problems now but certinely wouldn't mind it running faster if possible! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 adam, http://www.tweakvista.com/ sbrideau, there's something wrong with this picture if you really think I'd pick some guy on a forum over a techie who took the time to run those tests. Honestly, I don't care. There's no point arguing if you really think Vista is faster than XP. :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbrideau Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 It's too old, it's from time when computers better ran XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLancer Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 XP runs extremely fast on newest computer rigs, much faster than Vista. Frankly I don't even see the need to make exclusive tests about it; Just try dual booting yourself. The difference is obvious due to the way XP allocates resources (and consumes less RAM). It also runs significantly less background processes, and the kernel is lighter & it boots faster (I get from BIOS screen to desktop in roughly 10-15 seconds) I prefer Linux, but I do use Vista for it's extra functionality on my other PC. Some programs and hardware drivers are already being geared towards Vista and Win7 only, so XP could become obsolete in some areas just like Windows 98 did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadril Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 I don't really like the performance tests vs Vista and XP. The main reason is that, chances are, you aren't going to notice it. I don't notice any slowdown or problems with vista, and I prefer it to XP due to some of the neat features (like hovering over a toolbar to see what that window has). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compfreak847 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 In benchmarks, vista is slightly slower then XP. In real world usage, vista is much faster. Reason? Behind the scenes caching and paging. Virtually all of the programs I use are already cached and load in under a second with Vista. Plus, XP doesn't play nice with my SSD. Drops: 1x Draconic Visage, 56x Abyssal Whip, 5x Demon Head, D Drops: 37, Barrows Drops: 43, DK Drops: 29GWD drops: 14,000x Bars, 1x Armadyl Hilt, 2x Armadyl Skirt, 4x Sara Sword, 1x Saradomin Hilt, 8x Bandos Hilt, 8x Bandos Platebody, 9x Bandos Tassets, 4x Bandos Boots, 43x Godsword Shard, 82x Dragon BootsDry streak records: Saradomin 412 kills Bandos 988 kills Spirit Mages 633 kills - Slayer Sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 XP runs extremely fast on newest computer rigs, much faster than Vista. Frankly I don't even see the need to make exclusive tests about it; Just try dual booting yourself. The difference is obvious due to the way XP allocates resources (and consumes less RAM). It also runs significantly less background processes, and the kernel is lighter & it boots faster (I get from BIOS screen to desktop in roughly 10-15 seconds) I prefer Linux, but I do use Vista for it's extra functionality on my other PC. Some programs and hardware drivers are already being geared towards Vista and Win7 only, so XP could become obsolete in some areas just like Windows 98 did. I don't need the test either. Just the feel of it is obvious, but I guess with some people... I'm skipping Vista all the way and just planning to use Win7. I see Win7 being installed in horribly spec'd machines and it seems to run proper. Looks like a great OS for a netbook. :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now