tisello :
No, it's not the money i'm concernd of.. i have enough
what i really want to know it's how games and such work's in Windows 7? on my computer now i have both xp and vista. when i want to play high end games i have to use vista because of dx10 and the 4gig ram cap that is on my verision of xp. But when i dont play games or i play older games i always have xp running because i hate the slow thinking over capacitated vista. I've runned the MS Config to shut down a whole lot of progresses that starts up but it didnt help too much.
I know Punkbuster has had some issues - mostly due to their delay/lack of support for Windows 7. In certain games, it doesn't recognize the OS and shuts you out for 'cheating'. In their defense, 7 is still Beta/RC - So it may be... unrealistic to expect them to have their ducks in a row. Nevertheless...
< and we'll skip the discussion that "Punkbuster is really a form of 3rd party DRM" >
By and large, most games 'Just Run' - There is (one of many) listing(s) at
http://www.sevenforums.com/gaming/5739-windows-7-game-compatibility-list.html Of course - The Caveat that you can't run programs/games with 16 bit code still applies to Win 7 x64. My personal experience is 7 is as fast in a gaming situation as it's predecessors. Theoretically, one hopes this should further improve as DX11 cards and software hit the streets. But that is some time off, yet. A little note: 7 includes a nice utility you can use to calibrate your monitor - I like the difference.
tisello :
What i'm really is concerned of is as i said. Is it smoother then Vista? not all too noob friendly like vista is asking a 100 questions just for downloading a executable file and such, i mean that's just irritating for a person like me that know quite much about software and stuff.
I have both at home - In regular usage, Windows 7 is noticably snappier than Vista. Superfetch has been made more polite about how it manages system resources - preferring to work in the background - and the result of that is it boots to a usable desktop faster. Regarding pop-up questions from the OS: UAC is configurable and more polite by default.
tisello :
Another thing that i dont like about vista is the interface of "explorer.exe" i think the whole *** looks ike crap confusing me over and over again. That's what i like about XP, XP had a way way way smoother interface. The vista interface is just clumpsy and irritating.
Really? I happen to like the 'Breadcrumbs' approach, rather than the up/back icon, since I can skip a couple levels with a single click. To be honest, though - I don't navigate folders and sub folders very often any more: Instead, I just type the name of what I want in the search box. The results come back as fast as I can type.
tisello :
I also wonder about vista sp2, i havent downloaded it yet. Is it good and simpler as they promised or is it just original Windows bullcrap? i mean that they promise to make it much safer and infact it really doesnt matter. Will it also reduce the processes starting up so it will run faster or will it be like xp sp3. Total *** that makes your computer so slow you start to wonder if u got a *** load of viruses on it...
I've had it
(Vista x64 SP2) running for a couple months - from shortly after the time it became available through Technet. Verdict? Well... it's a service pack... Makes a few tweaks, compiles various patches and updates into a single file, etc etc.. But it's not Holy Water, doesn't make any fundamental changes to the operating system, and once installed the sky doesn't open up with a brilliant white light decending from The Very Heavens Above to somehow transform the OS into "XP 2010"
(which is apparently what a lot of people want). So if that's what you're looking for, then..
If you'd like to optimize performance, here's a pretty decent tutorial:
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/81176-speed-up-performance-vista.html