Windows 7 Overtakes Windows XP as Leading OS

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
* side note: I screwed up with my post about side-grading XP. I rarely ever think of Vista, I forget about it. I meant to state that "Many XP systems sold had Vista Sticker/Licence numbers attached" - so that MS would still count those XP systems AS Vista... IE2: If Lenovo sold 2 million ThinkPads with XP pre-loaded... MS said "See! We sold 2 million vista computers".

When Win7 came out, vista vanished from the stores instantly. I am betting that somewhere in a desert, the buried cartridges of ET for the Atari 2600 *IS NOT ALONE*. God forbid the Aliens who find these 500 years from now and wondered what killed all life on this planet.
 


Most people who know nothing about computers do not go to Macs. If they did, then Apple would have a huge user base instead of an extreme minority.
 


Actually, people have just whined about it. Not many at all have expressed anything about it properly and the only negative aspect that has been whined about is metro. something that you don't even need to use! I've been running Windows 8 (well, server 2012, but close enough) and I simply don't use *Metro* because I see no need to. I also don't use the start menu much anymore, but I installed one anyway, mostly so that I could directly log into the desktop without having to click on it at log in to save even more time when I boot it up.
 
[citation][nom]luciferano[/nom]Most people who know nothing about computers do not go to Macs. If they did, then Apple would have a huge user base instead of an extreme minority.[/citation]
As long as Apple will continue to alienate from the IBM PC standard where all components can be removed and added back from different vendors, personally I can't name their PC-like product a personal computer. It's not personalized at all, as you want it to be. It's more like a "black box". No personal features, it's all what you get, Apple will decide for you, ha-ha.
 
linux with wine and inbuilt drivers is actually more backwards compatible with old windows software and hardware then new windows is, hell a few weeks ago I installed shadows of the empire on win 7, on the first level the bloody probe droids didn't even show up on the screen, but under wine, beautiful
 
[citation][nom]Teeroy32[/nom]linux with wine and inbuilt drivers is actually more backwards compatible with old windows software and hardware then new windows is, hell a few weeks ago I installed shadows of the empire on win 7, on the first level the bloody probe droids didn't even show up on the screen, but under wine, beautiful[/citation]

Hoooly sweet jesus, I still have that game on an old disk!
Gonna give it a try with that OS, its been years i've been missing to play again that first level

You just made a fellow sw nerd happy.
 
Vista once M$ fixed the bugs was damn good. It was just released before it really was ready. Windows 7 is just Vista with some of the edges smoothed off and a few simple but nice UI tweaks.
 
Vista once M$ fixed the bugs was damn good. It was just released before it really was ready. Windows 7 is just Vista with some of the edges smoothed off and a few simple but nice UI tweaks.
Click to expand...

What bugs? list them for me - what was different SP0 - SP2?

I do agree 7 is just vista with some adjustments, its 99% vista and i loved Vista as much as 7, it was never designed for single core systems with less then 2gb of ram like every manufacturer wanted to push, it was a required step to get to 7.
 


thats because the drivers act more as a pass through, the trade off is your linux/wine combo will kill performance compared to the native platform on modern working titles

its all a nvidia/ati optimization thing, they work for the here and now, a game from 3+ years ago = dont care, easy solution for native windows os, use older drivers or as i do, use a separate old system for old games - much better
 
apache-lives wrote
use a separate old system for old games - much better
Click to expand...
only problem with that is my old system dies, and to fix it it would cost more then a new budget computer, and an old game on wine on a new rig with like 2 cores and 3.0ghz is going to play as good or better the a pentium 2 and barely enough ram to run a modern internet browser
 
beside I like to run at the leading edge of technology, not run a 15 to 20 year old system that use's more power then my bloody toaster and produces about as much heat, hence why when I've save the money, my pentium 4 precott will be officially retired, the kids mite destroy it playing flash games on xubuntu, but me, never gonna use it again and thats only like 7 years old, it works fine as htpc with a HD6670, but I things and pentium g with that card would be heaps more powerful but a damns site cheaper to run, damn a 1 Gb stick for that P4 is more then I payed for that HD6670, financially not worth it
 
[citation][nom]Teeroy32[/nom]beside I like to run at the leading edge of technology, not run a 15 to 20 year old system that use's more power then my bloody toaster and produces about as much heat, hence why when I've save the money, my pentium 4 precott will be officially retired, the kids mite destroy it playing flash games on xubuntu, but me, never gonna use it again and thats only like 7 years old, it works fine as htpc with a HD6670, but I things and pentium g with that card would be heaps more powerful but a damns site cheaper to run, damn a 1 Gb stick for that P4 is more then I payed for that HD6670, financially not worth it[/citation]

pentium 3's are far more efficent then pentium 4's you have it the wrong way around ESPECIALLY with a prescott get your facts right, there pretty much the record holder for highest tdp/power consumption and lowest performance (efficency) of any desktop chip EVER
 
apache-lives
pentium 3's are far more efficent then pentium 4's you have it the wrong way around ESPECIALLY with a prescott get your facts right, there pretty much the record holder for highest tdp/power consumption and lowest performance (efficency) of any desktop chip EVER
Click to expand...
um I know that, hence why I said I was gonna retire it, my facts arn't wrong, I'm referring to modern hardware, I count the Prescott as one of the old room heaters, and I know its the worst, from personal experience, maybe you need to learn to read and learn a little bit of comprehension. I did say I wanted to upgrade to a pentium G, you know a sandy bridge, the second most efficient x86 processor architecture, behind Ivy Bridge
 
[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]What bugs? list them for me - what was different SP0 - SP2?I do agree 7 is just vista with some adjustments, its 99% vista and i loved Vista as much as 7, it was never designed for single core systems with less then 2gb of ram like every manufacturer wanted to push, it was a required step to get to 7.[/citation]
you must have a super short memory. we have already had posts about this plenty before. I know you are a Windows 7 fanboy and all but start taking notes or something.

one super annoying issue/bug in Vista/Win7 is the "nvlddmkm stopped responding and has recovered" issue. oh wait I digress, I should call that a "feature" perhaps? lol It is one HUGE issue with both OS's. it can be caused by different things and even a bad video card but most times it is caused by the way microsoft designed the OS to want the video card to constantly talk back to it within 2 seconds I believe the time frame is. if the video card is per say busy rendering 3D/gaming the OS "assumes" the card crashed and tries to restart the driver. fricking stupid. and I have seen this in BOTH vista and win7 and it is always fixed with modifying the registry to get that stupid hardware check feature under control. and microsoft has never acknowledged this at all. they simply let the user's gripe to their video card manufactors or whatever else they choose to do. the point is user's are left to their own devices. and if you search microsoft site ENOUGH you can finally find a page to direct you on how to actually modify the registry now but it is far from being in a user's face. I guess by now it could be easier to find. but this registry fix I found else where before microsoft had a page with this exact information.

and oh yeah there is STILL a site dedicated to this issue - http://www.nvlddmkm.com/
lol give me a break. an issue that got a domain registered after it! now that is rich. and btw it is NOT just an nVidia issue, ati has the SAME problem and guess what? they registered a brother domain for the ati problem also! http://atikmdag.com/

this IS a HUGE bug/feature. the only time it isn't a bug is if the video card is actually bad which is rare. it's more common the user's don't know how to fix it and mistake their cards for being bad.

does any of this ring a bell? anyways there is one of the super annoying bugs. I'm sure we could list others for your forgetfulness but to me this is the most annoying one being as I am a gamer.

a gamer still on XP MCE actually so I don't have to deal with such issues. lol and I can agree 100% with some previous posts if I could get dx10 or dx11 I probably wouldn't consider upgrading.
 
[citation][nom]thegh0st[/nom]you must have a super short memory. we have already had posts about this plenty before. I know you are a Windows 7 fanboy and all but start taking notes or something.one super annoying issue/bug in Vista/Win7 is the "nvlddmkm stopped responding and has recovered" issue. oh wait I digress, I should call that a "feature" perhaps? lol It is one HUGE issue with both OS's. it can be caused by different things and even a bad video card but most times it is caused by the way microsoft designed the OS to want the video card to constantly talk back to it within 2 seconds I believe the time frame is. if the video card is per say busy rendering 3D/gaming the OS "assumes" the card crashed and tries to restart the driver. fricking stupid. and I have seen this in BOTH vista and win7 and it is always fixed with modifying the registry to get that stupid hardware check feature under control. and microsoft has never acknowledged this at all. they simply let the user's gripe to their video card manufactors or whatever else they choose to do. the point is user's are left to their own devices. and if you search microsoft site ENOUGH you can finally find a page to direct you on how to actually modify the registry now but it is far from being in a user's face. I guess by now it could be easier to find. but this registry fix I found else where before microsoft had a page with this exact information.and oh yeah there is STILL a site dedicated to this issue - http://www.nvlddmkm.com/lol give me a break. an issue that got a domain registered after it! now that is rich. and btw it is NOT just an nVidia issue, ati has the SAME problem and guess what? they registered a brother domain for the ati problem also! http://atikmdag.com/this IS a HUGE bug/feature. the only time it isn't a bug is if the video card is actually bad which is rare. it's more common the user's don't know how to fix it and mistake their cards for being bad.does any of this ring a bell? anyways there is one of the super annoying bugs. I'm sure we could list others for your forgetfulness but to me this is the most annoying one being as I am a gamer.a gamer still on XP MCE actually so I don't have to deal with such issues. lol and I can agree 100% with some previous posts if I could get dx10 or dx11 I probably wouldn't consider upgrading.[/citation]

So a Nvidia problem from either flakey gpus or drivers -- not microsoft's fault or problem, its well documented Nvidia f'd up and didnt make decent working drivers for Vista on time.

Im sorry your using XP still dont tell us how "HUGE" the problem is when your using XP still and have no idea, i have used Vista since RTM, then 7 RTM, and now 8 RTM -- no issues like you listed, in fact no major issues at all anywhere.

How do you call yourself a "gamer" - you cant even play modern games - Battlefield 3? A lot of new modern video cards have more memory then your 32-bit OS can handle.

Not a 7 fanboy, just hate XP - its dead, takes too much effort compared to any NT6 based OS.
 
[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]So a Nvidia problem from either flakey gpus or drivers -- not microsoft's fault or problem, its well documented Nvidia f'd up and didnt make decent working drivers for Vista on time.Im sorry your using XP still dont tell us how "HUGE" the problem is when your using XP still and have no idea, i have used Vista since RTM, then 7 RTM, and now 8 RTM -- no issues like you listed, in fact no major issues at all anywhere.How do you call yourself a "gamer" - you cant even play modern games - Battlefield 3? A lot of new modern video cards have more memory then your 32-bit OS can handle.Not a 7 fanboy, just hate XP - its dead, takes too much effort compared to any NT6 based OS.[/citation]

you know you sure "assume" a lot of things. I ran Vista Ulimate for a LONG TIME. I KNOW ALL ABOUT IT. and a little fyi, I support a network for Win7 computers so I have seen Win7 PLENTY. just another reason I choose to NOT use it at home.

also I installed Win7 for my parents to use. this problem I HAVE seen and FIXED on BOTH Vista and Win7 systems and it had NOTHING to do with drivers or the gpus. It was fixed modifying the registry each time. A WINDOWS PROBLEM. Oh wait, I meant feature like I stated before.

and as I stated it is NOT an nVidia problem or an nVidia ONLY problem. So I guess to you ati provides flakey drivers and gpus also? TRY READING THE ENTIRE COMMENT. I provide you with an example as you ASKED for and you go into immediate "fanboy" mode. lol geez.

it is called a FLAKEY OS problem if you want to be accurate and how microsoft designed both OS's to handle hardware. basically a STUPID feature they thought would be helpful. so if you want to be really technical even I will understand how it could not actually be a bug but just a stupid design flaw. Oh and try doing a search on the problem as I quoted it. Uh there is tons & more tons of forum posts with people having run into this. Uh why do you think there is a registered domain for both the ati & nvidia side of this issue? BECAUSE it is a HUGE OS ISSUE. they didn't register the domains for fun I don't think. you just don't read or have any common sense it seems. can't explain basic common sense to a wall I guess.

and how can I call myself a "gamer"? lol uh I play LoL, GW2, DCUO, WoW (on occassion), VG, Aion, GW, SW:TOR (not as much lately for sure), AoE: Online, & even sometimes login into AoC still. Primarily it is LoL & GW2. I'm sure I forgot a few and I'm not listing any games I have through steam. And I won't go into my XBOX 360 collection either. Yeah I call myself a "gamer" without any doubts.

Lastly, I will give it to you, 64-bit is the only other reason I have even considered upgrading. However, my GTX 680 is running just fine on my 32-bit OS. No game I play has needed more than the memory my system has or the 2GB my card has. Do I need 12GBs of memory I will never use? What's the point of that? Even the 8GB's my parent's system has was cheap as anything but completely overkill as far as the amount. And yes I can't completely use all the memory my system has but if I go 64-bit eventually I wouldn't even add memory. I'd just let the system utilize what it has now. I prefer the speed over quantity (a touch over 1900 MHz DDR3 - memory is actually rated faster even I just can't clock the system high enough but it works great). I do give you kudos on understanding a 32-bit OS and the quantity of memory limitations. A lot of people don't even know that much.
 
[citation][nom]thegh0st[/nom]you know you sure "assume" a lot of things. I ran Vista Ulimate for a LONG TIME. I KNOW ALL ABOUT IT. and a little fyi, I support a network for Win7 computers so I have seen Win7 PLENTY. just another reason I choose to NOT use it at home.also I installed Win7 for my parents to use. this problem I HAVE seen and FIXED on BOTH Vista and Win7 systems and it had NOTHING to do with drivers or the gpus. It was fixed modifying the registry each time. A WINDOWS PROBLEM. Oh wait, I meant feature like I stated before.and as I stated it is NOT an nVidia problem or an nVidia ONLY problem. So I guess to you ati provides flakey drivers and gpus also? TRY READING THE ENTIRE COMMENT. I provide you with an example as you ASKED for and you go into immediate "fanboy" mode. lol geez.it is called a FLAKEY OS problem if you want to be accurate and how microsoft designed both OS's to handle hardware. basically a STUPID feature they thought would be helpful. so if you want to be really technical even I will understand how it could not actually be a bug but just a stupid design flaw. Oh and try doing a search on the problem as I quoted it. Uh there is tons & more tons of forum posts with people having run into this. Uh why do you think there is a registered domain for both the ati & nvidia side of this issue? BECAUSE it is a HUGE OS ISSUE. they didn't register the domains for fun I don't think. you just don't read or have any common sense it seems. can't explain basic common sense to a wall I guess. and how can I call myself a "gamer"? lol uh I play LoL, GW2, DCUO, WoW (on occassion), VG, Aion, GW, SW:TOR (not as much lately for sure), AoE: Online, & even sometimes login into AoC still. Primarily it is LoL & GW2. I'm sure I forgot a few and I'm not listing any games I have through steam. And I won't go into my XBOX 360 collection either. Yeah I call myself a "gamer" without any doubts.Lastly, I will give it to you, 64-bit is the only other reason I have even considered upgrading. However, my GTX 680 is running just fine on my 32-bit OS. No game I play has needed more than the memory my system has or the 2GB my card has. Do I need 12GBs of memory I will never use? What's the point of that? Even the 8GB's my parent's system has was cheap as anything but completely overkill as far as the amount. And yes I can't completely use all the memory my system has but if I go 64-bit eventually I wouldn't even add memory. I'd just let the system utilize what it has now. I prefer the speed over quantity (a touch over 1900 MHz DDR3 - memory is actually rated faster even I just can't clock the system high enough but it works great). I do give you kudos on understanding a 32-bit OS and the quantity of memory limitations. A lot of people don't even know that much.[/citation]

think someone needs to chill

your problem isnt as common as you make it out, sorry its just not

your trying to prove to me how you can still use a prehistoric 32-bit application and limit yourself, what part of this do i care about? do you need lessons on how to use a modern OS?

Windows 7 + 16gb of ram is like $150 max - you can afford $150 right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom