Windows 7 Saves 43 Hours, or $1,400 Per PC

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

hp79

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2006
173
0
18,710
I'm guessing this finding is based on Vista. If it was comparing with XP, I don't think the numbers would have been that much different.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Compared to vista perhaps.
Compared to XP, 7 has more disk activity (costing you your HDD faster), is more active in the background(causes more wear on fans), consumes more electricity, taxes your graphics card more than XP.
All the more reasons not to move over from XP yet for me.
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]insider3[/nom]I've been trying to convince my company to upgrade to windows7 for the longest. Still on XP on computers that can handle windows7. I can't count how many times I had to do reinstalls or use ASR because of glitches etc.[/citation]
My company still runs Windows 2000 on P3's!
 

elkein

Distinguished
Mar 8, 2010
110
0
18,690
I've had a few old applications run better in win 7 x64 ultimate than anything since their native win '95 OS. It's just freaky, after having abandoned running some of them for a few windows iterations.
 

bamslang

Distinguished
Aug 6, 2009
162
0
18,690
I'm lucky in the fact that my IT department is smart enough to know that building comps > pre built and that you can easily dual boot XP and 7 on a 500g HDD with server for storage. That way, we can choose which we prefer.
 

stuckless

Distinguished
May 10, 2010
47
0
18,540
I know with my experiences Windows 7 are all pretty much positive. I have not had trouble with old hardware or software.

One thing that hasnt worked so well for me thus far is a "shotty" USB VHS to digital converter. Doesn't work so well with windows seven, ffs, it doesnt even work in its native OS winXP. (it wasnt a loss to me but for a friend of mine)

But a client of mine uses a program called SAP Business One Solutions. It works fine under winXP (tends to hang and have trouble running smoothly) but once I had it installed under windows 7 the program DEFINATLY runs smoother AND faster.

Its a great OS and I can SEE where it would save companies money.
 

luke904

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2009
142
0
18,690
[citation][nom]nahdogg[/nom]Maybe it's my machine but my 4 month old lappy with Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit needs to be rebooted constantly...I'm not sure if it's conflicts with apps or what but going from XP 32 bit to Win7 I'm not impressed thus far...tons of IE hangs, action center hangs, lots of end tasking.[/citation]


i find it pathetic how people mark this person down...

he had legitimate problems, not everyone has a carefree win7 experience

i can get microsoft products free through my school and so i installed win7 x64 installed along side my xp pro x64 and i still use xp. win7 is a little faster booting up (~5 secs) and maybe a little faster over all but i dont know, i just like my xp

my xp is more stable too, win7 does crash more often
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,840
0
20,810
[citation][nom]nahdogg[/nom]Maybe it's my machine but my 4 month old lappy with Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit needs to be rebooted constantly...I'm not sure if it's conflicts with apps or what but going from XP 32 bit to Win7 I'm not impressed thus far...tons of IE hangs, action center hangs, lots of end tasking.[/citation]

get a beter computer, and i am not referring to dell, hp or gateway. spend a little more and get a sony or toshiba, or an asus. notice i did not mention alienware since they are very overpriced
 

70camaross396

Distinguished
Apr 26, 2010
48
0
18,530
I have to take this 43 hours thing with a grain of salt. you will spend way more time retraining users, and dealing with application compatibility.

we are currently have a pilot deployment here in our IT department. I must say that 7 is faster and more stable. deployment using WDS and custom images is a dream. much better than Ghost or the old RIS. however we have ran in to a few problems with application compatability and we are using the 32 bit version on Lenovo intel core2 duos, and 2 GB ram, intigrated video, 320GB HDD. here are the problems we have encountered.

1. Adobe Acrobat Pro just plain sucks on win 7. constant crashes of the application and sometimes it cant even be uninstalled/reinstalled. i can now see why Steve Jobs hate flash as much as he does.

2. Network Printer Support. we are going to have to upgrade our print server to server 2008 R2 and update all of our printer driver to work with win 7.

3. Propriatary application. just about every industry or busniess has its own propriatary applications. a lot of these are still designed to be run as a local administrator. they simply dont work under vista/win7 with out creating shims with the software compatibility tool kit or running them in XP mode. its getting better now that companies are realizing they can no longer just update thier old code and are force to rewrite it to work properly as a non-administrator. any software company that is worth thier salt should have seen the writing on the wall with windows NT back in 1997. its hard to belive that after 13 years companies still write software that requires local administrator privliges to run. so I am not knocking MS for this. it the responsability of the software manufactures to get it right. In the end it will make windows more secure in the long run and keep my end users form altering things they shoundn't be messing with.

the biggest hold up for us will be the propritary software. we have tons of old one off apps (that require local administrator privleges) that interface with our AS400 system that will not run on win7 with out a lot of work. we will have to basicly reinvent how we work and process data to get rid of these apps. and the cost of replacing them with new applications and the training and testing cost assocated with that. However in the end it will make our infastructure more secure and save a ton of time on help desk calls because someone changes something and now it doesnt work. but all this comes at a price. so i dont see any return on investment until we have been running windows 7 for a very long time.





 
G

Guest

Guest
Win7 is 1000X better than Vista. But Win7 is still not as fast as XP.
Oh sure you can switch apps faster but win7 errors out apps if they hang for 2 seconds. so when the system has allot of programs open and the hard disk is going nuts it will just decide the app has stopped working. when in reality it just needed a little more time. So you are constantly restarting apps.
 

lashton

Distinguished
Mar 5, 2006
607
0
18,990
[citation][nom]Daggs[/nom]sorry, I don't buy it, bring me a non sponsored ms findings and I might believe it.[/citation]
of course you dont buy it, you pirate it lol - save more money
 

razercultmember1

Distinguished
Dec 28, 2009
439
0
18,780
[citation][nom]darrendevigili[/nom]Until 7 gets proper driver support (even dual-screen nVidia is buggy) I'm sticking with XP. I always go with the latest fully supported OS version until I'm forced to use the newer, inevitably slower, "latest thing".[/citation]

ignorant troll is ignorant.
 

razercultmember1

Distinguished
Dec 28, 2009
439
0
18,780
[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]Compared to vista perhaps.Compared to XP, 7 has more disk activity (costing you your HDD faster), is more active in the background(causes more wear on fans), consumes more electricity, taxes your graphics card more than XP.All the more reasons not to move over from XP yet for me.[/citation]

put the theme on windows classic -_-
 
G

Guest

Guest
Win2K still has the most stable kernel. XP is solid as well.
I never got blue screens except on Vista and Windows 7.
 

techguy378

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
449
0
18,780
[citation][nom]ee323[/nom]Win2K still has the most stable kernel. XP is solid as well.I never got blue screens except on Vista and Windows 7.[/citation]
Win2K and XP have more security holes than Mac OS X (which is as insecure as Adobe Flash). If you're getting blue screens then you must have upgraded to Windows 7 instead of doing a clean install.
 

830hobbes

Distinguished
May 30, 2009
103
0
18,680
[citation][nom]hemelskonijn[/nom]If each user saves 43 hours annually any medium or large size company could get rid of yet another employee if not a bunch of them. It is amazing to realize that with all this technology we are killing jobs replacing people for computers and machines![/citation]
domo arigato, mr. roboto...

Actually, it's not that simple. If they save money or have higher productivity, they can just use the extra money in expanding the business. Not to say it's that simple either, but pushing back against technology for the sake of saving jobs in the short term is what communist russia did. see how that worked out...
 

robles

Distinguished
Sep 11, 2005
13
0
18,510
[citation][nom]COLGeek[/nom]Yes, install Flash. Lots of sites use it and it just simplifies your life later. While I am 46 years old and a geek of the highest order (and the org boss), I am the 3rd youngest person in the organization (not including interns). Any and all changes within the workforce come at great cost in terms of training. Not impossible, just takes longer than it would in a younger, more tech savvy environment. Regarding permissions, it is something to be considered from the very start. Do you trust your users to do the right thing or do you minimize those potential disasters from the very beginning. That, in and of itself, is a painful topic in itself.[/citation]
I was just joking a bit about the whole flash business. I'll install it when and if there is legitimate business necessity for it. We really don't run very many programs here. We're a grocery store and everything is either POS or signage programs for the grand majority of users. I'm actually happy about removing the right to install because you wouldn't believe all the crazy things I've found on various computers. With a few exceptions everyone has physical access to all computers and there is common login. So now I have made certain they have to run any changes by me first.
 

luke904

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2009
142
0
18,690
[citation][nom]eddieroolz[/nom]Everyone should be going to Windows 7, period.[/citation]


you see, this person is your average web browser. he probably still uses the stock settings. when you start to try to make windows 7 your operating system, you will see its failures.

more and more microsoft (as well as almost every other company) is making things simpler for the average joe and harder for everyone else.

do you know how many folders windows 7 locks you out of? most of them don't even have important data in them. go ahead, make hidden folders visible and you will see.

im not saying windows 7 is bad, i like it, im just completely content with windows xp.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.