I’m running the BETA of Windows 7 and it’s been running so well that I’ve decided to make it my quasi-production machine.
Windows 7 is a massive usability upgrade from any previous version of Windows. Much of the changes are just minor in terms of effort but just make the whole system feel a lot better designed.
For example, if I want look at my connected devices I see this:
Notice I don’t see a bunch of crap. I just see the stuff actually connected to the machine. It’s a very nice change from what has been in Windows before.
One of the purposes of this series of articles is to let you know what programs I have problems with, and which ones work right.
Over the coming weeks and months I’ll give you generalized reports on the progress of our software (Stardock’s) running on Windows 7 as well as highlighting cool little touches in Windows 7.
Now, for the purposes of making life hard on Stardock, I’m not just running a beta of Windows 7, I’m running a beta of Windows 7 64-bit. By the time Windows 7 is released, all applicable Stardock software must run on this machine.
Sorry, but your post just made me stay away from Windoz even more...
I am also sorry if my post offended you since that was not my intention.
I was Win user for 10 solid years until 2 years ago when another company "persuaded" me that stuff can work as well as look much better than what I was used to...
I will have no problem switching back to Win when Microsoft manage to "persuade" me that it is the right thing to do...
And somehow, I don't think Win 7 will succeed in that mission - but who knows...
All the best man and take it easy
It's a bit more than a patch - they've made some real improvements with the new driver control panel. The underlying driver model is the same, but they've put a lot of work into making the UI a lot better. Same with pretty much everything else: Windows 7 doesn't just "fix vista," it also cleans up and improves the user interface a lot.
Vista was that fundamental redesign, and yes, they're continuing to make progress in the aspect of design.
It sounds like you have invested so much time absolutely hating Vista that you've completely failed to realize that it did improve a lot of the underlying technologies. A lot of the stuff underneath is very different, but you are pretending it is somehow the same.
Everybody rips off everybody else, essentially. If you trace everything back far enough, it all goes back to Xerox . Seriously, though - do you have something in particular you want changed?
What's wrong with the look? I like Aero far better than Luna. Vista and Windows 7 look as good as any other OS, IMHO.
They did, essentially. Vista is about as much as they can redesign without absolutely killing backwards compatibility. They're even doing a lot of virtualization to keep backwards compatibility with things they made fundamental changes to. How much more "fundamental" do you want??
Question: Do you have anything particular in mind that you want redesigned, or do you just think "redesign" is a cool word?
Something's wrong, then. I haven't had to do such a thing. The biggest problem just seems to be my natural tendency to install too much, and that's not Microsoft's fault . . .
. . . usually if I uninstall the hogs, though, I get my performance back.
It's not?!
I thought everything was Microsoft's fault!
[/sarcasm]
A corporation pushing for 64-bit compatability! I fucking love StarDock!
Well it is a thread on a StarDock forum, by the CEO, so I think the responses can be forgiven bias.
The very same thing can be said about the Windows Fanbois as you so effectively proved with your post.
Errrrr, coz they dind't know better, or had no other choice because it came pre-installed and getting an XP-Downgrade was hard to come by?
Or because they feared that when XP support ends they wouldn't get any drivers for new hardware?
Also your statement might hold some merrit concerning private end-users, but face it: Almost NO major company even THOUGHT about switching to VISTA. Even MS had to admit that. That's actually why they had to extent XP support and are so hard pressed to release Win7. Even more so eversince a major web book manufacturer stated that they plan on pre-installing Android on all of their machines coz VISTA is such a rampant ressource hog.
Reply to few posts above
Regarding "fanboy" stuff - lol, just forget it... It has nothing to do with being a "fan" or not but about comfortable, reliable and secure work environment. As professional designer and photographer who happens to be spending most of his time in front of computer for me "comfortable, reliable and secure" is imperative and after huge number of years using Win I can only be happy to move away from it... For the time being, OS X is the way to go - no doubt - but in near or distant future it can easily be something else - Linux or perhaps Win again if M$ gets their act together... I will have no problem ditching all my Apple Mac stuff for hardware / OS that performs better...
Redesigning Win from a scratch - I meant exactly that... It is ugly, bloated, insecure, under performing hog from early 90s. It is so out of time and tact its not even funny... When they get rid of REGISTRY they will be on the right track - until then I can only yawn at topics like this and smile while using OS X
Regarding few posts that talked about 'installing too much' on Windows... Well, spot on! Regardless which version of Win we are talking about 95, 2000, XP, Vista and I am sure it will be the same case with Win7 we are always having the same problem. Fresh install works great but as soon as we install everything we need on it performance drops drastically and various problems starts to sneak in. Usually within year or two we are forced one way or the other to wipe the disk and reinstall everything... I mean HELLO!?!?! Anyone there? On my Mac I have more things installed than on all PCs I ever owned put together - and guess what - it performs in exactly the same way as almost 2 years ago when I bought it... Guess another thing - yeah, there is NO REGISTRY in OS X...
Did you ever imagine your computer life WITHOUT REGISTRY?
I remember when I was Win user dreaming of it frequently
Regarding defensive posts on way Win GUI looks...Taste is personal thing at the end of the day so it is hard to argue about it... Personally, however, I find it extremely ugly hence I was hardcore user of all Stardock products back in the days which did allow me to customise the looks + add much needed yet missing features from the OS itself.
Looking at various screen shots of Win7 on this and other forums it certainly looks like M$ still didn't invest into their design apartment
[quote who="-=XX=-Nephilim"]
Regarding "fanboy" stuff - lol, just forget it... It has nothing to do with being a "fan" or not but about comfortable, reliable and secure work environment. As professional designer and photographer who happens to be spending most of his time in front of computer for me "comfortable, reliable and secure" is imperative and after huge number of years using Win I can only be happy to move away from it... For the time being, OS X is the way to go - no doubt - but in near or distant future it can easily be something else - Linux or perhaps Win again if M$ gets their act together... I will have no problem ditching all my Apple Mac stuff for hardware / OS that performs better...[/quote]
Mac is secure because their market share is so small, not because the OS is secure itself. Vista/MS blows Mac/Apple security any day of the year. If you want to learn more about Windows security and internals Mark Russinovich blog and videos are a great place to start.
*LOL* Yeah, of course... This is why MS has to constantly release critical security patches, huh?
Granted, the Airbook was the first one to be cracked when they tried it, a Vista notebook and some other nb I forgot about. Still, stating that Windows security works well is like saying coitus interruptus is a good way to prevent pregnancy.
And before you ask where I get my expertise from: I'm a ten year experience system/network engineer and administrator.
Haven't tried a Vista or Server2k8 rig yet, but with access to the LAN they're connected to, I'll hack you an XP or Win2k3 in 5 minutes.
Don't get me wrong. I don't say that Windows is the root of all evil, but it's heavily flawed. Can't testify on whether or not Mac OS is any better though, due to the lack of first hand experience.
I have my fair share of security knowledge too. And I stand by my words, Vista is far more secure than Mac OS. I won't argue about XP as you are right there, but that OS was designed before the SDL was implemented in Microsoft. They learned their lessons with XP and it payed off in Vista.
Btw, hacking a Win2k3 server is not a great feat at all. As hacking a Linux box or hacking anything else. Most flaws when a site gets hacked are human flaws or security flaws from programs installed over the OS (bad developed applications, etc).
So much for security...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/19/the-pwn2own-trifecta-safari-ie-8-and-firefox-exploited-on-day
Excerpt:
"In a repeat performance, Charlie Miller pocketed a $5,000 cash prize and a fully-patched MacBook by splitting it wide, and gaining full control of the device after a user clicked on his malicious link. Another white-hatter by the name Nils (pictured) toppled Internet Explorer 8 running on a Windows 7 laptop."
So it looks like Data Execution Prevention, Adress Space Layout Randomisation and so on are still of no use in conjunction with the usual internet browser...
You think that's bad?
Hacking a pre-beta-software in a beta-OS? Why, that's practically unheard of!
Seriously though. Windows and Security Don't Mix. Because they have the largest market, they are the largest target and therefore face the largest threat.
I wonder if there is a corresponding exploit for AMD processors...
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
