Windows 7 runs so much smoother on my laptop (AMD sempron 2.1ghz, 1 gb ram) than Vista did, with the Aero interface on Vista running, it was sloooow, with the aero running on 7, it runs faster than vista, minus the aero interface. Everyone is raving about how good 7 is, I'm with them.
Did you wipe the default Vista install when you got the lappy? You know how much shit they put running on them as default?CammRobb wrote:
Windows 7 runs so much smoother on my laptop (AMD sempron 2.1ghz, 1 gb ram) than Vista did, with the Aero interface on Vista running, it was sloooow, with the aero running on 7, it runs faster than vista, minus the aero interface. Everyone is raving about how good 7 is, I'm with them.
Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2009-11-29 07:36:58)
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
No, I didn't at the time, but later on, I put vista 64bit on it, and much the same occurred.GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Did you wipe the default Vista install when you got the lappy? You know how much shit they put running on them as default?CammRobb wrote:
Windows 7 runs so much smoother on my laptop (AMD sempron 2.1ghz, 1 gb ram) than Vista did, with the Aero interface on Vista running, it was sloooow, with the aero running on 7, it runs faster than vista, minus the aero interface. Everyone is raving about how good 7 is, I'm with them.
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!CammRobb wrote:
No, I didn't at the time, but later on, I put vista 64bit on it, and much the same occurred.GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Did you wipe the default Vista install when you got the lappy? You know how much shit they put running on them as default?CammRobb wrote:
Windows 7 runs so much smoother on my laptop (AMD sempron 2.1ghz, 1 gb ram) than Vista did, with the Aero interface on Vista running, it was sloooow, with the aero running on 7, it runs faster than vista, minus the aero interface. Everyone is raving about how good 7 is, I'm with them.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
all the cool kids are doing it.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!
i just put x64 on a desktop w/2 gb ram. to be fair, i'm not done yet . . .
Why does it matter? Sure it wont have any advantage over x86 with 1 gb of RAM, but what downsides would there be?Freezer7Pro wrote:
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!
64bit is slower in stupidly low amounts of ram, and faster with lots of ram.Wallpaper wrote:
Why does it matter? Sure it wont have any advantage over x86 with 1 gb of RAM, but what downsides would there be?Freezer7Pro wrote:
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
There are zero reasons not to run Win7. Zero. Unless, maybe, if you're a mac user. But otherwise, again, zero. Same speed as XP, features as Vista, better power management and performance than either, full compatibility with both, in-place or easy upgrades for either, and $30 (or £30) for students. You'd be an idiot not to do it.
-kon
-kon
As a current happy vista user (yeah one of the few) I see no reason for me to go to win 7. It gives me nothing I need over vista and sicnce I'm not a student I don't get it cheap. I would go with 7 no doubt if I needed to purchase an OS but I don't see the need to upgrade from Vista.konfusion wrote:
There are zero reasons not to run Win7. Zero. Unless, maybe, if you're a mac user. But otherwise, again, zero. Same speed as XP, features as Vista, better power management and performance than either, full compatibility with both, in-place or easy upgrades for either, and $30 (or £30) for students. You'd be an idiot not to do it.
-kon
I concur. If you've got a reasonably fast computer, Vista will run just as well as 7. There is but one thing that is keeping me from going 7, and that is the UI. They've made all these small changes all over, so that it's almost like Vista, but not really. It annoys the hell out of me.jaymz9350 wrote:
As a current happy vista user (yeah one of the few) I see no reason for me to go to win 7. It gives me nothing I need over vista and sicnce I'm not a student I don't get it cheap. I would go with 7 no doubt if I needed to purchase an OS but I don't see the need to upgrade from Vista.konfusion wrote:
There are zero reasons not to run Win7. Zero. Unless, maybe, if you're a mac user. But otherwise, again, zero. Same speed as XP, features as Vista, better power management and performance than either, full compatibility with both, in-place or easy upgrades for either, and $30 (or £30) for students. You'd be an idiot not to do it.
-kon
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
monetary is as good as any reason to not upgrade. compatibility is the other reason. an HP scanner that worked for vista doesn't have 7 drivers yet, and i may have to relegate it to an XP x64 machine i have. i will say i have been very happy otherwise, with win 7.jaymz9350 wrote:
I don't get it cheap. I would go with 7 no doubt if I needed to purchase an OS but I don't see the need to upgrade from Vista.
Everything that worked with Vista works with Win7 for me. I installed several printers using Vista drivers on my win7 machines.burnzz wrote:
monetary is as good as any reason to not upgrade. compatibility is the other reason. an HP scanner that worked for vista doesn't have 7 drivers yet, and i may have to relegate it to an XP x64 machine i have. i will say i have been very happy otherwise, with win 7.jaymz9350 wrote:
I don't get it cheap. I would go with 7 no doubt if I needed to purchase an OS but I don't see the need to upgrade from Vista.
-kon
Only thing I cant get to work Is HDMI audio from my computer to my TV
Because I had it handy.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!CammRobb wrote:
No, I didn't at the time, but later on, I put vista 64bit on it, and much the same occurred.GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Did you wipe the default Vista install when you got the lappy? You know how much shit they put running on them as default?
I got my windows 7 for free through Microsoft student alliance.
It was worth it.
It was worth it.
not a ringing endorsement. nice price tho!AussieReaper wrote:
I got my windows 7 for free through Microsoft student alliance.
It was worth it.
nice, i got 2 windows 7 keys through the engineering department, but I don't have the time to mess with all that, so I'm saving them for whenever I finally get a new motherboardAussieReaper wrote:
I got my windows 7 for free through Microsoft student alliance.
It was worth it.
I've done countless win 7 installs in the last few days and the only really positive thing I can say is that the blue screens are a lot nicer looking than in Win 9x
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Downsides? It'll be slower (each instruction will be bigger and so take longer to run - but have the potential to do more 'work').Wallpaper wrote:
Why does it matter? Sure it wont have any advantage over x86 with 1 gb of RAM, but what downsides would there be?Freezer7Pro wrote:
Why THE HELL put 64-bit on a laptop with ONE GIGABYTE of RAM?!
Unless you're in a very specific environment where you are working with huge numbers (>4 billion) for big and complex calculations on a regular basis - but that is hardly typical.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-11-30 11:33:18)
XP and Windows 98 will always be awsome PC OS's. and they only have half the problems of Vista or WIndows 7. Ill keep my Macbook pro, at least i have no problems with the OS.
Don't you?specialistx2324 wrote:
XP and Windows 98 will always be awsome PC OS's. and they only have half the problems of Vista or WIndows 7. Ill keep my Macbook pro, at least i have no problems with the OS.
I take it you haven't upgraded to 10.6 then....
I seriously hope you're trolling.specialistx2324 wrote:
XP and Windows 98 will always be awsome PC OS's. and they only have half the problems of Vista or WIndows 7. Ill keep my Macbook pro, at least i have no problems with the OS.
I hope to *GOD* if there is such a thing.
Finray wrote:
I seriously hope you're trolling.specialistx2324 wrote:
XP and Windows 98 will always be awsome PC OS's. and they only have half the problems of Vista or WIndows 7. Ill keep my Macbook pro, at least i have no problems with the OS.
I hope to *GOD* if there is such a thing.
AussieReaper wrote:
I got my windows 7 for free through Microsoft student alliance.
It was worth it.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/01/cnet … index.html
Just for you Finray. Totally more stable than XP. Security Hot-fix's that cause black screen-o-death.
Just for you Finray. Totally more stable than XP. Security Hot-fix's that cause black screen-o-death.