It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion
Windows 7 slower than XP Pro..
Likes # 0
Posted January 20, 2009 at 1:55PM
PcMark05 benchmarks run on my dual-boot (XP Pro SP3/ 7 Beta both 32bit) Dell Inspiron 9400 , T7200 2GhZ , 2GB RAM, GeForce Go 7900 GS give
5052 marks on XP, 4661 on Windows 7, XP performing better in all tests.
In the 'real' world ripping a DVD using AutoGK took
2 hours 8 mins in XP , 2 hours 28 mins in Windows 7.
Likes # 0
Posted February 6, 2009 at 1:44PM
yes you have an argument there it was the same with people changing over to xp but it had no where near as many teething problems that is why there was more law suites because of vista the thing is it took ms quite a while for them to reliese xp on to shelvs and it also hade more bata's before it was reliesed but that was when ms actually heard what bata testers actually said but for vista they basicly reliesed a bata on to the shelvs it was pritty much useless, also i was reading a few e-mails that were retreved from one of the law suites with ms and even one of the microsoft exects said it turned his $30000 pc in to an emailing machine, also vista wasnt compatable with many ms hardware let alone anyone eltses and in my oppinion i won't even bother looking at windows 7 untill at least the first service pack arrives because i think microsoft are trying to rush windows 7 to the rescue of vist but i don't think it will work at all and it will just be another failiure on microsofts part again.
Likes # 0
Posted February 5, 2009 at 8:05PM
The only "performance" issue I have come across that is of any interest/concern to me is when using Corel Video Studio 12. The programme is a little reluctant to "draw" itself on the screen when it is opened, and, having imported a 1920 x 1080 video clip, scrolling through the clip is rather sluggish (in comparison to XP). This is more important to me than rendering time as I tend to leave the pc to get on with this. No doubt this will improve soon as Windows 7 and video drivers are tweaked over the next few months. In the meantime please share your experience if you are using any of the non-pro video editors.
Likes # 0
Posted February 5, 2009 at 7:18PM
"Lies , damned lies, and FE's who..
don't understand statistics.. for a start 15.3% saying they have or will install 7, well why not? and that doesn't mean they'll prefer it to XP"
Kindly point me to where I said people will prefer Windows 7 to Windows XP. Methinks you need a lesson in politeness, and a good deal more understanding about how the software business works - it's something that comes with experience.
When Windows XP was a bright,shiny new thing on the horizon of its life we had people - lots of them - here, in the forum who said 'I'll install XP when hell freezes over' or words to that effect. I predicted then that within a year of its launch people would be migrating to it in droves, and I was ridiculed for saying so. In fact that's exactly what happened, but it took that long - Windows XP encountered all kinds of teething problems and needed all manner of tweaks by the developers before it was something the average user was happy with.
Now, with the rose-tinted glasses of hindsight firmly in place people eulogise about XP as if it was an old and trusted friend - never putting a foot wrong and running like the proverbial greased lightning.
Windows 7, contrary to what a lot of people - you included - seem to forget hasn't launched yet, it's still beta software. There'll be a Release candidate, and that will include revisions that have been made as a result of the feedback that beta users have provided. I expect the code to go gold very soon after the RC, and shrink-wrap to follow hard on its heels - Microsoft wants this software out of the door. What will follow is largely an unknown, although it's pretty obvious that Windows 7 will enter a market that isn't exactly booming - the computer industry is having a hard time of it, and it will get worse. That means fewer OEM licences and fewer corporate migrations - Win7 will have to be good to make up for Vista's shortcomings.
Meanwhile people like me, who haven't experienced any problems with Vista will continue to run it as well as testing Win7 beta. Whether one is a few seconds faster than the other at certain tasks is largely immaterial as far as most people are concerned - this thing about speed is an obsession that isn't shared by the vast majority of ordinary computer users
Likes # 0
Posted February 5, 2009 at 10:46AM
i first tried vista when it was put on the shelvs and tbh the ammount of hardware compatability issues i had was imense so i changed back to xp which i have never had any problems with whatsoever vista was reliesed to soon which is why there was a law suite against microsoft because there were so many issues also windows 7 even tho you say it only takes a cupple of days to get used to (that may be for some one who has good knowladge of computers) it will take a lot longer for the advarage user ad with xp everything is simple and its where you would expect it to be insted of having to search for it
if you want to spend ure day searching you would just use google and the ui is is supposed to be easy to use when you have all the options on like the sidebar it would just get all conffusing for the adverage user (there are too manythings you don't need to see and not enough of what u do ned to see for example u have to manually put most icond on your desktop like internet explorer i remember when it was mandatory to make it easyer to use and now its not apparently ms are like children they cant make up there mind on what is easy and what is not.
the onlt thing that is good about windows 7 is the probem steps recorder which if you know how to use it (average user wont even know how to find it) can be usefull and also thank god you can change the UAC settings so you dont get "bumb" and a dark screen on everythig you click on. over all i will be sticking to xp i know lots of people who have tried it (for more than a DAY) and they also think its complicated and it has alot of fetures that really don't need to be there and for windows 7 i think ms should listen to the user on what it wants at the end of the day its the user that buys so the user should have some involvment and if i want run on my start menue i will have it there and thats why im not changeing over.
Likes # 0
Posted February 2, 2009 at 12:19PM
with all these diffrent versions of windows you would think the would have made a simple resourse free o/s for gamers and ppl who dont want all the fancy crap. the rather save the resources for more important apps.
as for the migration of xp to vista to win7, well in my opionion its just the same as the migration from win98 to me to xp! just a thought to ponder on
Likes # 0
Posted January 25, 2009 at 9:16PM
I feel you are missing the point here windows 7 is a beta program not a release candidate which means changes can be made to the code at any time before the release making your benchmarks somewhat meaningless at the moment
98se to millenium to xp sounds familiar xp to vista to windows 7 see a pattern the middle o/s on both occasions is the poor relation so to speak
hardware improvements improved the performance of xp along with the service packs and i am sure the same will apply to windows 7 and a year or so down the line we will be looking back thinking what was all the fuss about
Likes # 0
Posted January 25, 2009 at 6:51PM
don't understand statistics.. for a start 15.3% saying they have or will install 7, well why not? and that doesn't mean they'll prefer it to XP.
Next,7% say they plan to upgrade, well if they already have Vista, they'd be mad not to from what I've seen the Vista SP called Windows 7 is an improvement.
The 17.8% who say Vista will be their next system is presumably made up of people intending to buy in the next few months - and with the paucity of machines available with XP , if they aren't able to find drivers or don't know how, or can't be bothered to install XP, they have no MS option.
Which leaves 38% who are happy to stay with XP, and 5% who presumably are going to Mac or Linux.
Likes # 0
Posted January 25, 2009 at 5:45PM
Ummmm but didnt ...
I'm sticking with Windows XP as long as possible
get 40.2% ??
And to my mind that kinda beats all the other nominations into a cocked hat i mean its more than double all the others . Sorry F.E
Likes # 0
Posted January 25, 2009 at 5:28PM
I see people like satchef1 comment that their XP crashed all the time and personally mine has not crashed in several years. So when people say to me that XP is buggy and crashes all the time as far as I am concerned its self inflicted. I do not mean that you have done anything deliberate or anything like that but that those that have problems do not run regular virus scans, surf safely and perhaps install programs that are not entirely safe.
My windows is perfectly stable and has been for years, no BSODs or crashes of any description so if mine is perfectly ok then there must be something that those that do have problems are doing wrong that causes the problems.
The only comment I would make about Vista and it running fine for you is that part of the security it is meant to have, which is part of the advantage that they say it has over XP, is that it is meant to be more stable. And to me part of that stability must include windows stopping malignant programs from altering part of the windows code and causing crashes.
I have to say that that is my opinion on the situation and I do not know if that is the case.
As I said earlier I tried Vista for such a short period of time I am not very knowledgeable about it. But my XP is not buggy, never has been buggy and I cannot recall when it last crashed - it must be 4 or 5 years ago at least.
Reply to this topic
This thread has been locked.