Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



How would you rate windows 7?

Scale of 1-10 10 is the best Rate Windows 7

  • 1

    Votes: 3 7.9%
  • 2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4

    Votes: 2 5.3%
  • 5

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • 6

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • 7

    Votes: 6 15.8%
  • 8

    Votes: 9 23.7%
  • 9

    Votes: 10 26.3%
  • 10

    Votes: 6 15.8%

  • Total voters
    38

ElektroFreak

New member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,728
Points
0
XP is still the king.. Win 7 ain't too shabby, but it really isn't any faster than Vista.
 



Jaseth

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,641
Points
0
I would give it 8, but that is being very nice.. I was lucky enough to get my tiny Uni-work-only-laptop (10 inch wide screen) with XP. This laptop is Samsung and its battery lasts an amazing ~11 hours when not working with high requirement stuff such as movies and games, but this is still without power-saving features enabled. The fact that it lasts a whole day at Uni with no recharge and then still has plenty of juice if you have a long train trip home and want to watch a movie or something is really amazing.

In fact.. now I think about it, since I would give XP 8.5, Vista 7 should probably have a 7.

Seb
 

Hallucynogenyc

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
3,635
Points
0
I would give it 8, but that is being very nice.. I was lucky enough to get my tiny Uni-work-only-laptop (10 inch wide screen) with XP. This laptop is Samsung and its battery lasts an amazing ~11 hours when not working with high requirement stuff such as movies and games, but this is still without power-saving features enabled. The fact that it lasts a whole day at Uni with no recharge and then still has plenty of juice if you have a long train trip home and want to watch a movie or something is really amazing.

In fact.. now I think about it, since I would give XP 8.5, Vista 7 should probably have a 7.

Seb
But, have you tried W7?
 

Grix

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
2,212
Points
63
All you XP fanboys need to remember that back when XP first released you previous 98 fanboys complained about XP just the same as you now complain about Vista and 7. XP is very old, and I can't understand why anyone would still use it. DX10 and 11 + decent 64-bit support is not worth sacrificing for a little extra speed. (Which I personally can't see, I think W7 64-bit is just as fast as XP, if not faster)
 

moonreft

New member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
108
Points
0
All you XP fanboys need to remember that back when XP first released you previous 98 fanboys complained about XP just the same as you now complain about Vista and 7. XP is very old, and I can't understand why anyone would still use it. DX10 and 11 + decent 64-bit support is not worth sacrificing for a little extra speed. (Which I personally can't see, I think W7 64-bit is just as fast as XP, if not faster)
I was one of them win98 stubborn people. It took me 2 years to switch over. Still on the fence on this one. I will most likely to a duel boot w7/xp this weekend just to check it out.
 

Hallucynogenyc

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
3,635
Points
0
All you XP fanboys need to remember that back when XP first released you previous 98 fanboys complained about XP just the same as you now complain about Vista and 7. XP is very old, and I can't understand why anyone would still use it. DX10 and 11 + decent 64-bit support is not worth sacrificing for a little extra speed. (Which I personally can't see, I think W7 64-bit is just as fast as XP, if not faster)
Exactly.
 

Cyparagon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
9,645
Points
113
So I could sit here with my 512 of memory and keep XP, or I could pay out of the nose for a new computer and OS to get slightly better performance.

That's all I needed to know. Thanks.
 

iskor12

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,154
Points
0
All you XP fanboys need to remember that back when XP first released you previous 98 fanboys complained about XP just the same as you now complain about Vista and 7. XP is very old, and I can't understand why anyone would still use it. DX10 and 11 + decent 64-bit support is not worth sacrificing for a little extra speed. (Which I personally can't see, I think W7 64-bit is just as fast as XP, if not faster)
i Love windows 7 and I am using windows 7 64-bit profesional eddition and it isn't even close to being as fast for starting up in comparison to XP 64-bit when it comes to starting up.

Maybe it's just my pc...I don't know

Like I said.
Core2Quad running at 3.0ghz

XP startup takes less than 10 seconds to boot
7 takes about 25 seconds
 

bobhaha

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
3,256
Points
63
So I could sit here with my 512 of memory and keep XP, or I could pay out of the nose for a new computer and OS to get slightly better performance.

That's all I needed to know. Thanks.
Hey I can get you W7 for a very good price.. pm me if your interested!

EDIT: LMAO post 777!!!! hahahahah
 

iskor12

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,154
Points
0
How do you make the windows to adjust to the screen without going above the gadgets? I didn't say I couldn't install gadgets, I said I now have to look at the desktop every time I need to see them!
Right click on the gadget that you want to be on top and select "Always On Top"
Easy fix :):)
 

HIMNL9

New member
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
5,416
Points
0
@ Grix: you're right, i was one of the ones that was complaining about XP, when it come out ..... and i continued to complain against it and remained sticked to my old W2K, for almost 2 years and half :p ..... i started to use XP when it got enough patches, service packs and "reworking" from M$, that started to act stable and efficent (also if say "efficent" about a M$ product is someway blasphemy :p), almost same as W2K.

Now, that XP is starting to act almost as a real OS, they change all, first releasing a crap bunch of spyware modules and ineficent working routines like palladium, with brand new name of "vista", then pretend to make us trust that the SP3 of vista is a new brand OS called "vienna" ? (yes, basically vienna / W7 is nothing other than a SP3 for vista, and they make you PAY for it just changing its name :p)

Let me say to M$ CEO "thanks, but i'm not yet so stupid :na:"

:evil: :D

(absolutely no offense intended, btw ;))
 

diachi

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
9,676
Points
113
Interface: 9
Speed: 7 (A little smoother than vista, blown away by XP though)
User friendly: 9
Visuals: 8
Drivers: 8 ( Not too bad - picks up most things okay, though had trouble with my soundcard )
Areo: 9
Available software: 10

Overall: 8 ( Faster than vista and a tad less buggy. XP was faster , smoother and a lot less buggy. Just didn't look nearly as good ).
 
Last edited:

gogu

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
9
Points
0
Creaded a dual boot xp/win7, ran both for a couple of days then unexpected HDD problems. (long story)
On the second load, xp was left out.
Speed is better then XP, on this 3+ year old laptop.

win7 = 10 for me
 

Hallucynogenyc

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
3,635
Points
0
This will make the gadgets to stay above the windows, not the windows to adapt to them the way they did on vista, you get me? I already tried this one but when I wanted to click the "quick reply" button f.i I couldn't because of the gadgets...
 

Dr_Evil

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2008
Messages
2,331
Points
63
I think I would give it an 8. It is still a resource hog compared to XP. The new taskbar sucks too. Win 7 does seem faster that Vista though. I don't care about DX 10 or 11 yet since there aren't many games that use 10 yet. IE 8 sucks and I don't really like any other browser.
 




Top