Added: 3 years ago
From: TheStreetTV
Views: 5,929
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (71)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • XP all the way..

  • but it has small compatible softwares....-_-

  • i heard negitive things about it

  • speed? this is slow as hell compared to os x. put windows 95 on a modern day computer and it will run just as fast (i did it)

  • win95 doesn't support reasonable amounts of ram, nor does it support almost all modern software, The reason it runs fast is because unlike win 7 its not running lots of processes essential to a modern PC (such as rapidly opening large regularly used programs, firewalls, security etc..

    OSX isn't faster, don't believe everything those ppl touting overpriced goods at apple tell you.

  • OS X - $30

    WIndows 7 - $300

    OS X has more features, faster, secure, etc. Obviously you have never used a mac.

  • PRICE LOL its only compatible with MAC computers - which cost two times the price of an equivalent PC so don't claim its cheaper please.

    I'm geussing that your comparing your experience with a $500 PC and a $3000 Mac, bought at a later date when the tech had moved on, try a decent $1500 PC and the difference won;t be there, infact you'll likely have a better spec comp.

    software compatibility of windows more than makes up for the useless 'bells and whistles' apple throws in.

  • Actually Macs are cheeper. I'm sending a PM

  • LOL which quoted a mac, worse than the PC I'm using for twice the price I paid 8 months ago....

    yeah, a point well made. L O L @ YOUR FACE

  • your so full of shit. XD

    yet again, another PC user who SAYS it is but can't prove it.

  • Windows 7 is VERY smooth and quick, almost as quick as OSX Leopard. I love the new dock-like taskbar and Aero Peek is semi useful. The shutdown and startup times are a lot faster than Vista. However, it still is a bit slower than Leopard, especially when multitasking and shutting down. Not nearly as fast as Snow Leopard overall, but still a very solid and speedy release from Microsoft.

  • idiot seriously....the computers internet speed doesnt go faster with the OS, ITS THE INTERNET LINE TWAT. how dare you say that is mac like aswell....that was a really, really dumb thing u said

  • dont be stupid he meant its fast as in it uses very little processor and memory so it completes tasks easier DUH you are a real mouthbreather

  • Actually speed in modern Operating systems is less dependant on how much system resources are used by the OS, and more to do with how much is pre-loaded by the OS into ram - which in turn makes the systems much more responsive (as it effectively loads the software before you even think to click on it.)

    MORE RAM USE = BETTER sounds silly, but its free to use ram (can be instantly wiped if needed elsewhere), so it may as well be full of your most needed programs - this is what makes Win7,OSX fast

  • but its fast when you're NOT in internet, werewolf786

  • Windows 7 looks so much cooler I'm using it right now.

  • i ran beta version 7000 on on a crappy emachine with a Celeron D 3.2ghz (not dual core) an xpress 200 chipset (using its IGP the Xpress 200) and 2gb of ddr 333mhz ram and OMG it was so smooth! hard to decide what runs better on that machine win xp or win 7 beta! even ran aero with that crap xpress 200 igp flawlessly. no errors or odd artifact and best of all it was smooth! woot microsoft job well done and that was just the beta o.0 wait for the retail O.O

  • Its ugly.

  • For me this is windows vista fixed, windows vista was afucking mess and its even better windows 2000 than the windows vista and i tryed the beta of windows seven and i have to say of i uninstall xp and change it for the seven,this is an a incredibleoperating system!!!!

  • The equipment I want to use with Windows 7 does not support Aero, and the maximum screen resolution is horrible. Windows Update won't fix the problem, and I can't find a better graphics driver than the generic one Windows provided. The graphics card is a part of the motherboard, so I can't upgrade it without basically getting a new PC. Running the RC on VirtualPC is sluggish; I guess I'll just wait until it's released to get to test drive the new Windows.

  • or you can buy a graphics card... install it on ur pc,and use that instead of ur crappy integrated one,then u don't have to buy a new pc :P

    and you don't need an expensive one

  • it's actually faster than xp vista etc because they make a copy of everything 2 times. one in hidden folders and the other is the actual file. 7 dosent

  • the new expiration date was extended to march 2 2010

  • Incorrect. The new expiration date (actually June 2010) applies for the Release Candidate; the Beta will begin bi-hourly shutdowns soon and will expire a few weeks after that. This is done so you will switch to the RC if you want to keep on using Windows 7. The bi-hourly shutdowns for the RC will begin in March of next year.

  • look MOFO im not gonna use it all the way til june the reason why i wrote march 2nd is because the screen will turn off every 2 hours

  • starting march 2010

  • its a beta,shit happens :P, windows 7 can do things much faster than xp and vista too,when theres too much shit in xp it never runs great i had a google side bar and microsoft search installed,the search was useful but used alot of resources

    gonna use ubuntu and windows 7 when its out of beta

  • thing that pisses me off with 7 is the different type/versions of 7 there will be. Example there is a Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate, etc. I like Mac OS X's approach, selling one version

  • Yeah, I agree. One "great" version is what Microsoft needs to release after the Vista disaster. Also, anyone that has already had to deal with Vista should get a free upgrade from that crap. That would go a long way in repairing their image right now. I have converted 2 of my machines back to XP PRO. One more to go if this Windows 7 doesn't deliver. May even go MAC. Vista, the operating system from hell.

  • That used to be Microsofts approach too. Now with that multi type of OS it just sucks in my opinion. If MAC hardware wasn't so expensive I'd buy a mac, and run XP on it with MAc. It's just annoying having the different version fo windows, it's like some users are in the ghetto (home basic) and some are in beverly hills (ultimate), what happened to the days when all windows users were part of the same group (windows users), now they've split us up into what we can afford or willing to spend

  • true. too many versions divide us.

  • But why would a home user would need a fully blown IIS7 on his machine. I think the different versions concept is right, but it should have been just like in Win XP, just two of them. What say?

  • "Almost Apple Mac like." I vow never to use Windows 7 then.

  • i agree, thingy at the bottom is just like mac dock

  • only mac dock is better and doesn't take up a big part of the screen but apears if you hover your mouse on the edge of the screen. i have it on my XP. it's called objectdock and i love it. i hope Win7 doesn't crash every 2 secs like my Vista Home did. i paid 160 euros for a piece of crap

  • lol i wanted to buy vista when it just came out but something holded me back :P

  • well im not saying i agree with vista but obviously you have a shit computer if it keeps crashing

  • 2,8Ghz Quad core

    4GB RAM

    Geforce 9800GTX 512MB

    640GB HDD

    that's not crappy.. it's the 64-bit version of vista that is crappy. just the fact that i'm running 32-bit XP on it without problems proves that.

  • touché

  • All you need now is a dual core over a single core and loads more ram, and a bigger hard drive to store it all.

    Yeah...what an obvious improvement. *sarcasm*

  • it's pretty logical for people to have to upgrade in order to be able to run new stuff. like mac OSX leopard only runs on intel macs. if you don't own an intel you are stuck at tiger 10.4.5 i think.

    come on be reasonable, you can't expect an older computer to run just the newest things. that counts for all technology!

  • just a thing to add:

    the problem with Vista was that even Computers that was pretty new, and "supported" by Vista, it wouldnt run it or had difficulties running... thats what the problem is all about.

    And OSX does actually support every Intel mac, which is what? the last 10 gens?

  • Comment removed

  • yep!

    and i think that someone doesnt like your oppinions xD

  • IT SUPPORTS FLASH! I wouldn't be watching this vid if it didn't.

  • then PLEASE tell me how you got it to work. I am using Vista Home 64-bit Service Pack 1 and every time i try to install flash in any webbrowser it says it isn't supported, and even though installing it in iexplorer 32-bit does work, every time i use it in iexplorer it automatically shuts down...

  • and i am talking about 64bit vista. i know 32bit vista runs flash prefectly, cause i used to run it on my old computer which ran 32bit vista ultimate

  • Why would you downgrade from Vista Ultimate to Vista Home, anyway? :/

  • 32bit vista only detects your parts to a limit. like 3,3GB RAM max. so if you have anything above that, it isn't used. Same for other parts. therefore i had to change to a 64bit version. so i bought Home version.

  • no it does run on PowerPC, not sure about snow leopard but I suspect it also run on powerpc.

  • vista you piece of shit

  • I have vista on a laptop and desktop and have XP on 2 other laptop including the Acer1 I got today. XP is significantly faster but god I love Vista.

  • also check out gNewSense and run that first if it works for you

  • xp been out for years, I have vista and had no problims with it what so ever(I never used xp),the only people who conplane are the ones with outdated hardwere.Now I'm on 7's beta and it's go so for.

  • The test showed Vista and 7 40% slower than XP.

    I have a new computer and I enjoy XP because its fast, responsive, stable. Still not as fast as my linux though.

    Vista and 7 have 100 background processes weighing in at 650 Mb RAM actual usage. My XP is at 97 MB with 26 processes.

    And btw try running Daemon Tools on W7. It bugs out into a loop of reinstalling and rebooting.

  • Windows 7 is still under development. It has not yet been released. They have released the RC1 and you must be aware that these Betas and RCs have debugging code to track bugs that slows down the performance. Once RTM is out you can expect better performance and speed. And are you adding the processes of both the OS together or is your PC running all that manufacturer shit like webcam, disk watching, light scribe etc etc processes. you can shut them off by using Run-msconfig

  • No manufacturer shit. Just plain OS shit and a 3rd party firewall.

    My prediction is W7 will be slower and slower as more and more patches are applied as usual. Like that hunk of shit Vista.

  • of course... pretty much every new OS ever created will use up more resources and have more demanding minimal hardware specifications. This is nothing special.

  • No ofcourse but what I dont like with Vista and W7 is the wasting of resources. I run my computer for the applications. Why not have them run the best they can.

    Windows 7 is touted as a speed demon but was 5% slower than Vista on some tests.

    Again, Both were 40% slower than XP. If that is "speed demon", then the word has offically lost all its meaning.

  • I will stay with Ubuntu Linux.

  • Comment removed

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more