[News] Microsoft simplifies the PC with Windows 7

[FlashD]

NEW YORK — Oct. 22, 2009 — Today Microsoft Corp. announced the worldwide availability of its new Windows 7 operating system. Windows 7 delivers on a simple premise: make it easier for people to do the things they want on a PC. The new operating system offers a streamlined user interface and significant new features that make everyday tasks easier and allow people to get the most out of computers of all styles and sizes.

Yesterday was an important day for Microsoft and all it's enthusiasts. Windows 7 came to stores after a long time of waiting. With it people at Redmond wish to drastically simplify the user's experience with the computer by providing system performance and user-friendly interfaces. At the same time they were working to make end-user's work with everyday tasks fast and pleasant. Do you think they succeeded? I think they did.

Full article here. Enjoy the reading. ^_^

[Teddy2116]

Hm, I have windows 7 and my friend does also, and we love it. Its pretty, easier than vista (omg i almost wanted to kill myself over vista) and i haven't had a problem with it so far. Thumbs up to Mircosoft

[Unrested]

what pisses me off is that here they are releasing 7 when they never finished fixing all the massive problems with vista. why didnt they just take their time and give us a quality product like 7 to begin with...ill tell you why. greed.

after vista i refused to but another PC. its mac from here on out.

[SigmaSD]

Oh gosh don't even talk about Vista. Seriously, why did they have to make it so that you can delete your recycle bin anyway? Not to mention how it doesn't support some wireless securities. I don't even have vista, but trying to fix my sisters and uncle's computer was worse than when Rocky Balboa tried to face Ivan Drago. (I succeeded at the end, but with great costs).

I can't wait to check out Windows 7. If its that easy to use then I'm going for it. Though I will miss XP a lot.

[kayacamilla]

what pisses me off is that here they are releasing 7 when they never finished fixing all the massive problems with vista. why didnt they just take their time and give us a quality product like 7 to begin with...ill tell you why. greed.

after vista i refused to but another PC. its mac from here on out.

They repeated the whole ME/XP thing... It was a sad day for me, I ended buying ME then buying XP when it came out. History repeated itself and now I have to save up for WIN7 cause Vista is just evil!

[Eris]

That's pretty funny, because MS DOS is about a billion times simpler than Windows 7. Sure, you have to actually be able to read, but in terms of how easy it is to use, there is no competish.

[TheAsterisk!]

@Eris: Traitor! PC-DOS, all the way!
I've actually still got an old IBM desktop from 1984 in my basement running some type of DOS, and it works- at least as well as can be expected for such an old piece of crap.

By the way, does anyone actually know how much memory this monster realistically requires? I've developed a distrust for Microsoft's 'minimum' and 'recommended' requirements, so can anyone tell me a more honest figure?

[ZenErik]

I'm a Mac user, but I have high hopes for Windows 7. Going to need to use it when I build a desktop for Diablo III.

[Ryuuzaki HD]

I got a free upgrade to Windows 7 with my new PC but ATM i'm running Vista personally I don't see how it can be any simpler but I suppose i'll have to upgrade to keep up to date.

[Hautalken]

I haven't used Vista regularly before. I just tried it out on other people's PCs. And I know for sure that it was crappy.


Windows 7 seems really good on the other hand. Well, from the previews I've seen uptil now atleast. I haven't got a chance to as much as see someone using it in front of me -.- *sigh*

[FlashD]

By the way, does anyone actually know how much memory this monster realistically requires? I've developed a distrust for Microsoft's 'minimum' and 'recommended' requirements, so can anyone tell me a more honest figure?

Depends what do you mean by 'minimum' and 'recommended'.
The current specs listed on Microsoft's sites are the recommended specifications for office use. If you really want the very minimum specs I can tell you it's an 800Mhz CPU with 512MB of RAM. How will this system work it's something else. On the other hand, if you are a gamer or graphic designer it needs at least a 2Ghz CPU with 1GB of RAM for offline games (GFX settings set on Default). Of course this is valid if you own a decent GPU (DX9 class). As you can see there are a lot of factors that matter depending what do you want to use the system for. The specs above are all intended for 32-bit systems, 64-bit requirements are a bit higher.

Personally I'm using W7 Ultimate RC on a P4 2.4Ghz CPU with 768MB of RAM which runs perfectly fine until I start Java, WMP and a game all together and W7 Enterprise RTM on my Intel Mobile 2.5Ghz (the gen before Centrino technology) with 1GB of RAM. Both are single core, both are terribly old, both work as they should for what I need them for.

[div]

Windows 7 is pretty good. I'm loving the multi-touch support on my tablet, but that's not something that most people will get to appreciate. The UI improvements, although subtle at first (compared to Vista) are great. When I first saw that new taskbar, I disliked it, but after using it, I must admit that it works great.

I had no problem with Vista. I can see how people would be irritated if they had incompatible/underpowered hardware, but that's avoidable if you do your research before buying a computer. My computer is fairly up-to-date, so I had no problem running it, but Windows 7 is definitely an improvement over Vista.

[Ranshiin]

The UI improvements, although subtle at first (compared to Vista) are great. When I first saw that new taskbar, I disliked it, but after using it, I must admit that it works great.

I actually have to agree with that. When I first saw the new Aero theme and taskbar, I felt it looked a little strange. At first, I did set it to a "classic" feel by making the buttons small and adding the text to them but a day or so later I turned that all back again and stuck the taskbar on the left of my screen. It looks great.

For anyone running Vista, W7 is a must-upgrade. It's more stable than Vista, faster than Vista, plays games better than Vista (dear God the amount of stuttering I had playing games on Vista...) and looks better too.

I've got W7 Pro x64 on my laptop (compared to Vista Home Premium which the laptop shipped with) and W7 handles the laptop a lot better than Vista. I've also put it on my desktop (which used to have XP) and I've yet to notice any particular problems with doing anything with it - runs as fast as XP, plays games just as good, etc.

By the way, does anyone actually know how much memory this monster realistically requires? I've developed a distrust for Microsoft's 'minimum' and 'recommended' requirements, so can anyone tell me a more honest figure?

I know Flash already answered this question but I want to give my honest opinion.

Anything that can run Vista will run W7 at least 20% better. the better your computer the better W7 will run, natch. but the suggested specs really aren't that unreasonable to me.


On the other hand, I did hear that someone got W7 to run on a 300Mhz processor of some variety, and 96MB RAM, although I can't remember where I heard that and in honesty I don't think anyone would realistically want to run W7 off of that :P

[TheAsterisk!]

Depends what do you mean by 'minimum' and 'recommended'.
The current specs listed on Microsoft's sites are the recommended specifications for office use. If you really want the very minimum specs I can tell you it's an 800Mhz CPU with 512MB of RAM. How will this system work it's something else.]
But we can probably guess!
[On the other hand, if you are a gamer or graphic designer it needs at least a 2Ghz CPU with 1GB of RAM for offline games (GFX settings set on Default). Of course this is valid if you own a decent GPU (DX9 class). As you can see there are a lot of factors that matter depending what do you want to use the system for. The specs above are all intended for 32-bit systems, 64-bit requirements are a bit higher.

Well, I just remembered how XP was supposed to run with 128 MB of memory (Microsoft's 'minimum'), but took 256 MB realistically (Microsoft's 'recommended'), and my tower's installation, which admittedly does have quite a few applications installed, still lags with 512 MB (what other users have recommended to me). It never really seemed to get snappy until I installed it on a roughly equivalent machine with a full 1 GB.
I don't really have any plans to purchase and/or install Vista or 7, since I only use Windows for some light CAD work right now and since I haven't the money, but I just kinda wondered. So, thanks for the info!

[nioniosmeg]

what pisses me off is that here they are releasing 7 when they never finished fixing all the massive problems with vista. why didnt they just take their time and give us a quality product like 7 to begin with...ill tell you why. greed.

after vista i refused to but another PC. its mac from here on out.

*Thumbs up*

Click the fourth bar in my signature. That man expresses what I can't, really.

[lovejenete]

Windows 7 is just a combination of Windows-XP and Windows Vista. It looks like Vista and work like XP. Windows 7 includes a number of new features, such as advances in touch and handwriting recognition, support for virtual hard disks, improved performance on multi-core processors, improved boot performance, Direct Access, and kernel improvements. The taskbar has seen the biggest visual changes. One of the biggest new features makes Windows Media Player useful again: you can now stream media files from one Windows 7 computer to another, across the Internet and out of network.