Too late
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| hkwint Jan 12, 2009 6:17 PM EDT |
He's to late to qualify for a laptop for Chrismas I'm afraid. In contrary to what I hoped when starting to read, there's not much content at all. It can be summed up as 'Windows is almost at some place where Linux already passed". |
| jdixon Jan 12, 2009 7:23 PM EDT |
> 'Windows is almost at some place where Linux already passed". Pretty much yes. I'd say it's "Windows 7 will be good enough that people won't bother switching to Linux". He may even be right, but Microsoft's past history argues against it. AFAICT Windows 7 is looking more and more like Vista.1. And if that's the case it'll be just as big a flop as Vista. |
| montezuma Jan 12, 2009 11:06 PM EDT |
From Ars Technica http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/windows-7-beta.ars/6 "If Vista's hardware demands were too steep, Windows 7 will likely cause you the same grief, as its hardware demands match." So if this is true how will it run well on a netbook? Aren't netbooks the place where windows is most vulnerable to Linux? Curiouser and Curiouser..... I suspect this Weapon of Mass Destruction will again be mythical. |
| dinotrac Jan 12, 2009 11:19 PM EDT |
Montezuma -- You have given Windows 7 too much credit. It is, in fact, merely a Weapon of Mass Dysfunction. |
| montezuma Jan 12, 2009 11:59 PM EDT |
Dino, It's not me "giving the credit". I'm simply satirically paraphrasing the "Why Windows 7 will crush Linux" absurdity. I recall starting a thread here not long ago about another piece of ultra superficial FUD claiming Windows 7 will crush Linux on *netbooks* Gah these shills need dunking. /rant |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 13, 2009 3:49 AM EDT |
Quoting:So if this is true how will it run well on a netbook? Easy. By the time Windows 7 is released, half a decade will have passed and netbooks(c)(r)(tm) will have become a lot more powerful :-) |
| jacog Jan 13, 2009 4:03 AM EDT |
You joke, but if Microsoft were to give Vista a bit of paint, but basically ship it entirely as is, call it "Windows 7", and release it a year or two from now, people would say "gosh, this runs a lot better than Vista"... because they'd probably have better hardware. In fact, this might really be the official plan, who knows. :) |
| jdixon Jan 13, 2009 7:47 AM EDT |
> In fact, this might really be the official plan, who knows. :) Pretty much everyone here, jacog. :) That's exactly their plan. Given 3 years from it's release, when Vista would only run properly on top end machines, it will run fine on mid-range machines when Windows 7 (i.e., Vista.1) is released. It still won't run properly on low end machines though such as netbooks though. That'll take another 2 to 3 years. |
| TxtEdMacs Jan 13, 2009 10:18 AM EDT |
My motto, in general, is never to be confused by facts, particularly when it gets in the way of pulling off a farcical tale. However, it has not escaped my notice that uniformly all the responses are based either upon conjecture or derived from past experiences, at best, or third party reports of MS's failures. The arguments are being embellished by constructive additions of the wave amplitudes. Perhaps comforting, but also not based upon first hand observation. Uncharacteristically, I cannot ignore what I am hearing from the room outside my office where the leaked beta has been running for about a week on a 1.5 year old HP laptop that does not the highest specs that were offered when purchased. Impressions are: faster than XP, nearly no hardware compatibility problems due to lack of drivers. [The latter might lend credence to the idea that this is a reworked Vista clone.] In addition, much of the maddening character of Vista "Security" badgering can be avoided. Overall he likes it. No killer bugs encountered. Now this experience does not imply that the average Windows user will be as pleased. However, I remind this audience, "when was that ever necessary?". Moreover, I suspect that Win 7 will appear sooner than suspected by the commenters on this thread. Furthermore, when that happens (the tester) predicts that corporations will bypass Vista for 7 rapidly. [I think that is a plausible expectation, but it might be retarded by the economy. The smarter ones would also have learned it pays to threaten to hold back and to run the Linux desktop for a selected few in "testing mode".] On the netbook front, Linux still has an opportunity. If the pricing is relentlessly driven downward, using non-Intel CPUs the faction Linux grabs will be even higher. If my take is correct, MS has to act fast to keep the corporations from defecting, the mass of regular users are less of a problem. Most will dutifully follow. I know you are all responding to a crappy article*, however, do not let an inciter blind you to reality. The competition that Linux and other FlOSS projects represent forces MS to really compete. Like it or not, there is real talent on the MS campuses and they can construct worthy code and products. This does not mean they will not play dirty (and I suspect that remains part of the program), but do not under rate them. They remain formidable. So let's stop the echo chamber effect and ignore the clap trap articles. It is better to be working on constructive endeavors. That is, be realistic but do not jump to MS's bait no matter how enticing. Bye folks back to jokes most of the time. Txt. * which I refuse to read |
| jdixon Jan 13, 2009 11:31 AM EDT |
> Moreover, I suspect that Win 7 will appear sooner than suspected by the commenters on this thread. Eh? The beta's already out. They're obviously pushing for an third quarter release to have it ready for the Christmas market this year. > ...where the leaked beta has been running for about a week on a 1.5 year old HP laptop that does not the highest specs that were offered when purchased. A 1.5 year old mid-range machine should run Vista acceptably, though probably not well unless it has at least 2GB of memory, so it's not that surprising. Remember, Vista is almost 2 years old now. That machine would have been designed with Vista in mind. As I said, midrange machines due out for the Christmas market (almost 3 years from Vista's release) will run Windows 7 with no problems. The key requirements seem to be a dual core processor, at least 2 GB of memory, and a large. fast hard drive (> 200GB sata). Low end machines such as netbooks (1 GB of memory or less, single core processor, and a small HD or SSD) still won't unless Microsoft has made major changes, which there is no sign they have. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!