Windows 7 - First Impressions

[X-Istence]

This is my first impression:

 

[kcnychief]

Actually, one (bad) thing about Vista is disk space consumption. I have less 4gb available at the moment and I only have Office and a few small apps installed.
I see Windows 7 consuming more than Vista rather than less. It eats up around 10gb (on 64-bit) without any other apps.

A lot of people say 'why not just get a bigger HD, it's not expensive'.
I haven't had my 36gb raptor HD long enough to need replacing. Nor do I want to have a massive 80+gb HD for having only an OS and a few apps installed on.

Have you adjusted the size of your disk that System Restore can use, tried cleaning out Winsxs directory or the SP1 cleaner? I have listed this in potential impact on freeing up your space.

 

[LordOfLA]

Bad points : Finding any 3rd party firewall that works..... eventually ok using Kaspersky 7

You don't need a firewall.

 

[LordOfLA]

This is my first impression:

copy & paste ftw

 

[jpom]

I've been playing with it on 2 machines so far, an Asus EEE PC 1000h and a Dell Inspiron 1520.

Both machines run it quite well, I was in fact a little suprised at how well the Asus did run it. Eset Smart Security runs fine on it for anti-virus/firewall and I have played a few games on the 1520 with no problems. I have encountered 2 programs that will not work, one is Daemon Tools, and I believe from what I've read that it is the Virtual SCSI driver that does not work rather then Daemon tools itself, I'm using Slysoft's freebie virtual drive program for the time being. My main issue right now is that Real VNC viewer does not seem to work, I have the Enterprise version for work and I haven't tried the server but the viewer just comes back with an error message when trying to launch it.

I also miss the quicklaunch bar as I found it extremely handy, I suppose I'll live though, other then that so far I like it well enough.

 

[Johnny]

I also miss the quicklaunch bar as I found it extremely handy, I suppose I'll live though, other then that so far I like it well enough.

Windows 7 has quicklaunch. You have to do this to get it back.

Right click on the taskbar
Select new toolbar in the toolbar selection
lead folder to 'Your userfolder\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch'

It is still there, just not by default.

 

[jpom]

Slick, thanks

 

[Mizzle]

I haven't seen Win7 using any less resources/storage space than Vista so far.

Huh? My RAM usage dropped from 1.3 - 1.4 gigs to about 600 megs.

 

[LordOfLA]

less caching is bad, unless it is reporting memory use differently? no blank DVDs to burn and install myself.

 

[Mizzle]

It does cache. I was talking about the RAM usage at boot.

 

[Perris Calderon]

It does cache. I was talking about the RAM usage at boot.

what's the differance how much ram it uses at boot?

you want all memory to have data populated, you want a huge 'standby' list, memory that is available for immediate use if memory goes under pressure

you want very little "free memory"

 

[Mizzle]

No I don't want it to load almost one and a half gigabytes of what seems to be utterly useless software, when 500 megs is more than enough. Windows 7 is faster than Vista and uses less memory.

 

[Johnny]

I have noticed that windows 7 does not cache memory like vista does. It seems to run better because of, as it leaves more ram free.

 

[Perris Calderon]

No I don't want it to load almost one and a half gigabytes of what seems to be utterly useless software, when 500 megs is more than enough. Windows 7 is faster than Vista and uses less memory.

actually you do, as long as the os is designed to release said memory and write to it just as quickly as when it's "free", and since xp the os has been able to do just that, this is called "the standby list"

best case scenario, if your OS can use as much ram as you can install, you would have as much memory as your hardrive and everything would be loaded right onto memory

that scenario by the way is the next great OS and I predicted that a long time ago

we will have enough memory and it will be pro-actively written to the hardrive after we boot and while we work until the entire data is transferred to memory

that is exactly what the OS tries to do know and since xp however there has been a processor restriction with just how much memory can be efficiently addressed...in xp before sp2 it was four gigs by design but in any event it was never more then four gigs per process

now that there is 64 bits and memory is mighty cheap expect to see this scenario real real soon...as a matter of fact those of you with motherboards that can support tons of ram you really should us the 64 bit and install as much as that board supports and watch the thing fly

 

[Xie]

Why? You think they're going to go back to the XP user interface? Perhaps they should just go back to the Win 3.11 interface.

Just something sensible/useable would be ok with me. If I wanted a DOS prompt (Win 3.11) I could do that with most any OS out. Great trolling.


-edit- for all those talking memory usage above ... from what I've read to really see the difference you MUST be running the 64-bit version of Windows 7 and have 4+GB of RAM (thus the need for 64-bit to start with).

 

[Not Bman]

Anyone notice CCleaner does not work 100% in 7, probably due to the fact that its 64bit and 7 lol. It keeps finding the same reg files over and over, once I clean them. Weird.

 

[LordOfLA]

that'll be due to registry permissions

The reg cleaner does nothing for you anyway

 

[LordOfLA]

Vista caches the applications you use most. How do you think it achieves that instant launch effect? Its already loaded it, its just waiting for you to tell it to execute

The problem is the kernel needed 400MB to itself, no kernel needs to be that big

 

[Not Bman]

I don't know if I should ask this here. The last little bit, when I download something, or just save a file somewhere, I first get a message saying I don't have permission. So I click ok, try again, it says do I want to replace the one that is there, and I hit ok. So it's giving me an error for no reason. Anyone else get this..

 

[LordOfLA]

take ownership on the folder.