Windows 7 snagging thread.
 

Well, I got my hot little hands on the final retail version of Windows 7 Ultimate & built it on Saturday, so having had every beta build from 6596 to 7729, here's a couple of observations.

It's actually slightly slower than any of the beta's that I've had, discernibly so. My guess is that Ms have bloated it out with features & that eats into the performance. I've turned off a bunch of features & services I don't require, but then again, I did that with the betas' so build for build, a slight decrease in performance.

My media centre extender (Linksys dma2100) finally works as advertised - prior versions would not recognise the music library, so hurrah for that.

There is an irritation with Windows consistently querying whether software installed correctly or not - a dialog pops up around 1 in 2 times when I add an application, but a minor irritation at worst.

I'm back on the update trail, so far it's been on my box for four days & has wanted to add something like fifteen updates just for the os alone, although the driver updates have been welcome & as with previous versions of 7, nearly every driver was installed on first use.

I like it, we're gonna be friends, but as ever, not quite the finished article.

Microsoft's entire business franchise seems to rely on never getting it all right all at once. Keeps folks coming back for more.

One poorly thought through element is the help & support function. In previous versions of windows, it was held on the machine. Now it's online.

When my box dropped the internet connection unexpectedly the other day, I clicked on help and....er...

Do you know if W7 can use 4GB RAM? I still don't understand why some manufacturers advertise their "top-end" machines with Vista and 4GB ... :confused:

Yes, on 32 & 64 bit installs, but as ever, you will likely see 3 to 3.5gb due to the inherent limitations of 32bit machines completely independent of the operating system.

This is an ok-ish explanation of memory limitations in 32bit systems.

The 4GB Windows Memory Limit: What does it really mean? - Brian Madden - BrianMadden.com

I am installing W7 tonight after work, have W7 Business given to me to load on my IBM machine, been told XP drivers are the ones to use as some vista ones have issues with W7, not sure how true that is.

Main thing i want to know:

- Am i going to make a hugh mistake going from XP to W7?

Dont play games, but i do edit my photos (CS4) and ProE and Autodesk, as well as come CFD and FEA software get used daily, so will i see a slow down or no change?

Thanks

Provided your hardware meets the minimum requirements, I don't see why not. If however, your hardware just about meets the minimum requirements, it won't run as fast as xp.

I wouldn't worry about drivers - by the time it's installed, it will have found just about every driver you need & installed them before you get to click away at anything.

Sprogget keep up the great work
 

Call me a bit of a bottom dweller if you like, but I think this tread is going to gain momentum - W7 seems to have the potential of being a first class operatiing system given time. Its the poor idealists; who collect the early real life flack once new operating systems are unleashed into the expectant gaze of the real world.

I can imagine that the final release will be a bit slower in some ways; when compared to the pre releaase candidates. Think of security and memory handling at code level etc.

I will come clean, having had the experence of having taken the brunt of commercial damage caused by a major software upgrade; not Windows by the way, I'm like many of the "eternaly cautious" out here, watching the progress of the brave in implimenting Win 7 - I'm an XP and Ubuntu troll who will have to bite the bullet re W7 in the near future.

Without trawling through the forums of the mags, the shared postings of hitches and their fixes, are useful for the great silent masses who eyeball here. Its the long term niggles that really do effect attitudes to consumer operating systems. Think of Visa for example. PS you are right about online help - but its saves disk space.

CAT III

Yes, it may have been a helpful thing to have included network & internet connection problems on the os itself.:)

I am contemplating whether or not to build 7 on the box I use at work all day, every day. I have done this before with one or other of the beta builds & run into a few problems & as a result, I'm back on xp. The old adage if it ain't broke probably applies to windows 7 - if you have a working machine that is important to you, why change? My trouble is I can't leave it alone, I always want to see what's around the next corner & on the whole, that attitude hasn't burnt my fingers too badly & it helps one to learn a trick or two along the way.

I've had my full version of 7 on for a week now & it's pretty flawless still. I use media centre, firefox, livemail, excel, word, flash player, adobe reader, all the mainstream stuff & they all work just fine, as does a small home network. It is still update heavy, running at four or five a day so far, although nothing over the weekend - but I'm trying to find broken stuff in it & failing.

I'm running a rc version of W7(evaluation copy build 7100) and very pleased with it on my laptop except for one thing. It will not recognise or rather connect to any network after waking up from sleep mode. It won't even authorise my vodafone mobile broadband dongle. It requires a restart to connect which it then does perfectly happily. Everything worked OK when I was using XP.

Hows-about Hibernate?

Strange that you find it slower. Microsoft has a very rigorous release process (I've been directly involved with it) and the release candidates were "code complete" some time ago. They most certainly have not bloated it nor added "memory checking at the code level". Have you run the Windows Experience rating or other benchmarks? There are many things that could cause the RTM to run slower than an RC and it might be a fixable problem for you.

Cheers

You'll find Microsofts' business model will be heading towards having more and more content based online.

Eventually I expect them to introduce an online subscription service for Windows or whatever they call their operating system at the time.

Personally I find Win7 ok, but still haven't found a compelling reason to upgrade from XP x64 as yet.

Simonta,

Yes I have run the expeience test & it comes out at 4.6 as it has from day one with the betas from 6956 or was it 6596, I forget.

I'm not complaining, I like 7 a great deal, particularly more than Vista & I liked Vista when that arrived, I suppose because I've built my machines around the spec, so they've always been up to the job.

The 4.6 score always highlights my 8500gt gpu as the weak link, but I don't use the box for games, so I'm happy enough with the score, but it is noticeably slower than the six or seven beta builds that I pinched off the net (sorry MS, couldn't help myself).

I only make an observation based on personal experience, but now I have my bought & paid for copy, I wouldn't hesitate from recommending it to anyone considering an upgrade. It is a good operating system,

P.s., it wasn't me who suggested changes at the code level.:ok:

I think the blame lies squarely at the 3rd party manufacturers and their software writing skills. It's deplorable that Adobe for instance doesn't have a 64-bit IE8 plug-in available. I've also noticed the Sun JVM give problems with certain installs. I'm now also trying to troubleshoot a video performance slowdown which only manifests itself as minor jerkiness in YouTube videos which is probably their fault too.

LOL

Poorly thought?? As Microsoft loves to say 'This behavior is by design".
They get to see who uses help (location, time of day)
What they are asking for help on
Browser version and .NET runtime version
(possibly licensing -legal- status)

And of course, a simpler way to update and disseminate the help files....

Sounds like its very well thought out to me!

p.s. If you are using a dual core processor system make sure the 2nd cpu is turned on. It was on on the betas but off on the final (compatibility reasons?)

Provided of course that you are not the one suffering a connection problem & experiencing no way to display a help file...:)

I have no idea about switching on the 2nd cpu on my dual core system. Nothing obvious in the bios or control panel for that particular line of thought.

I've had the RC running happily inside VirtualBox and established that the software I really need works under it. Not really a surprise since mostly it's Office, IE and CS4. Will be ordering it once the academic licences is available in the UK.

At present I have a .open.ac.uk email address so should qualify for a copy for £30. :cool:

Got a couple more...

I took a deep breath & built it n my main work box, having put all the data on my infallibly reliable freecom hdd. It all went in ok, as did the apps which are:

MS Office 2003
Quickbooks 2008
Acrobat reader
primo pdf
Avast
Acronis true image
Windows live mail
firefox 3.5
a few other bits and bobs.

Anyway, I do a lot of faxing from excel. In my business, we are still staring wide eyed at this machine that looks a bit like a typewriter and spits out bits of paper written on hundreds of miles away - we're essentially stuck in 1987.

Windows fax console is now updated to windows fax & scan. Previously, I would click print, then choose fax & select a fax number from my handy list of fax numbers stored in outlook.

Now, Windows F&S happily does the same, but sends a blank page. I have to print my page to a pdf & print that to fax, which adds an irritating step to the process - I send about twenty faxes a day, so it does pinch a little.

Also, windows converts any document to a tiff file by default when you fax & you can't preview it in windows - it doesn't recognise the format! Slight disjoin there chaps.

Windows contacts I have found live in different folders between live mail & any other application that uses them. If I add a contact in live mail, it doesn't appear in my fax numbers for example. They live in a folder under users documents, so I do have to duplicate them on occasion.

Still like it though.

I've not sent a fax from my machine since I converted to Win 7, but I did find that Windows Fax & Scan can't see my scanner. Everything else can. It's a pretty conventional USB scanner, running through Twain. But no way will W F&S see it. I can faff around with Paint Shop Pro and printing to the fax, but that shouldn't be needed.

Apart from that, I'm impressed. The only annoying bit is all the stuff I've installed and set up that I'll have to do all over again when the DVDs arrive from Mr MS in a few weeks' time.