Jump to content

windows 7 updates - completely new, non-backwards-compatible system?


prophetik music
 Share

Recommended Posts

well, virtual machines don't function nearly as efficiently as standard equipment does.

Right, because there's gotta be tons of overhead for running an OS on top of an OS.

also, it means that all new software coming out will not be backwards compatible in the least - and you can't run a vst on a virtual machine into a w7-compatible sequencer.

Right, but without the backwards-compatibility, everything can be more efficient. Still, I may not be able to buy new software, but my old stuff will still work. And besides that, I'll either still be in college (depending on release date) or my brothers will be, so I should be able to get it at a discount. So for me, it's pretty sweet. But for others, maybe not so much. But at least there still IS a form of backwards compatibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

hopefully, they warn developers far enough in advance to let them start coding their older stuff in new ways to make it work on w7. that'd make for an easier release...particularly if they offer it for free to existing owners.

it's gonna play hell with the hackers and crackers, though, now all torrents are gonna have to be labeled what they work for. not that i'd know anything about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait. You mean *GASP* they're putting in software features which require fairly recent hardware?! THE SHOCK.

No, seriously - you get a Core 2 Duo (which is pretty standard for now) and you'll be able to run at least one virtual machine at full core-speed emulation. And if I wanted to, say, play Thief 2 or Deus Ex, my virtual machine is still going to have cycles to spare.

Finally, a real answer to Compatability Mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/24/2358210

it's official, windows 7 will ship in one year and seven months.

*laughs* yes, because everyone knows how reliable Microsoft is with release dates and stuff. When they do release it on time...well, we only need to look at the 360 and its Red Lights of Doom (or the ring of fire, as my friend calls it :P) to show what happens when M$ rushes things. Yes, I am aware of the difference between shipping an entire hardware and software package, and just an OS, but I still don't have much faith in them regardless.

It sucks for Vista users though; I saw them dropping Vista after discovering how terrible it was, but I really don't see them having any more luck with this "windows 7" than they have with their past attempts.

This is probably their one and only chance for a good long time to prove to the world that they can actually make a half decent OS without screwing it up.

We can only hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

than they have with their past attempts.

uh, we all know that vista was a flop, but xp was possibly the greatest os ever designed - longevity, scalability, etc. beyond that, you've got ME (which was really just a service pack) which sucked, then 2000 which was pretty good, then 98 and 95, both of which were pretty good. 98 was awesome, actually, i still run it on two machines. oh, and don't forget server edition 2008 and 2003, both of which are excellent.

This is probably their one and only chance for a good long time to prove to the world that they can actually make a half decent OS without screwing it up.

again, read above. they 'screwed up' one major release and one minor release in ten releases (if you count service packs as releases, which ME basically was for 2000). i'd call that pretty good.

argh, i'm defending microsoft now. shoot me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uh, we all know that vista was a flop, but xp was possibly the greatest os ever designed - longevity, scalability, etc. beyond that, you've got ME (which was really just a service pack) which sucked, then 2000 which was pretty good, then 98 and 95, both of which were pretty good. 98 was awesome, actually, i still run it on two machines. oh, and don't forget server edition 2008 and 2003, both of which are excellent.

again, read above. they 'screwed up' one major release and one minor release in ten releases (if you count service packs as releases, which ME basically was for 2000). i'd call that pretty good.

argh, i'm defending microsoft now. shoot me.

Fair point, although remember that XP was good IF IT WORKED. Never happened for me; like you said, their packages were usually good, and I agree XP was a pretty solid OS. A heap of people regard 98 as being the best OS that they ever released, even to this day.

I'm hoping that by building it from the ground up, they can bring out an OS as respected as 98; one that just worked. Let's hope that they can learn from their past mistakes (*cough* ME and Vista), and pull themselves together.

What has me most worried is they already have a release date. And its comparitively close. In their shoes, I'd be reluctant to release it so soon.

That said, I disagree about the exact quality of XP; some of the features in it clearly lacked any semblance to thought. It was good until it broke. Then you were pretty much fscked. Although I agree that 98 and XP were generally pretty good. Just not a fan of the others...especially ME...*shudders*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not sure what to do right now, since my PC of 6 years just kicked the bucket. Although I could purchase a system with Window XP on it, I'm not sure that I'll be able to find one by the time I've saved enough more for one.

I wonder if the prophet of mephisto will still be capable of building one with XP, or should I just go two years without a computer? Alternatives, anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not sure what to do right now, since my PC of 6 years just kicked the bucket. Although I could purchase a system with Window XP on it, I'm not sure that I'll be able to find one by the time I've saved enough more for one.

I wonder if the prophet of mephisto will still be capable of building one with XP, or should I just go two years without a computer? Alternatives, anyone?

You can always build your own (or have prophet do it). I did last year for about $700 including the 20" 1680x1050 monitor. Then you can put whatever OS you want on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not sure what to do right now, since my PC of 6 years just kicked the bucket. Although I could purchase a system with Window XP on it, I'm not sure that I'll be able to find one by the time I've saved enough more for one.

I wonder if the prophet of mephisto will still be capable of building one with XP, or should I just go two years without a computer? Alternatives, anyone?

i can rip it, but i can't get a legit copy any more =( of course, a system builders copy of xp pro (read: OEM, one install) is only 140 bucks, and you can still buy them.

do'nt go that long without a compy. get a linux-based machine and either run linux or get a copy of xp and load it on there...and be careful =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...