should be obvious by now / upgrade

[armandh]

I have not used unity. [yet] just too comfortable with gnome.
but it sure looks as if windows 8 will have everyone scrambling in the "new os / new hardware" musical chairs game.

another round of perfectly fine hardware cast off for the latest and greatest. given that Ubuntu traditionally works very well on the last gen hardware, I will be glad to see the re-purposing and reuse of older hardware continue to keep generations of working hardware from the land fill.

Ubuntu, good for you and good for the environment too.

[Basher101]

in 11.04 you still have gnome 2.3 so updating to that should not be a problem. Only 11.10 will not have gtk2 anymore, just unity and gnome 3

[sffvba[e0rt]

Well, with Windows 7 older systems got a bit of a leash on life from MS, especially ones that where struggling with Vista... so I guess only time will tell with 8...


404

[3rdalbum]

in 11.04 you still have gnome 2.3 so updating to that should not be a problem.

I think you missed a digit - Gnome 2.3 looks like this:

http://www.linux.org.ru/gallery/big4OitrB.png

[Bitrate]

Well, with Windows 7 older systems got a bit of a leash on life from MS, especially ones that where struggling with Vista... so I guess only time will tell with 8...


404

Not really. Windows 7 is just as slow, bloated and insecure as Vista. It hardly even qualifies as a new OS - more like an overpriced service pack that should have been free. Any perceived speed gains with Windows 7 were due to the placebo effect and Microsoft spin.

[sffvba[e0rt]

Not really. Windows 7 is just as slow, bloated and insecure as Vista. It hardly even qualifies as a new OS - more like an overpriced service pack that should have been free. Any perceived speed gains with Windows 7 were due to the placebo effect and Microsoft spin.

Having used (and currently using) both Windows 7 and Vista I disagree.


404

[zero244]

I had Windows 7 on a i3 dual core with 4 gigs of ram and it ran pretty well.
MS learned a few things from Vista and pulled off some tricks to speed up Windows 7 over Vista.
What I don't like about Windows 7 is it takes up 1.2 gigs of memory just booting up.
It is more secure out of the box, but nothing to brag about really.
I think its almost impossible to make Windows as secure as Linux and still have it backward compatible.
Also its overpriced and still a hassle to install when change your hardware.
If you need to do a restore back to the factory installation it takes hours to complete.
Linux is just a much better deal all around.

[lancest]

Win 7:
Nice looking - but complicated.
Too commercial - big brother feel gets in the way.
I can see that Apple capitalizes on this.
Torrenting and office software not included.
Insecure, and features silly pop ups for driver installs for things like USB insert.
WIFI didn't work on my excellent ASUS router. (and some others I've seen)
Anyway the PC desktop isn't very innovative anymore.

[elliotn]

to be honest windows 7 looks good, as much ad it isn't a perfect OS and the fact that it is sold and MS forcing people to upgrade, it still beats Linux simply because it has broader hardware support from manufactures. No matter what strategy Ms using it works

[Juan Largo]

Vista was created at the behest of the RIAA and MPAA. Vista checks to see if you are playing HD movies 30 times every second and it will turn itself off if it finds out that you are.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...t_s_DRM_Puzzle

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00..._cost.html#cpu

This means that even with nothing else happening in the system, a mass of assorted drivers has to wake up thirty times a second just to ensure that… nothing continues to happen (commenting on this mechanism, Leo Laporte in his Security Now podcast with Steve Gibson calls Vista “an operating system that is insanely paranoid”). In addition to this polling, further device-specific polling is also done, for example Vista polls video devices on each video frame displayed in order to check that all of the grenade pins (tilt bits) are still as they should be.

So it's little wonder that Vista is such a resource hog. It seems that Win7 is somewhat less of a DRM delivery system than Vista, which explains why it is slightly faster. Win7 is very noticeably slower than WinXP or Win2K, however.