my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Windows 7 (Page 3)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Author Topic: Windows 7 Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-10-2009 01:31 AM                        Again, does nobody listen? You seem to think that I am saying that they shouldn't work on new versions of the OS. I am not even talking about Windows 7. I am talking about Windows 9 and 8. Chris still has the ONLY good answer and is perhaps the only individual who understood what I was posting about.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-10-2009 09:40 AM                        Joe, sorry, I responded based on how your post reads to me. In the technology industry, new product releases rarely contain every feature they *could* have. Reasons vary, could be the h/w isn't up to it yet, could be as simple as holding something cool back for later release if you already have a product packed with enough cool features to make it competitive. MS knows what's coming from Intel in the next 3-5 years and probably brainstorms new OS features a couple major releases ahead of the release curve. As far as people deciding to stick with XP, its end-of-life is 2014 so it has plenty of utility and support left in it. If it's getting the job done for you and you aren't interested in shiny new things, you might not need to upgrade. And there is a 64-bit version of XP available for XP users who could benefit from more than 4GB RAM (which is actually <4GB under 32-bit XP as Bobby pointed out). Ideally you'd want 64-bit apps to go with 64-bit XP though. Likewise for 64-bit Win-7. To be clear I am not a paid MS booster. And yes I think they should have given Vista users at least some discount on W-7. A $25 rebate would be better than nothing. Win-7 is what Vista should have been, with a few new stuff thrown in. So it goes. I will however give MS credit for getting a new OS "right" when they do so and they have done that with Win-7 as far as I can tell and from reading other users' experiences with it. "No smarminess intended in this post"  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 11-10-2009 10:30 AM                        I basically missed Vista due to the timing of my last computer purchase (pre-Vista). With the new i7-based system I built in March, there was no way I was going to install XP on it, and had it not been for Windows7 beta being readily available, I would have installed Vista. I've used Vista briefly a few times, and I didn't have any issues with it. From everything I've read, Vista with the latest Service Pack was pretty stable and decent. I think one of the biggest mistakes people did when Vista was released was to install it on machines that were ill-equipped with present day OS requirements. If you have an old machine that runs XP just fine, why put a brand new OS on it? Windows 7 has been great in my experience since March. I have the RC installed right now, with a full release copy sitting on my desk waiting for the time to install it and reinstall the apps. When I was selecting components, I made very sure that every item had Vista 64-bit drivers available and tried my best to determine if they were going to be supported by Win7. $99 for 6GB of RAM made loading the machine with plenty of RAM easy, and my motherboard has room for another 6-12GB should I ever need more. Win7 64-bit is ideally suited to take advantage of the 8 cores of the i7 920 processor, better than XP or Vista could. The only issue I've run into that has been a real pain is the lack of support in Quickbooks 2009 and Adobe Acrobat Professional 7.0 for creating PDF's via the Printer Driver mechanism in both products. Acrobat is old enough that it's not surprising that it doesn't work properly, but Quickbooks should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to charge customers $150 for minor upgrades that do very little incrementally. But still, even QB 2009 was released before Win7 was available to the public, so it can be excused to some extent for not working perfectly. I have a copy of QB2010 that better solve the problem, or I'm going to go captain on Intuit's butt. Bottom line, brand new operating systems belong on brand new hardware. It's ridiculous and unrealistic to expect that old hardware will run a new OS without any issues. The OS should not be forced to perform at peak efficiency on outdated hardware. That said, I've heard lots of reports of Win7 running great on netbooks with 1GB of RAM and tiny Atom CPU's. That's a testament to what Microsoft has accomplished with the new OS. Device drivers are another story, as I think there should be an expectation of support for at least a couple of years on whatever OS is current for that time period. Speaking of price, is $100 really too much to pay for an OS upgrade? Really? Look at the upgrade prices for Adobe products sometime, and then see if it's reasonable to complain about $100 for an entire Operating System...  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-10-2009 12:32 PM                     I think comparing what Adobe charges for upgrades versus what an OS upgrade costs is a bit of an apples to oranges thing. They're both different. Even comparing an upgrade of something like Microsoft Office to an Adobe Creative Suite upgrade isn't an equal thing either. The Microsoft product is meant to be a completely mass market item that anyone can buy for either home use or use at work. Adobe's CS products are not geared for casual home use. They target a smaller crowd of professional users who make a living doing creative work. As industry specific software is focused to a more narrow, specialized task that software becomes much more expensive. Adobe's software is pretty affordable compared to what some large format printing RIP applications cost.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-10-2009 01:16 PM                        quote: Joe Redifer About the only thing they can be doing is making OS's which require far more CPU and RAM, like Vista. Well Joe, that's what I was thinking about in both of my responses. I'm sure way back in the Win 3 days, they were going "Wouldn't it be rilly cool if like the windows could like fade in instead of like just popping onto the screen?" But computers then couldn't handle that kind of thing, so it was put on a "list" of future features. So you could say they're leaving features out, but in most cases it's probably justified.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-10-2009 03:20 PM                        They probably weren't thinking that, but independent Mac devs were. I recall there was a plug-in at that time which made the windows fade in and out. Useless, but neat at the time. All in all it just slowed things down. However I am wondering what they have in mind for the future that can't be made a reality by the time part 8 comes out. I sure hope it's not just the glossy stuff. That does more to slow things down than anything. I had to run a script containing some registry tweaks just so that the submenus would open immediately instead of waiting a half second before appearing. The script can be found HERE. It will require a restart to take effect. Here is what it does: - Adds "Copy To" and "Move To" options in files and folders context menu, so that you can easily copy and move them to other locations. - Sets Windows to automatically end task of programs which are either hanged or taking longer time than expected to exit. - Decreases menus show delay time, it'll show the sub-menus fast when you select their parent menu. - Disables the low disk space check so that you don't get the annoying low disk space notification in system tray. - Sets Windows to not waste time in searching for a program which no longer exists in your system when you try to open its shortcut. - Disables "search on Internet" prompt in "Open with" window so that it directly opens the program list. - Speeds up the Explorer navigation. - Adds "Take Ownership" option in files and folders context menu so that you can easily take ownership of files and folders in case you want to replace them for customization purpose.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 11-10-2009 03:30 PM                     You're still assuming that they're doing that at all. Again, they could be working on one thing that uses the same NT-line of kernels and another new line of software with perhaps their first kernel from-scratch kernel in a long time?  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-10-2009 04:08 PM                        Yeah, you already said that... remember? And what am I "still assuming"?  |  IP: Logged Tom Mundell Expert Film Handler Posts: 120 From: Silver Spring, MD, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 11-10-2009 04:58 PM                        quote: Joe Redifer I was just trying to point how how features are DELIBERATELY being left out of Windows 8 to be included in Windows 9 and everyone spazzes out and goes apeshit. yes, this is very common in software development I believe (I know I've done this just with some very small projects). There's multiple reasons; one is time and money - you can't get everything into a single release within a reasonable time frame or budget. Another is similar to what Bobby mentioned with Intel processors - you want to have a long term plan so you have releases coming out on a reasonable schedule that each offer new features and fixes to encourage upgrades. And as mentioned technology may be one; if something sounds useful but might not be practical on current hardware set it aside for later. So you take your list of features and fixes and plan to spread them out over several releases based on priority/feasability or whatever criteria. Of course it seems MS hasn't done a great job of this with the delays of Vista's release and it's apparent lack of a compelling reason to upgrade.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-10-2009 08:02 PM                        A few of our Win 7 users (who upgraded from XP) made it their first goal to disable all the Aero graphics stuff and other similar bells and whistles and make 7 look and work as much like XP as possible. Once they were able to do that, they were happy and declared the upgrade a success because they now have much better memory management and can benefit from other 7 advances, while keeping the interface simple. In game development, cool stuff gets cut all the time, for reasons having to do with time, budget, and current hardware not being up to the requirements. Some of that cut stuff makes it into subsequent releases or migrates to a different, more powerful game platform.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-10-2009 08:48 PM                        I made my XP look like 2000 because it was FUGLY and inept in GUI design. Do you mean to say they made it look like XP while XP is looking like 2000? Aero isn't too bad, much better than default XP. I like the icons in the bottom bar (whatever they call it) as opposed to giant tabs with text on them.  |  IP: Logged Wayne Keyser Master Film Handler Posts: 272 From: Arlington, Virginia, USA Registered: May 2004 posted 11-10-2009 10:47 PM                     I await the general cursing when all the "kewl new features" monkeys discover brand-new layers of unbreakable (for a while) DRM enforcement. It took almost a year before some inventive genius figured out how to break Vista's chains off of the media people purchase through iTunes and similar sources of "you can only use what you bought while we let you" music and video.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 11-11-2009 12:48 AM                     quote: Joe Redifer And what am I "still assuming"? You asked what it is that they have in mind for version 9 that can't be done by version 8, which assumes that they actually are thinking about things to include in 9 that can't be made by the time 8 comes out. Also, where did we get the info that they are working on both of these products?  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-11-2009 01:32 AM                        quote: Chris Slycord Also, where did we get the info that they are working on both of these products? That'd just be common sense. Hell, they're probably dreaming up features for five or six versions from now.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 11-11-2009 09:42 AM                     Except they have no idea what kind of technology will be in computers by the time they've released 5 more versions. That's an entirely dubious idea. And common sense, to me, would only dictate that they'd be working on the next product and not something that's going to be the "sequel" to that one at the same time. Common sense or not, do you have actual information showing that they are doing so or is this just an assumption?  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.