Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Newest steam survey, W7 rolling

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 8:30:40 AM

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/12/29/steam-h...!.aspx
During 2010, we expect to see Windows 7 replacing Windows XP as well, given the momentum we're seeing here. The real results will be December 2009 [Jan 17, 2010] and January 2010 [Feb 17, 2010] numbers will include Christmas sales and first after-Holidays month. If Windows 7 keeps the steam [pun intended], 2010 may well be the year of W7.
December 31, 2009 8:58:06 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/12/29/steam-h...!.aspx
During 2010, we expect to see Windows 7 replacing Windows XP as well, given the momentum we're seeing here. The real results will be December 2009 [Jan 17, 2010] and January 2010 [Feb 17, 2010] numbers will include Christmas sales and first after-Holidays month. If Windows 7 keeps the steam [pun intended], 2010 may well be the year of W7.


Jay, do you know if it's possiable to access the Steam hardware surveys archive or does Steam only publish the currant months data?
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
December 31, 2009 9:30:17 AM

All we need now are some games that good enough to be able to demand a 'cut off' point, just as Doom 3 was the cut off point for ME and a lot of users of that fine and upstanding OS.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 10:07:59 AM

i dont see meself upgrading to win7 at all..

vista x64 served and still serving its purpose for me.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 10:39:39 AM

win7 and quad cores are the big ones for 2009
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
December 31, 2009 10:42:25 AM

obsidian86 said:
win7 and quad cores are the big ones for 2009

I'm hoping SSD's are going to be the thing for 2010, more so than GPU's.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 10:55:23 AM

maybe only in q4 when ssd's drop to the $2-3 per gb line but win 7 should gain a lot in 2010 and linux will be snapping at its heels with bigger gains as well,but to be honest i think ram will be the biggest gainer in 2010 with 64 bit becoming the norm and games becoming more demanding,ram specifications has been the slowest climber in games the past few yrs
a c 376 U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 11:05:34 AM

Mousemonkey said:
All we need now are some games that good enough to be able to demand a 'cut off' point, just as Doom 3 was the cut off point for ME and a lot of users of that fine and upstanding OS.

If this is going to happen it will likely be a huge hit game that relies heavily on DX11.
December 31, 2009 11:39:46 AM

wh3resmycar said:
i dont see meself upgrading to win7 at all..

vista x64 served and still serving its purpose for me.


Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements
-Highest compatibility with hardware
-Better administrative and monitoring tools

Aside from ME, Vista is the worst OS Microsoft has released and I'd be surprised if you didn't see improvements on just about everything you do on your computer with Win7 over Vista, especially with x64 versions. The only thing I can't say for certain is if Win7 has great compatibility with older hardware, but then again, you wouldn't be running the x64 version of Vista if that were the case. :p 
December 31, 2009 11:53:00 AM

Mousemonkey said:
I'm hoping SSD's are going to be the thing for 2010, more so than GPU's.


With the way memory prices have been going recently I wouldn't hold your breath.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
December 31, 2009 12:04:53 PM

jyjjy said:
If this is going to happen it will likely be a huge hit game that relies heavily on DX11.

But what?, it's got to be as good as HL and better than F.E.A.R and a whole step forward. Do you know of any candidates? ;) 
JeanLuc said:
With the way memory prices have been going recently I wouldn't hold your breath.

I fear you may be right sir, but that does not make me want them to reduce in price and increase in size any less. :lol: 
December 31, 2009 12:16:28 PM

Quote:
You keep telling yourself that.


Weak.

Have you tried it? Benchmarked it? Use it day-to-day?
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
December 31, 2009 12:26:35 PM

pandemonium_ctp said:
Weak.

Have you tried it? Benchmarked it? Use it day-to-day?

I have, what's your ish?
December 31, 2009 1:12:52 PM

Mousemonkey said:
I have, what's your ish?

Ish?
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 6:36:20 PM

Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements
-Highest compatibility with hardware
-Better administrative and monitoring tools

Aside from ME, Vista is the worst OS Microsoft has released and I'd be surprised if you didn't see improvements on just about everything you do on your computer with Win7 over Vista, especially with x64 versions. The only thing I can't say for certain is if Win7 has great compatibility with older hardware, but then again, you wouldn't be running the x64 version of Vista if that were the case. :P

said:
Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements
-Highest compatibility with hardware
-Better administrative and monitoring tools

Aside from ME, Vista is the worst OS Microsoft has released and I'd be surprised if you didn't see improvements on just about everything you do on your computer with Win7 over Vista, especially with x64 versions. The only thing I can't say for certain is if Win7 has great compatibility with older hardware, but then again, you wouldn't be running the x64 version of Vista if that were the case. :p 



im a gamer, as far as benchmarks are concerned, there are no tangible improvements win7 has over vista x64 .

i have 4gigs of ram. i dont care if my mem usage go beyond 2gb. hell, i'd be happy to have my system use all of its RAM.

financially, upgrading from vista x64 to win7 = epic fail (unless you're gonna "bay" it eh?). i'd rather get myself some new hardware and some new games instead as far as tangible benefits go.
a b U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
January 1, 2010 5:36:48 AM

Jaydee, didn't we already have this discussion? Besides, you're argument is even more flawed, as 7 uptake compared to Vista/7 actually SHRUNK; (IE, the rate of people switching has slowed), and XP still has a higher share then any other Windows OS.

Nevermind that ~47% of the market is not going to be ignored by devs, or that ~67% of all PC's still run XP. So please, stop the flawed arguments using flawed data.

Quote:

Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements (Flat out wrong; don't quote Task Manager numbers, as the memory tab only lists Address Space usage, and has nothing to do with how much memory is actually in use. Memory requirements for program X should be static across all windows versions (assuming all windows dependencies are the same at least).
-Highest compatibility with hardware (Not true at all; I have lots of professional HW I work with at my job that still lacks Vista drivers; don't even start about 64-bit drivers! I also cite total lack of support for 16-bit software, and flat out horrific 95/98 compatability due to depriciations of the DirectX API over time)
-Better administrative and monitoring tools


So I'm calling 3 of 7's "improvements" totally bogus.
a b U Graphics card
January 1, 2010 6:03:23 AM

wh3resmycar said:
i dont see meself upgrading to win7 at all..

vista x64 served and still serving its purpose for me.


Same here. I've used 7 and I actually like Vista Home Premium 64-bit better than I like 7. The main area where 7 is better is performance, other than that Vista is superior.

pandemonium_ctp said:
Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements
-Highest compatibility with hardware
-Better administrative and monitoring tools

Aside from ME, Vista is the worst OS Microsoft has released and I'd be surprised if you didn't see improvements on just about everything you do on your computer with Win7 over Vista, especially with x64 versions. The only thing I can't say for certain is if Win7 has great compatibility with older hardware, but then again, you wouldn't be running the x64 version of Vista if that were the case. :p 


As Strange Stranger said "You keep telling yourself that."

Quote:
Never felt a reason to completely stop using vista as it does everything fine for me.


+1

wh3resmycar said:
im a gamer, as far as benchmarks are concerned, there are no tangible improvements win7 has over vista x64 .

i have 4gigs of ram. i dont care if my mem usage go beyond 2gb. hell, i'd be happy to have my system use all of its RAM.

financially, upgrading from vista x64 to win7 = epic fail (unless you're gonna "bay" it eh?). i'd rather get myself some new hardware and some new games instead as far as tangible benefits go.


Agreed.

Me too it's nice having an OS that uses the ram you give to it for a change.

+1
a b U Graphics card
January 1, 2010 6:09:11 AM

It wasnt me this time gamer, I made the post about an article that coincides with what Ive been telling you , thats all.
Im sure therell be another one next month as well, and since my by March overtaking is waaay off, and its already happened, so far so good
a b U Graphics card
a b $ Windows 7
January 1, 2010 8:07:56 AM

I switched from Vista x64 to 7, and although I like it (and I'm glad I switched), there was certainly nothing wrong with Vista. I liked Vista a lot, and I certainly prefer it to XP for example.
January 1, 2010 3:33:14 PM

gamerk316 said:
Jaydee, didn't we already have this discussion? Besides, you're argument is even more flawed, as 7 uptake compared to Vista/7 actually SHRUNK; (IE, the rate of people switching has slowed), and XP still has a higher share then any other Windows OS.

Nevermind that ~47% of the market is not going to be ignored by devs, or that ~67% of all PC's still run XP. So please, stop the flawed arguments using flawed data.

Quote:

Windows 7 > all other Windows versions
-Faster boot with latest hardware
-Faster read/write on hdd/ssd
-Less minimum running memory requirements (Flat out wrong; don't quote Task Manager numbers, as the memory tab only lists Address Space usage, and has nothing to do with how much memory is actually in use. Memory requirements for program X should be static across all windows versions (assuming all windows dependencies are the same at least).
-Highest compatibility with hardware (Not true at all; I have lots of professional HW I work with at my job that still lacks Vista drivers; don't even start about 64-bit drivers! I also cite total lack of support for 16-bit software, and flat out horrific 95/98 compatability due to depriciations of the DirectX API over time)
-Better administrative and monitoring tools


So I'm calling 3 of 7's "improvements" totally bogus.


I have one word for you: K.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=22006 - Read the entire comparison involving all tests, but I especially liked this part, "Subjectively, the change from Vista to Windows 7 is like releasing a car’s handbrake."

http://www.system-tools-software.com/knowledge/windows-... - Not that this is definitive to say the least, but it does show 7 generally on top.

And don't quote me links to reviews which are from January of 200NINE with pre-release builds, as those comparisons are uterly useless.

And sure, quote me that in only 6 months time we'll see even more significant improvements where-as it took 2 years for XP and Vista to mature?

You guys can dispute your viva la resistance positions all you want, but the fact that there's any improvements over XP or Vista is telling enough since the RTM was so recent.

The OS runs better than any OS I've ran before, and this soon after RTM. I'm happy with it even though I really enjoyed XP and prior to that Win2k was perfectly fine for my needs. Hell, I even remember the glory days of 3.11.

The point is, there are improvements and there's no need to bash someone willing to recognize them.

Happy New Year.
a b U Graphics card
January 1, 2010 7:53:02 PM


You guys can dispute your viva la resistance positions all you want, but the fact that there's any improvements over XP or Vista is telling enough since the RTM was so recent.
said:

You guys can dispute your viva la resistance positions all you want, but the fact that there's any improvements over XP or Vista is telling enough since the RTM was so recent.


like what ive said, gaming-wise those "improvements" are negligible.

i'd rather get a hardware upgrade, as improvements would be tangible.

and besides, shelling out another $200 in a span of not more than 2 years for an OS upgrade is nuts. i just got used to my hardware dying along with my os. my k6-2 with win98, my x2 with xp.

!