Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Disadvantage of windows 7

Tags:
  • Windows 7
  • Windows XP
Last response: in Windows 7
Share
Anonymous
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 3:57:22 AM

what are the disadvantages of windows 7?
im planning to upgrade my OS from Xp to windows7..are these specs okay for windows 7?

2gb RAM
250 HD
128 graphic memory
dual core 2.16ghz

and another question..my laptop is NEO basic2145n...can i increase my dedicated graphic memory?coz i want to play 3d games...tnx

More about : disadvantage windows

a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 5:22:39 AM

Quote:
what are the disadvantages of windows 7?
im planning to upgrade my OS from Xp to windows7..are these specs okay for windows 7?

2gb RAM
250 HD
128 graphic memory
dual core 2.16ghz


Windows 7 uses more memory than XP. Its also slower, but not significantly slower. It has a different interface which you may or may not like. It uses more hard disk space. 7 has less flexibility with aftermarket security software than XP.

Obviously 7 has positives as well, but that was not your question.

Those are OK specs for 7. I would stick with XP with that unit, but 7 should run fine on it.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 7:43:37 AM

Windows 7 may be a bit sluggish on older hardware, but with a decent PC it is as quick as XP, at least in my view. Your biggest potential disadvantage is incompatibility with older software and hardware.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 8:53:33 AM

I think the biggest issue with Win7 is the much different interface for it. If your an XP user it will probably frustrate the cr@p out of you. I've used it before, and nothing is where it should be. Drive space and memory usage isn't a big deal as long as you have enough of each. I have 1.5TBs and 4GBs, so I doubt it would bother me much. 2GBs of ram is fine for XP, but will have problems with some games with Vista/Win7.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 4:57:02 PM

4745454b said:
I think the biggest issue with Win7 is the much different interface for it. If your an XP user it will probably frustrate the cr@p out of you.


Yeah, they've moved things around for no apparent reason and added completely counterintuitive interfaces which must have seemed like a good idea to someone but continually make me glad that I only have to boot into Windows to play games these days. The taskbar thing which groups windows together and shows you thumbnails isn't a bad idea, but when you move the mouse over the thumbnail it shows you the actual window, then you move the mouse to the window that's now being displayed on the screen and it vanishes behind another window again. Yes, it's terribly obvious and user-friendly that you can't actually use the window that's being shown on the screen unless you first click on the thumbnail.

Honestly I haven't found a single thing that would make me want to switch from XP to Windows 7 if it hadn't come with my laptop; UAC is probably the best benefit but again while the idea is a good one the implementation is awful ('Do you want to allow Foobar.exe to make changes to your system?' 'How the hell do I know? What changes? No, I don't want it to install a keylogger, but I do want to allow it to write to its own program files directory, which of those is it trying to do?'). I've been disappointed even in my low expectations of the upgrade.

Oh, and the 64-bit version provides no way to run 16-bit games like Carmageddon; I've yet to find any way to run it because the only method that works half-decently is booting Windows 98 in VirtualBox and that's too slow to be playable. My guess is that I'd have to run it in XP in VirtualBox with a Glide wrapper that passes the rendering to the native 3D drivers, but I don't have a usable XP license to do that. So much for backwards compatibility.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 5:18:16 PM

The task bar changes are the least of what I was talking about. I was working on a neighbors machine for the first time and found out some folders are hidden, with no way to browse to them from my computer. I was trying to help him with files in his "my documents" area, and had a hell of a time just getting there. Similar problems exist in the control panel and network areas as well. I know where the settings are in XP, but they seem to be gone in Win7.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 5:21:37 PM

Nobody has mentioned the obvious expense of buying software with marginal (if any) benefits so I will. I cannot address what's going on behind the screen but from a users perspective it's a re-shuffle of features some with less intuitive names. Basically, smoke and mirrors IMHO.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 5:37:24 PM

I recently bought a new PC and bought Win7 pro 64 bit, on a phenom II X6 1090T, and right away I noticed it is slightly sluggish. Very hard to navigate and find things, for example in the control panel.

The biggest problem I had was blurry text, especially in any web browser. I googled the problem, and it seems there is a subtle problem displaying text, (that many don't notice). The Win7 beta versions did not have this problem, and I even read of someone in a computer store who compared XP and Win7 pc's side by side, and the difference was indeed noticable.

Windows 7 isn't compatible with some older programs (Age of Empires 2 for me), and seeing that I only have 4 gigs of ram, I went back to Windows XP 32 bit. There doesn't seem to be any great 64 bit software out there, you can get 64 bit web browsers and winrar, etc, but that is not a huge improvement over 32 bit.

If and when they fix the blurry text problem, I wouldn't mind installing it as a 2nd OS, and dual booting, to play around with it. But I certainly much prefer Windows XP, as it is lightning quick and compatible with all my programs.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 6:13:18 PM

Quote:
Basically, smoke and mirrors IMHO.


From and end user perspective perhaps. More so if you don't do any digging on whats going on behind the scenes. There are many good things going on like DX10 or 11 support, TRIM support, Aero, etc. Its only S&M (!) if you don't use your computer for much.

Quote:
and compatible with all my programs.


Similar to the comment above. What if your programs need more then 4GBs of ram? What if your programs need DX11 support? I'm glad you can use XP, but not everyone can. (before you jump on me, I'm still using XP as well. But I know that not everyone can.)
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 6:35:46 PM

4745454b said:
The task bar changes are the least of what I was talking about.


I was mostly using that as an example of how they've changed something for good reasons but implemented it badly.

Quote:
I was working on a neighbors machine for the first time and found out some folders are hidden, with no way to browse to them from my computer.


Yeah, that's fun too. Again, the 'library' idea doesn't seem like a bad one but the way it's implemented is poorly thought out.

I also discovered recently that Windows 7 now exports all your user files on the network by default with full access rights; what bozo came up with that idea? Yeah, I really want anyone on the network who can steal my password to be able to update all my files remotely.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 9:18:02 PM

MarkG said:
Yeah, they've moved things around for no apparent reason and added completely counterintuitive interfaces which must have seemed like a good idea to someone but continually make me glad that I only have to boot into Windows to play games these days........


I can tell you exactly why they made these changes. They are trying to spoon feed users who don't know what they are doing ala the mac. Its features that will not appeal to power users on up who don't need or want to be led from a to b to c.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 9:30:35 PM

4745454b said:


From and end user perspective perhaps. More so if you don't do any digging on whats going on behind the scenes. There are many good things going on like DX10 or 11 support, TRIM support, Aero, etc. Its only S&M (!) if you don't use your computer for much.


DriectX, TRIM and Aero? You say its only smoke and mirrors if you dont use your computer for much and DirecX TRIM and Aero is the best you could come up with?

That makes his smoke and mirrors point for him.


Quote:
Similar to the comment above. What if your programs need more then 4GBs of ram? What if your programs need DX11 support? I'm glad you can use XP, but not everyone can. (before you jump on me, I'm still using XP as well. But I know that not everyone can.)


4 gb of RAM isn't an XP/7 issue, its a 32/64 bit issue. There is a 32 bit 7 and a 64 bit XP.

I know of no games that do not run on DX9. But it will eventually happen. But only a small percentage of people use their computers as $1000 game consoles. And even this is more of an issue with MS refusing to port DX10/11 to XP.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 9:34:20 PM

deadmeow said:
There doesn't seem to be any great 64 bit software out there, you can get 64 bit web browsers and winrar, etc, but that is not a huge improvement over 32 bit.


And thats because the transition to 64 bit has largely been driven by the 4 GB memory barrier and not software limitations. There is little reason at the moment to write native 64 bit software.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 21, 2010 9:56:37 PM

Quote:
DriectX, TRIM and Aero? You say its only smoke and mirrors if you dont use your computer for much and DirecX TRIM and Aero is the best you could come up with?


Meaning if all you do is surf, you won't care what Win7 can bring. If you care about speed, its the way to go. Sure I could list all the features that the ultimate version of win7 brings, but how many users would understand?

Quote:
4 gb of RAM isn't an XP/7 issue, its a 32/64 bit issue. There is a 32 bit 7 and a 64 bit XP.


Yes there is, now how many people use the 64bit version of XP? Not many. The drivers were horrible. Win7 doesn't have that problem. You are correct, the big reason for 64bit is simply to access more ram.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 11:05:07 PM

Honestly, I wouldn't go on a new OS on an old hardware unless you need a certain software that doesn't run on the previous OS. I never did (Linux does not count). If you build yourself a new system, that's another story. XP is still widely used, stick with it for some time.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 22, 2010 9:07:34 AM

4745454b said:

Meaning if all you do is surf, you won't care what Win7 can bring. If you care about speed, its the way to go. Sure I could list all the features that the ultimate version of win7 brings, but how many users would understand?


Or care? 90% of the new "features" are fluff.

You even see professional articles showing you how to get "Ultimate" features out of 7 home using freeware. This principle applies to XP also. There is little 7 provides that XP can't be given. And if your a power user of 10 or 20 years, you likely have what you want/need already.

Quote:

Yes there is, now how many people use the 64bit version of XP? Not many. The drivers were horrible. Win7 doesn't have that problem. You are correct, the big reason for 64bit is simply to access more ram.


Actually, XP 64 is just fine. It was released before machines were pushing the 4gb memory barrier, so there was no reason to upgrade to 64 bit. Low user base meant fewer 64 bit drivers. So back in the day, XP 64 was problematic. Again, a 64 bit issue, not a XP/Vista/7 issue.

With the proliferation of Vista/7 64 bit, a dramatic increase in 64 bit XP drivers has changed the landscape considerably. Once the 64 bit code exists, porting it is fairly simple. Just about anything with Vista/7 64 bit drivers now has XP 64 drivers. It isn't 2005.

The recent popularity of 64 bit has been a direct consequence of so many machines having to deal with greater than 4 GB of RAM. Not the relative merits of XP, Vista or 7.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 22, 2010 4:16:45 PM

FALC0N said:
And thats because the transition to 64 bit has largely been driven by the 4 GB memory barrier and not software limitations. There is little reason at the moment to write native 64 bit software.

Many companies, like Adobe, Dassault, Autodesk are providing native 64 bit programs already, many others will follow soon. There are cases where you absolutely need the 64 bit precision for some things, esp. in CFD and similar work.

As far as XP x64 vs Win 7 x64: This comes down to drivers and software you run. I run/ran both and for some things, like Inventor 2011, 3DS and AutoCAD(x64) Win 7 x64 was much more stable than XP x64. There are also hardware with drivers for Win 7 x64 but not XP x64.

Quote:
Honestly, I wouldn't go on a new OS on an old hardware unless you need a certain software that doesn't run on the previous OS. I never did (Linux does not count). If you build yourself a new system, that's another story. XP is still widely used, stick with it for some time.

Well said. +1
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
June 22, 2010 11:11:47 PM

Quote:

As far as XP x64 vs Win 7 x64: This comes down to drivers and software you run. I run/ran both and for some things, like Inventor 2011, 3DS and AutoCAD(x64) Win 7 x64 was much more stable than XP x64. There are also hardware with drivers for Win 7 x64 but not XP x64.


I know a couple of people who have used 7 and XP 64 who have the opposite experience with the two. They are the ones who convince me to actually try it instead of believing the myth.

And XP 64 has plenty of drivers in 2010. I make a point of looking up 64 bit drivers anytime I need a driver for anything. As a general rule, if it has Vista/7 64 bit drivers, it has XP 64 drivers.

Not sure I would buy XP 64 new. But If I just didn't like vista/7 I wouldn't have a problem with it at all.
m
0
l
!