Windows 7 or vista..?

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Macs run a Linux core (you can install Xubuntu on Macbooks too). What I find is that Mac hardware is more expensive, and you can get a Windows machine to run faster than Mac (less overhead) once you have installed Linux.

Not quite... Mac OS X is FreeBSD running on top of a Mach kernal. On top of that is Quartz (a pdf based graphical system unmatched by any other OS, and the Finder (the GUI). There are alternates to the Finder, but it works so well together.

You may be able to find cheaper hardware, but to get anything as well engineered as a Mac you have spend the same or more. Intel courted Apple to use their chip because they needed someone to show what the chips were capable of...

I feel the best way to use Linux (1 or more flavours) on a Mac or almost any other x86 OS (including SunOs, Windows xxx, BeOs, even DOS) is VMWare Fusion

Of course i'm biased, been using macs since 1984.

dave
 
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Good news, then.

Nice to hear some good things about 7. I hated to move from my trusty old Win2K pro. I liked it, it just worked.

At my old job I had to run OS9.1, OS8.5, OSX, Win2K, WinXP and DOS! What a mind bender that was. DOS was fun. It can only do 1 thing at a time, but it does it superbly.

And speaking of the Linux "workspaces", who remember that in the good old BeOS? :cloud9:

Anyhow, good news on the W7 front, then.
 
the marketing on windows 7 is excellent, microsoft has people brainwashed into thinking that they need it. My Asus laptop shipped with vist64 bit, I have it set to dual boot my linux or windows. Im using Linux 98% of the time. At work we have windows machines. For most computer users out there, linux will more than satify their needs, I dont miss the days of sluggish computer use caused by spyware malware etc. I dont use antivirus software either. I still think viruses are created by the antivirus companies to keep there product selling. Run out and get Windows 7 if you choose, its your money and your computer. I dont plan on purchasing it anytime in the near future, Most linux distros offer live cds so you can try it without installing it on your computer.
 
If you're considering Vista, you want 7.

Some will tell you that 7 is too new, but frankly, 7 is just a new interface on top of a bug-fixed Vista core.

For a low power system (single core, <=1gb of RAM) I would still suggest Windows XP. Anything exceeding that specification will run 7 fine.
 
Why have you started a new thread when an identical thread is running ......

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/154374-windows-7-vista-new-post.html


Even starts the same....

Windows 7 or vista..?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi to all
I am planning to buy new laptop.But confused little which system to buy.So please share your experience so i can get some ideas.which one is better..?


Andy
 
Last edited:
Have been using Windows 7 at work since RC comes out and didn't look back. 7 RC (and even late Betas) beat Vista in terms of usibility, performance and stabiliy. I was impressed enough that I started using Widnows 7 RC on my main home machine as well. I have updated to the final release since Sep and have been very happy so far.

I don't have first hand informtion on how it sounds yet since I haven't updated my music server, but I saw some MS engineers actively going to some pc audio forums to collect end user pain points (such as the kernel mixer issue) early in the development cycle (2-3 years ago) so I have some confidence in that front.

Vista was a rush job to get something out of the door from a project (Longhorn) that went seriously wrong. Windows 7 on the other hand was planned right and was very well executed. I am so glad that MS put Sinofsky on the driver seat for this release. The Sinofsky model definitely makes a difference here.
 
I'm running Windows 7 64bit ed on my home computer, and it runs fine, havent had one single issue so far, I'm duel booting so once I get my win 7 drive set up I'll be cloning it to my main drive (have it running on my 3rd hdd right now) and Ill be done away with win xp.

Linux is nice, but I've found it has problems with allot of the audio software I run. And lets face it, Ubuntu Studio is nice, but it's not on the same level as the programs it tries to emulate.

And most regular computer users are not going to want to fight with their computer to get their drivers running, its bad enough in windows but toss in the difference of Linux and how it does things people don't want to be bothered with it.
 
Why is the 64bit a better system than the 32bit?

Will the 64bit run on all systems?

You need to have 64 bit compatible hardware, but most processors have been 64 bit compat for a while now.

With regards to your other hardware it mainly comes down to the drivers available. You'll have to check with the manufacturers website for 64 bit capable drivers. If there aren't any then you're stuck. I had to replace my wireless card when I went to 64 bit, and that was it, so not exactly that expensive to sort out.

As far as I understand it the main advantage of a 64 bit system is the way it handles memory, or more precisely it can handle a lot more. On a 32 bit system under XP the maximum amount of memory I can handle is around 3.3GB and this as far as I know is hardware limited. Under a 64 bit system you can reach far higher theoretical amounts of RAM, more then you'd ever need. And as far as I know this is software limited more then anything as the different versions of windows 7 come with different maximum caps on the amount of RAM they can handle.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.