Why I hate Windows.....and why I have to use it!

[JSR]

It's always been the way with both OSs and a lot of software - As I seem to recall remarking earlier, there really isn't very much of note I'm doing today with PCs that I wasn't doing a dozen or more years ago. Microsoft always was prone to P-ing the power of the supporting machine up against the wall. And it's one big con - It's actually very rare for developments to be really new; or particularly useful... Certainly very rare for 'new' features to appear that would truly be totally unachievable with properly coded software on the machines of 8 or even 10 years ago...

I remember thinking similar things when Windows XP first came along and I had to ask myself what I could do with XP that I wasn't doing with 98SE. Microsoft constantly tout the new OS as being "faster" - but then the specs demand a much faster system. The original OS would go much faster on a faster system! Barmy. I have a nice small laptop here from years back that'll run Windows 98SE quite dandy - with its 16MB RAM and 1GB hard drive. Yet we have to throw perfectly working machines out because of software and hardware requirements.

A couple of years back, I tried to start moving over to Linux. Not the 10MB one (that's a little too restricted for anything but the basic stuff, or if you really want to roll your sleeves up) but to a 100MB one that boots from my SD card or USB stick. The biggest stumbling block was lack of hardware support - particularly printers. Something as simple as printing was like a hurdle of epic proportions. That's something that hasn't changed since I first tried out Linux some ten years ago.

I may moan about Windows and Microsoft until I'm blue in the face, but Windows does "just work" with everything I have. But that seems not to be guaranteed these days either. If you go to a 64-bit version of Windows, I understand that most software and hardware needs to be chucked in the skip. And it's not always certain that what you run on Windows XP today will even run on a 32-bit version of Windows 7 tomorrow. They don't make it easy to upgrade.

[Justin]

I ran the Upgrade checker which does a good job of testing all hardware and also states which software will/won't run. Everything I had installed runs ok under 64 bit.

[mgibbs]

If you go to a 64-bit version of Windows, I understand that most software and hardware needs to be chucked in the skip. And it's not always certain that what you run on Windows XP today will even run on a 32-bit version of Windows 7 tomorrow. They don't make it easy to upgrade.

64Bit XP was certainly a nightmare for compatibilty (or lack thereof). 64bit Windows 7 has far fewer problems. So far we've not found any program that works on 32 bit Win7 that doesn't run on 64 bit.

If you have the pro version of 7 you have xp compatibility mode which essentially runs a copy of xp in a virtual machine if you have any essentail XP programs that don't work under 7.

Mark

[Draner]

if you ask adobe very nicely, your photoshop licence allows you to use it on 2 computers (only one at one time though) they may give u a new product key for Mac

[JSR]

If you have the pro version of 7 you have xp compatibility mode which essentially runs a copy of xp in a virtual machine if you have any essentail XP programs that don't work under 7.

I already have Windows 98SE running on a Virtual Machine for software that won't run right on Windows XP! :biggrin: And I didn't have to buy the "professional" version of XP for this to work.

I guess the "pro" version of 7 costs much more than the non-pro version?

Not that I'm considering 7. It's too bloated to run on my netbooks, so it's a no-go for me no matter what the perceived advantages are.

[Draner]

Ask not what Windows can do for you, Ask what you can buy for Windows.

[mgibbs]

I already have Windows 98SE running on a Virtual Machine for software that won't run right on Windows XP! :biggrin: And I didn't have to buy the "professional" version of XP for this to work.

I guess the "pro" version of 7 costs much more than the non-pro version?

Not that I'm considering 7. It's too bloated to run on my netbooks, so it's a no-go for me no matter what the perceived advantages are.

Pro does cost more than the Home versions yes. The main difference is that Pro supports domains on the network.

Mark

[Draner]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP9tkpMR ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GWYaviI ... re=related
sorry, couldn't help my self

[socialgiraffe]

I am running Win 7 and it works at treat. Have Coreldraw X3 and Adobe CS5 Master Edition installed and never get any problems (although I doubt if I am doing the sort of photo editing that some of you are doing). In fact its quite the opposite. I used to run XP and my version of CorelWings (embroidery creation software) would not run. On Win 7 it does.

[draig]

I used to love OS2 Warp, not bloated and ran like a dream. Then MS did the dirty and marketed windoze, not wanting to put a lot on a forum but there is a huge history behind this.

First OS i ever used was CP/M then Xenix ah those were the days.

Sharon