What's Not To Like About Windows 7?

If you're feeling adventuresome, you can get a jump on the rest of the world by being one of the first to try out Windows 7, the next version of Windows. I've tested out the beta version for the last few months and, so far, my experience has been quite positive.

Microsoft still hasn't announced the date of the final commercial version of the upcoming operating system, though it's widely expected to be out by the end of this year. But Microsoft is allowing anyone to download and install a free copy of the operating system so it can be tested on a wide range of machines. Windows 7 RC, as it's called, was made available for public testing May 4th and will be available for free "at least through July" to those willing to go through a few hurdles.

Getting set up

Microsoft is recommending that you install Windows 7 on a dedicated test PC, admonishing users not to test it on your primary home or business PC. I have a confession. I ignored that advice and tested the first beta and the release candidate on the machine I mainly use for work. Having said that, I'm a very experienced PC user, I back up my data daily, and I have other machines I can rely on if there is a problem. Installing any new operating system - especially one that's not officially released or supported - can be risky, so if you do install Windows 7, be sure you have a complete backup of your system; back up your data regularly and have a plan of action should something fail.

First you have to download a 2.36-gigabyte file, which could take a considerable amount of time depending on your Internet speed and how busy the download servers are at the time. What you download is an ISO file that must be burned to a DVD before you can install it on a machine, so be sure your PC has a DVD burner and you have a blank DVD handy. Microsoft says your machine will need a 1 GHz or faster CPU, at least 1 GB of RAM (I recommended at least 2 GB), and at least 16 GB of available disk space (more is better). The 64-bit version has higher requirements.

You can install Windows 7 over Vista but not earlier versions of Windows. For best performance, I recommend a "clean install," which requires that you re-install all your software when you're done. In theory this can be done without destroying the data on your disk, but I would never dream of installing an operating system without first backing up all of my data.

The installation process went very smoothly for me and, when it was done, most of my hardware worked properly thanks to Windows 7's built-in drivers. Most simply installed automatically. I had to manually install my printer drivers, but even they were included with the operating system. It discovered my Brother laser printer on my network and installed it without my having to download any new drivers. It also recognized my keyboard and dual monitors. The built-in Windows driver for the IDT sound adapter on my Intel motherboard installed basic features but didn't give me as much control over settings as Intel's drivers. However, I was able to download and install them from Intel's Web site.

So far, all of the programs I've tested work. There were a few that gave me a bit of trouble at first but right-clicking on a program's icon brings up the Windows 7 "troubleshoot compatibility" tool that usually takes care of things. The one big problem I had was installing the plug-in to watch videos on ABC.com. Before it would let me download the software, it kept telling me that I had to upgrade my operating system to XP or Vista. It saw that I wasn't using an approved operating system and refused to let me try. But I solved that problem by downloading it to another (Vista) PC and copying the file over to my Windows 7 machine where it installed just fine.

First impressions

My favorite feature in Windows 7 is the taskbar, which not only displays running programs but lets you "pin" frequently used programs so you can run or switch to them with a single click. When you hover your mouse over an icon of a program that's running, you see thumbnails of all the open windows for that program. If you move the mouse into the thumbnail, it grows much larger. Click on that larger window and you're in the program. This feature makes it a lot easier to navigate between documents or Web sites. With Firefox, you only see one tab per window, but Internet Explorer shows all the tabs, which is quite nice. In fact, that feature caused me to start using Internet Explorer 8 (which comes with Windows 7) and I'm starting to like it a lot more. I read the reviews that say Firefox 3 is faster than Explorer 8, but with my cable modem connection I don't see any noticeable difference, and Internet Explorer seems to be a less prone to crashes.

I'm also liking the Libraries feature that you can access from the navigation pane in any folder. Libraries are virtual folders that, by default, provide access to documents, photos, and other media files without having to navigate through a hierarchy of folders. You can use this to add links to additional folders on your machine, a network server, or another machine on the network. For instructions on how to use libraries, see this post on Windows Live.

Although an improvement over previous versions, it still retains some of Windows' annoying attributes. For one thing, it will slow down over time. My brand new RC installation is quite fast but by the time I used the beta for a few months, it was starting to get a bit sluggish (that's called "Windows rot"). That's been the case with every version of Windows so far, and Windows 7 doesn't seem to be an exception. Still, it's noticeably faster than Vista which is at least a step in the right direction. Also, as with earlier versions, it sometimes doesn't properly close programs that have crashed. There have been times when I've had to turn off the PC to recover from a program's crash.

For a lot more details on Windows see Ed Bott's excellent write-up on ZDNet.
By Larry Magid

[E Elder]

I got tired of the hassles with Microsoft. I bought a new PC for my wife and attempted to swap hard drives and, of course, you have to call Microsoft when hardware changes and provide the product number to get a new activation code. For giggles I loaded Ubuntu Linux 9.04 over the Microsoft XP Pro and discovered I loved it.

So does my wife. I have Unbuntu and XP pro installed on tow identical P4 computers. I have to run utilities on the XP Pro PC all of the time to speed it up. It also gets infected with viruses, malarkey and Trojans that are not a problem on a Linux machine. The Linux machine runs faster and doesn't slow down over time like XP Pro.

It had the Firefox browser, Evolution email which is equivalent to Outlook and OpenOffice which is equivalent to MS Office. I bough a Linux magazine for $10 to get the Linux DVD, but you can also download it for free. It also came with a free DVD/CD burner, and other Internet, graphics and audio tools. I was also able to download ClamAv and and front end called ClamTk for free anti-virus protection. I looked at several Linux firewalls and pickled Gufw. I have even sent email and received a response form the developer of that firewall.

There are also some serious downsides to Windows 7. the XP Emulation Mode (XPM) only works on enterprise versions of the software. XPM also requires a modern CPU. Many of the older Intel and AMD CPUS don't support XPM and some modern laptop CPUS don't work with it either. This means home users and many enterprise users will be forced to upgrade to Microsoft Office 2007 and to other legacy XP Pro applications. In addition, there is no upgrade path from XP Pro to Windows 7. Only PCs with Vista installed can upgrade to Windows 7.

People would be wise to backup their data onto a 16 or 32GB thumb drive and install Linux before they make an expensive investment in Windows 7. If you install Windows 7 on a home PC, you may have to upgrade Microsoft Office, your DVD/CD burner, your anti-virus software and any other special applications that worked under XP Pro. You can avoid a lot of time and expense by using Linux. Two versions i would recommend are Fedora and Ubuntu Linux. If you need technical support, buy the commercial version of Fedora called Red Hat. The thechs at Red Hat are excellent.

[timetrips1]

I'm a computer professional so have to stay up with the technology, but for me the Microsoft OS peaked with XP. That OS was stable and easy to use. I use VISTA at work, ONLY because the company forced the upgrade. I installed Vista at home about a year after it came out, hated it, hated that it didn't recognize my older printers, hated the new Exploer window (seems it can't recognize anything but an audio file), hated the Office 2007 upgrade (Damn ribbon bar was the WORST idea I have ever seen, if I wanted a MAC I'd buy a Mac.). I quickly reverted back to XP at home and forcibly reloaded XP on the two "new" computers I aquired since the Vista release. The only good thing about Windows 7 will be that it is NOT VISTA. Other than that I'll stick with XP. I want an OS that lets me use the computer to get work done, not require a MEGA computer to let the OS run.

[barbaram99]

I 'member Ma Bell. I am that old-54. I am using Vista on an old notebook. I needed the sp needs . MS Sam is awful, MS Anna is better. I am a legally blind person. I have a notebook that is built in 07. I use apps that use Windows. I know MS is too big for it own good. They tried to break MS up. They can't- the money issue. I have used XP home and Vista. Sure Vista was was poorly done. We know that. I have to have things read to me. MS Sam is so down in the dumps sounding voice. I am aware that the processor etc was made for XP but I hate Pro. The thing I hate about Vista is it boots too bloody slow. Vista is too controling. vVista blooks things it should not. It does wake up fast from sleep. It is a slow OS.I do like the interface. I have the AERO. i don't use the term eye candy as that is so dumb. I find it helps me and others. I like XP home but it is limited . Vista blocks an internet station I used to listen to and will not open it so I can listen to it. MS has pieed a lot of people off. I wait for the books on Win 7.

[tmittelstaed]

I wrote a book about Open Source a number of years ago. Trust me, the general public will never go to Open Source for a general purpose computer. They will have no problems buying all manner of consumer products that contain embedded Linux (and currently do, it's more prevalent than you think) but the Ubuntu people who are out to take over the world are kidding themselves. It won't happen.
The computer industry lost it's chance when Apple decided against porting System 7 to the PC oh so many years ago. If that had happened, both Microsoft and Apple would be like Coke and Pepsi today, Apple wouldn't of course be selling hardware anymore, but both would have competing software and have split the market. The competition would be good for the consumer and we would all be happy.
Instead what we got is a monopoly. And it is a shame that so many people here are so inexperienced with economics that they don't understand how a monopoly operates. Microsoft is operating exactly like you would expect a monopoly to operate and guess what? It IS a monopoly, morally, philosophically, and LEGALLY. MS is a legal monopoly on the same order as Bell Telephone and things will remain as bad as they are in the computer industry until someone at the Justice dept. finally pulls their head out of their ****** and does something about it.

[Scimajor]

Had VISTA on my desktop and hated the fact that most (Ok some that specifically run DX 10 do run faster in VISTA) of my apps ran faster and with less problems on XP. Also, XP starts so much faster than VISTA.

I can only assume (I don't assume this lightly) that the newest entry is worse. Sorry, I'm not upgrading anytime soon. I'll stick with XP.

[ayatoldya]

What's not to like about Windows 7?
1. The pricing structure. MS will offer 7 for under $35 to those living in Chinese and India. The American and European consumers will have to pay the premium prices close to $200 for the same operating system with maybe a few extra bells and whistles. Whoopie.

2. The forced obsolescence of windows XP software. Read the fine print and users of 7 will have to buy another MS product that allows XP software to run in a window on Windows 7.

3. Software bloat. Windows 7 is so processor and memory intensive, to run it like it's shown to the masses requires a quad processor and 8 gigabytes of memory, plus a gamer video card with at least 512 MB memory. Consider that XP runs on a single processor, with 256 MB memory and on a 64MB video card just fine. That's a lot of extra horsepower just for window dressing.

4. Windows 7 planned obsolescence is already in the works. Windows 8 will be the big buzz in under 3 years.

The world is missing something by never experiencing the long term stability and support of an computer operating system like Solaris. Solaris had 64 bit versions more than 10 years ago. Sun developed open source technologies that Windows 7 have trumpeted as new and unique to the Windows experience.

The sooner consumers start to embrace free operating systems offered by Sun, (open Solaris) BSD (the core for Apple's OS) or IBM's and Novell's versions of Lynix (both own the rights to UNIX source code) the sooner the consumers will see they have been paying to be kept sheltered in a cardboard box outside of the Y, when they could have been staying at the Ritz, for FREE!

[boatdocster]

I have yet to see any good reason to upgrade to Windows 7. What is the single driving need for me to upgrade from Windows XP Professional to Windows 7? If there is a good reason out there, Microsoft has not divulged it (other than wanting more of our money).

Vista had more than it's far share of problems. Office 2007 with the Ribbon Bar is atrocious, de-installed within 1 week and back to Office 2003.

Microsoft - if you want people to upgrade their existing software, there should be a compelling reason why and a logical path to do so. Example - why make 20 year computer veterans start over with completely new user interface in Office??? Microsoft MUST consider the training costs for a large or small business to retrain its entire staff to support a "cute Idea". Typically that is not a cost effective solution for most businesses!

[lennypw]

Windows 7, aka Vista SP2, provides nothing in the way of improvement as an OS. My applications load no faster nor do they execute any faster. Rather than lowering my hardware requirements, it raises them. There is no increase in RAM available for apps, increase in paging performance, nothing that would help the end user is accomplishing his/her task faster and with greater efficiency other than a few more poorly copied features from other O/Ss.

Non-Microsoft, impartial benchmarks (see other websites) show an "optimization" over Vista of less than 5%, which is less than a user would notice.

Even Microsoft's own apps such as Word or Excel show no performance gains in my own and others testing. Eye candy is much, much better in the various flavors of X windows managers with lower performance requirements.

Security in Win 7 is a "fixed" Vista which just has added a batch of crap to fix problems with the basic architecture and implementation. Security is an architecture, design, and implementation issue not an after thought.

Performance is an architecture, design, and implementation issue, not an after thought. When I worked at Microsoft with their O/S they would hire teams of programmers (not engineers) to fix the problems with performance after the fact rather than do it "right" from the beginning. They treat security the same way. Win 7, aka Vista SP2, falls into this same methodology -- just add some code, tweak some code, rewrite some code, remove some code; the exact way not to do software.

[DefendLiberty]

Funny, but every quality this article mentions is a copy -- and usually a bad copy -- of Mac OS X, and every problem that is mentioned is non-existent on a Mac. (There is no counterpart to "WIndows rot" on a Mac; program crashes are extremely rare and never crash the entire OS; etc.)

I used Windows for 20 years. Been using Mac for over 2 years and I've never been happier. Forget Windows and their bugs...
Posted by tritoneking at 9:15 PM : May 6, 2009
-------

I was going to comment, but you hit about every point I was thinking. I use both Macs & PC's in my business. They each have their uses, but the Macs have had a tenth of the technical problems and crashes. Being tech savvy, we can always find and fix the PC issues, but it's a hassle. I agree about "new" the features sound a lot like MacOSX has had for years.

All that said, I'm sure we will install Windows 7 on one of our PC's and see if it is better. It would be great if Microsoft finally starts getting its act together.

[MacOO7]

I can say one good thing about the new version of Windows. It's looking more and more like the Mac OS. They even have something like the dock now. What's' good about this is that when I visit my brother, who uses Windows, I find that it works more like a Mac now. That means I have less troubles getting around when I use his computer. My sister-in-law will only use Windows so they're not going to switch to Mac which is ok since at this rate it will end up exactly like Mac OS anyway.