What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Discuss Windows 2000, NT, XP and Windows Server 2000, 2003, SBS 2003.
Post Reply
cool_charac
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:41 am

What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by cool_charac »

I'm already aware of two reasons why some of you guys don't like Windows 7, they are Aero and poor software compatibility (by the way, does AutoCAD 2006 work on 7?) but I'm curious to know if there are other reasons why you don't buy newer hardware with 7 on it.

I'm not talking about old pre-SSE2 hardware.

OdysseyNeptune
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 7:54 pm

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by OdysseyNeptune »

Um, Aero is great, i use Windows 7 all the time. I haven't found any compatibility issues. Although i miss XP :(

JimOlive
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 12:07 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Universe, Existence

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by JimOlive »

cool_charac wrote:I'm already aware of two reasons why some of you guys don't like Windows 7, they are Aero and poor software compatibility (by the way, does AutoCAD 2006 work on 7?) but I'm curious to know if there are other reasons why you don't buy newer hardware with 7 on it.

I'm not talking about old pre-SSE2 hardware.
Are you talking about 7 or Vista?

cool_charac
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:41 am

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by cool_charac »

JimOlive wrote:
cool_charac wrote:I'm already aware of two reasons why some of you guys don't like Windows 7, they are Aero and poor software compatibility (by the way, does AutoCAD 2006 work on 7?) but I'm curious to know if there are other reasons why you don't buy newer hardware with 7 on it.

I'm not talking about old pre-SSE2 hardware.
Are you talking about 7 or Vista?
I was comparing XP to 7, and 7 is otherwise a very good OS, so I'm baffled at why so many XP users refuse to use it.

gtgamer468
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by gtgamer468 »

There is Windows XP Mode available as well, but does require Windows Virtual PC and that itself requires Windows 7 Professional, Enterprise or Ultimate as Home Premium was not enough. With XP Mode, I was use a tightly- integrated Windows XP environment on Windows 7 even though it was virtualized.

SistemaRayoXP
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:26 am
Location: Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Jalisco, Mexico.

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by SistemaRayoXP »

It's not exactly as easy as you said: The remaining XP usrs around the world are (mostly) companies, which btw use specific software made by them for themselves, and as a custom software, most time these kinds of software are "hard linked" to the OS, that said, the program may not run the same on newer OSes since they change the forumla a lot (e.g. the Documents and settings folder is now the Users folder, and the company program trusts on the Documents and setting folder (The real one, not the NTFS link).

Also many times the hw doesn't gives up for more, I have a crappy 2003 PC which runs XP kinda slow, but acceptable. Once I installed 7 on it, and it run waaaay slow, so upgrading to 7 wasn't an option, and it happens that the people doesn't upgrades their hw, because they don't care that much about the PC, let's mean they don't use their PC a lot and they usually just check their email or they never connect the PC to internet, so there's no reason for them to move anything on the PC (Here applies the "If it works, don't touch it")

But AFAIK, many XP users already upgraded to 7 or even 8 or even trashed the old PC and bought a new one, so there's not really a lot of XP users who do not want to upgrade to 7. And IMO, the only thing that I could say against 7, is that it uses more Aero effetcs in the windows which sometimes slow the computer due to crappy integrated cards (And then switches the process of drawing the winodws to the processor, which slowdwns the rest of the programs)
Image
Registrations are now open. Join us today!

gtgamer468
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by gtgamer468 »

True, that the hardware that came in most PCs pre-installed with Windows XP was so old that you could barely run Windows 7. As an XP user, you would be getting performance hits and lags very frequently when running Windows 7.

cool_charac
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:41 am

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by cool_charac »

I also heard some people saying "it takes more clicks to do stuff on 7 than XP."
SistemaRayoXP wrote:It's not exactly as easy as you said: The remaining XP usrs around the world are (mostly) companies, which btw use specific software made by them for themselves, and as a custom software, most time these kinds of software are "hard linked" to the OS, that said, the program may not run the same on newer OSes since they change the forumla a lot (e.g. the Documents and settings folder is now the Users folder, and the company program trusts on the Documents and setting folder (The real one, not the NTFS link).
Is it even possible to install a new OS on embedded hardware?

SistemaRayoXP
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:26 am
Location: Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Jalisco, Mexico.

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by SistemaRayoXP »

Of course it is, on the PC it's always possible. Just backup all your data, and install as normal
Image
Registrations are now open. Join us today!

ATeamInc
FTP Access
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 6:49 pm
Location: GMT+2 w/dst
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by ATeamInc »

SistemaRayoXP wrote:It's not exactly as easy as you said: The remaining XP usrs around the world are (mostly) companies, which btw use specific software made by them for themselves, and as a custom software, most time these kinds of software are "hard linked" to the OS, that said, the program may not run the same on newer OSes since they change the forumla a lot (e.g. the Documents and settings folder is now the Users folder, and the company program trusts on the Documents and setting folder (The real one, not the NTFS link).
...
In fact, there's a game that ONLY with Windows XP, and even Windows Vista dropped support for it, since it does rely on XP's quirks, much like other-era programs. (It's "The Godfather the Game"). And no, it doesn't have any backward compatibility with say, Windows 98.
gtgamer468 wrote:True, that the hardware that came in most PCs pre-installed with Windows XP was so old that you could barely run Windows 7. As an XP user, you would be getting performance hits and lags very frequently when running Windows 7.
Not really that bad, anything that has a Core2 chip from '06 and newer should be able to run Windows 7, and if you are lucky, even get aero.
For example, I have a Toshiba Tecra A8-S513, which has a very old and early core 2 chip (@1.6Ghz), and Windows 7 plays very nicely with it. I even get aero, which is a tiny bit slower than what I am used to.
Actually, under Windows XP, the computer was randomly crashing and doing weird stuff (for example it might suddenly freeze the taskbar), and using VMware 6.5 to play around with DCE on Longhorn 3718, VMware crashes 8-) .
<!--Placeholder-->

SistemaRayoXP
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:26 am
Location: Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Jalisco, Mexico.

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by SistemaRayoXP »

Offtopic Comment
Well, the problem could also be that your specific XP installation was messed up somehow, so it would not work properly, but a simple clean XP reinstall could have fixed your issues
Image
Registrations are now open. Join us today!

cool_charac
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:41 am

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by cool_charac »

Now I see. You can't upgrade all those old computers working fine to newer operating systems, which have way too high system requirements. Vista is probably to blame for that.
Offtopic Comment
I just installed Vista x64 on vmware with one core. When I added a second core the uniprocessor HAL started wasting my cpu cycles (even going back to one core still wastes cycles). How do I properly change it to multiprocessor HAL? The Microsoft docs instructions don't seem to work.

MrBurgerKing
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:08 pm

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by MrBurgerKing »

While 7 has a higher bar, it runs surprisingly well on older hardware - my Prescott machine was shockingly useable. While 7 also has an impressive ammount of compatibility with xp hardware, the tricky part is proper drivers.
The problem is how slow old silicon is at modern workloads: ad & javascript bloated websites, hd video streaming, multitasking, etc. This makes old computer obsolete to everyone but the most extremly basic users. So why even bother upgrading? Anyone who cares about 7's benefits (stability security software etc.) would rather get a whole new machine with a later version of Windows, while anyone using a XP machine doesn't care enough to install something different.

Dibya
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:48 am
Location: Inside Windows XP Kernel

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by Dibya »

MrBurgerKing wrote:While 7 has a higher bar, it runs surprisingly well on older hardware - my Prescott machine was shockingly useable. While 7 also has an impressive ammount of compatibility with xp hardware, the tricky part is proper drivers.
The problem is how slow old silicon is at modern workloads: ad & javascript bloated websites, hd video streaming, multitasking, etc. This makes old computer obsolete to everyone but the most extremly basic users. So why even bother upgrading? Anyone who cares about 7's benefits (stability security software etc.) would rather get a whole new machine with a later version of Windows, while anyone using a XP machine doesn't care enough to install something different.
I can't believe your words.
On a core 2 duo laptop, 20fps -30fps framedrop in Windows 7.
System became much slower.

Wheatley
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1839
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:19 pm
Location: shell32.dll

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by Wheatley »

MrBurgerKing wrote:While 7 has a higher bar, it runs surprisingly well on older hardware - my Prescott machine was shockingly useable.
I can certainly corroborate this, as even my old Northwood Pentium 4 machine (I think the CPU was running at 1.8GHz) with 2GB of ram and a Radeon 9600 was quite usable for light browsing and XP-era games back when it was still my main machine.
Dibya wrote:
MrBurgerKing wrote:[...]
I can't believe your words.
On a core 2 duo laptop, 20fps -30fps framedrop in Windows 7.
System became much slower.
Frame drop in what? It seems to me that you pulled this statistic from nowhere. And yes, obviously XP can run faster on a lot of hardware, but countless tangible improvements made in versions after it require some performance sacrifices on older hardware...
Windows Defender for great justice! Bugs are an international trading company. I need to defeat the anti-debugging and obfuscation methods. It wasn't for Intel's absurd ability to load in ie6. Why even waste time with people in an envelope?

DragonWars
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 9:57 am

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by DragonWars »

Wheatley wrote:
Dibya wrote:
MrBurgerKing wrote:[...]
I can't believe your words.
On a core 2 duo laptop, 20fps -30fps framedrop in Windows 7.
System became much slower.
Frame drop in what? It seems to me that you pulled this statistic from nowhere.
he is right, for example windows 7 will never work smooth (especially in games) on a laptop like dell d620 (core2duo, 4gb ram, old nvidia quadro)

yourepicfailure
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1260
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm
Location: Flying high in a DC10

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by yourepicfailure »

And on my Latitude XT, Vista outperforms 7 dearly.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
Image
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!

Wheatley
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1839
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:19 pm
Location: shell32.dll

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by Wheatley »

DragonWars wrote: he is right
He might be, but where's the evidence for his claim? How was the framerate of this mysterious program measured? What even is the program, and what exactly is the "core 2 duo laptop"?
DragonWars wrote:for example windows 7 will never work smooth (especially in games) on a laptop like dell d620 (core2duo, 4gb ram, old nvidia quadro)
Well yeah, a machine that was never intended for gaming doesn't play games smoothly, who would have thunk it. But for lighter use, nearly any Core 2 Duo laptop can still be "smooth" enough on 7 and even 10, especially if you upgrade the RAM and install an SSD. I know because I used a Core 2 Duo machine for years with those upgrades.
Windows Defender for great justice! Bugs are an international trading company. I need to defeat the anti-debugging and obfuscation methods. It wasn't for Intel's absurd ability to load in ie6. Why even waste time with people in an envelope?

SistemaRayoXP
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:26 am
Location: Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Jalisco, Mexico.

Re: What's wrong with 7? (vs. XP)

Post by SistemaRayoXP »

Wheatley wrote:He might be, but where's the evidence for his claim?
You use a Radeon 9600, he probably used a shitty integrated graphic card, and 7 became something like a game, where you need a minimal graphic card in order to run the system smooth (In fact, this comes since Vista with Aero). I can comprobate that a P4 runs 7 nice, the issue here isn't with the processor, Windows 7 requires a minimal of 1 GB of memory in order to run questionably usable, but in order for the system to be fast, you need 2 GB of RAM, and a basic DirectX 9 graphic card. Also having a good disk speed increases the system load times
Image
Registrations are now open. Join us today!

Post Reply