Religion & Spirituality2 mins ago
What's so great about Windows 7?
19 Answers
Firstly, I've been involved with computers and computing for 30 years and Windows 7 is the 10th version of Windows I have used. (I jumped from DOS to Windows 2 0 does anyone else remember that?) I have also used other operating systems and written software so I'm not entirely green when it comes to software and operating systems.
However, I find Windows 7 so frustrating!
Example: I use Google News. For stories that catch my attention, I right click to open in new tab. With XP, I could start a dozen pages opening at once with no problem. With 7, I have to wait whilst the first page is loaded before it will let me open a second.
Example: I want to view the files on my computer. I try to open documents and settings and the operating system tells me "Access Deied!!! Who's in charge - me or the machine? I am forced to use the "Libraries".
Example: It constantly decides to change the drive letter of the device I store most of my documents on. (I've been using computers too long to trust keeping important documents on the primary drive!), So I have to change it back which means waiting for "Snap Ins" to be loaded and then virtual disc before I can eventually get to the device and sometimes it won't offer me the cjance of changing it back whilst other times it will but only after warning me that changing the drive letter may mean some files may not be seen by programs. (But it's not worried about that when it chavalierly decides to change them itself. Today it decided to not only change drive E to F but F (which is a backup facility) to H!
Perhaps if I upgraded to a multi core faster processor and considerably more RAM, it might become nearly as efficient as XP? I don't call that progress!
However, I find Windows 7 so frustrating!
Example: I use Google News. For stories that catch my attention, I right click to open in new tab. With XP, I could start a dozen pages opening at once with no problem. With 7, I have to wait whilst the first page is loaded before it will let me open a second.
Example: I want to view the files on my computer. I try to open documents and settings and the operating system tells me "Access Deied!!! Who's in charge - me or the machine? I am forced to use the "Libraries".
Example: It constantly decides to change the drive letter of the device I store most of my documents on. (I've been using computers too long to trust keeping important documents on the primary drive!), So I have to change it back which means waiting for "Snap Ins" to be loaded and then virtual disc before I can eventually get to the device and sometimes it won't offer me the cjance of changing it back whilst other times it will but only after warning me that changing the drive letter may mean some files may not be seen by programs. (But it's not worried about that when it chavalierly decides to change them itself. Today it decided to not only change drive E to F but F (which is a backup facility) to H!
Perhaps if I upgraded to a multi core faster processor and considerably more RAM, it might become nearly as efficient as XP? I don't call that progress!
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chrisrob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Taking your points one at a time:
Browsing google news. I can't duplicate your problem in IE, Firefox or Chrome under Windows 7.
"Documents and settings" is not a real location. (it wasn't under XP either). There's absolutely no need to use it, which is why it's normally hidden. You don't need to use libraries, you can simply click your username to get to your own documents and settings. or open C:\Users to get to the folders of other users.
Drive letters are allocated to removable drives as they are connected. XP does the same. You can override it in both XP and Win7 by allocating a preferred drive letter. Once you've done that Windows will always allocate the preferred drive letter unless you've allocated it to more than one device, or plugged in enough devices to have already used up the preferred letter when you attach the device.
Browsing google news. I can't duplicate your problem in IE, Firefox or Chrome under Windows 7.
"Documents and settings" is not a real location. (it wasn't under XP either). There's absolutely no need to use it, which is why it's normally hidden. You don't need to use libraries, you can simply click your username to get to your own documents and settings. or open C:\Users to get to the folders of other users.
Drive letters are allocated to removable drives as they are connected. XP does the same. You can override it in both XP and Win7 by allocating a preferred drive letter. Once you've done that Windows will always allocate the preferred drive letter unless you've allocated it to more than one device, or plugged in enough devices to have already used up the preferred letter when you attach the device.
Just to add...
I built my first computer in 1979. I've been working with computers ever since through Commodore PET, Apple II, Tandy TRS8,0 Sharp MZ80K, Sharp MZ80B, CP/M, MP/M, CPM86, Unix, Xenix, DOS 1 - DOS6, DRDOS, GEM, Windows, OS/2, OS2 Warp3, Windows 3, Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, 7. Ubuntu.
As far as I'm concerned Windows 7 is the best business OS I've ever used.
I built my first computer in 1979. I've been working with computers ever since through Commodore PET, Apple II, Tandy TRS8,0 Sharp MZ80K, Sharp MZ80B, CP/M, MP/M, CPM86, Unix, Xenix, DOS 1 - DOS6, DRDOS, GEM, Windows, OS/2, OS2 Warp3, Windows 3, Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, 7. Ubuntu.
As far as I'm concerned Windows 7 is the best business OS I've ever used.
Thanks Rojash but you are one of those who says Windows 7 is the best OS without saying why.
But opening multiple tags at the same time with whichever browser I use still persists - not only on my laptop but my wife's desktop is the same.
And the same happens if I try to download 2 files at the same time, or move too fast when playing solitaire.
AND no matter how often I reassign the drive letters, it will still decide to change them on a whim.
Windows 7 [I] may [/I] work sor some but it appears [I]only[/I] if you invest in the most powerful multi core processor and masses of memory. If the operating system really was better than its predecessor, it would need less resources to operate, not more!
But opening multiple tags at the same time with whichever browser I use still persists - not only on my laptop but my wife's desktop is the same.
And the same happens if I try to download 2 files at the same time, or move too fast when playing solitaire.
AND no matter how often I reassign the drive letters, it will still decide to change them on a whim.
Windows 7 [I] may [/I] work sor some but it appears [I]only[/I] if you invest in the most powerful multi core processor and masses of memory. If the operating system really was better than its predecessor, it would need less resources to operate, not more!
My old PC died last August Chris. That had XP Professional but this new one has Windows 7. It took a short time to get used to the different layout and I was scratching my head at a few things. I prefer XP.
I don't know why they have to meddle with winning systems. It seems that once everyone is comfortable with a system they have to change it. I presume they would argue they are making improvements but I wonder whether it's just some people trying to justify their salaries.
I don't know why they have to meddle with winning systems. It seems that once everyone is comfortable with a system they have to change it. I presume they would argue they are making improvements but I wonder whether it's just some people trying to justify their salaries.
It's so Microsoft can continue to make millions, I guess.
And it comes with "bloatware" of latest versions of Microsoft Office that will work for a short while and then have to be paid for giving Microsoft another few hundred pounds!
I use Open Office.
I know Bill Gates is attempting to look a good guy and his anti malaria and other charity work is extremely laudable - but, of course, we, the users of his OS and software, are the actual benefactors.
And it comes with "bloatware" of latest versions of Microsoft Office that will work for a short while and then have to be paid for giving Microsoft another few hundred pounds!
I use Open Office.
I know Bill Gates is attempting to look a good guy and his anti malaria and other charity work is extremely laudable - but, of course, we, the users of his OS and software, are the actual benefactors.
"you are one of those who says Windows 7 is the best OS without saying why. "
I have two machines, one running XP the other running Win7
Despite the fact that the XP machine is a higher spec, the Win7 machine is blindingly fast in comparison.
Searching is also amazing under Win7 (even with indexing turned off).
It does take a while to get used to Win7, but just as an example: which is easier?
Open Explorer, Navigate to C drive, Navigate to Documents and settings, Navigate to the folder you want,
or
Click Start, Click the icon with your user name, double click the folder you want.
I have two machines, one running XP the other running Win7
Despite the fact that the XP machine is a higher spec, the Win7 machine is blindingly fast in comparison.
Searching is also amazing under Win7 (even with indexing turned off).
It does take a while to get used to Win7, but just as an example: which is easier?
Open Explorer, Navigate to C drive, Navigate to Documents and settings, Navigate to the folder you want,
or
Click Start, Click the icon with your user name, double click the folder you want.
Morning, I'd just like to echo Rojash' comments about searching on Win7 - it is absolutely excellent. To do something in XP I have to go to control panel and try and work out where a techie/engineer would put something (this is usually a logical but not "human" placement) - with Win7 all I have to do is search for the kind of task I want to perform. Which is pretty good.
Spare
Spare
"If the operating system really was better than its predecessor, it would need less resources to operate, not more!"
That's absolute rubbish. In fact, if Microsoft (or any) software developer tried to iterate on an OS by lowering the baseline specification required, then you might as well have stuck with DOS. PCs nowadays are far more accessible and far more multifunctional than they ever have been and will continue to become so as time goes by.
Before upgrading my PC a few weeks ago, I was running a 5 year old computer that I'd upgraded from XP Home Edition to Win7 Home Premium. It ran as smooth as butter. If you're trying to suggest Win7 has undue hardware requirements simply because you're having issues that other people aren't, then I think you're being unfair. Especially since the continued "march of Bill Gates" means that today you can buy a massive amount of computing power for a fraction of what it would have cost 10-20 years ago. So, your statement is a dangerous one to make seeing as it's taking what, three problems? Then making it sound like everybody who uses a modern computer should just ditch the progress made in the last 10 years. I think not.
That's absolute rubbish. In fact, if Microsoft (or any) software developer tried to iterate on an OS by lowering the baseline specification required, then you might as well have stuck with DOS. PCs nowadays are far more accessible and far more multifunctional than they ever have been and will continue to become so as time goes by.
Before upgrading my PC a few weeks ago, I was running a 5 year old computer that I'd upgraded from XP Home Edition to Win7 Home Premium. It ran as smooth as butter. If you're trying to suggest Win7 has undue hardware requirements simply because you're having issues that other people aren't, then I think you're being unfair. Especially since the continued "march of Bill Gates" means that today you can buy a massive amount of computing power for a fraction of what it would have cost 10-20 years ago. So, your statement is a dangerous one to make seeing as it's taking what, three problems? Then making it sound like everybody who uses a modern computer should just ditch the progress made in the last 10 years. I think not.
"With XP, I could pin a particular document folder from my documents drive on the start menu.
I have been using Win 7 for a year and still haven't worked out how to do this"
Open Documents
Drag the folder to the start button (when the mouse pointer is over the start button, a hit will appear saying "Pin to start menu")
Release the mouse button
I just did that by guesswork - it seemed pretty obvious to me.
I have been using Win 7 for a year and still haven't worked out how to do this"
Open Documents
Drag the folder to the start button (when the mouse pointer is over the start button, a hit will appear saying "Pin to start menu")
Release the mouse button
I just did that by guesswork - it seemed pretty obvious to me.
"Drag the folder to the start button (when the mouse pointer is over the start button, a hit will appear saying "Pin to start menu") "
That may work for you, TRojash but when I do it, it just opens the start menu but nothing permits me to "Oin to Start Menu"!
Mobius, I stand by what I said about the resources required to do the same job. Why should it be necessary to use higher spec processors and more memory to end up with something that doesn't work so well as a previous edition?
Mobius, I agree the computing power today is massively increqased and at a fraction of the cost - but that's more to do with the hardware developers than Bill Gates's software and OS company.
Anyway, since no-one has attempted yet to answer my original question (perhaps there isn't an answer), I'm unsubscribing from this thread.
That may work for you, TRojash but when I do it, it just opens the start menu but nothing permits me to "Oin to Start Menu"!
Mobius, I stand by what I said about the resources required to do the same job. Why should it be necessary to use higher spec processors and more memory to end up with something that doesn't work so well as a previous edition?
Mobius, I agree the computing power today is massively increqased and at a fraction of the cost - but that's more to do with the hardware developers than Bill Gates's software and OS company.
Anyway, since no-one has attempted yet to answer my original question (perhaps there isn't an answer), I'm unsubscribing from this thread.
If the operating system really was better than its predecessor, it would need less resources to operate, not more!
Not really true.
The more complex PCs/component parts become the larger the OS will become to control them.
After 30 years with computers and software you would have made that link - from DOS none of them has ever gotten smaller - hence the constant need for hardware upgrades for the latest OS. The fact you have to upgrade your hardware tells you they have already stripped out support for older crap in order to make room for ever more new crap. So it's smaller than it could be!
Not really true.
The more complex PCs/component parts become the larger the OS will become to control them.
After 30 years with computers and software you would have made that link - from DOS none of them has ever gotten smaller - hence the constant need for hardware upgrades for the latest OS. The fact you have to upgrade your hardware tells you they have already stripped out support for older crap in order to make room for ever more new crap. So it's smaller than it could be!
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
ChatterBank46 mins ago
Film, Media & TV48 mins ago
