Windows 7 Owned [Archive]

QueenZ

Jan 15, 2009, 06:26 AM

Still testing it and here are first results..

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3474/3199113288_29fe0e843a_b.jpg

even worse than vista..

edesignuk

Jan 15, 2009, 06:30 AM

It's a beta FFS, MSN pooped itself. So what?

ZOMG ITS OWNED!!!one1!

:rolleyes:

mattyb240

Jan 15, 2009, 06:39 AM

Wow.....

:rolleyes:

So next topic? How stable are beta releases?:D JOKE!

cogsinister

Jan 15, 2009, 09:04 AM

Still testing it and here are first results..

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3474/3199113288_29fe0e843a_b.jpg

even worse than vista..

Still moaning about how bad Win 7 is i see..........

QueenZ

Jan 15, 2009, 10:19 AM

Still moaning about how bad Win 7 is i see..........

Yep! :) It's bad bad bad and bad bad bad :D Nothing will beat OS X and there's nothing that Microsoft can do about it :D

Anyway, I'm really into testing it now and I'm reinstalling Windows 7 already.. kind of died.. :D

iAthena

Jan 15, 2009, 10:22 AM

Yep! :) It's bad bad bad and bad bad bad :D Nothing will beat OS X and there's nothing that Microsoft can do about it :D

Anyway, I'm really into testing it now and I'm reinstalling Windows 7 already.. kind of died.. :D

What kind of installation and update times are you seeing when you perform a fresh install?

QueenZ

Jan 15, 2009, 10:58 AM

What kind of installation and update times are you seeing when you perform a fresh install?

It installs in about 40 minutes or less on my PC.

edesignuk

Jan 15, 2009, 10:58 AM

A fresh install took 15 minutes under a Fusion VM for me.

dvince2

Jan 15, 2009, 11:10 AM

A fresh install took 15 minutes under a Fusion VM for me.

Same here for parallels... though it did take 2 attempts. The first time the installer just kind of hung.
Personally I don't mind Windows7 so far. the UI has an almost linux feel to it. Still a lot of work to do, but its already at least as good as vista is.

Stridder44

Jan 15, 2009, 11:11 AM

iParis

Jan 15, 2009, 11:15 AM

I heard that it works better than Vista.
Hell even XP still has some crashes.
One of my friends is even using 7 as his primary OS.
What are the specs of your computer?

diego2k7

Jan 15, 2009, 11:16 AM

Oh my god, you got some apps to throw exceptions! The OS is such crap... it just kept running.

QueenZ

Jan 15, 2009, 11:22 AM

edesignuk

Jan 15, 2009, 11:24 AM

It makes no sense that I have a clean install under a VM go on in 15 minutes, but you take 40 minutes on a full blown well spec'd stand alone system.

Your conclusions from your "testing" are utter nonsense.

dukebound85

Jan 15, 2009, 11:25 AM

ill be sure to post pics of when my mac apps say they unexpectedly quit....which isnt the rarest thing in the world

QueenZ

Jan 15, 2009, 11:41 AM

I don't really care how fast it installs or how much ram it needs.. All i care about is that it can run all my programs and it can't.. lame..

cogsinister

Jan 15, 2009, 11:41 AM

What kind of installation and update times are you seeing when you perform a fresh install?

Took about 30 mins to install, only a couple of updates, one was a definition update for defender, the other the MP3 update thingy and the third was my Zune software that turned up in update......and installed fine unlike the version i downloaded from the M/S Zune site !!!

cogsinister

Jan 15, 2009, 11:43 AM

I don't really care how fast it installs or how much ram it needs.. All i care about is that it can run all my programs and it can't.. lame..

The main thing i use windows for is My Zune 120, and ive not tried that yet.......if it BSOD's then im with you and Win 7 is crud......

edesignuk

Jan 15, 2009, 11:43 AM

lame..Sums up this thread really.

Stridder44

Jan 15, 2009, 12:01 PM

I don't really care how fast it installs or how much ram it needs.. All i care about is that it can run all my programs and it can't.. lame..

It's a beta...

chewietobbacca

Jan 15, 2009, 12:05 PM

This thread is so very :rolleyes:

Thetics

Jan 15, 2009, 12:43 PM

I like XP a lot better than Vista or Windows 7. And Vista is the same Windows 7.

My spec..
Core 2 Duo 3Ghz or something like that..
4GB RAM
1TB hdd

Anyway i think that Windows 7 really really sucks and Windows has to go.. i mean if they can fail 2 times in a row.. that's ridiculous... I think that it's time when Mac replaces Windows once and for all :)

you're absurd. First off, competition is good. if you have no reason for companies to outdo each other, then you get one crappy operating system.

Second, your "tests" and such, just don't make sense, windows 7 installs in 15 minutes or less.

3rd, iChat crashes on me more than msn has crashed on me.

4th, stop being a fan boy/girl/thing.

ps. I own 2 macs. and 1 pc. By the way, if you hate it so much, why are u testing it? what are you looking for? it seems like you're desperate to find flaws in win7, to justify something. Just relax, go use osx and be happy with it. Splitting hairs can get you anything you need.

iParis

Jan 15, 2009, 12:49 PM

ps. I own 2 macs. and 1 pc. By the way, if you hate it so much, why are u testing it? what are you looking for? it seems like you're desperate to find flaws in win7, to justify something. Just relax, go use osx and be happy with it. Splitting hairs can get you anything you need.

Maybe because he thought it was going to be better and he didn't know if he hated it until he tested it out.

Thetics

Jan 15, 2009, 12:56 PM

Maybe because he thought it was going to be better and he didn't know if he hated it until he tested it out.

Its a beta... msn crashed... He's basic the whole stability, functionality, and usefulness of an entire OS based on an MSN crash? Dont get me wrong, Im not a fan of windows, but this is just....:rolleyes:

sharp65

Jan 15, 2009, 01:26 PM

This thread is so very :rolleyes:

I'm noticing a pattern here ;)

Quillz

Jan 15, 2009, 01:43 PM

Actually, it's good that the applications QueenZ are trying to use keep crashing. In Beta 1, all crash reports are automatically sent to Microsoft, even if doesn't say so. (Read the pre-release EULA.) So, in theory, Microsoft is getting hundreds of thousands of reports a day that detail why an app crashed and how to fix it. That's the whole point of the public beta. Get people to test it with all sorts of various configurations.

Andrmgic

Jan 15, 2009, 02:10 PM

Quillz

Jan 15, 2009, 02:13 PM

I'm sure a beta of OS X would have its share of problems as well.. even Leopard gave people a number of problems at release. I never personally had any issues to speak of with leopard, but I haven't had many problems with Windows 7 as of yet either.
It sure did. I remember paying $29 for Mac OS X Public Beta. Was essentially unusable, but it was an important release for Apple, as it helped to make the first official release of Mac OS X much better.

Microsoft is doing the same thing with Windows 7. Make a public beta anyone can try out, collect all the feedback and then use it to make the RTM better.

The Flashing Fi

Jan 15, 2009, 03:36 PM

Anyway i think that Windows 7 really really sucks and Windows has to go.. i mean if they can fail 2 times in a row.. that's ridiculous... I think that it's time when Mac replaces Windows once and for all :)

So that Apple can monopolize the consumer market!!! YAY! How could we not lose.:rolleyes:

Quillz

Jan 15, 2009, 03:42 PM

So that Apple can monopolize the consumer market!!! YAY! How could we not lose.:rolleyes:
Exactly. Why do iSheep think the world will be better if only Apple was making computers and operating systems? It'd be a world without FireWire and optical drives.

ryannazaretian

Jan 15, 2009, 05:37 PM

turkeymaster

Jan 15, 2009, 05:49 PM

Ok Queenz... your computer is having issues with Windows 7. Where do I start...

1. It's Beta... This has been said before already... Expect problems... Microsoft even said to expect problems.

2. Windows is still running there bub...

3. Just because you experience one glitch doesn't mean that it sucks. Guess what, Safari crashes on me all the time. Safari also blocked Facebook for me... These are bugs, and guess who made it, Apple.

4. I'm running Windows 7 and have doubled my battery life from 1 hour in XP to 2 hours in Windows 7. I have also had zero problems so far.

Microsoft is hard at work making Windows 7 great because they really need it. Vista was released because most people already had XP, so XP license sales were down. Vista was a flop, but now is not too bad. It does still have issues though. Windows 7 is meant to be a big performance release (yea... Snow Leopard... whatever...)

Give Microsoft a break. You try to make a perfect OS that millions of people use every day to work on many machines. You sir, FAIL.

i agree the people that do crap like this are just showing how retarded they are
im using windows 7 and it works flawlessly
i also run windows vista on teh same pc and it runs flawlessly too
the only problem with 7 is that on 64 bit google chrome doesnt work properly and crashes when you try to use flash on chrome (chrome browser crash not os)
the fact that vista would crash if i overclocked my video card due to dx10 and the fact that 7 doesnt is a nice plus
my bro runs xp on a similar spec,ed pc and its 7 is at least twice as fast and certainly 10x nicer looking
next time think before you act

elppa

Jan 15, 2009, 06:04 PM

It sure did. I remember paying $29 for Mac OS X Public Beta. Was essentially unusable, but it was an important release for Apple, as it helped to make the first official release of Mac OS X much better.

Not that much better though :D

Acorn

Jan 15, 2009, 07:05 PM

BlackLight

Jan 15, 2009, 07:09 PM

Windows 7 feels soo right on my macbook :) i love it no problems so far ....everyone should check this out. awesome

chris200x9

Jan 15, 2009, 07:29 PM

Still testing it and here are first results..

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3474/3199113288_29fe0e843a_b.jpg

even worse than vista..

ZOMG!!1!!!11! LAWLZ PWNED!!!!!111 WINDOWS 7 IS TEH SUCKS!!!111

Quillz

Jan 15, 2009, 08:03 PM

im running windows 7 on a spare machine I had. it installed in 20 minutes. not 40. very quick actually. much faster then both xp and vista.

resource usage is 100x better then vista. overall its actually pretty nice.

I dont really consider it a "new" operating system. its more like what vista should have been. kinda like windows 98 went to windows 98 SE. windows 7 should have been a SE addition to vista not marketed as something new. honestly though i can see why though vista has some bad press.
You shouldn't consider it new. It's not new. It's evolutionary. I think a better analogy than 98 -> 98 SE would be 95 (Vista) -> 98 (7).

But I do think Microsoft should market it as a new operating system. After all, people who complain about Vista also complain that Microsoft needs a "new" OS to fix all of Vista's supposed problems.

Theophany

Jan 17, 2009, 09:22 AM

im using windows 7 and it works flawlessly

If it worked flawlessly it would be on the shelves right now. You're as bad as you claim the OP is. :rolleyes:

NB: being able to turn the computer on and use a few apps is not 'flawless.' No less than a week of uptime in which the machine is used in a multitude of challenging ways is 'flawless.' I can do that in XP and OS X. I have a friend whose Linux box only needs to be shutdown when critical OS updates require it, his record so far is about a month short of a year. It is ludicrous to even insinuate that W7 works flawlessly.

ryannazaretian

Jan 17, 2009, 10:59 AM

If it worked flawlessly it would be on the shelves right now. You're as bad as you claim the OP is. :rolleyes:

NB: being able to turn the computer on and use a few apps is not 'flawless.' No less than a week of uptime in which the machine is used in a multitude of challenging ways is 'flawless.' I can do that in XP and OS X. I have a friend whose Linux box only needs to be shutdown when critical OS updates require it, his record so far is about a month short of a year. It is ludicrous to even insinuate that W7 works flawlessly.

OSX doesn't work flawlessly either, but everyone here praises it. You cannot say any OS runs flawlessly. Linux doesn't run flawlessly either. It has issues as well. How about you think before you post. Don't change the meaning of what others are saying.

On OSX, I have to restart for most updates. I believe what turkeymaster was saying that Windows 7 hasn't produced any issues for him for a reliable OS.

I too have been running this since the Friday it officially came out. I have had 0 issues that keep me from doing my work efficiently. I have noticed some small UI problems like parts of the screen not refreshing and the MP3 problem. Other than a few small OI problems, I find Windows 7 to be very efficient for what it's running and am looking forward to Windows 7 being released.

I have played video intensive games, transfered a lot of stuff over the network, and have done a lot of work in programming and have experienced 0 issues. Yesterday, I did notice that the whole OS froze, but that's something with Bootcamp's BIOS emulation. It happened in XP, and Vista, and is showing its ugly head again.

P.S. Going by your logic... By bashing turkeymaster, you are thereby, supporting the OP. But, you blame turkeymaster by only using a few apps to say that Windows 7 is horrible. The OP shows 2 programs with problems (one with unfinished code too...) and Windows Messenger. So who is right in your argument? The OP, or turkeymaster? Get a life and stop trolling.

Theophany

Jan 17, 2009, 11:41 AM

OSX doesn't work flawlessly either, but everyone here praises it.

Massive generalisation, many people here are also it's strongest critics as they use it, rather than simply 'bashing' it.

You cannot say any OS runs flawlessly. Linux doesn't run flawlessly either. It has issues as well. How about you think before you post. Don't change the meaning of what others are saying.

Um, turkeyboy (or whatever), who you're defending said it ran flawlessly, I disputed that claim, take it up with him, not me.

On OSX, I have to restart for most updates.

Maybe you should actually read what I wrote. I didn't dispute or say otherwise in regards to the above statement, I mentioned an instance with a Linux distro my friend is using.

I believe what turkeymaster was saying that Windows 7 hasn't produced any issues for him for a reliable OS.

I too have been running this since the Friday it officially came out. I have had 0 issues that keep me from doing my work efficiently. I have noticed some small UI problems like parts of the screen not refreshing and the MP3 problem. Other than a few small OI problems, I find Windows 7 to be very efficient for what it's running and am looking forward to Windows 7 being released.

Good for you, relevance to your argument = 0 though. If you're having issues, which you admit you are, then it isn't flawless, as you are defending, despite arguing no OS is flawless. For goodness sake, pick a side to argue for and stick to it.

P.S. Going by your logic... By bashing turkeymaster, you are thereby, supporting the OP. But, you blame turkeymaster by only using a few apps to say that Windows 7 is horrible. The OP shows 2 programs with problems (one with unfinished code too...) and Windows Messenger. So who is right in your argument? The OP, or turkeymaster? Get a life and stop trolling.

Um, I didn't ever suggest that I agreed with the OP or that the OP was right. Learn to read. I disputed the accuracy of his (turkeywhatever) statement. I don't actually agree with the OP's sentiment at all based on what little they have actually contributed to the argument of W7 being a complete failure, nor did I ever allude to agreeing.

So basically, get off that high horse of yours and read before you reply.

gkarris

Jan 17, 2009, 12:00 PM

Windows 7 Owned

I thought by the thread title that you actually bought the Beta version of Windows 7....

:p

iParis

Jan 17, 2009, 12:07 PM

Windows 7 works fine on my computer. You probably did something wrong.

twoodcc

Jan 17, 2009, 12:09 PM

windows 7 is a beta, and you should expect that there will be things that won't work with it. this is not the final product.

that being said, i have 7 installed on my macbook air, and it works great. sure i've had a crash or 2, but that is to be expected with this beta. so far it works at least as good as vista, if not better

Nuc

Jan 17, 2009, 12:16 PM

Are you running 64 bit or 32? I installed 64 on my laptop through Fusion and it was slow. After installing the 32 bit version everything was fine...

Nuc

EmperorDarius

Jan 17, 2009, 12:18 PM

I thought by the thread title that you actually bought the Beta version of Windows 7....

:p

It would have made the right effect if it was "Pwned"

ryannazaretian

Jan 17, 2009, 12:33 PM

Massive generalisation, many people here are also it's strongest critics as they use it, rather than simply 'bashing' it.

Um, turkeyboy (or whatever), who you're defending said it ran flawlessly, I disputed that claim, take it up with him, not me.

Maybe you should actually read what I wrote. I didn't dispute or say otherwise in regards to the above statement, I mentioned an instance with a Linux distro my friend is using.

Good for you, relevance to your argument = 0 though. If you're having issues, which you admit you are, then it isn't flawless, as you are defending, despite arguing no OS is flawless. For goodness sake, pick a side to argue for and stick to it.

Um, I didn't ever suggest that I agreed with the OP or that the OP was right. Learn to read. I disputed the accuracy of his (turkeywhatever) statement. I don't actually agree with the OP's sentiment at all based on what little they have actually contributed to the argument of W7 being a complete failure, nor did I ever allude to agreeing.

So basically, get off that high horse of yours and read before you reply.

First of all, I did completely read your post.

I agree that being a critic is different than bashing it. What the OP is doing is completely bashing it, which is useless to everyone, and therefore, this whole thread should be deleted. turkeymaster was simply saying that he has not encountered a problem yet. You took his words and turned it around to saying that there are absolutely no problems with Windows 7. Of course, this is not true, and that is not what turkeymaster meant. He simply meant that he has not encountered any problems so far with the Beta.

Also, the thing about Linux never having to restart. What relevance does it have to this thread if you didn't want me to talk about it. You suggest that a flawless OS is one that never needs restarting. Well... all OS's need restarting at some point. I sometimes have to restart OSX because I cannot get my dock to work at all. Window's sometimes needs restarting for updates. When I used to run Linux, I would have to restart because it wouldn't let me open anything.

Apparently this argument doesn't have two sides. The OP's argument is that Windows 7 is 'Owned,' meaning that Windows 7 is a useless POS that no one should ever use. Others are saying that Windows 7 has produced no problems for them. My side is that Windows 7 is not perfect, but is certainly a good upgrade from XP or Vista. I have encountered some problems, but that is to be expected from a beta. The OP suggests that this is the real retail product being released today that has a problem with one program, and therefore is useless.

I believe turkeymaster could have used different terminology to make it less confusing to those that read word-for-word and use the basic definition of each word as a basis for their statement. He meant he has had no flaws in operation since he has used it. This can be true.

I'm not bashing you Theophany, I'm just pointing that your original post to turkeymaster's post is unjustified. turkeymaster said "im using windows 7 and it works flawlessly." From this, I read, "I, turkeymaster, have not had any problems with Windows 7 yet."

Theophany

Jan 17, 2009, 01:39 PM

First of all, I did completely read your post.

Did you really though? I'm still skeptical.

I agree that being a critic is different than bashing it. What the OP is doing is completely bashing it, which is useless to everyone, and therefore, this whole thread should be deleted. turkeymaster was simply saying that he has not encountered a problem yet. You took his words and turned it around to saying that there are absolutely no problems with Windows 7. Of course, this is not true, and that is not what turkeymaster meant. He simply meant that he has not encountered any problems so far with the Beta.

Well what he said and what he meant are two different things. You're not actually addressing the core argument here, just convoluting it with 'he said' 'she said' irrelevancies.

Also, the thing about Linux never having to restart. What relevance does it have to this thread if you didn't want me to talk about it. You suggest that a flawless OS is one that never needs restarting. Well... all OS's need restarting at some point. I sometimes have to restart OSX because I cannot get my dock to work at all. Window's sometimes needs restarting for updates. When I used to run Linux, I would have to restart because it wouldn't let me open anything.

*sigh* I didn't say it 'never' had to restart, are you illiterate? I didn't ever say a 'flawless OS never needs to restart,' nor did I insinuate such, I merely said that one of the criteria for a 'flawless' (note the use of inverted commas in every instance I use that word) was the ability to have a respectable uptime (I used a week as a benchmark) with no serious errors. I thought you said you read my post?

Apparently this argument doesn't have two sides. The OP's argument is that Windows 7 is 'Owned,' meaning that Windows 7 is a useless POS that no one should ever use. Others are saying that Windows 7 has produced no problems for them. My side is that Windows 7 is not perfect, but is certainly a good upgrade from XP or Vista. I have encountered some problems, but that is to be expected from a beta. The OP suggests that this is the real retail product being released today that has a problem with one program, and therefore is useless.

The OP didn't suggest anything of the sort. The OP posted a screenshot of two errors and a console bug and from that deduced that W7 was 'owned.' You've made your own interpretation of what the OP meant without the OP actually stating such, much the same as you have done with my original post. I really don't see what relevance this has to your argument with me though? I'm not the OP and I didn't ever suggest I agreed or disagreed with them until you replied to my post.

I believe turkeymaster could have used different terminology to make it less confusing to those that read word-for-word and use the basic definition of each word as a basis for their statement. He meant he has had no flaws in operation since he has used it. This can be true.

I'm not debating the truth of what you have understood his post to mean. He said it was "flawless," I said it was untrue. Simple as that.

I'm not bashing you Theophany, I'm just pointing that your original post to turkeymaster's post is unjustified. turkeymaster said "im using windows 7 and it works flawlessly." From this, I read, "I, turkeymaster, have not had any problems with Windows 7 yet."

Having no problems yet and being 'flawless' are two distinct things, hence why I posted what I posted and you posted what I posted, but I strongly suggest you stop attempting to disprove or disparage what I have posted until you actually read through and understood what I have posted. I don't take what you write as a 'bashing,' I am just irritated by the fact that you make an argumentative reply to a post that you have not understood or have misread and thus misrepresent my views.

gkarris

Jan 17, 2009, 02:02 PM

I thought by the thread title that you actually bought the Beta version of Windows 7....

:p

It would have made the right effect if it was "Pwned"

People tell me that but it has no effect - I guess I'm from the generation where "pwned" means that someone misspelled "owned"....

BTW, I'm running Windows 7 in Virtual PC on a 1.8 Pentium M Dell laptop with 1.2 Gigs assigned to it and I've had some problems - expected with a Beta.

Does run great under the circumstances. I think MS will be successful with this one...

nishishei

Jan 17, 2009, 06:00 PM

Theophany, give it up. You are arguing for argument sakes with ryannazaretian.

Quillz

Jan 17, 2009, 08:14 PM

I think to avoid any more arguments, we can more or less all conclude that while Windows 7 presently works quite well for many people, it's also (obviously) going to be flawed and won't always work so well for some. But this is how it is with all operating systems. And that's why we have choice, so that we can use the OS that works best for our individual needs.

Theophany

Jan 17, 2009, 08:18 PM

Theophany, give it up. You are arguing for argument sakes with ryannazaretian.

Says the guy backing somebody who argues against a post without reading it :rolleyes:

ryannazaretian

Jan 17, 2009, 08:32 PM

Says the guy backing somebody who argues against a post without reading it :rolleyes:

I'm not sure if you joking or not... but what is it with you saying that people aren't reading your posts if they do not agree with you?

Theophany

Jan 18, 2009, 09:04 AM

I'm not sure if you joking or not... but what is it with you saying that people aren't reading your posts if they do not agree with you?

Miaow! :D

Dude, you misquoted me, I was just making that clear. I can accept you disagree with me, I pretty much expect it, just don't misquote me please :)

Schtumple

Jan 18, 2009, 09:07 AM

Shock horror, a beta that's unstable, it's almost as if it's not the final product... oh wait.

ITT: Some mac users with rational, and Windows trolls with nothing better to do. :)

Abstract

Jan 18, 2009, 06:47 PM

Having no problems yet and being 'flawless' are two distinct things....

And when someone says that something is "working flawlessly", it does not imply that the item in question is "flawless." ;)

I believe turkeymaster could have used different terminology to make it less confusing to those that read word-for-word and use the basic definition of each word as a basis for their statement.

Yes, but those people are considered illiterate. I don't think this site should cater for those who can only read the words and take them all literally. You need to be over 13 to post at this message board.

I'm not bashing you Theophany, I'm just pointing that your original post to turkeymaster's post is unjustified. turkeymaster said "im using windows 7 and it works flawlessly." From this, I read, "I, turkeymaster, have not had any problems with Windows 7 yet."

What turkeymaster meant was crystal clear. I wouldn't bother justifying what turkeymaster said, or how he said it.

KevinN206

Jan 18, 2009, 07:56 PM

The Command Prompt window does not support fullscreen mode. That's not an error or a bug, and it's working as designed. The command prompt does not support fullscreen mode since Vista.

I think they want people to use PowerShell, which is much more powerful than the older command prompt.

jamesdmc

Jan 18, 2009, 10:27 PM

Schtumple

Jan 19, 2009, 05:17 AM

At least you guys get to test it. I can't even download the thing. The download starts for a few seconds, I get about 1% downloaded, and then it just sits there. For hours. I've tried three times (each on a different day and time) and still no go. Oh well.

James

You're not missing much, apart from it booting faster and the UI tweaks, it's still Vista, I still can't stand the new windows explorer *shudder*...