Windows 7 in details

Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by RACERPRO, Nov 9, 2008.


    RACERPRO MDL Senior Member

    Feb 13, 2008
    Given that I knew most of you would be virtually blasted out of your chairs by a “shock and awe” of Windows 7 reviews once the news embargo on the OS was lifted (combined with the fact that I only got my hands on a copy of Build 6801 a couple of days later), I decided to take my time to get to knows the OS before I shared with you my thoughts and feelings about Microsoft’s latest OS.


    Installing Windows 7 is quick … very quick! I managed to get Windows 7 installed and ready to go in under 15 minutes on one system - a time that makes Vista seem like a lumbering dinosaur.

    Beyond the speed boost, the setup process for Windows 7 Build 1601 is pretty much the same as for Vista in that you interact with it at the beginning and the end of the process, but for the most part it gets on with the install by itself.

    OS Speed

    Once I’d recovered from shock of the speed of the install (I’d set aside 45 minutes, and was done in 15!), I was next struck by how fast Windows 7 is. There’s none of the sluggishness and lag that I remember with early builds of Vista and XP. Everything is snappy and responsive … Start Menu, Control Panel applets, applications … everything. About the only thing I’ve come across so far that was slow was the Magnifier tool … this tool about 20 seconds to load. Side by side, Windows 7 is far snappier and more responsive than Windows Vista. That alone is promising for the future.

    Also, bootup and shut down times are faster. Basic tests show that bootup is some 10% faster and shut down some 15%. Impressive.

    If there’s one word to describe the Windows 7 UI it’s this - Unfinished! In fact, using Windows 7 puts you in a wierd wonderland of Vista mixed in changes for Windows 7.

  2. kvic

    kvic MDL Junior Member

    May 25, 2007
    #4 kvic, Nov 12, 2008
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2008
    People say this and that but i have vista 32bit sp1 and it is no way the same as 7 sure the graphics are but on my system 7 is very close to the speed of xp w/sp2,and as far as setup time i clocked it from start to finish amazing 16 min's compared to vista's 35.

    So far i have installed everything that i had on vista and it all installed and runs super smooth my only hitch was a audio driver but once i found the newest one even that works.

    In short i dont know what kind of system they or you run it on but on this one 7 is running perfect.
  3. davehc

    davehc MDL Novice

    Nov 11, 2008
    #5 davehc, Nov 13, 2008
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2008
    You probably didn't grasp the concept of my post. My installation of 7 is also running perfectly, I am not disputing that. I did also stress that , when making assumptions as to speed of various functions, they must be mad with identical machines.
    To repeat, on 100% identical machines, my original insallation took pretty well the same time with both OS's. Any changes which might occur here would be mostly down to the speed of the DVD and hard disk which is being used. Using a really hot machine borrowed from an Office, I got the installation down to 23 minutes. It is also important to define installation time. To me , it is from the time the DVD says "Start Now"" to the point where the hourglass has settled down and I am able to use the desktop without interruption. This would include having made the connection to the Web and Lan. The latter requires some few minutes of typing in a late stage of the installation, as does filling in a username and password. I did notice that, even on the borrowed faster machine, "Expanding files", took eight minutes alone.

    Over the past two years, I have applied all the worthwhile tricks that have been available, to customise and improve Vista.My Vista is totally reliable. I have never had a blue screen, apart from failed experiments of my own making. Admittedly with the help of SP1, it now runs considerably faster in all aspects than initially. The bottom line of my story is that I am of the belief that "7" is , as is what Vista should have been "Out of the Box". The average user is not prepared to go to the customising lengths I have done. The small number of extra features, so far available in "7", could easily be incorporated into Vista by Microsoft. Perhaps we are being led, with blinkers, into SP3?
  4. ZaForD

    ZaForD MDL Expert

    Jan 26, 2008
    Hi davehc,

    I haven't seen any major increase in speeds with Windows 7 either.
    This week I re-installed both Vista SP1 Ultimate and Windows 7 on my Netbook (HP 2133 Mini-Note w/2GB RAM)
    Both installs where from a USB DVD and took around 25/30 mins. Windows 7 was up and running a little faster, but thats due to the fact it only needed 3 drivers where as Vista needed 5.
    (The GFX driver in Windows 7 crashes if I switch to the glass theme, so it be effecting these results a little.)

    As I said, I can't say theres any noticeable difference in the speeds with opening or using different programs. The heaviest App's I have installed are Media Centre and Office 2007 both of which take around the same time to start up in both Vista and Windows 7.

    A couple of things I have noticed are that Windows 7 just seems to work in an easier or a smoother way.
    And that it definitely works better with less resources.
    With only 1GB RAM Vista is almost un-useable, It takes almost 5mins for the desktop to fully load and Office takes around a minute to start.
    Windows 7 also takes around 5 mins to load to the desktop, but once loaded its fine if alittle slugish at times. ;)

    XP is still quicker on the HP 2133 with both 1GB or 2GB RAM.
    But is a pain to use as the GUI doesn't scale very well on a small screen with a high resolution. :eek:

    But that a whole different subject. :D