Re: Windows 7
Posted by Tricob on .
Quote:
>Vista and the upcoming Windows 7 still offer nothing that XP can't do.
Can't argue with that. :-)
But what really gets me is the system requirements of Windows 7's WinXP mode. Doesn't vanilla XP require 25% of the RAM and horsepower that Window 7's WinXP mode requires? I get the impression that WinXP mode isn't a truly legitimate XP mode, and will cause more problems than it solves. I'm only more certain of this after reading of the User License Agreement for Windows 7, which is virtually identical to that of Windows Vista.
- Tricob.
"Glass Tiger for life! "
>Vista and the upcoming Windows 7 still offer nothing that XP can't do.
Can't argue with that. :-)
But what really gets me is the system requirements of Windows 7's WinXP mode. Doesn't vanilla XP require 25% of the RAM and horsepower that Window 7's WinXP mode requires? I get the impression that WinXP mode isn't a truly legitimate XP mode, and will cause more problems than it solves. I'm only more certain of this after reading of the User License Agreement for Windows 7, which is virtually identical to that of Windows Vista.
- Tricob.
"Glass Tiger for life! "
I hear ya. I bought a laptop last year with Vista Ultimate pre-installed on it. After wiping everything HP out of it and using a clean install of Vista Ultimate for a week, I went back to XP. Took a whole day of driver hunting for a system that wasn't designed for XP to begin with, but I got everything working perfectly and it runs ridiculously well with it's much higher than needed requirements. Vista and the upcoming Windows 7 still offer nothing that XP can't do.
Replies:
| Re: Windows 7 | majinsnake -- 10/23/2009 2:35 pm UTC |
| Re: Windows 7 | Tricob -- 10/23/2009 9:05 pm UTC |