Is it worth it for Vista users to upgrade to 7?


...  

222 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you upgrade to 7?

    • Yes
      178
    • No
      17
    • Not sure
      27
  2. 2. What's your experience with Vista?

    • Great
      132
    • Average
      66
    • Terrible
      19
    • Not sure
      5


Recommended Posts

I'm sure if I tried Windows 7, I would have gone with a solid "Yes", but I haven't tried it yet and I'm not as excited over it as some of you are, so as it stands, "Not sure" is my answer.

I got Vista last year and didn't see what all the fuss was about. I guess all the kinks were rolled out of Vista by then? It works very well for me... aside from the forgetful folders that can't remember my view settings.

There is a fix for that if it bugs you. Here is the link:

Tweakguides.com Fixing Vista Annoyances Page.

Maybe I'll upgrade to 7, my main issue isn't really Windows its the eco system surrounding it. NVIDIA drivers for example have never really been pro quality for me in Vista and nothing has changed with 7. I'm not ready to pay up for Windows 7 if NVIDIA can't even get their drivers sorted out.

Then buy a ATI card and dump the Nvidia. Problem solved.

*facepalm* Just because you can't use Vista properly (if Vista is really the problem for that computer, taking 4 hours to fix it is downright laughable) doesn't mean it's a bad OS. It's still far and away better of an overall OS than XP ever was. I wonder if XP mode will also introduce XP's inherent failings at malware resilience to Windows 7. Hardly something many people would want, given XP can be credited (or blamed) for introducing most of the worst malware the world has ever seen to the consumer market.

That said, as soon as this resolution glitch I have with 7 is resolved, I'll upgrade to it.

Having used computers for more than 23 years, I think i'm more qualified to talk about computer use than you are. I'm very familiar in how to use Windows (including Vista). Agreed it's downright laughable that Vista took 4 hours to fix, but it did. I prefer not to do formats where I can help it, it makes for happier customers. As for a better OS? No, IMO I don't think so.

I doubt XP-M would be able to interact with Win7 in such a way that Malware would affect computers, especially with the security thats present in both O/S today. It'd be mad of MS to allow that sort of access between the two systems.

And that "facepalm" loses most credibility you might had with me. Sorry mate, nothing personal. Or was it? Don't like XP? Point noted. But don't bash other people's abilities when you don't have all the facts. Run my business for a day, and you'll be in a position to comment.

I've been playing with 7 for over six months now, yet I'm back on Vista x64 SP2.

I like the new taskbar and the jump lists. I don't have much use for libraries as I'm quite organised naturally, no use for homegroups and I'm standalone with a router which goes for WMP sharing as well. I don't multitask much either, I'm usally concentrating on one activity at a time.

Don't like WMP12, seems to be a step back from WMP11.

Perormance is all but identical with modern hardware.

I'll probably buy it once available but I wouldn't say it's worth it, will be more out of habit and the placebo effect the computer industry thrives from.

Having used computers for more than 23 years, I think i'm more qualified to talk about computer use than you are. I'm very familiar in how to use Windows (including Vista). Agreed it's downright laughable that Vista took 4 hours to fix, but it did. I prefer not to do formats where I can help it, it makes for happier customers. As for a better OS? No, IMO I don't think so.

I doubt XP-M would be able to interact with Win7 in such a way that Malware would affect computers, especially with the security thats present in both O/S today. It'd be mad of MS to allow that sort of access between the two systems.

And that "facepalm" loses most credibility you might had with me. Sorry mate, nothing personal. Or was it? Don't like XP? Point noted. But don't bash other people's abilities when you don't have all the facts. Run my business for a day, and you'll be in a position to comment.

Is it worth it for Windows Me users to upgrade to XP? You bet!

It's just as much worth it for Windows Me 2.0 users to upgrade to Win7 :yes:

+1 to both of those posts :D

Im on windows 7 now. I purchased Vista Ultimate when it came out - worst mistake of my life. Sure vista has some "pretty-ness" but thats about it. Just to be fair I've tried using it since SP1 and 2, its still a pain. XP does everything I need - and so has win7 so far!

Why do you think MS started working on 7 so quickly?? As far as vista goes, MS has pretty much swept it under the rug.

don't EVER upgrade, do a fresh clean install.

Don't listen to anyone who argues you shouldn't upgrade from Vista RTM to Windows 7 RTM. Microsoft's new (vista+) installation methodology does away with the issues people used to have upgrading from say 98 to XP.

Unfortunately, that outdated FUD is still circling pretty heavily even though it's now about 4 years out of date.

The REAL issue is to make sure you BACK UP before upgrading or doing a clean install...period.

I'm sure if I tried Windows 7, I would have gone with a solid "Yes", but I haven't tried it yet and I'm not as excited over it as some of you are, so as it stands, "Not sure" is my answer.

I got Vista last year and didn't see what all the fuss was about. I guess all the kinks were rolled out of Vista by then? It works very well for me... aside from the forgetful folders that can't remember my view settings.

Your entire answer mirrors what I was going to say. Voted Not sure. Vista has been very solid for me. To be honest, I am sort of wary when I hear all this hype about a product. Usually I am let down when I do finally try it.

Don't like WMP12, seems to be a step back from WMP11.

Just out of curiosity... in what way?

There are many features in Windows Media Player 12 which I think make it an improvement over Windows Media Player 11. Some of the little things like where it plays a preview of the song when you hover over it and the fact that the interface is more intuitive.

I'm interested in why you think it is a step backwards? Many people I've heard say it's because of how different the design of the player is compared to the more 'nice-looking' Windows Media Player 11, but I go beyond the design, sometimes, and look at the features.

Just out of curiosity... in what way?

There are many features in Windows Media Player 12 which I think make it an improvement over Windows Media Player 11. Some of the little things like where it plays a preview of the song when you hover over it and the fact that the interface is more intuitive.

I'm interested in why you think it is a step backwards? Many people I've heard say it's because of how different the design of the player is compared to the more 'nice-looking' Windows Media Player 11, but I go beyond the design, sometimes, and look at the features.

Hmm, well for starters I use 64 bit WMP in Vista. As to why, well by installing 64 bit codec pack I don't mess up anything that runs @32 bit and in turn no 32 bit players interfere with WMP. It's a little sandbox in a way if you make WMP your main media tool as there should be no other 64 bit codecs or players about. Can't find a way to set WMP12 x64 as default in 7 as yet, which is a shame. Yeah I know 7 has it's Codecs locked down if you will, but I have stuff it won't play and also need filters to handle subtitles and such, so I have to install some codecs. Doing this on x64 has meant since day 1 I've been able to play everything I need and never had a problem, it's proven reliability for me.

Navigation in 12 seems to be all over the place, in 11 I have immediate access to everything and I stay in library view. 12 has incorportated tabs for what I can see as no good reason. In 11, in library view I can just right click the menu bar, select view and view anything anywhere. In 12, say if I wanted to open the equaliser, I have to switch tabs and it's still buried away even then.

I don't think 12 is aesthetically pleasing as 11 either. The tabs look horribly out of place and instead of intuative controls things are starting to sprawl off in every direction.

It's not as pleasant to use as 11 either, I just don't like it. I'll be sticking to 11 for as long as I can.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      502
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!