well, win 7 is very solid, need to get use to, but...


Recommended Posts

when is the sp1 gonna be release?

i'm not all that satisfied with 7, the system is stable, but most of time she's not that responsive, id'e say, very low responsive.

and no no viruses, malwares or any other junk.+very low on proccess as well.

i know when xp first came out she was a disaster, sp2 made it all sweet. hope sp1 will do the same to win7.

Just out of curiosity what are your system specs? My windows 7 is very responsive and super fast but I'm also running a macbook intel 2.26 Intel core 2 duo w/4gb of ram and a 256mb nvidia video card.. if your running just the minimum system requirements I recommend turning off system restore, and disabling hibernation and not needed services to try and speed things up.

Edited by ibetheone
If you're experiencing very poor responsiveness then there is an issue with your configuration, that sp1 probably wont fix.

As much praise as Windows 7 has got for its stability, your completly ruling out that's its 7's fault, it is quite possible its 7's fault.

Edited by thealexweb

I've found that almost always when people complain about *anything* being unresponsive, it's because the hard drive is thrashing - sometimes it's thrashing because the machine has too little RAM, sometimes it's thrashing because of background tools (search/backup/defrag/etc), and sometimes it's thrashing because of antivirus software. The HDD is still the performance bottleneck and because many programs are poorly written or block the main program thread while reading/writing data, the application will feel unresponsive.

Unless your hardware is foobar or you're running way below the min reqs, it's not Windows 7, it's whatever software you're running on it.

when is the sp1 gonna be release?

i'm not all that satisfied with 7, the system is stable, but most of time she's not that responsive, id'e say, very low responsive.

and no no viruses, malwares or any other junk.+very low on proccess as well.

i know when xp first came out she was a disaster, sp2 made it all sweet. hope sp1 will do the same to win7.

i have to ROFL @ this post

service pack ? why honestly im sure it's being worked on but atm it's not needed

None responsive are you freaking kidding me

1 you got a bad install or 2 your pc just plain sucks

im not saying win7 may not be at fault but im leaning to it's a hardware/user error

I'm running Windows 7 on a Thinkpad T61 with 2GB of RAM and it's running sweet. Will i be getting 4GB? You bet your butt i will but even with 2GB it runs just fine and dandy. I got this system with Vista Ultimate and i took out that HDD and installed Windows 7. I used Vista from beta days and loved it (even when everyone said it sucks). I used 7 in beta times but didn't get to keep up much with it and now that i'm on the RTM it's even sweeter than i remember!

I don't care how fast Windows 95 (or 2000, XP) would run on this system, i'm far more productive with Windows 7!

service pack ? why honestly im sure it's being worked on but atm it's not needed

Your post is far more ignorant and silly than his. There are tons of bugs in Windows 7, so for you to sit there and say that "atm it's not needed" is just nonsense. Maybe we should just shut down Windows Update as well because, hey, the hotfixes that will make up the Service Pack aren't needed either.

As for the topic, again, the OP does not provide enough information to give any sort of useful answer. Saying that it works perfectly on your system means nothing and is not useful. Not that there's much else one can say, but still.

Windows 7 is one of the best operating systems Microsoft ever made/planned for. With how stable everybody says it is, you aren't going to announce it isn't because it doesn't run good on your setup. Windows 7 wasn't designed to run good on a bad graphics card/not enough RAM/not enough disk space/Pentium 3 CPU... So if you have a $2,000 computer from 6+ years ago, it is probably worth only 50 dollars now and is complete crap. If you have a $500 computer from 4+ years ago, it is probably worth 55 dollars now and is complete crap. If you have a $300 computer from 3+ years ago, it is probably worth 60 dollars now and is complete crap. I think you get it, and those netbooks aren't using the Celeron CPUs you might have in your old computers, there a type of Core 2 CPU that use the name Celeron. The Atom CPUs also are better than older CPUs. Plus, memory in netbooks are 1GB RAM, nothing less or there a rip-off. If you have 512MB RAM of memory, that's probably what's wrong.

Well did SP2 fix all of Vista's issues? No, it didn't. It fixed many of those issues, but it didn't make it extremely faster or give it Windows 7's features and some new features. Windows 7 is great just how it is, and SP1 and SP2 won't be like some rewrite of Windows 7 like Windows XP SP2 was. Windows XP was complete utter **** until SP2, it was just Windows 2000 with blue kiddie curtains on the windows basically. Windows 7 is awesome, everybody loves it who uses it. So no, there won't be a rewrite service pack with Bill Gates' signature engraved on it for you.

The only reason Microsoft is working hard on Windows 7 SP1 is because many businesses/schools/enterprises switch to the next OS when it reaches 6 months after release or the first service pack. Microsoft knows Windows 7 is great how it is, but they want to make this first service pack special for those businesses who wait for the service pack. Windows 7 SP1 will probably be a helping hand in the seamless experience of SharePoint 2010, Office 2010, and Windows Live Wave 4. All of that except Windows Live Wave 4 has something to do with Microsoft's 'The New Efficiency', so again, it has something to do with businesses getting ready for the first service pack. That stuff probably will be out when SP1 is out. Windows 7 SP1 might have some code under-the-hood for it to improve the experience for everybody. But it certainly isn't going to make it more responsive for a computer that is unresponsive right now on RTM, and it isn't going to bring you many new features to please you.

I've encountered several annoying bugs that no one has been able to find a cure to, for example the position of the preview pane is not locked, every time i open explorer its moved nearly all the way across the screen, its so annoying.

The only reason Microsoft is working hard on Windows 7 SP1 is because many businesses/schools/enterprises switch to the next OS when it reaches 6 months after release or the first service pack. Microsoft knows Windows 7 is great how it is

Microsoft is working on the Service Pack because they know there are lots of bugs to fix (and many hotfixes have already been released, some even for critical bugs that could compromise a system). Windows, as any software, even ships with massive amounts of known unresolved bugs that are considered too low priority to fix. The reality is that even though you personally haven't (or think you haven't) encountered a bug, that doesn't mean that someone else can't have. If serious bugs always showed up for everyone, then they would have been caught by internal testing and not even exist.

Note that I'm not saying a bug is necessarily responsible for the OP's problems, but some of you seem to be so madly in love with Windows 7 that you can't even imagine the possibility of it having anything wrong with it. It's absurd. Accepting the reality that software of this complexity (Windows is arguably one of the most complex pieces of software in the world) has problems doesn't make one a blasphemer or troll, and it's okay to admit it.

guys, i have nothing but great respect to you, neowin is perfect, the people here are(tmho) are the best on web, quality people, even the insulter's. ;o)

here are my spec's:

myspec_s.png

guys 7 is great, but soetimes its just not that great, when i play xvid file(MPC) the playing is not that smooth, when i browse, sometimes my music stutter's believe me that i know my way in tweaking, i'm still not that satisfied, maybe my setup is messedup, or maybe i'm right.

do you guys think i'm to demending? with 7 and my spec's?

i dont want to **** u off, but, with xp my system was top notch responsive, couldn't ask more.

with respect.

I'm running Windows 7 on a Thinkpad T61 with 2GB of RAM and it's running sweet. Will i be getting 4GB? You bet your butt i will but even with 2GB it runs just fine and dandy. I got this system with Vista Ultimate and i took out that HDD and installed Windows 7. I used Vista from beta days and loved it (even when everyone said it sucks). I used 7 in beta times but didn't get to keep up much with it and now that i'm on the RTM it's even sweeter than i remember!

I don't care how fast Windows 95 (or 2000, XP) would run on this system, i'm far more productive with Windows 7!

Same here, I got a Lenovo G530 (Intel Dual Core T3400 with 3GB of RAM) and it runs solid, also ran well on my 5 year old AMD64 3200+ System.

Dude, your CPU is 4 years old, that's probably the cause of it.

in 4 years your i7 will be nothing. anyways his system is fine for Windows 7.. a AMD64 processor, 2GB of RAM and 8800gts is more than enough.. people just wow me sometime.

There's nothing wrong with your specs. I run windows 7 on my netbook and it runs great, I can play divx video or play music and do other stuff at the same time. That's what makes me think your problem is to do with a driver or some other software you have installed, thus it probably won't be resolved by a service pack.

I have 4 Apple QT windows open playing 4 different 720p movies...And I am still quite comfortably able to work on a 60 MB powerpoint presentation. And it is only a 2.16 GHz core2 duo processor. So far I didn't not have any issues with windows 7 when it comes to responsiveness or stability.

Do you have any anti-virus software installed?

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!