I just bought a new computer. I spent less than 1k, got 8gb ddr3 ram, 1TB hd, AMD phenom quad core, decent graphics card, and windows 7. One of the "gadgets" windows 7 has measures performance. I have charts up, multiple tabs on firefox, and music players, my processor never gets over 25% used. Soooo.... unless people are buying computers that should be running XP and running 7 on them I can't see why they have a problem.
DOH ! I had to read the original posts twice and still I don't really understand it, but it's OBVIOUS that any new OS or piece of software is consuming more and more resources. You downloaded it, your fault ! Just say NO to it. I STOPPED ALL UPGRADES, don't you understand where we are going here ? The software industry has morphed into a scam , as it realized it's the only way it can keep the profits flowing. We do not need new OS, we do not need new software. But developers are deciding for us, and forcing the retirement of computer equipment , with massive and deadly pollution ahead as a result. People need to become aware of this, I searched Google for a movement against upgrades , incredibly it appears there is no such thing, yet . I am sure most people just can't keep up, and I believe this will become a serious issue for web users and companies deriving revenues from traffic as traffic will drop due to slowdowns and people giving up, I am already giving up on some websites that are becoming too slow . The web was way way better 10 years ago. Developers and corporations are deciding what's good for us, we are prompted to downoad upgrades al the time, we are working for them, for free. And provide for their livelihood at the same time, by purchasing new equipment. This is a scam nothing else. Anyway it just confirms that Windows 7 is another shit so ... Vista is shit XP Pro is ... shit , Win 2000 still rules !
Not necessarily. I've seen at least a few OS comparos where W2K has been included "just for kicks"... only to find W2K performing better than the others. I was resistant at moving from W2K to XP until I learned that it's easier to reinstall XP.
Behind the Windows 7 memory usage scaremongering http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/02/behind-the-windows-7-memory-usage-scaremongering.ars
I used to use W2K before XP also but that was quite a few computers ago and their processors were slo-mo compared to todays processors. This is what I meant. I liked W2K.
I figured that. But current "W2K snobs" cite how fast it runs on today's computers... much less overhead is the likely reason. I remember my transition. I liked W2K and found XP to be annoying... until it was time to reinstall the OS... XP was MUCH less hassle.
Win 2000 was an amazing program but with the new software out there, more RAM was needed. XP Pro was great, stable and solid. Vista was ALMOST as bad as ME but not quite. Win 7, especially Pro or Ultimate are even more solid than XP and utilizes RAM better. Memory is so cheap now that running less than 8GB seems silly. Making statements like this is similar to my grandpa telling me that his 37 Ford was a better car than my Escalade.