Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows 7 "Not Much Faster" Than Vista

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the its-the-pedal-on-the-right dept.

PLSQL Guy writes "Tests of the Windows 7 Release Candidate in a PC World Test Center found that while Windows 7 was slightly faster on our WorldBench 6 suite, the differences may be barely noticeable to users. The PCs tested were slightly faster when running Windows 7, but in no case was the overall improvement greater than 5 percent, considered to be a threshold for when an actual performance change is noticeable to the average user. One of the major complaints about Windows Vista was the fact that it was consistently slower than Windows XP. If Windows 7 can't significantly improve that situation, what chance does it have to convince people to move away from Windows XP?"

5 of 821 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What else did we expect? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    You're absolutely right. The thing is though, Vista is a good operating system that is plagued by a stigma that is largely persisted by technology sites that, by default and in some sort of nerd conformance insist that all Microsoft products are garbage, an opinion formed with disregard to objectivity.

    No, Vista got slapped with the reputation for being a worthless piece of shite by, hmm, let's see, being a worthless piece of shite. In other news, porcupines object to being described as "prickly."

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  2. So despite the astro-hype it IS just another P.O.. by distantbody · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    .Shit Microsoft OS. Microsoft had dozens of new technologies and UI innovations in the pipeline back in the day. Now all the marketing executives can pull out is 'it's faster than Vista'? What the hell happened to you M$?

  3. Re:What else did we expect? by SL+Baur · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The thing is though, Vista is a good operating system that is plagued by a stigma that is largely persisted by technology sites that, by default and in some sort of nerd conformance insist that all Microsoft products are garbage, an opinion formed with disregard to objectivity.

    What part of "garbage" do you not understand? An unusable user interface? Viruses/Malware? Poor performance? Cost? Convenience?

  4. Re:Weren't the earlier betas much faster? by mario_grgic · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Are you saying that Windows 7 does not have new DRM features? How about this:

    http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/16/2259257

    And people still continue to use that MS steaming pile of shit for whatever reason. And largely they deserve the experience they get out of.

    --
    As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
  5. Re:Its true. I went back to XP (from windows 7) by Yunzil · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Windows 7 and Vista have terrible file I/O. Its just slow and bloated. XP ran siginificantly faster with windows desktop search, comodo firewall, and nod32 anti virus installed. One would think those extra processes would slow down XP, but it was still far faster than windows 7.

    I've grown to hate vista because of how poor it is. I cant stand the UI. The automatic folder views suck. Vista never gets it right.

    Vista loves to eat up all of your ram, and then when a program needs lots of ram, your system takes a giant shit because Vista goes into swapping mode to dump its giant "cache" to hd.

    XP (XP64 also) is a better OS all around.

    Tell me, what's it like, being wrong about everything?