Seven Reasons to Avoid Windows 7

jroe52 said:
lol i forgot in the other article you can upgrade to over 200gb ram unlike that pesky x64 of other operating systems only allowing 128 or 192... yeah BECAUSE WE ARE ALL DOING THIS WITH END USER MACHINES.

more like 8-32gb lol
Click to expand...

Why not? I want 256GB of ram! :p
 
I agree that was a waste of time and they need to grow up and write like an adult that has real values.
 
Bambi005 said:
I was thinking the same think as Nemesis. It sounds as if they could not give a legit reason so they made up bs ones.
Click to expand...

agreed...

that was probably the worst article i've ever read regarding windows, and 99% of it isn't even true... i mean, like what was said, this applies to ANY upgrade.

last i recall, it also took time to upgrade your current macbook with the latest Leopard software...
 
7 Reasons to avoid Wired.com

1. With only 4% of the market why do we even care what mac users think about windows.
2. With only 4% of the market why do we even care what mac users think about anything.

shoot I only have 2 well lets make up 5 more

3. [H] gives me a choice to read what I want, Unlike wired.com that forces me to read FUD.
4. Wired.com does not look as good on windows, On Snow leopard its sparkles with rainbows and sunshine.
5. Wired.com is pro gun control as seen by their lack of .50 cal
6. If you read Wired.com on a mac then it totally makes sense.
7. wired.com servers are powered by a magical jelly bean farm.

I am done will Kyle please see how many macbooks a .50 cal will go through

** Disclaimer this post was submitted by a windows users and he does not believe any of it except for 1,2, 3, 5. my source are wired.com for 3,4,6,7**
 
Talk about nitpicking! If someone's still using XP,they more than got their money's worth and shouldn't bitch about the costs of upgrading.And the price isn't that bad if you jumped on the half price upgrade deal they ran.And using the upcoming Snow Leopard as a point was just plain lame.Did they even pay attention to the overwhelmingly positive reaction by all those people using 7 now?
 
Actually at the end of the article Mr. Chen basically says that if you are a Windows user 7 is a worthwhile upgrade, just that if you're on Mac or Linux that is not. Well, how many colleges did he have to drop out of to reach that plainly obvious conclusion?

IT media SUXXXXXXXXXXXX!
 
SNOW Leopard is coming and is only $30.....

$30 for existing users? Why would you even want to pay $30 for a new theme and to enable multi-touch for the touch screen your iMac and MacBook DOESN'T have... and to enable the use of ridiculous amounts of RAM that you don't own (and motherboard won't accept) for your apps that aren't written to utilize :rolleyes:

So you will have to buy a new touch-screen MAC just to use the only real feature of Snow (Multi-Touch). The upgrade should be FREE for existing users. If I just bought a MAC, I'd be pissed....

Now technically you would have to buy a new PC to get multi-touch on 7, but 7 has a host of new features over XP (not just touch) and runs great on an old P4 2.6 with 1GB RAM and old AGP card so it really does give you a REAL reason to spend money on an upgrade version on for an existing PC....unlike Snow
 
What a crap set of articles. This author is mediocre at best. None of the given "reasons" are valid to anyone serious about adopting Windows 7. These articles read like a thinly veiled Apple advertisement. In sum, this is not news worthy of [H] Front Page space.
 
rofl at that dumb article.

I would be more than happy to buy Snow Leopard if the article writer would buy me a Mac.
 
Thanks to your comments I can save my precious time from being wasted by reading this lame excuse of an article.

Many thanks to everyone in this thread!
 
puphus said:
What a crap set of articles. This author is mediocre at best. None of the given "reasons" are valid to anyone serious about adopting Windows 7. These articles read like a thinly veiled Apple advertisement. In sum, this is not news worthy of [H] Front Page space.
Click to expand...

Plenty of [H] 'news' poking fun at Macs. Annoying (maybe) but Mostly Harmless.
 
"Now technically you would have to buy a new PC to get multi-touch on 7"

Sorry, need to correct myself

I guess thats only correct for notebook users. If you are like millions of PC users and you have a desktop and just need a new monitor to get Touch on 7, which again provides more upgrade value for PC users. The same could be said for Mac mini or Mac Pro workstation users, but I'm guessing most Mac users are Book/iMac
 
Why is this mac fanboist garbage even posted up here.
 
I got to the part where the author made the unbelievably false statement that the Mac os is actually more secure and fell out of my seat laughing.

I love my macbook for work, but to imply that it is secure is open denial or overwhelming fanboism.
 
I think its pretty absurd that they tout the release of "Snow Leapord" as reason not to upgrade to windows 7. They are preaching to an entirely different market there! Of course, its reasonable to go out and buy new hardware and scrap everything I already own because I dont want to upgrade to windows 7. The author of that article needs to be flogged
 
ZenDragon said:
I think its pretty absurd that they tout the release of "Snow Leapord" as reason not to upgrade to windows 7. They are preaching to an entirely different market there! Of course, its reasonable to go out and buy new hardware and scrap everything I already own because I dont want to upgrade to windows 7. The author of that article needs to be flogged
Click to expand...

I think Apple should release a PC version of OSX, to give MS a run for its money.
 
I would like to have OSX as an option too, but it would absolutely kill their computer hardware division because there would be absolutely no reason to buy overpriced hardware from them anymore if any generic PC was capable of using OSX.
 
gwarren007 said:
I think Apple should release a PC version of OSX, to give MS a run for its money.
Click to expand...

Two problems:

1. Vendor support
2. Apple DOESN'T do open systems. Everythinng that Mac users complain about Windows would come to pass. Running on any old piece of hardware just isn't something Apple has ever down and the support costs would be enourmous.
 
I like how their issues are that:

-Upgrading from an 8 year old OS requires a clean install. A shocker I know.

-The upgrade is expensive. Compared to what? I suppose you could consider the opposition, Apple, for which the upgrade is $130. Or to itself, where you can still get the upgrade for $50, or if you buy a new PC and it's free? I suppose it's expensive compared to free...(and how the VAST majority of people will buy it).



-It costs time. Yes, it takes some time to set up, but their gripe is in relation to businesses. Moot point. Businesses won't be buying any other OS, so they will spend that time one way or another. After all, those businesses who skipped Vista now have hardware that is at LEAST 4 years old, and reaching the end of their product cycle.



-It's still Windows? What kind of reason is that? And their complaint about recognizing an Adobe Air File? That was based off of a review during the Win7 BETA, and not long after, or just before the release of Air. Again, somewhat of a shocker. 0.0

- AND they go on to say that the OS is just as secure as the user. Wow, another amazing revelation. Welcome to computers



-DRM. Really? you blame the os?



-And then the kicker. The reviewer is a mac user, and ADMITS that he prefers Leopard to Win 7, which, if you think about it is impossible, because his review was based on the RC, and not the RTM. WHich means he prefers something he has used for several years to something he HAS NEVER USED.



These are the reasons I canceled my Wired subscription.
 
jroe52 said:
lol i forgot in the other article you can upgrade to over 200gb ram unlike that pesky x64 of other operating systems only allowing 128 or 192... yeah BECAUSE WE ARE ALL DOING THIS WITH END USER MACHINES.

more like 8-32gb lol
Click to expand...

It was 192gb of ram. The thing about any limit is it is something you don't want to hit. I remember when XP came out, most people were recommending 512mb of ram. Now people have atleast 4gb and there are many people with 8gb or 12gb of ram. The biggest reason to move away from XP is it lacks support for 4gb or more ram. Having a high limit gives you choices on what you can put in your system and how long you can use the OS for.
 
Modred189 said:
-It costs time. Yes, it takes some time to set up, but their gripe is in relation to businesses. Moot point. Businesses won't be buying any other OS, so they will spend that time one way or another. After all, those businesses who skipped Vista now have hardware that is at LEAST 4 years old, and reaching the end of their product cycle.
Click to expand...

The author couldn't be more wrong. Smart business IT people image an installation of Windows so it only takes a few minutes to get someone back up and running. I have images for each model computers and laptops we use in my company.

Besides, an outside consultant once told me that he thinks Linux cost even more than Windows (regard to money and time) in businesses regardless of their being free to use because of the time and effort it takes to find solutions to problems that arises. Windows solutions are more widespread and more readily found online because since more people use Windows, there's always bound to be someone who already had your problem and found solutions for it.
 
Maybe because its nothing revolutionary and just Vista SP3 with a few more enhancements for multi core support and different appearance?
 
Computerworld’s Steven Vaughan-Nichols stands firm that Windows 7 won’t change anything from a security perspective: “Windows 7 still has all the security of a drunken teenager in a sports car,” he wrote. “Millions of lazy Windows users are the reason why the internet is a mess. If you already do all the right things to keep XP running safely, you’re not going to get any safer by buying Windows 7.”
Click to expand...

What a fucking idiot.
 
You know what. It's a dumb article but it's getting a lot of attention for Wired. It worked since they are getting more traffic and ad $$$$$$.
 
Why don't they have a disclaimer saying that they're an Apple fan site? I'd have skipped over both articles if I knew, and not wasted time.:(
 
"Upgrading From Windows XP Requires a Clean Install"
What the heck? So they're telling you to stick with XP forever then? It's BECAUSE you stuck with XP this reason is even listed.

"The Upgrade Is Expensive"
It was $50.

"It’ll Cost You Time, Too"
As is every version of any OS ever created. What's new?

"It’s Still Windows"
Judging books by their covers now, are we?
Their example is laughable. Just because they don't auto-execute anything on the drive like Apple does (huge security flaw) doesn't mean it "doesn't work".

"Security Isn’t Automatically Better"
By default, no. Default UAC setting is broken, I'd agree. But they use the classic "I've never been in a wreck so why do I need seatbelts" mentality. UAC and Sandboxed IE is ages better than anything XP offered.

"Built-In Support for Egregious Hardware-Based DRM"
Either Microsoft supports DRM or your new movies (BLURAY???) won't play. Make a freaking choice.

"Snow Leopard Is Almost Here"
So if you've got a PC, and are considering Windows 7, ANOTHER PLATFORM is a reason to not switch? They've already bitched about the $100 cost of Windows 7 once before... But they're OK with dropping $2,000 on a Mac??? :rolleyes:
 
Reading the article was just the ramblings of some self admitted mac fanboy A-hole. I don;t know how they can let him even write something liek that for a magazine that focuses mostly on pc's.

Security on the mac sucks. The editor talks about price and time of installing as negatives. His argument is poor. he actually had nothing bad to say about the OS itself and just complained about the act of upgrading and how he would find it troubling. Then goes on to say that the mac is somehow better without giving a reason other than its avialable a month earlier for snow leapard. More like snow leper...... With a foot rotting off. Yuo can;t poo poo something without a real reason to critique.

The editor does not like windows and loves the mac. He;s an idiot. This is why I quit my subscription to wired magazine stupid editorials. I prefer Maximum PC. Much better.
 
I stopped reading the article after they mentioned DRM.

Don't get Windows 7, yah know, because they're cramming those DRM doo-hickeys down your throat by simply adding SUPPORT for them.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Modred189 said:
I don't know. I rather agree with him. People, largely, get viruses because they do something retarded, like click on the Windows Virus Scanner NOW 360 SUite icons.
Click to expand...

How can you possibly agree as him? 7 is worlds more secure than XP due to the fact that every idiot doesn't run as root, so to speak.
 
Also, why no mention of the classic start menu's absence? I remember several people getting their panties in a wad over it's removal from 7.
 
this was an bad link {H} the blog was bad in most likey 7 ways

windows 7 does an Inpalce install if you do not format the hdd it moves the c: root folders into windows.old folder (something like that) you lose nothing do not need to back up (but should any way)

if your installing windows onto an XP system its likey to be Old, But windows 7 works far far better then vista i got an laptop with 756mb of ram and an 1.7 p4 mobile cpu and ti works fine, if i had vista oin that i want to smash it for it been so slow (out of ram/pageing)

i have more but some one wants to use the system :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top