Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[UncleUB]

I suppose the thing with having a touch screen is it won't make much difference when the grandchildren visit   

[UncleUB]

Anyone who  has any thoughts about upgrading(when the time comes) have a read here first.


http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2910&tag=nl.e589

[mr_chris]

Thanks for the link UB... but I'd like to sit tight and wait til release to see "real world" upgrade issues / successes.

I always clean-install my OS, it gives me a chance to rid my system of too many installed useless programs I amass over the years!

If someone is hell-bent on actually upgrading the PC, my advice would be to back up everything as if they were reformatting the disk, try the upgrade first, and THOROUGHLY test their programs to see if everything still works now!

I actually upgraded someone's limping Windows ME system to XP once (I would have been reinstalling anyway, so wanted to see if it worked!).

To my surprise, it did work, marvellously, and that person is still using the upgraded system today, it's as solid as a rock, and now about 4 years on!! So upgrades CAN work, it's just that the chance of ridding your system of crud is too good an opportunity to miss for most techies

[oldfogy]

Much like Chris, Out of curiosity I like to try the upgrade route first, take note of the HDD storage space, before and after, then do a fresh install, it's amazing sometimes the space that is recovered.

A little like my last endeavour, I used the "No reformat Repair" on my XP PC last week (just "before" my last bout of troubles)

Although initially I seemed to have recovered an extra 4GB this was soon eaten-up with all the XP updates.
Not too mention when using one of my cleaning tools afterwards "Tuneup Utilities 2008" it found 9,646 un-needed leftover files.

[oldfogy]

It's Official: Windows 7 Shipping Mid-2009

http://gizmodo.com/5079563/its-official-windows-7-shipping-mid+2009

[Floydoid]

It's Official: Windows 7 Shipping Mid-2009

http://gizmodo.com/5079563/its-official-windows-7-shipping-mid+2009

Yeah, and wasn't vista originally scheduled for 2005?

[oldfogy]

 

[kitz]

>> and wasn't vista originally scheduled for 2005?


Ummm... who remembers Longhorn?   
Im pretty sure that was being tested by the public in 2002... as one of my friends was beta testing it at the time, and showed me a preview of it running on one of his machines.
Some where along the line Longhorn became Vista.  I really cant understand how one of what must be the longest O/S's to produce has been such a flop IMHO. 

From what I can remember (it may have even been 2001 ?) ..  it certainly appeared fine back then..  they've just bulked it out a lot with stuff I dont need or use and renamed it Vista.

[oldfogy]

I wonder if they will/are bringing Windows7 out as early as this because of Vista being such a flop?
Hence all the "I'm a PC" adverts on the TV.

[Floydoid]

3 years is quite a short time period between windows versions... surely it won't be another botched version like ME was?

It really does annoy me that XP is probably the most popular (and most solid) version of windows ever, yet MS are determined to kill it off... doesn't make much sense for any company to stop supplying a popular product.  Or maybe I'm just looking at it too simplistically.

[UncleUB]

I hope its not too soon,I want to get my moneysworth out of Vista first. 

[kitz]

3 years is quite a short time period between windows versions.

Conversely Vista was a VERY long time in the making...  a brief history of some windows releases.

1990 Windows 3.0
1992 Windows 3.1
1993 Windows NT 3.1
1995 Windows 95
1996 Windows NT 4
1998 Windows 98
1999 Windows 98 SE
2000 Windows ME
2000 Windows 2000 (NT5)
2001 Windows XP
2007 Windows Vista

[HPsauce]

As luck would have it I've been looking at a few Windows 2000 systems recently; I'd forgotten:
1. How good it was and how much I liked it at the time
2. How similar XP is in many ways, but generally better. An evolution that has deservedly lasted and will last many more years.

I now consider Vista a dead-end and generally advise people to buy new PC's with the free XP upgrade (if possible).

Many corporates will hang on with XP until W7 is proven, so expect it's life to be extended again and again. 

[kitz]

Yes I think Windows 2000 was always highly regarded, and for about the first time was actually serious competitor for Linux. 
IIRC it may have also been the start of the decline of Novell - prior to Windows 2000 look at all the corporates that used Novell.

- XP is actually based on Windows 2000 Kernel.


I think M$ actually forgot with Vista what an operating system is actually meant to be.. and instead started putting too much on software that should sit on top of the O/S - not be part of it.

[Floydoid]

3 years is quite a short time period between windows versions.

Conversely Vista was a VERY long time in the making...  a brief history of some windows releases.

1990 Windows 3.0
1992 Windows 3.1
1993 Windows NT 3.1
1995 Windows 95
1996 Windows NT 4
1998 Windows 98
1999 Windows 98 SE
2000 Windows ME
2000 Windows 2000 (NT5)
2001 Windows XP
2007 Windows Vista

Looking at it another way, i.e. the release of the major series...

1990 Windows 3
1995 Windows 4 (95, 98, 98SE, ME)
2001 Windows 5 (XP + 3 subsequent service packs)
2007 Windows 6 (Vista)

(bearing in mind that NT ran in parallel), it would seem that 5-6 years is the norm between major releases, hence 7 should be expected, around 2012-13.