Print
Windows 7 still isn’t officially released to the general public yet, but I’m willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that it will be a universal hit. Users making the jump from Windows XP have a lot of advances to look forward to, and for the most part we can thank Vista. The similarities between the two OS’s are shocking, so much so that many have simply dubbed Windows 7 as “Vista done right”.
Nobody will argue that Windows 7 isn’t a huge leap forward in terms of performance, but even a $600 PC purchased today has more than enough muscle to deliver an excellent experience in Vista. The simple fact that Windows 7 will be born into a mature world full of drivers written for it’s predecessor will almost singlehandedly ensure a successful rollout. Lack of drivers if you recall, was the single largest complaint against Vista’s at launch and Microsoft even alleges that it was a huge factor in reports of it’s early instability.
"I think people will look back on Vista after the Windows 7 release and realize that there were actually a bunch of good things there" said Steve Guggenheimer, vice president of the OEM division at Microsoft, in a ChannelWeb story. "So it'll actually be interesting to see in two years what the perception is of Vista."
So with the Windows 7 launch day less than three months away, are you ready to forgive Vista?
Comments are closed on this article
joeyjr
July 27, 2009 at 9:22am
joeyjr
And neither will PC gaming. Went you remove all of the politics behind consolds verses PC's you will find that thay are both computers. When your making a ton on money on one or the other the other is said to be dead. I don't see anything bad about consolds, thay are what thay are, but not for me. PC gaming sets the standard in quality, performance, and range of uses. When a consold upgrades many of the newer games are not compatable with the older ones and you will have to buy a new one. On a PC you can upgrade your system or build a new one. Hardware has been moving pretty fast for the last few years and a minimimal system can do alot Vista's a hardware requirement sets a standard and from there PC game developers can use it as a guide. I do miss 3D sound for now but, you can have the DRM and some of the annoying GUI in Vista. I have not installed Windows 7 as of yet, but it looks to be very well received and should be better for PC gaming because of it's range of use on older systems. As for XP inside of Windows 7, I wish it could play games, and was a full version of XP or XP MCE with a few tweaks. To me it makes sence, would make it even more appealing for someone to upgrade, and should be standard making an OS backwards compatable, at the same time more secure. All that said, I'd have to agree that Windows 7 will be a redeemer, as long as is is ready when it does hit the shelves. nuf said.
samduhman
July 27, 2009 at 6:37am
I firmly believe "one" of the leading reasons why Windows continues to survive is because of PC Gamers. The Windows OS has been required to enjoy the hobby since the 90s. With M$ focusing all its gaming artillery on the 360 and ignoring the PC I feel is a huge mistake on M$ part. The only reason I use M$ OS in my house on 5 PCs is because of gaming. If it wasn't for that I'd use some free Linux build.
So no I don't think Windows 7 will fix the Vista black eye unless M$ refocuses on the PC as a major gaming platform which seems unlikely anytime soon.
MleB
July 27, 2009 at 5:42am
Recently, I moved from the original Asus Eee 701 to an XP-powered Asus Eee 1005HA - and in doing so, I was finally able to toss my 'old' Vista HP notebook (erstwhile travel computer, relegated to being my home machine since the 701) in my tech junk drawer - and gained a far faster and (mostly) reliable OS in the process.
Meanwhile, neither anything I have read not the limited use I had with Win7 (aka Vista SP3 or WinME 2009) had encouraged me to wait until October to replace the Vista experience on either the HP or a new netbook. And Microsoft's current plan to not offer an (inexpensive) upgrade path from XP > Win 7 (despite the millions of netbooks sold - and will be sold by then - with XP loaded) means I won't be considering it anytime soon.
Vista was looked on enthusiastically by fans prior to its release - and we all see what that got us. Win7, based on the same old same old looks to be a nasty repeat. Microsoft desperately needs to 'do an Apple' and abandon its legacy OS and start afresh - not simply give us another few million lines of code.
XP is far from perfect but after all these years its patched enough to be stable and do what I want it to do with a minimum of fuss. Something both Vista and Win7 seem to have missed.
three6mafia1665
July 28, 2009 at 10:55am
And then there will be 10 million software vendors who lag behind on driver support. Creative and other major players already fail at release drivers, asking to write them from scratch would take years. "writing a os from scratch" is the exact reason software is so limited on OSX, well that and the fact that last time I checked OSX still only had less than 5% market share. Win7 is leaps and bounds better than vistas driver support, and the beta honestly feels like a polished OS. (I even upgraded my motherboard from a 680i chipset to Intels, and windows 7 automatically installed the necessary drivers, absolutly 0 headaches. When I attempted switching motherboard chipsets with vista a coupe years ago, it blue screend requiring a reformat.) As for no inexpensive upgrade path, was 50 bux not a screaming deal? Honestly windows has stepped it up for Win7, only place they have failed IMO is the necessity for an os to be installed for an upgrade. But, to only pay 50 bucks you can't complain too much.
On a side note, I wish these 12 yo russian kids would start messing up crapples 'no virus' reputation. But back to the market share, no one wants to attack an OS no one uses.
DriZzLe
July 27, 2009 at 5:46am
I switched to Vista 64 bit 2 years ago. I installed it on the same rig I had XP on:AMD 64x2 4600, 2 gigs ddr400, nvidia 8800gt. Vista ran faster, more stable & I was able to run all the "pretty" effects with no slowdown. Driver support has always been great for me, in fact Vista found every driver I needed to use AUTOMATICALLY. Memory use is better, as is the way Vista handles a driver or program crashing(it stops the problem ONLY instead of crashing the entire system). I have only had one total system crash & it was due to a bad stick of RAM. I had BSOD on xp at least once a month on the same machine running XP.
Now I have 4 gigs ram, a q9550, & a gtx275, not because Vista needs it, but because I can afford it, & Vista is purring along like a Ferrari.
To all the "experts" claiming Vista sucks & needs redemption: You haven't used Vista EVER, haven't used Vista since sp1(XP was crap until sp1, too, fyi), or you are using out dated hardware.
Grow up. Technology moves at a fast pace. The OS should take full advantage of bigger, better, faster components.
Wah! my Celeron, 512mb ram, & mx440 can't run Vista!
nekollx
July 27, 2009 at 9:33am
*nods* i forgave Vista 2 years ago
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
ghot
July 26, 2009 at 11:26pm
1st off, Vista isn't and never will be a good OS....there is absolutely no reason for hardware to have to "push" an OS uphill all the way.
2nd, I have run Windows 7 alpha, beta, and the RC...
the good: It installs fast and has such humongous driver cabs that almost any hardware you throw at it will run.
the bad: Everything else...where Vista required hardware to "push it up the hill" Windows 7 requires people-power to do exactly the same. It takes many times more "clicks" to accomplish even the simplest thing. I'd really like to know the reason for that. The new task bar is a lesson in how to make the simplest task, take an entire afternoon. The business world is gonna love that :/ It doesn't boot faster than XP, it doesn't run faster than XP.
Other than a very few amenities (bitlocker, 1/2 decent backup...etc) I don't see much to recommend it. I truly "want" to like Windows 7, but when I spend twice the time to achieve the same goal, the few perks it does bring aren't worth the effort. I think the problem must be that MS just doesn't realize that the world is slowly but surely becoming .....computer literate. Like Vista, Windows 7 is still just Windows XP with cosmetic changes.
Right here on Max PC, about a month ago....XP market share: 62%, Vista...21%. About the same time right here on Max PC...the business world says: We will NOT give up XP till 2014. Sounds to me like the vote is already in and MS just isn't listening.
Whoever was on the design team when XP was released....I salute you....you put out a damn fine product that 9 years of furious coding and hype by the "new" MS, STILL can't outdo.
I'll be rockin XP till MS gets their heads out of their rears and realizes that people aren't gonna fall for the BS anymore....or if that doesn't happen...then till the day I die.
Again...I salute the crew that made XP!
To all those that rush out and install Windows 7, well......I'll enjoy fraggin your azzes, while you are busy trying to find where MS arbitrarily moved that setting to, whatever setting that may be. They moved...everything...for NO reason whatsoever.
To MS:
You want to win peoples hearts back while you still have time? Simple...take XP stir in data security, DX11 and some supplemental driver cabs...and then....leave EVERYTHING else alone! I realize your marketing department will say: "Noone will want that!" Well they will be wrong....again. The best part of this is...it'll sell like hotcakes and you won't even have to spend millions on BS commercials :)
THEN make another OS....ya know a media centered OS, that actually works. I think if you interperate your demographics...CORRECTLY...you'll find that there are TWO types of Windows users. Those that want a lean, mean, productive OS and those that want a Media centered OS. Sure a small percent of the market WILL buy an OS that does BOTH....not realizing of course that they lose on BOTH fronts. For that small percentage...make it simple for them to dual boot the lean, mean version and the media-centric version.
You actually ALMOST got it right with Windows 7, the only problem is you made the lean, mean OS...aka XP, the buried option instead of the out front option :) If thats too complicated, I'll rephrase:
Keep the OS's seperate and make dual booting simple, or.....tack the media-centric OS on to XP. Make the media-centric OS, the buried option. I'll be axiously awaiting the dawn of your understanding....maybe XP Deluxe (XPD) will finally get you that 15th yacht you've been wanting so bad :)
Take an OS, and edit out all the efficiency, and what you have left is a post-XP Microsoft operating system :)
dracx619
July 27, 2009 at 4:38am
the only one with its head up its butt is you and the small group of people who find change a daunting task. im curious what you mean by "pushing on os uphill" if its what i think it means (which is having to use faster, newer hardware) then i dont see how 7 does that if it has been shown many times that ir runs perfectly on todays and many of yesterdays hardware.
again, from what ive seen read and hear, the new taskbar is loved and for me is a pleasant, welcoming, and wodnerful change. adding in vista switcher and virtual desktops and im in mega business.
7 runs and boots faster on my machine than xp ever did so i dont know what type of system or set up you havebut for me and many others, 7 just works faster.
while 60 % of companies are still planning to skip 7, the other 40 plan to do so within 2 years, and translated into numbers, thats about 170 million licenses and the study doesn't account for those that said they simply couldnt afford to at the moment and those that plan later on to make the switch. as far as the casual user, ocne they get a whiff of it, they will ditch xp and or vista as soon as they can. peopel love eye candy people love new, sleek, n sassy.
the xp design is ancient now and downright ugly now. it pains me to use it at work and have now eradicated it off my system at home. xp is kind of like going to war nowadays with a bayonet, sure it gets the job done, but it wontdo you no good once that m-16 starts firing towards you.
stuff isnt that terribly complicated to find. vista users wil find settings and options just as they have before and xp users will probably be frustatrated at first but after that, theyll wonder how they ever did it before. i was one of those. so enjoy your fraggin cause it wont last long...
media works fine and better than it ever has so i dont know what youre talking about. if you agree itl sell like hotcakes, what makes you so sure people are gona be like" well screw this, gimme back my toy dinosaur"
whatever, ive called you out before and i never get a response and that probablly wont change. i guess im just killing time since there isnt work to do right now at my station...
jihnn
July 27, 2009 at 6:19am
people that buy things just to be buying them....lol
ms keeps chugging out the os's just so they can keep profits comming in. guess you haven't figured out that yet.
you try to make peeps think that you have all this tech background, all i see is someone trolling the forums.
other than <keeping up with the jones'es> why should i trade in my xp?
there are always some that will have to have a tech product just because it is new... guess you win the brass ring
go ahead spend your cash on the latest ms marketing scheme
for me when i find hardware or software that is a must have and it isn't supported by xp..... then i'll find a diff os
mesiah
July 28, 2009 at 1:05am
Why is it the actual trolls are usually the first ones to drop the T word? As for factual information, Intels OS release schedule doesn't seem any different than most other companies. Generally they put out a new OS version every 2-3 years. They put out an OS, update it once or twice with service packs, then release a new version. MS did push the release date up on windows 7, but it was mainly because they were trying to get out from under the severe hate people had for vista. If you can't see an appriciable difference between windows xp and windows 7 then I am more likely to think that you are the one lacking a tech background. I could sit here and write out every innovation from vista/win7 that you do not have under windows xp, but it would take me all day. There is nothing wrong with liking an old OS, but don't hate on others just because they are ready to move on to something more functional. It's like some guy in an old camaro making fun of some guy for buying a new vette. You may love your camaro, and it may even run faster in some cases, but it just can't compete with the smooth ride and new technology.
Cregan89
July 27, 2009 at 8:05am
He clearly has at least more tech background than you. He based his judgement of Windows 7 on actual experience with the product and using it. You based your opinion of Windows 7 on Microsoft hate. Have fun with your outdated OS.
dracx619
July 27, 2009 at 8:02am
quite the contrary, i love to be up to date with a lot of tech related stuff, i may not be super harcore techinical like a lot of you but i do the best i can. my forte is all video and media production so i doubt computer people would ever be as versed in that as i or other media pros are the same as i wont be as versed as someone whos life is solely computers and tech. but as far as computer tech goes, i would consider myself an enthusiast, not hardcore. ive loved this stuff since i was 10, but only really started getting into it when i was 15 and helped build my first system. like everyone else, i am learning.
i wait a few generations to actually buy something or upgrade but when i can try somethign for free, i usually give it a go and in the case of windows 7, i was instantly hooked and convinced it wa something i will no doubt get (but not at launch cause i do have my money priorities). the last time i bought an os was in 2002, i change phone every 3-4 yrs, i probably would have had the same car i had since high school if my dad hadnt of given it to my uncle, and the car i have now wont be replaced until like 3-5 more years and ive had it for almost 3 now. i switch out major computer components every 2-4 yrs. basically, i wait until i feel whatever i have has run its course and a switch is a viable option. while i know others hold on to some of their stuff for 5+ years, ive been conditioned to upgrade a bit faster because i work in an industry that always demands the newest and fastes.
im not stupid, i now companies make new stuff to make money. since i didn't pay for vista (didnt steal it either, it just came with a laptop, naturally) and last paid for an oem xp home ages ago, i dont see paying for 7 as a big problem. 7 offers so many changes that have made my computing experience easier and more enjoyable. with adobe's new productivity suites now being able to take advantage of 64-bit and with the OS integrations that will be included with CS5, dang, i can only imagine how better working will be. the home network i have mapped out is goingto be much more simplified with libraries and with homeserver, itl make it even easier and viable since HP makes a good low power HS.so for me, there are many postives to embrace this change.
i embrace change, i like change. im by no means an early adopter and i do take a good time to get into the game, but i do look into the up and coming by reading articles on the net, mpc, wired, among others.
i am no troll. whatever i say, i back up and when challenged, i come back with more arguments until i can admit defeat or come to some agreement. a troll is some fool who talks out of his butt and talks nothing but smack with no substance to a claim or argument and is only there to act like a child.
why should you trade inyour xp? if you dont want to, dont. eventually youll have to trade it for something. reaistically you wont be using it in 10 years, and no one should only except as a fun side project just like how today making win 3.1 run on something is kidna cool just to say 'hey i did it!'. and honestly, 7 is a good os, i struggled a bit with vista but once i got it, i was happy. 7 was an isntant hit with me. i struggled with one driver and it wasnt a nightmare. microsoft has made so many positive changes on many fronts but still got a long way to go. some of their moves are still stupid, like the pricing and upgrade paths, offering 32-bit as an option still, among a few other things but i still respect them more than apple. they got a good gaming system (despite the rocky start), the new zune hd looks fantastic, project natal looks amazing, whether it will do what they say it can is another thing, but well see, im open to it. so you gotta give em credit.
three6mafia1665
July 28, 2009 at 11:08am
/agree, 32 bit OS needs to be NUKED. Most computers these days are usuing atleast 2GB and Core i7s tri-channel setup will easily push that to 3 gb. I hardly understood a 32 bit vista, and a 32 bit win7 makes even less sense. 64 bit has been around for 10 years and yet some companies still refuse to make drivers/apps. One of the most annoying to me is Flash, how software that popular isnt available in 64 bit is just beyond me. I guess it comes down to demand. Until MS pushes the market into 64bit ONLY software vendors will continue to be lazy/cheep and only release software in the dominant format.
sekander94
July 27, 2009 at 4:37am
Right click on the taskbar, and click properties. Set 'Taskbar buttons' to 'Never combine', and put a check in the 'Use small icons' box
Was that so hard?
VaMage
July 26, 2009 at 8:07pm
Win7 deserves, as did Vista, XP, NT, 98,95, DOS, note no Win 3x as that was never an OS, the right to stand or fall on its own.
As to forgive Vista, why? Does Win7 somehow make right the screw job MS tried to shove down everyones throat? Vista is merely par for the modern software release cycle, put it out knowing it's not finished, then do your best to force the consumer to pay for the rest of your development cycle by hiding behind the no return insanity, WE allow to exit.
Now, Win7 COULD gain such forgiveness, if MS gave it away to all Vista owners with a license before say SP1. MS won't because, MS has never been interested in anything remotely resembling business ethics and it never will be.
So, to answer the orginal question about forgiving Vista, of course not as that might imply forgetting the lessons learned from the Vista experience, chief among them being that MS doesn't own the industry to the degree it thinks it does.
There used to be another company that thought the same, it's still called IBM, take a look at the red ink whirlwind it reaped throught out the 90's, MS keeps it up, their day will be coming.
VaMage
American by Birth, But Southern by the Grace of God.
DogPatch1149
July 26, 2009 at 5:48pm
With the installation of SP2 (actually, SP1 fixed the problems I had), I've had a stable operating system in Vista. I have no intention of going out and paying for a new OS that's basically nothing more than a glorified SP3.
vulchan
July 26, 2009 at 8:48pm
Amen brother! I think Windows 7 is the most overrated OS to date. People just heard of driver complaints for Vista in its early days and indefinitely dismissed it as the worst Microsoft OS ever. Truth be told, I think Vista 64-bit is my favorite OS yet (after SP1), it boots up eons faster than XP, it's just as stable, and feels much faster than its predecessor. Fundamentally, I don't see a leap forward from vista, I see a few cheap tricks to entice Vista haters.
Cregan89
July 27, 2009 at 7:50am
I agree Vista was a great OS. It got a bad name early on because of driver and software incompatibilities. But you really should try Windows 7. If Vista boots faster for you than XP, Windows 7 boots even faster than Vista. The entire OS just feels snappier. And the new taskbar causes a lot of controversy, but if you give it a chance and get used to it, you'll quickly realize that it is much more intuitive than the old taskbar. I can't even work in Vista or XP anymore cause the old taskbar bugs the crap out of me now.
Asterixx
July 26, 2009 at 4:05pm
Nunc est bibendum!
I think I may be the only person on Earth who was unimpressed with 7. I was running RC1 from the day it was released until last Tuesday. It may have been the fact that I was running it on old hardware (a Gateway laptop with an Athlon 64 4000+ processor, Radeon X600 graphics, 100GB HDD and a whopping 1.5GB RAM), but I was having problems from the start. Quite often (but not every time), when I'd go to open or save something, in any program (Paint, Word, Firefox, etc), the little explorer window that displays your folder contents would half load, then stop, and it would crash whatever program I was running. I'd have to CTRL+ALT+DEL and shut the program down that way.
For example, if I was on a message board and wanted to upload a file, I'd click the "upload attachment" link. This would bring me to the screen where I'd click on the "browse" button. As soon as I did that the (windows) explorer window would open and crash the browser (Firefox).
It wasn't a Firefox issue though. If I was editing one of my wiring diagrams in Paint, as soon as I'd go to save the file it'd crash. So often that I'd do a Print Screen before trying to save so that if it crashed I could reopen Paint and CTRL+V my image back.
Word would do the same. In fact, any time I tried to open or save a file of any sort in any program explorer would crash. Sometimes explorer would crash when I opened explorer from the start menu. It seemed to be something to do with displaying files on the computer.
I lived with that, though, understanding that it was an RC OS and I was using old, underpowered, under-rammed hardware. What made me finally uninstall 7 was when the machine started blue-screening every time I opened the lid. It was a driver going into a loop, likely caused by the machine either going to or waking up from sleep mode. Rather than troubleshoot a beta driver on an RC operating system I uninstalled 7 and went back to Vista.
That being said, I am replacing the machine this fall. I'm holding out for Seven. I know I could buy a machine now and get a free upgrade, but I'm just gonna wait until the OS is actually available.
dracx619
July 27, 2009 at 4:41am
definitely, running 7 on decent hardware will change that mind right around. i ran 7 on a 5 yr old laptop and i didnt experience any hardcore problems, i just couldnt run any aero features cause 7 didnt have a driver for that old intel gfx chip but it just wasnt the same as runnign it on my newer laptop and desktop.
n0ctis
July 26, 2009 at 8:17pm
I cant speak to anyone else's experience on other hardware, but after testing and living with 7 RC1 for a good long while, I decided to take the preorder plunge.
________________________________________________________________
.: vires et honos :.
Tekzel
July 28, 2009 at 11:55am
Me too, I ran Win7 for 3-4 weeks then tried to go back to my old Vista install, that lasted about a day, I upgraded the old Vista installation to Win7 and have been happy ever since.
Uh, the reason I went back is the inital Win7 was a 64bit install and I just ran into too many annoying issues with that, so I went back to 32bit.
Badger1
July 26, 2009 at 3:07pm
I built a box to handle Vista long before it's release in 11/05. My experience has been great. I will use Windows 7 Pro at the pre-order price of $100 cuz I can;t pay $220 for Ultimate which is Ugly Vista to me. It's sad MS had to back off moving forward to support outdated hardware. How can OSes move forward if they support 5 year old hardware. If you have the hardware, Vista rocks!
Devo85x
July 26, 2009 at 2:15pm
Yes people, the bluescreen is fake... stop acting like no1 else noticed...
colinjm0517
July 26, 2009 at 6:36pm
Obviously, that particular BSOD only happens in the 9x series of windows.
Windows 7 is the King of all OSes
SpazzAttack
July 26, 2009 at 10:45pm
The first time I tried Vista was after SP1 was released. I didn't experienced all the horror stories surrounding it. I'm in no hurry. I'll wait until Vista SP3--I mean Windows 7--is offically released.
jkpwnster
July 26, 2009 at 1:30pm
The blue screen on the computer actually appears to be a Windows 9x BSoD, not a Vista BSoD.
knexkid
July 26, 2009 at 1:21pm
I was sick of hearing everyone gloat about Windows 7 (such as the usual gang on the podcast) so I finally downloaded the RC and installed it. I have been rockin XP for a long time, and was one of the fellow Vista haters. I had a cheap laptop that came with Vista and couldn't stand it so I put XP on it. Well I can say that Windows 7 really is great. I have had no issues with compatibility (yet, knock on wood) (except for my networked printers, but that's because of 32 bit to my new 64 bit, nothing to do with 7). The only thing I am not a really big fan of is the new task bar. I do not like the "mac-like" launcher. I like the more old school "quick launch tool bar" that then opened the task. Is there any way I can revert back to the old way? SUch as I have FIrefox on the task bar, but I can't open a new window without right clicking on it and selecting "firefox" again. Maybe I just need to get used to it....
dracx619
July 27, 2009 at 4:44am
you can also middle click on your mouse and thal open a new instance. the new taskbar has made my life so much easier. i constantly work with macs so im a very used to the whole 'dock' experience but the windows taskbar feels like a dock done right.
comptech08
July 26, 2009 at 3:30pm
I really like the new task bar. I pin everything i use the most on it and its pretty cool. I don't see how it relates to what apple has, somebody is going to have to explain to me how that is because i see little resemblance.
Tekzel
July 26, 2009 at 2:02pm
Oh man, give that new bar a chance, you will come to LOVE it. Especially the jump lists.
To
open a new firefox (or any, like explorer) window from the task bar
just shift+click on one of the icons. Easy as pie. You can right click
on any window and pin it to the task bar if you use it constantly.
Foreverlad
July 26, 2009 at 2:57pm
...or you could just reenable quick launch so things like Computer can be 'pinned' to the bar again.
Seriously, no offense to you Tekzel, but I don't understand the love people show for the new bar. I've run 7 for about a month and I cannot get used to it. I've had to set up quick launch to provide me the speed and accessibility I'd been missing, along with allowing me to access "show desktop" without having to hover over/near the clock.
Tekzel
July 28, 2009 at 12:05pm
No offence taken, opinions are like... Well, you know the drill.
I was used to the Windows 7 task bar by the end of my first day and now I can not STAND using the old school taskbar. Why in the world would I want to reenable the "quick launch" when I get every last bit of the minimal functionality I got there, and a TON more with the new task bar? Thats like... Well, I just can't come up with a reasonable analogy for that kinda craziness. :)
Show desktop? WinKey + Space. No mouse movement required.
Edit: Oh yea, and things like "Computer" can be pinned just fine on the new task bar in a way that makes a million times more sense to me: Drag it to the bar and drop it. It will be pinned to the Explorer task bar button, a right click on it and you can access it, and any other folders you have pinned, from the Explorer jump list.
wytworm
July 26, 2009 at 1:07pm
Vista caused our 5 PC household to transform into a 6 MAC household (won a mac book pro in a raffle) and we don't see a compelling driver to switch back. Now that the PC game market is dead, not sure one will immediately present itself...
comptech08
July 26, 2009 at 3:27pm
o wow get educated. PC gaming is on a huge rise like never before. Enjoy your mac and its games, WoW and Cake factory. Okay i know there is more but its very limited. lol
wytworm
July 30, 2009 at 2:00pm
To be clear, I am not a MAC gamer. Just use it for viedo editing, office work, etc...
Gaming for us is all console now.
What exactly is on the rise? What are you looking forward to?
SpazzAttack
July 26, 2009 at 1:56pm
BTW - I just checked Apple's web site. Here's the blurb for the Mac Pro's graphics:
The new Mac Pro features the fastest graphics ever on a Mac. Its standard configuration includes the up to 2.9x faster NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB of GDDR3 memory. For even greater performance — up to 2x more — upgrade to the ATI Radeon HD 4870.
Heh...their latest and greatest graphics cards are at least a generation or two behind from what's available on the PC. Have fun with that old hardware!
Digital-Storm
July 26, 2009 at 1:34pm
PC gaming dead? Please shoot yourself. I still play some of the old games and there still loads of fun.
SEALBoy
July 26, 2009 at 1:13pm
PC gaming dead? My frustrating hunt for open TF2 servers suggests otherwise.
Enjoy hardcore gaming on your Macs!
Cooketh
July 26, 2009 at 1:27pm
PC Gaming is far from dead. If it was ATi/AMD and Nvidia would be abondoning ship. There would also be no high-end PC market, for OEMs and custom builders alike.
A full fledge MAC can't ever ever ever do what even a mid-range PC can do, especially gaming. But a PC can do anything a MAC can do. Whether you want to argue if a PC or MAC can do those things better is beside the point, the point is that MACs and the MAC OS completely limit what you can do with a computer.
If you can't learn to use Windows XP, Vista, or 7, then go ahead and quit and buy a MAC. And if you can't learn to drive a car, then go ahead quit and buy a bicycle.
wytworm
July 30, 2009 at 2:05pm
A full fledge PC can't ever ever ever do what even a mid-range MAC can do, especially video editing. But a MAC can do anything a PC can do. Whether you want to argue if a MAC or PC can do those things better is beside the point, the point is that PCs and the Windows OS completely limit what you can do with a computer.
If you can't learn to use OS X then go ahead and quit and buy a PC. And if you can't learn to drive a car, then go ahead quit and buy a bicycle.
dag1992
August 02, 2009 at 11:16am
The problem is a PC can do what a mac can do. *cough Sony Vegas, 3dsmax cough*
