[WinTard]

Hey everybody, it's not a matter of killing anything. Remember, it's like welcoming an new and improved Windows. Everything else remains... More choices, that's all. And for the future, 64-bit and all, there's only one choice IMHO, as far as Windows is concerned, it's Windows 7 Ultimate x64 for home, and Windows 7 Enterprise x64 for businesses... Simple eh? Everything you have today, now remains the same... For at least five years, from the official discontinuation date of XP, which isn't clear yet... So NO WORRIES!

~~~~~~~~~
Is the glass half-full or half-empty?

[artzy65]

IT and computers ain't simple for a newbie... like anything in life, it only becomes simple once you know what you're doing.

[WinTard]

I got to add this, Windows 7 x64 is such a pleasure! IE8 works MUCH better than the 32-bit version under XP. It is at least 3x as fast! And no weirdness, or huge CPU loads on some pages. Especially on forums.pcworld.com. Yes there are problems in the javascript, and the fault lies on PCWorld. My CPU usage remains at ZERO use, 99.99% of the time! No kidding. Seriously!

>
I especially appreciate the Internet Protected Mode ON. :D

What a pleasure to use!!!

[Foxylady48180]

If you look at artzy65 just above you, I'm sure you will notice that I have a problem with the mumbers. If both are "googled" why don't they match? I don't know as much about computer as probably either of you, but I can add 1+1 and come up with 2. Now don't you guys go getting mad at me, but please tell me which one is correct.

[artzy65]

Wow, you ARE new, huh... more of a 'gee whiz' than a computer whiz! That's ok, we were all newbies at one time.... as you can see, we all love helping people out, so don't be afraid to ask anything at all. There are a lot of really cool, generous people out here in Geekland.

Always check the date of any given google result for time-sensitive info, like market share... the article I googled for you is about a month old if I remember correctly. A lot of stuff out there is literally YEARS old which is part of the beauty of it... just check any article's date like I said. Why is market share re XP/Vista so important to you anyway? The fact is WIndows 7 will supplant both of them eventually. Check out WinTard's posts for expert pc advice... I can't help you in that department, I'm a mac guy.

[asiafish]

WinTard said:

Hey everybody, it's not a matter of killing anything. Remember, it's like welcoming an new and improved Windows. Everything else remains... More choices, that's all. And for the future, 64-bit and all, there's only one choice IMHO, as far as Windows is concerned, it's Windows 7 Ultimate x64 for home, and Windows 7 Enterprise x64 for businesses... Simple eh? Everything you have today, now remains the same... For at least five years, from the official discontinuation date of XP, which isn't clear yet... So NO WORRIES!

~~~~~~~~~
Is the glass half-full or half-empty?

I wish it was that simple. Microsoft should follow Apple's example here and offer only one version of Windows, the "complete" version.

Since they don't, I will buy what I need. Back in 1999~2001 that was Windows 2000 Professional (I hated DOS-based Windows). From 2002 through 2006 that was Windows XP Professional, and since 2007 it has been Windows Vista Business X64. Windows 7 shall be the same, I will buy the business version in 64 bit. Yes, media center is nice, but I'm not willing to spend $100 on what to me is essentially a DVD player (I don't use any of the other functions). Especially since I already own WinDVD and use iTunes for my music.

I think that this was one of the biggest complaints about Vista, the need to spend more money for what traditionally was part of the OS. I never bothered with the media center edition of XP for much the same reason.

Likewise, why should "home" versions be crippled with regard to offline folder synchronization and the ability to log onto a domain? Don't some "home" users take their laptops to work? Isn't Microsoft pushing "Home Servers" now? Whenever I buy a new PC I always have to add in the $80 or so premium to get the business or professional version instead of the home, home premium or whatever today's crippled version in the store is called.

Okay, I'm done ranting. I do really like Windows 7 and consider it a solid improvement over Vista, which was a solid improvement over XP. Am I in the minority in thinking that Vista was actually a bigger improvement over XP than 7 is over Vista?

[WinTard]

Well, my only beef with Windows 7 is that it really is based on NT 6.1 LOL! So what? Windows 8 will be based on NT 7??? Weird uh?

[JimH443]

Foxylady48180 said:

If you look at artzy65 just above you, I'm sure you will notice that I have a problem with the mumbers. If both are "googled" why don't they match? I don't know as much about computer as probably either of you, but I can add 1+1 and come up with 2. Now don't you guys go getting mad at me, but please tell me which one is correct.

The problem is, in my opinion, that there are no reliable numbers. When a new PC computer is sold, it is placed in the "Vista" column - whether or not it was downgraded to XP. There's also no way to know how many of these computers were downgraded by the owners who had a copy of XP and didn't want to pay the downgrade fee. Finally, there's no way to know how many "home built" systems were constructed and what operating system was put on them.

Bottom line: No one can say with any degree of certainty or accuracy what share XP or Vista has.

[rgreen4]

The Home versions will join a workgroup which would include any home network. It cannot join a domain, and I doubt seriously if you will find any home networks that are domains.

As for the options, if you want the business/professional features and do not want Media Center, why should you have to pay for it and load it on your machine - no reason, thus they offer the professional version. If on the other hand I do want additional features and Media Center, but have no need to join a domain, nor other business features, why should I have to load it and pay for it? No reason. If on the other hand, WinTard wants all of the features, he can purchase the Ultimate version and have it all. Three major consumer versions for three different needs.

If an OS has a one size fits all arrangement, either someone is not going to get the features they need, or some one is paying for and having to load features they do not want or need. But if your market share is in single digits, it probably makes sense.

[ImaPhake]

That "pre-release" nVidia driver should be DX11, yes.

If you type "dxdiag" (without quotes) in your "run" box, the first page of that diagnostic will show you what version your OS is using.

In Windows 7 it should say DirectX 11 even if you don't have a video card which supports DX10 or better. My own GPU doesn't support anything higher than DX9 even though Windows 7 loads DX11 -- it's backward compatible with previous versions.

Regarding market share of operating systems -- I'm a Steam user and they continually conduct hardware surveys which delve into all the pertinent aspects of their user-base. They do that because they are game developers and they need to know the percentages of all those things in order to provide a broad enough coverage for the "average" machine.

Here's the breakdown on the Operating Systems of Steam users:

Windows XP 32 bit (-2.76%) 60.68%
Windows Vista 32 bit (+1.44%) 26.40%
Windows Vista 64 bit (+0.78%) 9.96%
Windows 2003 64 bit (-0.04%) 0.80%
Windows 7 64 bit (+0.25%) 0.78%
Windows 7 (+0.24%) 0.73%
Windows XP 64 bit (+0.08%) 0.33%
Windows 2000 (-0.01%) 0.19%
Other (+0.01%) 0.13%

The numbers in parentheses indicates if that OS is down or up since the last survey results.

You can view the complete survey which covers things like RAM, HD sizes, GPU brands and types, CPUs, etc. here:

store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Now, how closely these statistics represent the rest of the world is hard to say -- gamers can be stubborn on one side of the fence or another -- those who are stubbornly sticking with XP, or those who would upgrade to Vista or Win 7 regardless of the merits. As you quoted Einstein in another topic: "Everything is relative." :)

[asiafish]

rgreen4 said:

The Home versions will join a workgroup which would include any home network. It cannot join a domain, and I doubt seriously if you will find any home networks that are domains.

As for the options, if you want the business/professional features and do not want Media Center, why should you have to pay for it and load it on your machine - no reason, thus they offer the professional version. If on the other hand I do want additional features and Media Center, but have no need to join a domain, nor other business features, why should I have to load it and pay for it? No reason. If on the other hand, WinTard wants all of the features, he can purchase the Ultimate version and have it all. Three major consumer versions for three different needs.

If an OS has a one size fits all arrangement, either someone is not going to get the features they need, or some one is paying for and having to load features they do not want or need. But if your market share is in single digits, it probably makes sense.

Every version of OS X has cost $129 and every version is "ultimate". the only version that costs more is the family pack, which is five licenses for $199. There are no incomplete versions. The OS supports joining a domain, its up to the user to do so or not. The OS includes a media center application, its up to the user to use it or not.

When you buy Vista, ANY VERSION, everything is included on the DVD, and it costs Microsoft nothing more and nothing less to sell you Home Basic or Ultimate, only the profit margin differs.

[JimH443]

Quote

Here's the breakdown on the Operating Systems of Steam users:




Windows XP 32 bit (-2.76%) 60.68%
Windows Vista 32 bit (+1.44%) 26.40%
Windows Vista 64 bit (+0.78%) 9.96%
Windows 2003 64 bit (-0.04%) 0.80%
Windows 7 64 bit (+0.25%) 0.78%
Windows 7 (+0.24%) 0.73%
Windows XP 64 bit (+0.08%) 0.33%
Windows 2000 (-0.01%) 0.19%
Other (+0.01%) 0.13%




The numbers in parentheses indicates if that OS is down or up since the last survey results.

And this points out the inherent weakness of surveys: Sample bias. According to this survey, Microsoft has a 99.8% market share (assuming that the "Other" 0.13% doesn't include any Win 95 or Win 98 users).

[rgreen4]

asiafish said:

The OS includes a media center application, its up to the user to use it or not.

This is the first and only reference I have ever heard of OS/X including a Media Center. I sincerly doubt it. The Media Center has the capability of controlling a TV card and recording the input for later playback. You can set up a MC remote to control not only the Media Center, but the TV and a cable/satellite control box. Since I have never seen nor heard any reference to anything like that in OS/X, I will put it down that you meant it had the equivalent of Windows Media Player, a completely different application that comes with all versions of Windows.

[WinTard]

I don't know exactly what OS X uses for media player, but two excellent open-source, thus all platforms architectures are:
MPlayer - The Movie Player
VLC media player

Obviously available first for the ubiquitous and universal Windows platform, in both the latest binary or source forms.

Yes, most if not all of the significant Open Source offerings are available for Windows, and all the rest.

[ImaPhake]

" And this points out the inherent weakness of surveys: Sample bias. According to this survey, Microsoft has a 99.8% market share (assuming that the "Other" 0.13% doesn't include any Win 95 or Win 98 users)."



Perhaps I assumed it would be obvious to everyone that Steam is a site made up of gamers -- I don't know any serious gamers today using Win 95/98. So....yes, you are correct that there is a "sample bias" in this survey. I apologize for not making that more clear.

My objective was to show the percentages of people using XP/Vista/Win7 -- the 3 main contenitious objects of this discussion.

[WinTard]

It was crystal clear to me. I didn't even think of Steam as a spot-on source of solid statistics for PC fanatics! Good thinking ImaPhake! Instead of fuzzy numbers, from God knows where. Thanks for adding clarity to the situation.

I frankly couldn't care less about market share BTW. I like to think I only go for the best! Regardless of price. No offenses to anyone, but I would never choose luxury over performance. As a metaphor, a formula 1 racing car, isn't a Rolls-Royce. Not that I could afford either, but the formula 1 is not only higher tech, but also more expensive and technologically advanced than any luxury car... :D

What does best mean? Best price? Best performance? or Best exclusivity?

~~~~~~~~~~
Everything is relative.
~ Albert Einstein.

There is no waste of time in life like that of making explanations.
~ Benjamin Disraeli, British Prime Minister and Novelist. 1804-1881

It takes but one positive thought when given a chance to survive and thrive to overpower an entire army of negative thoughts.
~ Robert H. Schuller

The more you learn, the more you realize you didn't know. That's the downside of continuing your education. The benefits come next.
~ Unknown Source

Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.
~ Carl Jung

Knowledge is a treasure, but practice is the key to it.
~ Thomas Fuller, 1608-1661, British Clergyman and Author

There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness.
~ Friedrich Nietzsche

[JimH443]

ImaPhake said:

" And this points out the inherent weakness of surveys: Sample bias. According to this survey, Microsoft has a 99.8% market share (assuming that the "Other" 0.13% doesn't include any Win 95 or Win 98 users)."

Perhaps I assumed it would be obvious to everyone that Steam is a site made up of gamers -- I don't know any serious gamers today using Win 95/98. So....yes, you are correct that there is a "sample bias" in this survey. I apologize for not making that more clear.

My objective was to show the percentages of people using XP/Vista/Win7 -- the 3 main contenitious objects of this discussion.

(Underlining added for emphasis)

You actually missed my point. Are you saying that serious gamers only use PCs? Or were you suggesting that serious gamers on Macs use Windows? This is the sample bias I was referring to.

My post was motivated by the following post:

Quote

I understand by reading thru this stuff the Lenix has 1% of the market and Mac has 10%. (don;t know if that is exact) Can you tell me the breakdown for XP and VISTA. Since we are talking about killing XP, I would like to have some idea of the bodycount.

This post was referring to total market share.

[rgreen4]

The current market share split between Vista and XP does not matter. What does matter is if Windows 7 is a reasonable OS and the fact that Microsoft will not do any more enhancements of XP, only doing security related updates for the next 5 years. During the next 5 years, the use XP in corporate environs will drop dramatically. They will not stay with an OS that does not have security patches available.

For example and I have related this before, last fall my former employer (I retired at the end of July) rolled out Vista and Office 2007 upgrading from Windows 2000 and Office 2000, skipping totally over XP. The reason they decided to replace Windows 2000 was because of the pending end of support, and the reason they decided not to go to XP, was that it would only be supported for about 5 more years, whereas Vista would be supported for another 8-9 years. It is a considerable effort to roll out upgrades on 3,000 PC's spread across 65+ locations (almost half in 5 locations).

These roll outs in other corporations that are underway and the roll outs of Windows 7 starting in the next year or so will dramatically drop the market share of XP. In 5 years, the market share of XP will closely approximate that currently held by Windows 2000.

[artzy65]

It was clear to me... the way you wrote about Steam, and I'm not a gamer at all or even a windows user.

[Foxylady48180]

I think this survey related to Microsofts share of the market and where, by OS, 99.8% of it is. The other is "95,98, etc.