Originally posted by sammorris:

---

For the record, I have found at least one application that worked on Win7, but doesn't on Win8 (yet).

---

Originally posted by Blazorthon:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Your way off base Blaz, ME was the King of bloating, the KING hands down and I just disagree with you on XP being bloated, it was not. It is a fact that games and programs that run on XP and 7 won't run on Vista. That is why 7 was so revamped from Vista and is truly just an extension of it. It is also why businesses wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. So if I wanted to waste my time I could dig through my list and provide you many examples but I'm not going to waste my time so believe it or not if you choose, it doesn't matter to me.

---

Why does it seem like I've offended you or something? All I asked for was examples because this is the first that I've heard of software running on 7, yet not on Vista these days. I'm not asking for a huge list, just give me say three or four examples and I'll go from there. I've never known any such examples, hence I asked. I wasn't trying to put you in any spot light and say you're wrong, just asking for some examples since you say you have a lot of examples.

I'm simply telling you my experience with my numerous machines running these operating systems. What I believe is irrelevant as is what you believe, I'm just saying what I've seen with my own eyes and that of what I've read about as well.I don't have some of my oldest machines anymore thanks to some of their very old PSUs finally failing over the last few years (it's cost more to replace some of those old PSUs than the whole systems are worth these days, so I didn't bother fixing them up), but that's not the point.

Businesses didn't touch Vista because of the stability problems, huge expense of needles upgrades, potential software and driver incompatibility, and other such reasons. Any bloating over time issues had little to nothing to do with it. Even now, we're only seeing upgrades to 7 because it's in a much more stable time with much better software support and XP is running out of support time. The far lower costs than in the past with Vista for the time are probably also related.

EDIT: Well, this last paragraph is more like my opinion of the situation than a definitive guarantee, I'll admit that much.

---

Originally posted by Blazorthon:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Visa was Micro$oft's mistake, not ours. Why are we being made to pay for it?

Best Regards,
Russ

---

What do you mean by that? I never said nor even meant to imply that the customers were at fault for Vista's *fiasco*.

---

Originally posted by omegaman7:

---

Geese Russ. You've had some problems with 7 for sure. My experience has been the opposite. And by the way, the programs in your list that don't work for you, work for me :p The ones I use anyhow.

Dragon naturally speaking? I haven't installed that one, but I suspect I wouldn't have a problem. But then, the integrated speech capability is plenty for a good speaking person. I recall Sam has trouble with those sort of programs, due to certain accents. When I finished setting up my speech recognition, my brother(similar voice), could use my computer by speaking to it.

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by Blazorthon:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

XP was never bloated but it did have problems with compatibility/driver issues at first and wasn't stable until SP1 when it became a good OS at that point. Vista is still bloatware crap that can't run older programs, but Windows 7 is pretty good and unlike Vista I can run old programs and games that I can't run with Vista 32 or 64 versions. XP had problems because they made a big jump from their gaming OS and business OS's, which were separate prior, and they merged them together, ME didn't help in the conversion either.

I use AVG and it runs fine on Windows 7. I've installed it on many PC's and never had one problem attributed to the OS or in AVG's operation. This is with both free versions and full suite packages too.

---

Compared to Windows 2000, Windows XP was very bloated. I didn't consider it good until SP2, but I suppose that is a more subjective and per-situation sort of thing. However, the simple fact is at least in every situation that I'm aware of, XP needed much more system performance and capacity than Windows 2000 needed to run similarly well. I booted up two old 2000 and ME machines a year or two back and they ran better with 128MB and 192MB of SDRAM-100 with a weak P3 each better than XP ran on a system with 512MB of DDR2-533 and a decent for the time P4 630 (3GHz, 2MB L2 cache, and Hyper-Threading) until I threw in another 2GB of RAM for the XP system. XP had very bad resource management.

I don't know of any programs that can't run on Vista that do run on 7 unless you count XP mode. What programs are you talking about?

You may be right about XP's issues being contributed to by MS merging professiona and home use into a single system, but that was not nearly the only issue. It shared a lot of issues with Vista. Like Vista, XP was a LOT more bloated than its predecessor. Lot Vista, it had a lot of driver issues up to even a few years after its launch. It had its good qualities eve nearly on, but the same can be said for even Vista and 8. For example, Vista brought in a much more complete 64 bit experience than XP managed to do and had some innovative changes (and some very bad losses, but still).

---

There are tons of programs that won't install or run on Vista that do operate fine on XP and Seven, tons.... I play with a lot of games and business programs so I see more then the average Joe I guess.

NT/2000 was only good for business and ME was a gaming platform and poor one at that. XP was the blending of the two and because of that it did have more overhead but I wouldn't call that bloat. Also XP was built for a stronger base then 2K/ME so it should be that 2K or ME will run better on older gear, that is almost always true. ME and Vista bloat with time and Vista is a major resource hog, Seven is not and actually Windows 8 actually even performs better resource wise then 7. Vista is pretty and I think that is what people like, functionality doesn't seem to be important to Vista lovers. Unlike Russ I don't mind change as long as it is good unfortunately too often change is bad i.e, Metro....

---

Originally posted by omegaman7:

---

Geese Russ. You've had some problems with 7 for sure. My experience has been the opposite. And by the way, the programs in your list that don't work for you, work for me :p The ones I use anyhow.

Dragon naturally speaking? I haven't installed that one, but I suspect I wouldn't have a problem. But then, the integrated speech capability is plenty for a good speaking person. I recall Sam has trouble with those sort of programs, due to certain accents. When I finished setting up my speech recognition, my brother(similar voice), could use my computer by speaking to it.

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Sam,

You said something the other day about upgrading to Win 8 costs you your win 7 license? Could you clarify that please. If it wasn't you, I apologize.

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by Blazorthon:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

XP was never bloated but it did have problems with compatibility/driver issues at first and wasn't stable until SP1 when it became a good OS at that point. Vista is still bloatware crap that can't run older programs, but Windows 7 is pretty good and unlike Vista I can run old programs and games that I can't run with Vista 32 or 64 versions. XP had problems because they made a big jump from their gaming OS and business OS's, which were separate prior, and they merged them together, ME didn't help in the conversion either.

I use AVG and it runs fine on Windows 7. I've installed it on many PC's and never had one problem attributed to the OS or in AVG's operation. This is with both free versions and full suite packages too.

---

Compared to Windows 2000, Windows XP was very bloated. I didn't consider it good until SP2, but I suppose that is a more subjective and per-situation sort of thing. However, the simple fact is at least in every situation that I'm aware of, XP needed much more system performance and capacity than Windows 2000 needed to run similarly well. I booted up two old 2000 and ME machines a year or two back and they ran better with 128MB and 192MB of SDRAM-100 with a weak P3 each better than XP ran on a system with 512MB of DDR2-533 and a decent for the time P4 630 (3GHz, 2MB L2 cache, and Hyper-Threading) until I threw in another 2GB of RAM for the XP system. XP had very bad resource management.

I don't know of any programs that can't run on Vista that do run on 7 unless you count XP mode. What programs are you talking about?

You may be right about XP's issues being contributed to by MS merging professiona and home use into a single system, but that was not nearly the only issue. It shared a lot of issues with Vista. Like Vista, XP was a LOT more bloated than its predecessor. Lot Vista, it had a lot of driver issues up to even a few years after its launch. It had its good qualities eve nearly on, but the same can be said for even Vista and 8. For example, Vista brought in a much more complete 64 bit experience than XP managed to do and had some innovative changes (and some very bad losses, but still).

---

There are tons of programs that won't install or run on Vista that do operate fine on XP and Seven, tons.... I play with a lot of games and business programs so I see more then the average Joe I guess.

NT/2000 was only good for business and ME was a gaming platform and poor one at that. XP was the blending of the two and because of that it did have more overhead but I wouldn't call that bloat. Also XP was built for a stronger base then 2K/ME so it should be that 2K or ME will run better on older gear, that is almost always true. ME and Vista bloat with time and Vista is a major resource hog, Seven is not and actually Windows 8 actually even performs better resource wise then 7. Vista is pretty and I think that is what people like, functionality doesn't seem to be important to Vista lovers. Unlike Russ I don't mind change as long as it is good unfortunately too often change is bad i.e, Metro....

---

Mr-Movies,

I beg your pardon? I have always been a very progressive person. I have no objection to change, but I do take exception to change just for change's sake though! Computers are not like Automobiles! They don't need a new grille or portholes to look like a new computer! Metaphorically speaking, lot's of people out there want to put a skirt or pants on computers, like they are human, and your best friend, when they aren't and never will be.

My original purpose for building a computer was to do work with, and make some money. Games and other entertainment were very secondary to me. Today, I still do a lot of computer work, and when I'm doing it I don't want all the pop up garbage that you get with 7. My screen looks no different than it does with XP, with all the junk turned off! When I am not doing work, I focus more on entertainment and games, than I used to.

Let me ask you a question. What were you doing when you were 7? Did you know where your future lay? Well in 1951, at age 7, I already knew! I knew it the first time I went into the new electronics store in town. I had a sudden vision of electronic machines combined with medicine and I followed it up with a 40+ year career in medical electronics. Unlike most of the repair technicians of the day (1951), I wasn't afraid of Transistors and integrated circuits, and readily embraced them, making a very successful career for myself out of the new tech, while being a part of the creation of a huge industry that never existed before. I'm proud of what we accomplished, and the lives that are saved, every day because of what we created!

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Quote:

---

Let me ask you a question. What were you doing when you were 7?

---

Originally posted by Ripper:

---

I've only read about 10% of the discussion going on at the moment, but I'm glad someone mentioned ME was a POS. I never used Vista either, skipped to Windows 7.

In fairness to Russ, the first thing I do when I install Windows 7 is make it look essentially like XP did..

http://i.imgur.com/AbfXV.png

I probably won't be using Windows 8 for the foreseeable; I have no need to and I'm beyond the point of caring enough to install it just to have a look around.

---