Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] [Rival] Vista 7 is Fat and Released Prematurely Due to Pressures

On 2009-07-24, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:27:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| No matter how Microsoft spins it, Windows 7 is not suitable for a netbook. 
>>| It's lighter than Vista was in terms of its impact on system resources, but 
>>| then, what isn't? If you want a cheap netbook with decent performance, you 
>>| want Linux. And, if you want one after Windows 7 starts shipping, you'll want 
>>| to check ones running Moblin or Google Chrome OS.     
>> `----
>> http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows_7_rtm_works_well

> I've read a number of blog posts from people who have actually run 7 on a
> netbook, and every one of them has said it works fine, even with as little
> as 512MB of memory.  The only people I see saying it won't work on a
> Netbook are people that have never actually run it on one.

You mean like this one?


   It’s hard to come out with a final definitive verdict about Windows
   7 on a netbook because many of the netbook’s features rely on
   specific drivers. For the purposes of this piece I will ignore any
   driver-related issues.

How can anybody review something when they'll have to ignore what
doesn't work. How can they know if making the stuff work won't make
things worse?

   Windows 7 works on netbooks, but if you push the system the same way
   as you push a desktop system then you might need to add more RAM. On
   top of that, remember that Windows 7 takes some 7.5GB of disk space,
   so you need to factor this into your thinking, especially if you
   have a netbook with a small SSD fitted.

   My advice would be not to bother upgrading an existing netbook
   unless you really feel you want a particular Windows 7 feature. wait
   for Windows 7 netbooks to arrive on the scene as some of these will
   hopefully come with 2GB of RAM fitted.

A stellar recommendation!

I found an article about a pre-beta. But that's not going to be of any

Then I found this one:


It seems that nobody bothered to actually write any content (original
article here http://content.zdnet.com/2346-9595_22-262417.html), so
some wrote their own. Like 3.1:

    I have windows 7 on my netbook. As a matter of fact that I am
    writing this out of using windows 7.
    It does work but has its own glitches.
    The AVG Antivirus does not do well on this.
    Let me tell you one more thing. At its bare bone - it is faster on
    Netbook than XP. It does not load faster, almost equal, but it
    definetly responds faster than XP.

And 4:

   Obviously the writer (screen capturer) is abiding by the rules of
   the EULA for Windows 7 beta - no benchmarks allowed. 

No mention of drivers, though, except one guy and wireless, which he
got to work using the XP driver.

Then I found the following link:


The reviewer didn't have a lot to say. It was a test build. But one of
the comments goes like this:

   Why such eagerness to try Windows 7 on an netbook? it hardly seems
   worth it, is not like one would gain any advantage whatsoever from
   doing so…other than killing time waitng for the economy to improve,
   that is.

Sort of my sentiment.

Here's another one I found:


Titled: Windows 7 Runs So Much Better Than Vista On a Netbook

Another glowing endorsement!

That's it. I used ixquick for my search and came up with 5 pages.
That's all I saw out of 5 pages other than announcements by people who
reannounced what the monopoly announced, and some press releases by the
monopolists themselves.

Where are these blogs where people run it on a low-powered netbook that
"runs fine" with as little as 512M? I didn't see any.

I've already told you more than I know.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index