Jimmy Easterling
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 645
- Reaction score
- 0
I finally took the jump and moved to Windows 7. I am not quite finished loading all the programs back on but, so far it works.
Help Support Nitro Owners Forum:
Bill Hamilton
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2003
- Messages
- 2,299
- Reaction score
- 0
Make sure you backed EVERYTHING up before you loaded it, including hidden files. My issue with Windows 7 was that I had some older software that won't run on 32 or 64 bit Windows 7 and have to upgrade the SW at a high expense.
Bill Hamilton
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2003
- Messages
- 2,299
- Reaction score
- 0
Make sure you backed EVERYTHING up before you loaded it, including hidden files. My issue with Windows 7 was that I had some older software that won't run on 32 or 64 bit Windows 7 and have to upgrade the SW at a high expense.
Scott Hammer TOXIC
Well-Known Member
If you don't back it up it might cause double posts on the internet:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
TOXIC
TOXIC
Texas Transplant
Well-Known Member
In today's world, as big and as expansive as the software is, if you are not doing a 'disk image', it won't do you much good. Alternately, backing up everything and the hidden files, just simply means that you are going to go back to XP or Vista (or whatever) since the restore is not going to work as you want it.
Backups protect files in directories that you designate. When you install, the necessary files for any program are all over your hard drive.
Every few years, software moves forward in complexity and ability. When it does, old software trails behind and needs to be upgraded and/or replaced. It's the price we have to pay.
Tex
Backups protect files in directories that you designate. When you install, the necessary files for any program are all over your hard drive.
Every few years, software moves forward in complexity and ability. When it does, old software trails behind and needs to be upgraded and/or replaced. It's the price we have to pay.
Tex
Larry Morganstern
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2001
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
If you've got some XP programs that won't run on Win7 and you don't want to (or can't) upgrade them, and if you're running Win7 pro or ultimate, download the free XP virtual machine from MS and run an instance of XP on your Win7 pc with those programs installed on it. I didn't mean for that sentence to be 5 miles long!
Texas Transplant
Well-Known Member
Nice tip. Thanks.
Tex
Tex
Jimmy Easterling
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 645
- Reaction score
- 0
MS has a nice program called Windows Easy Transfer that you use to transfer everything from XP to 7. I haven't tried loading my AutoCad back on to 7 yet, the only thing so far that I like that won't install is Roxio, guess I will have to get use to something else or buy the new version.
Dan J.
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the tip, Doc!! Does anyone else remember when MS would boast about backward compatability with their earlier editions??? :wacko: Personally, I'd take XP over Vista any day. Most new netbooks are also XP. Must be a good reason for that. My newest desktop came with a free Windows 7 "upgrade" and I've been holding off to see how many skeletons get tossed out of the closet first. I keep saying I'm going to try a Mac and yet I keep buying PC. :huh: I guess I'm as whacked as MS!! :wacko:
Texas Transplant
Well-Known Member
If you are in school (College moreso than High School) or working for a printer; doing advertising layout and such - than Mac is the machine of choice. After that, it's a slam dunk - it's a 'PC' for business.
And from my perspective, I don't get caught up in the very nicely done Mac vs PC commercials. My hat is off to those that came up with that series of ad's, but the Mac doesn't even really show up in the global marketing numbers between the two.
Go down and price a 17" state of the art 'mid-range' PC laptop, and a comparative Mac Laptop. Decision should come easily.
I've been using Vista since January, and it has worked well enough. At times I get a littel frustrated with all of the gimmicks on security that seem to be there, but I have learned to live with it. I'll probably look to make the move to the new Windows 7, sometime after the first of the year.
Tex
And from my perspective, I don't get caught up in the very nicely done Mac vs PC commercials. My hat is off to those that came up with that series of ad's, but the Mac doesn't even really show up in the global marketing numbers between the two.
Go down and price a 17" state of the art 'mid-range' PC laptop, and a comparative Mac Laptop. Decision should come easily.
I've been using Vista since January, and it has worked well enough. At times I get a littel frustrated with all of the gimmicks on security that seem to be there, but I have learned to live with it. I'll probably look to make the move to the new Windows 7, sometime after the first of the year.
Tex
Larry Morganstern
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2001
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
In my previous reply on running a virtual XP instance on Win7, I should have added that your processor also has to support this. Even if you have a new pc, that doesn't mean it will support this. Research the processor model to be sure.
Jim B
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,257
- Reaction score
- 5
Yep Dan I do remember when backward compatability was touted and prevented MS from moving forward on a lot of things. Really there comes a point where you have to cut the cord on older applications and move to something new, its just the way it is.
The thing i find ironic is when the vista beta's first came out the new file system caused a ton of problems with older applications and MS was beaten down in the press to the point where they removed it and stuck with the older NTFS file system, yet when Apple went to the intel processor and chipset they stopped all support for older 68x and power pc apps in one fell swoop and they were praised for it.
Tex, your "mid range" 17" windows laptop vs a mac laptop isnt even a fair comparison. Operating system aside look at the hardware between the two and you will understand where the cost difference comes in. A 17" macbook pro is a superior piece compared to a mid ranged HP or a dell. You need to step up into the high end models in those brands to get comparable hardware and even then i personally dont think you can compare the two. The apple product is still better built and say in the instance of a loaded dell XPS price competitive. For me personally a Mac Book pro is the only laptop for me. I run both windoes and OS X on mine and it works fantastic with both. From a benchmark/speed comparison its faster running windows then my brand new T400 lenovo is from work by a good margin and its over a year and a half old. Apple flat out makes a quality peice.
From an OS standpoint you can argue it any way you want but short of a few admin tools i run on a day to day basis i havent found much i can do on a Windows box that i cant do on a Mac. From a IT network administrator standpoint control over the users is the biggest adgantage Microsoft has at this point(and its a huge one) whish is why in an enterprise they make the most sense. For small business the gap is a lot narrower.
btw Windwes 7 isnt really all that new. Its the same underpinnings as Vista with a new interface and a few new features. They also tweaked the driver model to be more tolerent of older hardware which was an issue with Vista.
The thing i find ironic is when the vista beta's first came out the new file system caused a ton of problems with older applications and MS was beaten down in the press to the point where they removed it and stuck with the older NTFS file system, yet when Apple went to the intel processor and chipset they stopped all support for older 68x and power pc apps in one fell swoop and they were praised for it.
Tex, your "mid range" 17" windows laptop vs a mac laptop isnt even a fair comparison. Operating system aside look at the hardware between the two and you will understand where the cost difference comes in. A 17" macbook pro is a superior piece compared to a mid ranged HP or a dell. You need to step up into the high end models in those brands to get comparable hardware and even then i personally dont think you can compare the two. The apple product is still better built and say in the instance of a loaded dell XPS price competitive. For me personally a Mac Book pro is the only laptop for me. I run both windoes and OS X on mine and it works fantastic with both. From a benchmark/speed comparison its faster running windows then my brand new T400 lenovo is from work by a good margin and its over a year and a half old. Apple flat out makes a quality peice.
From an OS standpoint you can argue it any way you want but short of a few admin tools i run on a day to day basis i havent found much i can do on a Windows box that i cant do on a Mac. From a IT network administrator standpoint control over the users is the biggest adgantage Microsoft has at this point(and its a huge one) whish is why in an enterprise they make the most sense. For small business the gap is a lot narrower.
btw Windwes 7 isnt really all that new. Its the same underpinnings as Vista with a new interface and a few new features. They also tweaked the driver model to be more tolerent of older hardware which was an issue with Vista.
Texas Transplant
Well-Known Member
Jim,
I can't argue your points directly, but I'll give you this from an end user perspective.
The VAST Majority of users that buy laptops, need to run:
IE or Mozilla or to surf the web.
Need to run Office or Open Office.org
May need to run some other middle of the road apps and some entertainment.
Most of us do not need to spend the extra $$$ to run development platforms or have all that 'power'.
Anyone that is happy with their Apple products, should certainly keep buying them and enjoying them. However, the verdict long ago was in on what platform 95+% of the world works off of - it's a PC, not a Mac (no offense to our NTOWS MAC, and I was generous on the 95% figure, likely far closer to 97-98%.
Tex (I am a PC).
I can't argue your points directly, but I'll give you this from an end user perspective.
The VAST Majority of users that buy laptops, need to run:
IE or Mozilla or to surf the web.
Need to run Office or Open Office.org
May need to run some other middle of the road apps and some entertainment.
Most of us do not need to spend the extra $$$ to run development platforms or have all that 'power'.
Anyone that is happy with their Apple products, should certainly keep buying them and enjoying them. However, the verdict long ago was in on what platform 95+% of the world works off of - it's a PC, not a Mac (no offense to our NTOWS MAC, and I was generous on the 95% figure, likely far closer to 97-98%.
Tex (I am a PC).
Jim B
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,257
- Reaction score
- 5
Tex, im not sure where you got your numbers from but right now apple has ~10% of the market and growing. One of the biggest reasons that windows is so ubiquitous is that it will run on just about anything. That does come with his share of problems from a driver persoective and stability perspective. Apple on the other hand decided to marry the hardware and the os together from the start. Sure it has hurt them market share wise(since they decided not to build el-cheapo hardware) but the user experience is far better then on any windows machine, it just works and that was apples focus. Had they decided to just market the OS i would bet that there would be a lot more of it out there. Since the switch to Intel on the macs a lot of people and some companies have started building "hackintosh" computers. Sure its not exactly legal per the EULA of the OS but there is a market for it.
Personally when it comes to a laptop i want something thats built well, is somewhat light and slim with good battery life with reasonable performance. HP, DEll, Toshiba etc dont build one in that mid range price point that satisfies those requirements. They are built generally flimsy and cheap. They are all big, bukly and built from flimsy plastic. For me to get a machine thats what i would consider on par with my 15" Macbook in size, etc i would need to buy something like a Lenovo t400s which with the same amount of memory and hdd space is actually more expensive then what an equivilent macbook would cost. For what i do with my macbook its not a "power" thing, just about anything out there will do what i want. Its a quality thing, quality is platform independent. The fact that it run's OS X and is very speedy doing it is a bonus. I dont want a cheap flimsy peice of junk and thats what most comsumer and business laptops are these days. I carried a dell latitude 630 which is a much better machine then any of thier home stuff is and it fell apart in 7 months. Its not thats its getting abused either, they just arent built well(i fix them every day in my opinion they are garbage). It went in the same bag that my macbook goes in every day and makes the same walk to the train station and to my truck. I personally want something that will last more then a couple of years. My last macbook was 6 years old when i gave it to my nephew and its still as solid as it was the day i got it.
I dont have anything against Windows, i use it and i make my living supporting it every day. I prefer OS X for a host of reasons first and foremost everything just works. It rarely crashes, its intuitive, software operates seamlessly, i dont get loaded with malware and viruses etc. Its not perfect but its a much more solid OS then Windows by far.
Personally when it comes to a laptop i want something thats built well, is somewhat light and slim with good battery life with reasonable performance. HP, DEll, Toshiba etc dont build one in that mid range price point that satisfies those requirements. They are built generally flimsy and cheap. They are all big, bukly and built from flimsy plastic. For me to get a machine thats what i would consider on par with my 15" Macbook in size, etc i would need to buy something like a Lenovo t400s which with the same amount of memory and hdd space is actually more expensive then what an equivilent macbook would cost. For what i do with my macbook its not a "power" thing, just about anything out there will do what i want. Its a quality thing, quality is platform independent. The fact that it run's OS X and is very speedy doing it is a bonus. I dont want a cheap flimsy peice of junk and thats what most comsumer and business laptops are these days. I carried a dell latitude 630 which is a much better machine then any of thier home stuff is and it fell apart in 7 months. Its not thats its getting abused either, they just arent built well(i fix them every day in my opinion they are garbage). It went in the same bag that my macbook goes in every day and makes the same walk to the train station and to my truck. I personally want something that will last more then a couple of years. My last macbook was 6 years old when i gave it to my nephew and its still as solid as it was the day i got it.
I dont have anything against Windows, i use it and i make my living supporting it every day. I prefer OS X for a host of reasons first and foremost everything just works. It rarely crashes, its intuitive, software operates seamlessly, i dont get loaded with malware and viruses etc. Its not perfect but its a much more solid OS then Windows by far.
Jimmy Easterling
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 645
- Reaction score
- 0
I have never talked to a Mac user that doesn't think a Mac is superior to all other makes of computers. I currently have 5 laptop computers, a couple of the older IBMs and 3 newer Lenovos and have never had one to "fall apart", and yes they move around. Mac is just a different animal than the rest. I don't know if Mac makes a "cheap reasonably priced" machine that the common person can afford but everyone else does. Jim, you are the first Mac person I have heard that will admit that a Mac even crashes and Mac's don't have the problem with viruses and such because there aren't enough Mac's for the virus writing nuts to bother with, yet. But their time is coming, Mac is gaining popularity, mostly with the younger generation, and when there are enough they will have the same problems. And if Mac wants a bigger piece of the pie they too will have to start making an affordable machine. You can buy a full feature, cheap IBM compatable machine for under $400 and the little mini's for under $200. I think what Tex was saying is that dollar for dollar if you want a laptop that will do everything that most people want it to do, you can spend around $700 and have a jam up laptop. I am not attacking Mac, it's like someone said about bass boats, if it gets you on the water and gives you the opportunity to catch fish, they are all good, same with computers. My oldest son is a Mac user and we just agree not to discuss which is better.
Back to the original post, Windows 7, I refused to move to Vista because I didn't want to have to give up my old programs nor did I want to have to learn a new OS, for the same reason I went from Win 98 to XP, and glad that I did. I am sure I will feel the same way about 7 when I learn how to make it like I want it. Learning something new is always a pain in the down below.
Back to the original post, Windows 7, I refused to move to Vista because I didn't want to have to give up my old programs nor did I want to have to learn a new OS, for the same reason I went from Win 98 to XP, and glad that I did. I am sure I will feel the same way about 7 when I learn how to make it like I want it. Learning something new is always a pain in the down below.
Texas Transplant
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I'm waiting awhile on moving to Win 7 for several reasons. Right now, most everything on my machine is working pretty good, and not sure at all if I want to go through the hassle. But I certainly will want to move to Win 7 sometime next year (likely), as moving one level is always better than moving two levels.
Looked up some info on Win 7 today, and one of the things it said was that if you are on XP, plan on starting from scratch and reloading your 'documents' and programs. Can't 'upgrade' from XP to Win7 directly and keep your 'stuff' (based upon others information and not personal experience).
Tex
Looked up some info on Win 7 today, and one of the things it said was that if you are on XP, plan on starting from scratch and reloading your 'documents' and programs. Can't 'upgrade' from XP to Win7 directly and keep your 'stuff' (based upon others information and not personal experience).
Tex
robert e morgan
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
dont expect the free iupgrade for newer comps to come easy . iv been trying for a month . :wacko:
I've been on Windows 7 starter edition for a few weeks and I like it so far. I just upgraded to the W7 Premium edition today so I can't speak for that yet. I was responsible for my old job's upgrade to Vista and I hated it. I left all my personal stuff on XP. I hope W7 is a much better edition.
