Windows 7 on your cab?

[Lilwolf]

I'm reading that windows 7 is amazing on older computers (netbooks ect).  With faster boot times and faster execution then xp and way way better then vista.

Anyone try it?  I know it expires soon, but thought it might be a great addition.

[Dazz]

I've been running it since Friday on my main computer and haven't really had any problems with it...  I don't think I would put it on my cabinet full time just yet though.

[richms]

I have installed it on my old ide hdd on my desktop computer, booted into it and had a play.

Would have to reinstall all my apps to use it day to day but it seems a bit more responsive then my vista install I normally use, but I am sure that a new vista install would also be more responsive so its not really proving anything. Sadly the CD i was given was only the 32 bit one which sucks.

I dont like the new taskbar replacement, seems to group windows when there is plenty of space for more to be beside them, vs what has being the norm since forever with them only grouping when the bar was full.

Was thinking I will get the 64 bit one and try it on the PC I am building to replace my old shuttle to go in my rebuilt cab soon, but am worried about getting 15kHz working in it, I never got that working on the onboard geforce 4 of the shuttle so just left a woefully undersized 21" monitor in it with a ghetto cardboard surround, will be having a 29" tv in it (27" for you americans) and will need 15kHz to feed it with via the scart on it, if I cant get that out of win 7 then there is no point.

[daywane]

I was just going to post a question about windos 7
but found your post.
I was about to download it but I see I do not have enough ram.
need 1 gig of ram. I have 512
I just wanted to know if anyone here has tried it.
I got rid of Vist and upgraded back to XP Pro

[Red]

So, is this Windows 7 a replacement for Windows Vista?  If so, why has Microsoft already given up on Vista?

I never ran Vista because of so many complaints.  Hopefully Windows 7 will work more like XP, especially for older software. 

Does anyone know if Windows 7 will have better compatiability with older software versus Vista?

[Dazz]

So, is this Windows 7 a replacement for Windows Vista?  If so, why has Microsoft already given up on Vista?

I never ran Vista because of so many complaints.  Hopefully Windows 7 will work more like XP, especially for older software. 

Does anyone know if Windows 7 will have better compatiability with older software versus Vista?

Win 7 is the next version of Windows... It isn't a replacement for Vista as they haven't given up on it.  However, with that said I've been running Vista 64 for a long while and have never had any issues with it on my desktop, but having 8gb of ram might help.  I have formatted my desktop and have been running Win 7 full time without any issues, but a couple software incompatibilities.

I think most people that ---smurfette--- about Vista just haven't tried it.  It does have a much larger memory footprint than XP, but I've enjoyed it.  I will not run Vista on my arcade cabinet because I only have 2gb of memory on it, and I will not risk my cabinet software, emulators, roms, image and over 2tb of stuff to run an beta OS on.  I have tested HyperSpin using Win 7 and have not had any issues, but I have not tested many other emulators.  Even though I liked Vista 64, I will definitely be making the move to Win 7.

[rovingmind]

I tried Vista,  Didn't like it. 

I'll give 7 a try, last thing i tried and liked was ubuntu but i havn't gone past using live cds with it.  to many xp based programs on my systems i need.

[sWampy]

I'm sure it will be overpriced like vista, it's insane that they want $200 for a os these days when you can pick up dual core dual cpu machines for $400.    $99 for windows was insane in the days when desktops cost $2000, $200 is just beyond belief.

[Red]

What's the ETA on Windows 7?  It seems like Vista was just released and from the sound of it, it doesn't seem like Vista is going to have the long life that XP had.

What makes Windows 7 so different from Vista?

[u_rebelscum]

What's the ETA on Windows 7?  It seems like Vista was just released and from the sound of it, it doesn't seem like Vista is going to have the long life that XP had.

Microsoft is not saying the exact date when windows 7 will be released, but from what I've read, I'd guess Jan-Apr 2010, or Aug-Sep 2009.  (More likely IMO, beta 2 will be Aug 2009, and the final release to public after the holiday seasons).  If it's Jan 2010, that's three years after Vista (Jan 2007).  XP was released, Oct 2001, and that 5 & a half years was usually called "too long" between versions.

What makes Windows 7 so different from Vista?

Not too much or everything, depending who you listen to; either way it's slanted, it's being called what Vista chould have been.

[daywane]

vista on a 32 bit machine was junk.
I rank it with window ME

News channel was talking to microsoft 2 days ago.
windows 7 is expected to be out in 13 months

I do not think it will be any better on a 32 bit PC than Vista is

[Zero_Hour]

Short answer to the original post - I can't think of a single compelling reason to put Windows 7 on a cab.

I've used Vista since Beta 2, and am now mucking about with Windows 7. I do intend to do a little benchmarking, but haven't had the time to do so yet. My totally unscientific observations thus far - Windows 7 definitely seems to do better overall with how it handles resources, which is to say it isn't a hog. It boots a bit faster than Vista for sure. I like the tweaks they've made to the User Interface, though none of them are particularly groundbreaking. If you're going to bother messing with it, at least dive in and use the 64bit version so you can enjoy 64bit MAME (Which rocks by the way). I wouldn't put it on a cab just yet, seeing as how there have already been some nasty bugs discovered (it was damaging MP3files when played, but a patch is available), but then you wouldn't put data you didn't have a backup of on a beta OS now, would you? 

As for why MS is so quick to be putting Win7 out the door ASAP? Corporate users have generally been loathe to adopt Vista, which has definitely not been good for the bottom line.

And as for Vista being so expensive? I paid under $140 each for both copies of Vista Ultimate I've purchased. OEM copies can be had easily, and are much less expensive than retail boxes. That's in the neighborhood of What Apple charges for OS X. Which reminds me, Windows 7 runs pretty nicely virtualized on my Macbook Pro at work too.

[sWampy]

And as for Vista being so expensive? I paid under $140 each for both copies of Vista Ultimate I've purchased. OEM copies can be had easily, and are much less expensive than retail boxes. That's in the neighborhood of What Apple charges for OS X. Which reminds me, Windows 7 runs pretty nicely virtualized on my Macbook Pro at work too.

But according to microsoft it's illegal to buy the oem version unless you are buying it with a new machine.   There is a hell of a difference between paying $140 to run osx on a $2500 macbook pro than paying microsoft $140 to run windows on a $400 e-machine. 

[rovingmind]

But according to microsoft it's illegal to buy the oem version unless you are buying it with a new machine.   There is a hell of a difference between paying $140 to run osx on a $2500 macbook pro than paying microsoft $140 to run windows on a $400 e-machine. 

Thats an old argument.  If its an oem copy being sold private, usually a piece of the original computer is sent along with.  Of course, thats why microsoft has gone to having the software itself register every piece of hardware in your computer.  They use a points system for how many things can be changed before the software invalidates itself. 

[Zero_Hour]

But according to microsoft it's illegal to buy the oem version unless you are buying it with a new machine.   There is a hell of a difference between paying $140 to run osx on a $2500 macbook pro than paying microsoft $140 to run windows on a $400 e-machine. 

Well, MS has never given me any grief when I go to activate their products, and it's not difficult to find the OEM stuff on NewEgg, and similar retailers.
For me, there is no difference in that $140 regardless of what you install it on. Gasoline costs the same whether you put it in a Kia or a Ferarri.  If cost is that big a factor, Linux + Wine might save you some $, but might also cost you some aggravation.
Personally If I bought a $400 PC, I wouldn't have any expectations of ever upgrading the OS that came preinstalled on it, but that's just me.

[sWampy]

It just gets me how companies like this and the music/movie industry has brainwashed the public.   20 years ago, they would have been laughed out of every court in the land,  made fun by every magazine on the planet if software/music/movie industry had tried to tell people they can't resell something they have bought, now it seem it's ingrained in everyone's head, and they accept it as norm.   It reminds me of the old experiment where you throw a frog in a pot of boiling water and watch it jump out.   You take the same frog put it in a room temperature pot of water, and turn on the heat, it sits until it's dinner.   I'm scared the same thing is happening to us on a huge scale.  

[sWampy]

But according to microsoft it's illegal to buy the oem version unless you are buying it with a new machine.   There is a hell of a difference between paying $140 to run osx on a $2500 macbook pro than paying microsoft $140 to run windows on a $400 e-machine. 

Well, MS has never given me any grief when I go to activate their products, and it's not difficult to find the OEM stuff on NewEgg, and similar retailers.
For me, there is no difference in that $140 regardless of what you install it on. Gasoline costs the same whether you put it in a Kia or a Ferarri.  If cost is that big a factor, Linux + Wine might save you some $, but might also cost you some aggravation.
Personally If I bought a $400 PC, I wouldn't have any expectations of ever upgrading the OS that came preinstalled on it, but that's just me.

You can't understand the difference between paying 5% of the total cost of a computer system for the os and paying 35% of the cost for the os?  Why do people put up with paying them $150 or whatever for windows in this country when in other nations they charge a fraction of that.

[Dazz]

Honestly, I think if MS charged $50-75 per license they would make a killing...  There is no reason to charge $200+.  Then they could justify charging $10-20 if you need to re-activate it after a specific number.  I personally would end up purchasing it for a more reasonable price opposed to cracking/hacking it.