Friday 22 May 2009

Windows 7

Most reports coming in about Windows 7 are that it is fast, shiny, and everything that Vista should have been. Microsoft, I'm sure, would rather you not compare it to Vista, but the comparison is inevitable. With the short time between these major Windows version releases and the striking similarity between Vista and Windows 7, how can we be expected not to do so? Besides, every version of Windows has the previous version as its benchmark.

Windows 7 must achieve in a couple of areas where Vista failed: the netbook market (processor, memory and hard drive demands must be lower than ever) and in business. It seems they've succeeded in the former goal, but who knows whether businesses will adopt it? Eventually they may have little choice.

I've seen a complaint that Windows 7 will cost more, but for most people the cost of Windows is buried in their new computer purchase - all they see is that computer prices keep going up. Now, if Windows 7 adds $300 to the cost of a netbook (when placed against a Linux or even XP machine) someone should perk up and say "why pay more?". For a netbook, when you're trying to run web browsing, photos and maybe a movie, Linux is better. It's the lack of MS Office that will throw most people.



Mokalus of Borg

PS - Few people try to run just a web browser on their netbooks.
PPS - I haven't seen a netbook running Windows 7 previews yet.

No comments: