Windows 7 will only run 3 applications at once

[Impulsivity]

Cueil said:

Impulsivity said:
I made the mistake of giving MS money for Vista once, buying an OEM copy of Ultimate, and will never, ever make that mistake again. This endless crap where they provide the worst possible version of the OS with horrid functionality and stupid limits then ask for 200 dollars to get the "full" version of the OS after you already have all your stuff on the PC is just insane. Why should Home Basic limit you to just a few GBs of RAM and less processors then your computer has? Why should you not be able to secure your information with something like bitlocker unless you buy the 300+ dollar version of the OS? Why should the OS be the most expensive part of your computer even if you are making a high end machine (retail i7 processor 300 dollars, retail 285 high end NVIDIA card, 300 dollars, High end intel motherboard? 300 dollars, Vista Ultimate? Almost 400 bucks!)?

Some have derided the OSX model which is basically you pay 99 bucks every few years for the new version (which is always the full featured version, the equivalent to ultimate) and you can install it with no activation, no genuine checks none of that. Not only that but with one retail version you can install on 5 macs with no problem (if you just split it with 5 other mac users thats 20 bucks per upgrade) and they don't harass you or make you call a number and get a code if you try to reinstall the OS. It's just so seamless and easy I don't know how in the world so many can defend the alternative. As a bonus the iwork suite with almost all the functions of Office (including Keynote which is VASTLY superior to powerpoint) costs 49 bucks vs what? 500+ bucks for Office?

Microsoft is greedy and enforces their standards through pointless gimmicks (like the nearly free but useless basic versions of their OS to bilk money out later) and inferior proprietary standards they force on partners like .net (an inferior Java) and direct X (an inferior open GL).

This starter edition on the PC you buy seems to be about the same as a mob guy coming to your store and saying "wow all your stuff here sure looks nice, I'm sure you'd like to keep it that way for 200 bucks."

As a final thing for all those saying Windows 7 is the second coming it IS vista. It is virtually identical in every way, it is Vista SP 2 with a different name. It ripped off the OSX dock, installs a little faster and doesn't include those crappy Microsoft ilife like programs but other then that its the same OS. Same control panel, same underpinnings, same drivers, same everything. It is 96% the same OS just like from XP SP1 to XP SP2 only 4% changed. The difference is they're going to AGAIN ask for 400 dollars to upgrade Vista SP1 ultimate to "Windows 7" also known as SP2. It should be offered free to those idiots who bought Vista like me, or at the very least for a cheap upgrade price (say 99 dollars for 5 machines).

 

 Are you retarded?  Windows 7 is an entirely new Kernal.  Just because the front end resembles Vista doesn't make it Vista... just like my Firefox looks just like my IE 8.0 doesn't make it IE.  And calling Direct X inferior to the defunct OpenGL is insane.  If it wasn't for Direct X you'd still be manually installing every f'n driver like you were using NT 4.0.  As for the RAM limit... I seriouslly doubt anyone who goes out an buys a PC with Vista Home is going to have more than 4 gigs of ram.  As and end note... Vista Ultimate was for enthusiest who wanted all the benefits of Home Professional and the Enterprise version in one... you don't need all the stuff unless you work at home and use your system for entertainment to.

 

   Hard to say Open GL is defunct when more then 70% of software sold uses it (a good number of PC games still, all mac games, all Linux games, every game for all Nintendo and Sony systems).  The 30% (xbox games and most windows only games) that use direct X seem to be pretty heavily in the minority.  It's like talking about the defunct Flash now that Silverlight is out without anything near a plurality of the market.  I never even had to know what a sound or video driver was running games on the entirely Open GL mac until I installed Windows on my mac in 2005.  Everything just worked with absolutely no issues (as still is the case with mac versions of games like Call of Duty 4, Spore or World of Warcraft).  Almost everything runs on Open GL, Windows games and the Xbox are the exception not the rule.

   As to the Kernel http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2008/05/ms-no-new-kernel-for-windows-7-same-requirements-as-vista.ars the headline of that article from arstechnica is "MS No New Kernel for Windows 7" which seems pretty straight forward.

   As to the arguement that noone with home has more then 4 Gigs of RAM anyway, why should it cost 400 dollars (Ultimate retail price) to get an OS that can address 200 dollars in RAM (6 high speed 2GB DIMs)?  Why should it cost as much if not more to buy a more expensive version of windows due to artificial locks then it does to actually upgrade the hardware?  That Ultimate should cost more then a quad core processor and 12 gigs of RAM (which, if you pay retail on both, it does) is pretty innane. 

   It also ensures that you don't have easy scalability without paying through the nose.  I remember two years ago when 4GBs was a lot, now most computers (even notebooks) come with 2GBs standard if they're cheap and 4GBs if they're mid range or higher.  Does anyone think that in another 2 years 8GBs or 12GBs won't be the new standard?  why should someone be forced to pay again for the same OS just because their hardware has evolved?  If you pay 99 dollars for OSX it doesn't care if you have 1 core of 16, it will use them all without complaint or ransom, ditto for RAM.  That MS uses hardware improvements to extort money from end users is sickening just like the high way robery that is 150+ dollars for a 120GB hard drive on the Xbox.  I paid 120 dollars for my last hard drive and it had 1.5 TBs of space, last year 120 dollars got me a 500GB drive for my PS3 from segate. 

They get you in with a cheap opening option and then try to screw you into paying huge multi hundred dollar upgrade fees at every turn, thats the MS way and it seems with Windows 7 nothing has changed.  More power to the community in emulating direct X  and .net (wine, to make games and programs that are "windows only" work on other Unix platforms) and even directly pirating more advanced versions of Windows for those who got saddled with a cheap version on whatever computer they bought.