News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by jwells89 on Tuesday July 11, 2023 @12:43PM (#36683564)
I was fond of many of the third party visual styles that used to be available for XP and 7. They brought visual flair and personalization while maintaining a level of contrast and legibility as good as that of the Classic theme or better and leaving padding/margins/whitespace in tact.
Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by mickelsen on Tuesday July 11, 2023 @08:25PM (#36688946)
Definitely, Windows 7 not only used fewer resources than Vista but also had its upgraded UI with good scaling and smooth fonts, plus a better taskbar and clever window management extras, like snapping. The overall experience was less annoying as third party software had already adapted to the new user permissions system and other quirks over the years.

After 7, I switched to Mac, and even after all these years, I still have fond memories of that OS. Every time I tried a new Windows version, they seemed to have gone downhill.

Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by ChuckNorris89 on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @12:36AM (#36690519)
>Windows 7 not only used fewer resources than Vista

Windows 7 didn't use less resources than Vista, it was virtually the same, it's just that PCs have gotten miles faster in the timespan between Vista and 7 and people thought it was the OS that improved.

7 was not that much different from Vista, the problem was that When Vista launched, most people still had Windows 9/XP level hardware and that's what most PC retailers were still selling as well, while Vista demanded more as it was a complete overhaul from Windows XP/9.

7 didn't improve much performance wise, it's just that by that time people had already upgraded to much better hardware and they felt a performance improvement.

By most metrics, 7 was basically a Vista Service Pack, renamed to distance itself from the bad press Vista got, but it was more or less Vista under the hood.

Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by atesti on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @01:39AM (#36690819)
I think Windows 7 did actually use ressources better than Vista. I remember two things: 1. Vista removed all hw acceleration from GDI, Windows 7 brought some back 2. Windows Search really slowed down Vista computers, but in Windows 7 they tuned it so that it used less ressources or had lower priority for IO.

For me that made a huge difference, with Vista I had to always stop the search service

Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by mickelsen on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @01:50AM (#36690874)
Sure, I give you that, technology did progress for what Vista was quite of a jump in requirements for little extra function at the time. And yes, 7 was a small revision.

But still... assuming a decent non-launchdate machine (1GB RAM, Geforce 6200), Windows 7 was more performant overall on the same hardware, and this was never 'fixed' on Vista's codebase over time. You can pretty much notice the small but important optimizations in the search service (faster, less lag), resizing explorer windows (less redraws), less scheduled services running, user account control alerts weren't as obtrusive. Sure, you wouldn't get extra fps on your favorite game, but those quality of life improvements really did show on daily usage.

Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by citizen-stig on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @03:27AM (#36691411)
I had a new laptop somewhere around 2006. Vista was lagging and throwing errors constantly. I switched to beta of windows 7 and it was waay snappier and stable. On the same hardware.
Re:Windows 9x and Word 9x at 800x600 resolution. Spacious. C... by ChuckNorris89 on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @03:31AM (#36691440)
Maybe your vista install was messed up. Did you compare fresh vista vs fresh 7 for this?