Is Windows 7 Worth the Upgrade?
By Carol Kopp Nov 18, 2009 2:00 pm
A non-techy’s guide to the new Microsoft operating system.
This is a software review by a person who has never read a software review. Like many reasonable people, I don’t give a hoot what’s inside my computer, my car, or my toaster as long as it doesn’t cause that device, vehicle, or appliance to blow up in my face.
And the question I now ask myself, as any reasonable person must, is whether it’s a good idea to upgrade a computer to Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows 7, or buy a new computer with Windows 7 installed on it. Or will it blow up in my face?
That’s not a question anyone should have to ask, but it’s unavoidable after the scathing reviews for Microsoft’s previous release, Vista.
In case this paragraph is as far as you’re willing to go in an article about software, here’s the short answer:
If you’re still using Windows XP, you’ll like Windows 7 much better. And if you’re using XP, it’s a good guess that your computer is pretty old, so you need to consider whether to upgrade or buy a new one with Windows 7 installed on it.
If you’re already using Vista, going to Windows 7 won’t change your life, but it also won’t make you crazy, and techy sources say it won’t blow up in your face.
Here’s a short breakdown of things to consider, depending on what you now use.
If you’re still using XP:
The Windows Vista launch was greeted with such a loud Bronx cheer that many people hunkered down with Windows XP, the version of the operating system that's been around practically since the Stone Age, or more precisely since 2001.
If you’re still using XP, you’re in for a pleasant surprise when you upgrade, as you must eventually, unless you’re keeping your old computer long enough for the Smithsonian to beg you to donate it.
Compared with XP, Windows 7 is fluid, non-intrusive, and elegant. It’s easy to use but not dumbed down with gimmicks like that creepy talking paper clip that pops up in your Word document to ask if you need help. It stays out of the way while you concentrate on the thing you’re trying to do, but lets you move easily among applications, documents, or functions.
And that sounds like a good definition of a graphical user interface for an operating system, even if it took Microsoft about 24 years to get there.
It also has a modern sensibility. The look and feel is suggestive of touch-screen technology, although, of course, it functions in the no-nonsense mouse and keyboard world. (Touch-screen functions are available in some versions of Windows 7, for use with some monitors).
And, of course, Windows 7 is built to facilitate uses -- like playing with images and watching videos -- that came of age after XP was created.
I’ve been using Vista with no real problems since shortly after its release, so I couldn’t quite figure out why it's so widely loathed.
I asked Kevin P., a knowledgeable young man who works at a Best Buy (BBY) store near me. He explained the problem: Once the initial bugs were worked out, Vista worked fine for those who got it, as I did, with a new and fairly powerful computer.
But it was a big fat pig.
If you tried to upgrade to it, and your computer wasn’t powerful enough, you were in trouble. If it ran at all, it ran slowly and it often froze. It wouldn’t even run a lot of software that was older, meaning about 10 minutes old. Using it on most laptops was hopeless.
But two things have changed since January 2007, when Vista was introduced.
First, desktop computers at the affordable end of the price range got more powerful and faster, as did laptops. This is about gigabytes and memory, and dual-core processors, and you need to find your own Kevin P. to hash out what you need for what you do.
Second, Microsoft got to work on Windows 7, which was, although nobody at the company will admit it, mostly about fixing things that made people crazy about Windows Vista.
If you’re already using Vista:
If you’re using Vista now, it must not have wrecked your computer, and it’s hard to see any one aspect of Windows 7 that would make upgrading an urgent necessity.
Many reviewers are praising cool new functions like “snap,” “peek” and “shake,” all ways to move stuff around on your desktop. It seems overly analytical to explain them. They’re just part of the package, and it’s high praise to say that you’ll just use them every day without giving a single thought to them.
Which is how an operating system should work.
If you’re just thinking about it:
If you’re using XP or Vista, you can upgrade to the “Home Premium” version of Windows 7 for $119.99. Microsoft has a list of system requirements online, or you can download a file that scans your computer to determine if it’s worthy.
Then again, computers that come with Windows 7 and are plenty powerful enough for most users are available at attractive prices: The HP Pavilion series from Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) starts at about $450. The Inspiron Desktop with Windows 7 from Dell (DELL) starts at about $458. Sony (SNE) has an all-in-one VAIO for about $850.
And the question I now ask myself, as any reasonable person must, is whether it’s a good idea to upgrade a computer to Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows 7, or buy a new computer with Windows 7 installed on it. Or will it blow up in my face?
That’s not a question anyone should have to ask, but it’s unavoidable after the scathing reviews for Microsoft’s previous release, Vista.
In case this paragraph is as far as you’re willing to go in an article about software, here’s the short answer:
If you’re still using Windows XP, you’ll like Windows 7 much better. And if you’re using XP, it’s a good guess that your computer is pretty old, so you need to consider whether to upgrade or buy a new one with Windows 7 installed on it.
If you’re already using Vista, going to Windows 7 won’t change your life, but it also won’t make you crazy, and techy sources say it won’t blow up in your face.
Here’s a short breakdown of things to consider, depending on what you now use.
If you’re still using XP:
The Windows Vista launch was greeted with such a loud Bronx cheer that many people hunkered down with Windows XP, the version of the operating system that's been around practically since the Stone Age, or more precisely since 2001.
If you’re still using XP, you’re in for a pleasant surprise when you upgrade, as you must eventually, unless you’re keeping your old computer long enough for the Smithsonian to beg you to donate it.
Compared with XP, Windows 7 is fluid, non-intrusive, and elegant. It’s easy to use but not dumbed down with gimmicks like that creepy talking paper clip that pops up in your Word document to ask if you need help. It stays out of the way while you concentrate on the thing you’re trying to do, but lets you move easily among applications, documents, or functions.
And that sounds like a good definition of a graphical user interface for an operating system, even if it took Microsoft about 24 years to get there.
It also has a modern sensibility. The look and feel is suggestive of touch-screen technology, although, of course, it functions in the no-nonsense mouse and keyboard world. (Touch-screen functions are available in some versions of Windows 7, for use with some monitors).
And, of course, Windows 7 is built to facilitate uses -- like playing with images and watching videos -- that came of age after XP was created.
I’ve been using Vista with no real problems since shortly after its release, so I couldn’t quite figure out why it's so widely loathed.
I asked Kevin P., a knowledgeable young man who works at a Best Buy (BBY) store near me. He explained the problem: Once the initial bugs were worked out, Vista worked fine for those who got it, as I did, with a new and fairly powerful computer.
But it was a big fat pig.
If you tried to upgrade to it, and your computer wasn’t powerful enough, you were in trouble. If it ran at all, it ran slowly and it often froze. It wouldn’t even run a lot of software that was older, meaning about 10 minutes old. Using it on most laptops was hopeless.
But two things have changed since January 2007, when Vista was introduced.
First, desktop computers at the affordable end of the price range got more powerful and faster, as did laptops. This is about gigabytes and memory, and dual-core processors, and you need to find your own Kevin P. to hash out what you need for what you do.
Second, Microsoft got to work on Windows 7, which was, although nobody at the company will admit it, mostly about fixing things that made people crazy about Windows Vista.
If you’re already using Vista:
If you’re using Vista now, it must not have wrecked your computer, and it’s hard to see any one aspect of Windows 7 that would make upgrading an urgent necessity.
Many reviewers are praising cool new functions like “snap,” “peek” and “shake,” all ways to move stuff around on your desktop. It seems overly analytical to explain them. They’re just part of the package, and it’s high praise to say that you’ll just use them every day without giving a single thought to them.
Which is how an operating system should work.
If you’re just thinking about it:
If you’re using XP or Vista, you can upgrade to the “Home Premium” version of Windows 7 for $119.99. Microsoft has a list of system requirements online, or you can download a file that scans your computer to determine if it’s worthy.
Then again, computers that come with Windows 7 and are plenty powerful enough for most users are available at attractive prices: The HP Pavilion series from Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) starts at about $450. The Inspiron Desktop with Windows 7 from Dell (DELL) starts at about $458. Sony (SNE) has an all-in-one VAIO for about $850.
No positions in stocks mentioned.
The information on this website solely reflects the analysis of or opinion about the performance of securities and financial markets by the writers whose articles appear on the site. The views expressed by the writers are not necessarily the views of Minyanville Media, Inc. or members of its management. Nothing contained on the website is intended to constitute a recommendation or advice addressed to an individual investor or category of investors to purchase, sell or hold any security, or to take any action with respect to the prospective movement of the securities markets or to solicit the purchase or sale of any security. Any investment decisions must be made by the reader either individually or in consultation with his or her investment professional. Minyanville writers and staff may trade or hold positions in securities that are discussed in articles appearing on the website. Writers of articles are required to disclose whether they have a position in any stock or fund discussed in an article, but are not permitted to disclose the size or direction of the position. Nothing on this website is intended to solicit business of any kind for a writer's business or fund. Minyanville management and staff as well as contributing writers will not respond to emails or other communications requesting investment advice.
Copyright 2009 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2009 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
(8)
Reply
2009-11-18 14:23:29
It's all about $$...
As a software engineer, I've been using XP for years now and it's a solid as a rock. Why didn't I upgrade to Vista and,now, W7? I prefer to let them work the bugs out first before I venture to a new OS. Another software engineer friend told me that, unless you absolutely have to move to W7, no need to...the differences between the two don't necessarily justify the $$ and the time needed to learn a new OS.
Unfortunately, moving to a new OS is all about $$ these days. The look and feel is surely different but the REAL question that needs to be asked is: does the new, additional W7 'enhancements' produce enough productivity gains to justify the time and $$? For most, the answer is no. If all you're using is MS Office, Quicken, browsing the 'net, or watching movies, why spend the time and $$ when W7 isn't going to make you more productive? Now, unfortunately, most software vendors force you to spend $$ on newer versions of their products by discontinuing support for XP. Inside their programs, they check to see if you're running W7 and, if not, won't let you run the program. It's all about $$...
Unfortunately, moving to a new OS is all about $$ these days. The look and feel is surely different but the REAL question that needs to be asked is: does the new, additional W7 'enhancements' produce enough productivity gains to justify the time and $$? For most, the answer is no. If all you're using is MS Office, Quicken, browsing the 'net, or watching movies, why spend the time and $$ when W7 isn't going to make you more productive? Now, unfortunately, most software vendors force you to spend $$ on newer versions of their products by discontinuing support for XP. Inside their programs, they check to see if you're running W7 and, if not, won't let you run the program. It's all about $$...
2009-11-18 15:43:51
Generally, I don't see any immediate advantage of moving to W7 from XP. Would agree with others that this OS must now be tested in the real world and bugs need to knock out a bit. With the exception of my two Vista machines running at home I don't plan on moving to W7 at this time. Perhaps I'll reconsider after sp1.
I'm a systems developer and active home user. I beta tested W7 on old machines as well as newer machines. Had one issue and that was when, on 9/28/2009, I loaded the beta on my new laptop with a blue-ray player. Appeared to be a driver issue and that was because I used the original 32 bit drivers so can't blame it on W7. Will retry test loading that machine with W7 this weekend as I now have the updated apis.
If you like using the classic menus and options and never used the Vista or XP mode then wait until you have to upgrade. W7 killed most of the old 'classic' code saying they did it for performance. That said, there are already software applications you can buy for W7 that will produce the classic start menu. You'll also have to finagle a bit to get the very functional 'Quick Lauch' back but it isn't displayed as a default. Some things still take more clicking than they should.
As far as W7 security. If you depend on an OS alone to provide you with security you probably deserve what you get. If you install or buy a W7 machine get a good security application or two.
As far as Vista goes, I also have two Vista licenses at home with up to date patches. I would strongly recommend Vista users that can afford the upgrade going for it. W7's performance kills Vista's. If you like the Vista interface you'll like W7 even more.
I'm a systems developer and active home user. I beta tested W7 on old machines as well as newer machines. Had one issue and that was when, on 9/28/2009, I loaded the beta on my new laptop with a blue-ray player. Appeared to be a driver issue and that was because I used the original 32 bit drivers so can't blame it on W7. Will retry test loading that machine with W7 this weekend as I now have the updated apis.
If you like using the classic menus and options and never used the Vista or XP mode then wait until you have to upgrade. W7 killed most of the old 'classic' code saying they did it for performance. That said, there are already software applications you can buy for W7 that will produce the classic start menu. You'll also have to finagle a bit to get the very functional 'Quick Lauch' back but it isn't displayed as a default. Some things still take more clicking than they should.
As far as W7 security. If you depend on an OS alone to provide you with security you probably deserve what you get. If you install or buy a W7 machine get a good security application or two.
As far as Vista goes, I also have two Vista licenses at home with up to date patches. I would strongly recommend Vista users that can afford the upgrade going for it. W7's performance kills Vista's. If you like the Vista interface you'll like W7 even more.
2009-11-18 15:50:35
No way the upgrade is worth it
I have computers with XP, Vista, and Win 7. If you need a new computer, it is going to come with Windows 7, so you haven't got a choice. If you have a computer with Win2K or later, Windows 7 isn't much of an improvement. People buy a drill because they want holes, and people buy Windows because they want to run Windows applications. If you currently use a lot of Windows applications, WinXP is far and away the best choice because it runs more of them than Win 7 does.
2009-11-18 16:20:23
Windows
And I would like to add.... I have just been working on an old Pentium compute with 32Mb RAM that has Win95 on it!!
Why? Because later programs wouldn't do what I wanted and no matter what I did, the program wouldn't run on Win 2000 or XP, so I still run that computer every 3 months to use that program!
I have a laptop that is from the 2001 time I think it was... it has been dropped, sat on and various other things, but it still works, I leave it switched on for hours and it is still okay... a bit clunky and you can't be in a hurry to do things... but it serves the purpose I want.
It has XP on it.
BTW the Pentium isn't that slow at all really... it has been cleaned up and hasn't got all the clogging stuff that slows computers down after a lot of use and installing/unistalling etc.
I have a quad core now as well but that is getting on a bit, don't really see why I should upgrade the OS as I don't want to give more money to microdahrlerrrs company
If it works why bother to upgrade, the companies are only trying to get you to spend money on stuff you don't want and don't need.
Why? Because later programs wouldn't do what I wanted and no matter what I did, the program wouldn't run on Win 2000 or XP, so I still run that computer every 3 months to use that program!
I have a laptop that is from the 2001 time I think it was... it has been dropped, sat on and various other things, but it still works, I leave it switched on for hours and it is still okay... a bit clunky and you can't be in a hurry to do things... but it serves the purpose I want.
It has XP on it.
BTW the Pentium isn't that slow at all really... it has been cleaned up and hasn't got all the clogging stuff that slows computers down after a lot of use and installing/unistalling etc.
I have a quad core now as well but that is getting on a bit, don't really see why I should upgrade the OS as I don't want to give more money to microdahrlerrrs company
If it works why bother to upgrade, the companies are only trying to get you to spend money on stuff you don't want and don't need.
2009-11-18 18:34:00
xp, vist and 7
XP does everything I want.....no need to upgrade simply to feed Microsoft...at least the author admits she doesn't know what she is talking about.
2009-11-18 20:01:55
xp, vist and 7
I totally agree with Robert Gorman.
And I'll add to the last portion, that "pretty old" does not mean "slow, less productive" nowdays. At least for majority of users to which me and author and all other people who have no idea about what is inside computers belong.
My laptop is core duo, 4 yrs old. But it has ATI video and it was of premium class when bought. Now? computers did not change that much unless you buy i7, etc. 2-3Gb RAM will do the trick and XP is enough. Though you can freely try W7 on such machines as well. All it needs - RAM.
And I'll add to the last portion, that "pretty old" does not mean "slow, less productive" nowdays. At least for majority of users to which me and author and all other people who have no idea about what is inside computers belong.
My laptop is core duo, 4 yrs old. But it has ATI video and it was of premium class when bought. Now? computers did not change that much unless you buy i7, etc. 2-3Gb RAM will do the trick and XP is enough. Though you can freely try W7 on such machines as well. All it needs - RAM.
2009-11-19 15:52:11
XP and 7
I tried the Win7 RC and I have to say, it is quite quick, even on old hardware. Some people may decide to resurrect their old PC getting dust in their closets and have it actually run very smoothly with Win7. However, remember this, Win7 just came out! Plain vanilla XP in 2001 turned into XP with hundreds of updates today. Lets see what happens when Win7 has quite a few updates under it's belt. Will it run as smoothly as the RC a few years from now? I have a feeling it won't.
Get real-time options trading ideas from Steve Smith, veteran options trader and newsletter author, plus let him show you the way to cut risk and boost your returns through the strategic use of options. Click here for a free 14 day trial to OptionSmith by Steve Smith.
Copyright 2009 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved
















