Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Misc Forums > Computers and Operating Systems

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 1, 2011, 11:28 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1
Default Why windows7 ?

Windows7 is better because it configure the files already.It has lots of security features.It protect the files.
__________________
..
Lindafox is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 2, 2011, 5:13 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: tr
Posts: 224
Default

why not? From the perspective of photography, you can find more softwares for digital darkroom on a windows platform. Why 7? There is not any support for XP and there is not windows 8.
imut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2011, 3:00 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Victoria, B.C., Canada
Posts: 866
Default

For the past few weeks I've had 3 computers running - a Mac, a PC running Windows 7, and another running Windows 2000. I wanted to compare them.

My only computer interests are Email, manipulating photographs, reading news, reading sites about photography, gardening and world affairs - and, where they include blogs, joining in. I'm not in the least interested in Gaming or Videos.

I've written Macs off because they can't run Faststone, (or even ACDSee or Irfanview).

As between Windows 7 and Windows 2000 I've found that Windows 7 does - automatically - various things that I don't want it to do - e.g. it often decides what folder a file will be placed in. Also it puts obstacles in the way of my selecting my desktop wallpaper. And setting it up is irritating too - e.g. it makes me go through unnecessary steps to make it automatically display the "run" command. Even when running Photoshop it doesn't display the right cursor unless I change the resolution from 150 to 149 - and even then I don't like the interface, (or is it called the "skin") appearance.

My preference is still for Windows 2000 - it's straightforward, easy to use, and isn't encumbered with the bells and whistles of Windows XP.

Last edited by Herb; Mar 20, 2011 at 10:23 PM.
Herb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2011, 2:01 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 490
Default

All these OSes are configurable. I like XP as it is very mature, meaner & leaner & a lot of the older software runs quite well. (Some of the new stuff has too much DRM.)

After any install, I spend the next 30 minutes just going thru settings and turning off stuff (usually the automation), setting backward compatibilities as well as tailoring font sizes, screen colors, sound attributes as well as visual candies which are performance vampires and sometimes just outright distractions/nuisances.

You might like Win 7 though because it better supports HD.

Last edited by sdromel; Mar 21, 2011 at 2:03 PM. Reason: Fix typos
sdromel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2011, 2:52 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The OP is a spammer (no doubt about it, given that *most* spam comes from the same IP address range that the OP's post was made from, and the signature (still incomplete with formatting in place) is what you'd find from spammers using "spambot" type software to use forums for commercial purposes.

I haven't banned that entire IP address range (yet), because there could be some legitimate members using the same ISP in the future as time passes (even though no existing members that are not spammers are posting from it at this time).

Frankly, I'm tempted to ban all IP addresses in the same range the OP posted from, just because most Spam we get comes from the same IP Address range (not in the U.S, if anyone cares).

I've been watching this thread, waiting for the OP to post something more obvious before pressing the "Ban" button. But, the OP may have lost interest and gone elsewhere.

IOW, I'd suggest that you don't waste your time responding, as it's just someone acting as a "Marketing Consultant", waiting to post links to solutions for you after they've made enough posts to bypass our spam filters. ;-)
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2011, 10:26 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Victoria, B.C., Canada
Posts: 866
Default

Despite my repeated declarations of my liking for Windows 2000, I was forced, a couple of days ago, desert it and switch to XP.

I switched from VGA to DVI by buying a new Video card (Nvidia GeForce 9500). Frustratingly, there turned out to no driver for the card that works with W2000 other than a basic display of 16 colors and 600x800 resolution.

So I switched to Windows XP. Windows XP had a driver that let the card display at my monitor's native resolution - 1680x1050. The display on the screen was noticeably better.

But unfortunately the Windows XP driver caused a new problem. Scrolling, whether using the mouse or keyboard was not smooth. Instead a series of lines passed up (or down) the screen, scrolling as it were by slow increments. XP has a smooth scroll function that you can turn on and off, but that didn't work with the new card.

If anybody has a similar problem, the good news is that this driver that I downloaded from the Internet solved the scrolling annoyance immediately - Nvidia Display Driver version 260.99WHQL .

26 March 2011 - OOPS! I said (above) - "... there turned out to no driver for the card that works with W2000." Wrong! After sorting through a labyrinth of Nvidia sites, I've just found one - though it was listed as being for Windows XP - and it's working fine with Windows 2000 on my old H.P. computer. Yet despite being listed as being for XP, when I actually installed it the heading to the box said it was for Windows 2000!

The actual install file came in a zipped file with the name 190_62_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_whql

and I found it via this URL - http://www.nvidia.com/Download/Find.aspx?lang=en-us

Last edited by Herb; Mar 26, 2011 at 4:54 PM. Reason: earlier mistake revealed by new discovery
Herb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2011, 6:27 AM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Win 2K and Win XP use the same kernel.

So, the same drivers will work with either OS.

The same thing applies to Windows 7 and Windows Vista. Under the covers, they use the same kernel (they're not as different as most people think). So, 32 bit Vista drivers should work with 32 bit Win 7, and 64 bit Vista drivers should work with 64 Bit Win 7 (although Win 7 requires "signed" drivers and it a bit more picky about letting you install them).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2011, 9:36 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
TD Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,492
Default

Well Jimbo, get ready for windows 8 in 2012
__________________
Gripped Canon 7D and some glass
Flickr
FotoZone Facebook Group
TD Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 2011, 2:35 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
tjsnaps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Posts: 652
Default

I just updated from vista to W7 a few weeks ago the only issue so far was running capture software. The program would open just fine but I have to run it in XP or vista compatibility mode for it to see my camera.
tjsnaps is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:35 PM.