already looks much-improved compared to Vista. Doug asked readers how
they think the next OS will stack up to its predecessors:
Maybe Microsoft will get it right with Windows 7. I've said all along
that if Microsoft had an OS which was small and responsive, it would win over
many companies. If the price is right and the performance is better than XP
on our computers, we would switch to the new Vista.
Windows 7 was good to take out some of the driver loading. But I've seen
some of the videos of demos and they are ALL about appearance. Most of us
don't need fancy front-ends (many people rarely have more than one app running
at a time, possibly two if they are daft enough to monitor their e-mail).
They need something simpler, more stable and more secure.
I think Windows 7 is already competing more with Vista than it will with
XP. However, as I think of my recently bought laptop and the pain I went through
to get my apps working, I doubt that I will risk losing them by updating to
Windows 7. This is in spite of the good words about Win 7. There is peripheral
hardware involved and I am not confident the change would go well.
Windows XP can be a more effective OS, but it still lacks in operating
ability, troubleshooting techniques and user-friendliness. XP has been around
for about seven years, but it still doesn't meet today's customer expectations.
I think Microsoft should have developed and invested more on XP rather than
any other OS.
We have resisted using XP in our organisation for some time now since
upgrading from 2000. Because of the fact that XP is very stable (ironically,
not on my PC at home) and performs very well on our newer PCs, we have no
reason to use Vista. We will be keeping a keen eye on Win 7 as hopefully it
will fulfil the role Vista was supposed to.
I have used Vista a number of times and although the general look and
feel are OK and functional, it still seems overly heavy on hardware.