Here’s our answer to the question that surely you have asked : it’s finally time to change the operating system? Windows is, from many points of view, the most important product from Microsoft : its widespread distribution is the basis for maintaining unchallenged dominance in the market of personal computing , and the publication of a new version of the operating system is always a time sensitive to the Redmond . A fortiori it is now, after the brief and difficult ” time view ” . Windows Vista , as we have said many times on these pages, was , bluntly, a real flop.
Why the name Windows 7 ? This is the seventh version of Windows. Do not do the math on his fingers : they probably would do male.Per Microsoft, Windows 4 was called for the public Windows 95, Windows 5 was Windows 2000 and Windows Vista was 6 . So this is Windows 7.Forse could be called Windows 6.1 , given the relative proximity ( temporal interface of the kernel) to Vista, but the luck has perhaps taken over. Clearly, Microsoft wants to close the parenthesis Vista is great.
The public has never loved, has not digested some of its showy … (excuse the pun ) defects , and many users have preferred to wait for the release of the successor , even to reinstall the old Windows XP on newly purchased computer . After having talked so much about , but is now finally on the shelves Windows 7, the ” Vista that works ” (the definition is Steve Ballmer, Mi
crosoft ‘s number one since mid-2008 , after the resignation of Bill Gates) , the operating system should restore luster to the image a little ‘ tarnished Microsoft . We tell you what are actually the strengths and weaknesses of the final version in an attempt to answer the most obvious questions that any Windows user will arise : upgrade or not to upgrade ? The highlight : the performance Ballmer made sure that the promises were kept : the definition of ” a Vista that works ” is the most apt you can find for Windows 7.
The change from the recent past are there, but they are apparently so deep ; accomplice graphical interface largely modeled on that of Vista, some users ‘ distracted could be so much at ease among windows Windows 7 will not notice the difference almost .
So where is the difference ? In such cases we say that “it is under the hood” to indicate that the main interventions were made at the architectural and design , and are therefore invisible to the user, but by no means insignificant. But there is something quite visible : the responsiveness of the system . From the preliminary versions , Microsoft has insisted on what Windows 7 would be faster than Vista, and the final version , published on MSDN in the first days of August , he kept his promise . Seven is significantly faster than Vista in all the canonical process , since it stops the system from launching applications to the higher reactivity of the processes in general . The overall impression , hardly measurable benchmarks , is that of a system that is difficult to ” nail to think” , as occasionally happens with Vista.
For the same system configuration ( the minimum requirements are substantially the same as Vista, CPU clocked at 1 GHz , and at least 1 GB of RAM) , Windows 7 offers performance comparable , if not faster , than those of the old Windows Xp . Minimum requirements Windows 7 demonstration of a partial reversal of this trend , more and more substantiated rumors that the next generation of netbooks ( from a few weeks ago minicomputer presented by Nokia ) will be equipped with Windows 7. We remember how Vista was always kept at a safe distance from the world of computer ultralight advantage of Windows XP.
Windows 7 commits much less system resources than its predecessor, Windows Vista. Several netbook manufacturers are planning to equip their computers with the ultralight infant from Microsoft