Can Microsoft comes back with Windows 7

[abhijangda]

With Windows Vista the biggest flop of year 2007 and also getting losses from Xbox 360 can Microsoft comes back in race (although it is in race with XP). Now many of the organisation has started moving towards open source (mostly Linux). Also i as a linux enthusiast uses Linux much but I like Windows 7 as compared to anyother Windows will it be XP, Vista or anything else. I think with Windows 7 Microsoft will can come back. So what do you think will Windows 7 do what Windows 98 and XP done to Microsoft(i mean increasing profit). SO WHAT YOU THINK WILL WIN 7 ROCKS OR NOT.

[SunnyChahal]

Windows 7 will rocks

[desiibond]

Neither "Lottery for Microsoft Win 7 works" nor "Oh no Microsoft falls again Win 7 doesn't works".

This time MS got a perfect operating system that can replace windows XP. you better ad an option "Microsoft got it right with windows 7" to the poll.

Luck doesn't work in current Operating system market.

[nvidia]

^^+1
IMO, Windows 7 will be the perfect replacement for Windows XP.
Btw, Is it possible to install Windows 7 on VirtualBox in Vista?

[abhijangda]

Originally Posted by nvidia

^^+1
IMO, Windows 7 will be the perfect replacement for Windows XP.
Btw, Is it possible to install Windows 7 on VirtualBox in Vista?

Yes it is able to install in atleast XP i don't know about Vista. I don't think that Windows 7 will be perfect replacement as it requires atleast 512 mb of RAM. Although most of the computers today have more than or atleast 512 mb of RAM but those who don't will be using XP only. So it's not perfect replacement however the use of XP will significantly decrease.

[SunnyChahal]

I've been using Windows 7 as my primary OS for more than a month now and I can tell that it's rock solid and very stable. Also games perform much better on Windows 7.
Support for older software is also very good in Windows 7. I'm playing World of Warcraft on Windows 7 which was released way back in 2004 and it works very well.
IMO Windows 7 will rock and it's the best Windows installment till date.....but not the best OS.

[rohan_kumar011]

Windows 7 does ROCK, and is probably the best Windows OS evr released!
Otherwise there are MACs consuming less resources giving equivalent GUI and linux machines reducing costs along with reducing system resource needs altogether. Also, since most of the world knws computer = windows...yes it does seem that its a return for microsoft thru win 7 & as for the Xbox 360, microsoft has already started work opvr xboz 720....as reported in Digit longgg back!

[Dark Core]

I 2 tried both Beta and RC Versions of Windows 7, though I didn't shift to Windows 7 - It's damn good from Visual effects to performance

[paroh]

I think the price should not be to high as vista

[MetalheadGautham]

To the exact question, YES and NO.

YES because we once again have a version of windows which is light(er), stable(r) and feature rich compared to the previous FLOP edition. This will definitely make windows users happy.

NO because the damage was already done with vista. There was an exodus among many to Linux/Mac and by now many (not all) of them are comfortable with that and may not be willing to come back to windows.

[ico]

^ can you click the Post Quick Reply button once and wait for the page to load automatically?

Ontopic:
lol, I've used Windows Vista for less than 20minutes in my life.
Windows 7 is good though.

[MetalheadGautham]

^^Bug in my mouse. Double Click happens instead of single click 40% of the time.

There is a REASON my friends were jelous of me in pistol matches in counter-strike. I could fire @ 140% the speed of others.

Its also the reason I seem to run out of Ammo faster than ever in UrT

[ico]

err lol..change your mouse orientation to left-handed then...

And stop using G36 in UrT. You fire way too fast for it.

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by ico

err lol..change your mouse orientation to left-handed then...

Good idea actually
But right click also turns to double right click 10% of the time.
Anyway, since I'm one of those guys who can use both hands, I say why not ?

And stop using G36 in UrT. You fire way too fast for it.

Thats because of double click. Any tips ? BTW, don't take this post offtopic. Post reply in UrT thread

[Rahim]

I dont see why one raises this question now? Microsoft will always be the leader is OS no matter what. As for the mis-leading title, Microsoft never went off the scene. So why this talk of them coming back. Look around most of the Monitors have Windows OS (different versions). So its a win-win situation for MS.

This is my expereince: Using Linux for 2 years full time, i am finding very confusing to work with Windows 7. Now my mind is used to the Linux way and I might never switch to Windows again. I dont now whether that is a good or a bad thing. One thing i have to concede is i never used Vista so doesnt have 1st time experience with its bad things (i read a lot of its negative reviews though). WIndows 7 is definitely better in looks.

Is there any way i can turn my KDE 4 windows to use glass effects on the borders?

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by a_rahim

Is there any way i can turn my KDE 4 windows to use glass effects on the borders?

RTFM

Enable kwin-composite and look at the plugins available. Also think of changing the desktop theme (I use the elegence theme with black panels instead of the default ugly blue panel).

[desiibond]

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

To the exact question, YES and NO.

YES because we once again have a version of windows which is light(er), stable(r) and feature rich compared to the previous FLOP edition. This will definitely make windows users happy.

NO because the damage was already done with vista. There was an exodus among many to Linux/Mac and by now many (not all) of them are comfortable with that and may not be willing to come back to windows.

how much was that percentage? 1%? 2%?

And look at the netbooks 98% is on windows when compared to less than 10% before all of the manufacturers started providing windows XP netbook edition. So, Overall, nothing was lost for Microsoft and win7 will only increase the market share.

Thanks to the recession, more people are going for PCs and windows/linux notebooks instead of macbooks.

All that I am seeing here is increase in market share for Microsoft when we combine netbook+notebook+tablets+phones+PCs.

And this happened during the time of Vista. Imagine what will happen when win7 goes public.

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by desiibond

how much was that percentage? 1%? 2%?

And look at the netbooks 98% is on windows when compared to less than 10% before all of the manufacturers started providing windows XP netbook edition. So, Overall, nothing was lost for Microsoft and win7 will only increase the market share.

Thanks to the recession, more people are going for PCs and windows/linux notebooks instead of macbooks.

All that I am seeing here is increase in market share for Microsoft when we combine netbook+notebook+tablets+phones+PCs.

And this happened during the time of Vista. Imagine what will happen when win7 goes public.

Obviously windows still has extremely high market share.

But even 0.25% of total computer owners who switched to linux/mac and out of that a 0.1% who decide to stay form a NUMERICALLY HUGE NUMBER.

For every guy like me or a_rahim microsoft is loosing a customer = 5000 Rupees. Plus guys like this switch more people to linux. Meaning more loss. :-P

[ionicsachin]

Originally Posted by abhijangda

Yes it is able to install in atleast XP i don't know about Vista. I don't think that Windows 7 will be perfect replacement as it requires atleast 512 mb of RAM. Although most of the computers today have more than or atleast 512 mb of RAM but those who don't will be using XP only. So it's not perfect replacement however the use of XP will significantly decrease.

Hardware has become so cheap these days and most of the branded PCs and Laptops are shipped with at least 2GB of RAM and a decent Graphic Card. Vista couldn't utilise low end graphic cards very well but i think Windows 7 will definitely do it. Moreover very very few amount of people have less then 512MB RAM, majorly due to dads not allowing upgrade or higher configuration is not needed. Some day or the other they'll have to upgrade weather it is for Windows or not. Previously Yahoo Messenger used to eat 5-10MB of RAM, but today it eats a minimum of 25MB of RAM.
I think Windows 7 will rock, coz of extreme stability and great interface. I have totally shifted from Vista to Windows 7 RC

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by ionicsachin

Hardware has become so cheap these days and most of the branded PCs and Laptops are shipped with at least 2GB of RAM and a decent Graphic Card. Vista couldn't utilise low end graphic cards very well but i think Windows 7 will definitely do it. Moreover very very few amount of people have less then 512MB RAM, majorly due to dads not allowing upgrade or higher configuration is not needed. Some day or the other they'll have to upgrade weather it is for Windows or not. Previously Yahoo Messenger used to eat 5-10MB of RAM, but today it eats a minimum of 25MB of RAM.
I think Windows 7 will rock, coz of extreme stability and great interface. I have totally shifted from Vista to Windows 7 RC

You forgot that windows 7 not just ships with new OEM PCs but people also buy it to install in old desktops.

Windows 7 obviously won't affect modern desktop buyers. Even most mediocre hardware today runs it blazing fast.

But its the old PC users who need to worry.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

But its the old PC users who need to worry.

Keep using Win 98 or XP, Microsoft is not here to please every Tom, Dick & Harry who still uses PCs from the Ramayana era. 1 needs to upgrade technology with time, if you can't then don't expect technology makers to service u as long as u live.

[desiibond]

^^yeah. compare it to Snow Leopard which won't work on powerPC macs (even if it's 4yrs old mac).

I don't see any problem if win7 cannot be used in decade old PCs.

Seriously speaking, if win7 can run on pathetic netbooks, it can easily run on a decade old computer.

[MetalheadGautham]

See ? By this attitude MS looses potential customers. I don't use it because it refuses to be flexible enough for me to use. So I end up with linux. And since I have used it for 2 years and find it MORE comfortable than any version of windows, I doubt I'm leaving it.

Originally Posted by iMav

Keep using Win 98 or XP, Microsoft is not here to please every Tom, Dick & Harry who still uses PCs from the Ramayana era. 1 needs to upgrade technology with time, if you can't then don't expect technology makers to service u as long as u live.

Given a choice, I chose neither. Why should I keep using Win 98 or XP ? The situation FORCED me into a better alternative.

Infact, I whole heartedly thank Microsoft for providing me with such a horrible experience with the world's "default OS" that I had opportunity to move elsewhere.

There is a difference between hardware upgrades and software upgrades. Technology keeps updating with time for me too. I use an OS which constantly delivers updates and upgrades to keep my data safe and my platform modern. I am not bugged with reasons to buy a new version.

Originally Posted by desiibond

^^yeah. compare it to Snow Leopard which won't work on powerPC macs (even if it's 4yrs old mac).

There is a difference. Apple has from the start targeted only people with large pockets or its own niche fanbase who like apple no matter what they do. I am yet to find the whole Mac community complaining about any of apple's moves.

Bill Gates wanted to make MS-DOS the People's OS since AT&T's UNIX was highly expensive and ran only on certain hardware.

I can't argue with MS changing priorities but its now trying to balence itself somewhere below where apple always has been but somewhere above where DOS was. Its definitely the sweet spot to earn money and hence I give MS a thumbs up on this one.

I don't see any problem if win7 cannot be used in decade old PCs.

Seriously speaking, if win7 can run on pathetic netbooks, it can easily run on a decade old computer.

The point is not whether it can run. The point is HOW well it can run. Ofc it can run on my workstation even though its old and next to obsolete. But it runs on such hardware with quite a few performance drops compared to competing products.




Anyway, I hear MS is launching Windows 7 Starter Edition for the equivalent of 15$. It lacks the old cripple of running only 3 apps at a time, despite other funny stuff like no changing wallpaper. But I guess its worth a try. I'm giving MS one more chance to earn money outta me.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

See ? By this attitude MS looses potential customers. I don't use it because it refuses to be flexible enough for me to use. So I end up with linux. And since I have used it for 2 years and find it MORE comfortable than any version of windows, I doubt I'm leaving it.



Given a choice, I chose neither. Why should I keep using Win 98 or XP ? The situation FORCED me into a better alternative.

Infact, I whole heartedly thank Microsoft for providing me with such a horrible experience with the world's "default OS" that I had opportunity to move elsewhere.

There is a difference between hardware upgrades and software upgrades. Technology keeps updating with time for me too. I use an OS which constantly delivers updates and upgrades to keep my data safe and my platform modern. I am not bugged with reasons to buy a new version.



There is a difference. Apple has from the start targeted only people with large pockets or its own niche fanbase who like apple no matter what they do. I am yet to find the whole Mac community complaining about any of apple's moves.

Bill Gates wanted to make MS-DOS the People's OS since AT&T's UNIX was highly expensive and ran only on certain hardware.

I can't argue with MS changing priorities but its now trying to balence itself somewhere below where apple always has been but somewhere above where DOS was. Its definitely the sweet spot to earn money and hence I give MS a thumbs up on this one.

The point is not whether it can run. The point is HOW well it can run. Ofc it can run on my workstation even though its old and next to obsolete. But it runs on such hardware with quite a few performance drops compared to competing products.

Well, if you're so happy with what you're using why are u so concerned with what MSFT is doing? Apple targets people with deel pockets, MSFT targets people with logical senses. Unfotunately there are some poeple who just don't understand what progress & development & technological advancements are, they can use what they choose to

[ionicsachin]

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

See ? By this attitude MS looses potential customers. I don't use it because it refuses to be flexible enough for me to use. So I end up with linux. And since I have used it for 2 years and find it MORE comfortable than any version of windows, I doubt I'm leaving it.



Given a choice, I chose neither. Why should I keep using Win 98 or XP ? The situation FORCED me into a better alternative.

Infact, I whole heartedly thank Microsoft for providing me with such a horrible experience with the world's "default OS" that I had opportunity to move elsewhere.

There is a difference between hardware upgrades and software upgrades. Technology keeps updating with time for me too. I use an OS which constantly delivers updates and upgrades to keep my data safe and my platform modern. I am not bugged with reasons to buy a new version.



There is a difference. Apple has from the start targeted only people with large pockets or its own niche fanbase who like apple no matter what they do. I am yet to find the whole Mac community complaining about any of apple's moves.

Bill Gates wanted to make MS-DOS the People's OS since AT&T's UNIX was highly expensive and ran only on certain hardware.

I can't argue with MS changing priorities but its now trying to balence itself somewhere below where apple always has been but somewhere above where DOS was. Its definitely the sweet spot to earn money and hence I give MS a thumbs up on this one.

The point is not whether it can run. The point is HOW well it can run. Ofc it can run on my workstation even though its old and next to obsolete. But it runs on such hardware with quite a few performance drops compared to competing products.




Anyway, I hear MS is launching Windows 7 Starter Edition for the equivalent of 15$. It lacks the old cripple of running only 3 apps at a time, despite other funny stuff like no changing wallpaper. But I guess its worth a try. I'm giving MS one more chance to earn money outta me.

Hell i m not that good at multi quoting
See i m not pulling it into another OS war, but here are a few things:-
your 1st para:
No, microsoft is not losing potential market. Think it in this way, if a person is buying a new PC and if Windows 7 is good, then he'll definitely go for it. Maybe you are an office working or more "light-weight PC" oriented, but in todays world i think everyone needs to upgrade PC who is into anything from watching movies to playing dead high end games. You had been using a same stream PC for 2 years(I assumed), maybe u didnt try anything(or many things) new on it, like modern games, high definition stuff and all the other things which have turned faster with 2 yrs. I beleive u might be having something like Nvidia 6600GT (totally assuming, u might be having a faster or slower card too) in ur 2 yr old machine and u might have purchased that for some 6000/-, but today at the same price u can get something really triple the speed of 6600GT. So people will have a reason to upgrade their PC and avoid adjustings and flexibilities. One can go for iPhone shelling out 31000/- but one can also go for someother phone at half the price and double the features.

2nd para:
You might be erupting an OS war. I agree I love Windows. But i have used Kubuntu for a great lot of time, tried Ubuntu for few weeks too. So in my case Linux in no way is "better alternative". It has its good points and in many cases it can do things better then Windows, but it doesnt fit well with me. In a similar way thr are people around the world who feel Linux, Windows and Mac to be the best with thr own reasons.

3rd para:
Term default OS is generally given by Linux lovers to Windows. I dont get it why Linux fanboys try to show Windows as "Horrible Experience". Anyways, all have Freedom of Speech. But i bet all Linux lovers wont say "No" to Windows if it was FREE, i bet that. Note: Plz no OS war.

4th para:
Take an example of WinRAR. It provided good compression with processors 2 yrs back. It provides even better compression now with the newer Core 2 Duos, Quads and AMDs. It can do the same with old processors also but also increasing compression times by many times. Thats whr hardware update is important. My response was a bit off topic.


Yes MS earns money, but they are delivering value too(OK Vista was off priced). MS is a corporate, it earns money for wat it does. And it does good. Ups and Downs always come, and i feel Vista was a down and 7 will be an up. 7 is running on my hardware very very very well, no matter how it runs on someone else's hardware. So no point abt efficiency.

Now u see, MS is telling u that u have so and so restriction and selling it for 15$. They are not cheating u in any case. Its user who is purchasing that Starter Edition. If it is $15 that is making it worth a try then i gaurantee that thr wud be no surviving OS other than Windows on earth if it was FREE(lol, totally hypothetical). You dont have to shed out $15 for trying how it'll be Gautam, i m telling you it'll be a horrible experience. If u really wanna try go for Windows 7 Home Premium(if it is named so later) on any Mid-Low end machine of present day. But again that wont beat the price of Linux, coz Linux is free.

Anyways, i respect ur views and have no intentions of erupting an OS war.

[adi007]

first .. why are people saying vista is a flop .. its still a nice OS IMO ...
Using it my 512+256 MB RAM and still works fine from the past 1+year ... even though my MB is ages old ...
Though i have disabled all eye candy effects expect the basic theme ....

win 7 is more stable when compared to vista ...

[desiibond]

See ? By this attitude MS looses potential customers. I don't use it because it refuses to be flexible enough for me to use. So I end up with linux. And since I have used it for 2 years and find it MORE comfortable than any version of windows, I doubt I'm leaving it.[/QUOTE]

what attitude?

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

Given a choice, I chose neither. Why should I keep using Win 98 or XP ? The situation FORCED me into a better alternative.

Now that windows 7 is rocking the world, time to move back

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

Infact, I whole heartedly thank Microsoft for providing me with such a horrible experience with the world's "default OS" that I had opportunity to move elsewhere.

Time to give back that thanks

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

There is a difference between hardware upgrades and software upgrades. Technology keeps updating with time for me too. I use an OS which constantly delivers updates and upgrades to keep my data safe and my platform modern. I am not bugged with reasons to buy a new version.

And I use an OS that gives me exactly what I need, doesn't make me pull my hair to make a device work and let's me watch TV, play music, sync music, play 3D games, supports millions of devices right out of the box, 24x7 support over mail/phone/chat. Yes, I would pay for such a software.

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

There is a difference. Apple has from the start targeted only people with large pockets or its own niche fanbase who like apple no matter what they do. I am yet to find the whole Mac community complaining about any of apple's moves.

Trust me. They won't. RDF is too powerful to escape from

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

Bill Gates wanted to make MS-DOS the People's OS since AT&T's UNIX was highly expensive and ran only on certain hardware.

I can't argue with MS changing priorities but its now trying to balence itself somewhere below where apple always has been but somewhere above where DOS was. Its definitely the sweet spot to earn money and hence I give MS a thumbs up on this one.

Can you please explain?? <<scratching my head trying to find meaning here.>>

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

The point is not whether it can run. The point is HOW well it can run. Ofc it can run on my workstation even though its old and next to obsolete. But it runs on such hardware with quite a few performance drops compared to competing products.

What to do. My spankingly new h/w won't work on Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSe, forget about old hardware.
Tell me one modern day OS that won't drop performance when you put it on old hardware. If you feel there is a performance drop, change to classic view.

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

Anyway, I hear MS is launching Windows 7 Starter Edition for the equivalent of 15$. It lacks the old cripple of running only 3 apps at a time, despite other funny stuff like no changing wallpaper. But I guess its worth a try. I'm giving MS one more chance to earn money outta me.

That comes with a h/w limitation. Won't run on everything.

[ionicsachin]

Originally Posted by adi007

first .. why are people saying vista is a flop .. its still a nice OS IMO ...
Using it my 512+256 MB RAM and still works fine from the past 1+year ... even though my MB is ages old ...
Though i have disabled all eye candy effects expect the basic theme ....

win 7 is more stable when compared to vista ...

Yeah i had been using Vista after i assembled a new PC last March... Its a great OS...it got bad response maybe due to the 3 yr old XPish configurations people tried it on

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by ionicsachin

Hell i m not that good at multi quoting
See i m not pulling it into another OS war, but here are a few things:-

WTH ? Just press the multiquote button.

your 1st para:
No, microsoft is not losing potential market. Think it in this way, if a person is buying a new PC and if Windows 7 is good, then he'll definitely go for it. Maybe you are an office working or more "light-weight PC" oriented, but in todays world i think everyone needs to upgrade PC who is into anything from watching movies to playing dead high end games. You had been using a same stream PC for 2 years(I assumed), maybe u didnt try anything(or many things) new on it, like modern games, high definition stuff and all the other things which have turned faster with 2 yrs. I beleive u might be having something like Nvidia 6600GT (totally assuming, u might be having a faster or slower card too) in ur 2 yr old machine and u might have purchased that for some 6000/-, but today at the same price u can get something really triple the speed of 6600GT. So people will have a reason to upgrade their PC and avoid adjustings and flexibilities. One can go for iPhone shelling out 31000/- but one can also go for someother phone at half the price and double the features.

Come on, you know the economy of choice. When money is limited, people make decisions based on what they want the most.

For eg, I am getting myself an electric guitar instead of a rig upgrade

Anyway, while I agree with what you say, I also need to add that there are quite a few people who are actually HAPPY with their own rigs. A few and infact negligible in percentage, but numerically high enough to be mentioned.

2nd para:
You might be erupting an OS war. I agree I love Windows. But i have used Kubuntu for a great lot of time, tried Ubuntu for few weeks too. So in my case Linux in no way is "better alternative". It has its good points and in many cases it can do things better then Windows, but it doesnt fit well with me. In a similar way thr are people around the world who feel Linux, Windows and Mac to be the best with thr own reasons.

Its not an OS war.

And what you said differs case to case. Some like it and some don't. Ones which don't end up making my party, the rest end up making yours. As simple as that. And as I said, the NUMBERS matter my friend. Absolute numbers make every damn percentage look insanely high.

Apple has 2% share in OS market. But youwill fall of your chair when you see the sheer number of macintoshes around. That's the only thing I have been saying and you two denying.

3rd para:
Term default OS is generally given by Linux lovers to Windows. I dont get it why Linux fanboys try to show Windows as "Horrible Experience". Anyways, all have Freedom of Speech. But i bet all Linux lovers wont say "No" to Windows if it was FREE, i bet that. Note: Plz no OS war.

Wrong. Its given by the world. Put yourself into the shoes of an OEM vendor. Which is the first OS you would choose to install by default to have maximum people buy your product ? The answer is usually something like Windows Vista Home Premium as of now. (And Windows 7 Home Premium is about to replace that).

And no, please don't try to generalise saying "all linux lovers".Thats plain crap. Each category has its own percentage and numbers.

And yeah, I'm not pushing this to an OS war. I'm just disagreeing with general points you are making. My comments are more market oriented than OS oriented.

4th para:
Take an example of WinRAR. It provided good compression with processors 2 yrs back. It provides even better compression now with the newer Core 2 Duos, Quads and AMDs. It can do the same with old processors also but also increasing compression times by many times. Thats whr hardware update is important. My response was a bit off topic.

Think of it. Does everyone really need to increase compression time by many times ? Does everyone even USE compression ?

There is a reason people buy underpowered low-cost subnotebooks dubbed "netbooks" by Intel. Its just that the needs are small enough for these people. Portability is another reason but this reason also stays.

You can't force people to upgrade when they have not much reason to do so.

Yes MS earns money, but they are delivering value too(OK Vista was off priced). MS is a corporate, it earns money for wat it does. And it does good. Ups and Downs always come, and i feel Vista was a down and 7 will be an up. 7 is running on my hardware very very very well, no matter how it runs on someone else's hardware. So no point abt efficiency.

To each his own. People say Apple is leagues ahead of competition because it has features others don't. And its always the end users who decide what they want.

You and 99% of the world choose to run Windows 7. The rest don't.

Now u see, MS is telling u that u have so and so restriction and selling it for 15$. They are not cheating u in any case. Its user who is purchasing that Starter Edition. If it is $15 that is making it worth a try then i gaurantee that thr wud be no surviving OS other than Windows on earth if it was FREE(lol, totally hypothetical). You dont have to shed out $15 for trying how it'll be Gautam, i m telling you it'll be a horrible experience. If u really wanna try go for Windows 7 Home Premium(if it is named so later) on any Mid-Low end machine of present day. But again that wont beat the price of Linux, coz Linux is free.

Obviously nothing can beat the price of linux but it can be impressive enough to make me consider it. For Linux, I need to get a GPU which costs Rs. 3000 more for extra power, to offset the performance issues from WINE for gaming. But in the end it works out as I save money on 3.5K Vista Basic.

So an Rs. 750 OS can attract gamers like nothing else.

Anyways, i respect ur views and have no intentions of erupting an OS war.

Same here. I respect each person's views, but I hate it when they try to go about "my view is better, yours sucks and you are just a fanboy".

what attitude?

Assuming that every single person would want to upgrade.

While it makes economic sense for MS, i.e, its easier for it to make people upgrade and not have everyone use windows than have more use windows but spend a hell lot more in R&D, the title of this thread was can MS come back. Usually that refers to market share recovering to that in XP Days.

Now that windows 7 is rocking the world, time to move back


Time to give back that thanks

That's for me to decide, after I evaluate Windows 7 RC.

And I use an OS that gives me exactly what I need, doesn't make me pull my hair to make a device work and let's me watch TV, play music, sync music, play 3D games, supports millions of devices right out of the box, 24x7 support over mail/phone/chat. Yes, I would pay for such a software.

So we both use different software, yet with overlapping needs. Amusing isn't it ?

Trust me. They won't. RDF is too powerful to escape from

Whats RDF ?

Can you please explain?? <<scratching my head trying to find meaning here.>>

I mean that atleast to 1% of total desktop users, windows isn't people's OS anymore. It isn't the world famous good guy EVERYBODY loves.

What to do. My spankingly new h/w won't work on Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSe, forget about old hardware.
Tell me one modern day OS that won't drop performance when you put it on old hardware. If you feel there is a performance drop, change to classic view.

You haven't tried many distros it seems. While its offtopic here, I'm just pointing out.

That comes with a h/w limitation. Won't run on everything.

Whats the limit in this version ?

[iMav]

Dude, you say your points are more "market oriented". <-- care to explain? I don't know what market you're talking about. The significantly high number you're refering to is far less than the 2% OS X users, so you can well imagine the no. you're talking about. And what are your posts all about anyway? What are you trying to justify? That Windows 7 should run on a 486?

Some CLI based Linux distro might run on that config & if you're happy with it so be it. Windows has far too many features that won't run on that config, besides Windows isn't competing with Linux, it doesn't need to. Sure, Linux has gained presence but Microsoft doesn't need to compete with it. It's competition is the Mac which is quite evident.

You can't force people to upgrade when they have not much reason to do so.

Who is forcing you? The last time I checked Microsoft doesn't have a policy of go-to-their-home & point a gun to their head.

And I don't know how simpler can I get with this:

Software development has to complement the hardware development & vice versa!

You can't expect software to keep giving you everything you want but hardware to remain static!