I rather wait a few months before trying 7. I'm sticking with XP and Ubuntu at the moment.

I personally think that both linux (especially Fedora, Ubuntu or Debian) and Mac OSX are better choices if you are willing to spend some time to get use to them. The only reason not to use linux is Suse and not to use OSX is price. I tried windows 7 beta because I was curious.

I think all microsoft product is nice as it name-bringing reputation but in a lot case some OS may produce or even worst mall-product all in one update! you seethe different if you just "keep it" as it was preinstalled after you buy the computer or else microsoft can update it and shoot!! got ya!

I just installed 64-bit Windows 7 Home Prem the other day. I wanted to upgrade from Vista Home Prem, but the upgrade failed for some reason. So I just did a clean install. I've tried both Ubuntu and Fedora 11, but neither will let me play videos on my DVD and had lots of problems with sound. I had none of those problems with Vista/Windows 7.

once you go mac, you won't wanna go back. trust your feelings. you know it to be true.

Hello everybody,

I got myself a retail copy of Windows 7 Professional because the offer seemed good and I intend to buy a new computer before Christmas.

However, I still have a couple of weeks left before I buy that new computer, and in the meantime, I would like to test Windows 7 on my current machine.

I currently run Windows Vista 64 and Ubuntu. I have a boot manager which gives me three choices at startup, including an earlier version of Windows (which is Win2K, but which doesn't work, just gets me a blue screen of death, and that is it.)

I'd like to add Windows 7 to my current system without tampering with Vista, and I'd also like to keep my Ubuntu.

It's obvious that I do not want to upgrade from Vista to Windows 7 because I'm gonna remove Windows 7 from the current system once I get the new machine.

What is the best way to proceed?

Actually, I'm quite happy with my Vista computer. There are a few areas where Vista is more convenient than XP. I really liked Win2K, but, sadly, most modern graphic adaptaers no longer support Win2K

buy a cheap harddrive or a good one for you new system and remove your excisting drive and install it and load win7 on it

Some in interesting comments, but as seems the "norm" on any MS-based topic, the trolls have yet again come out to play!

And you felt the need to tell us all, why?? If you don't care about Windows, why even bother reading about it and flaming the boards??

Okaaaay; care to qualify that opinion? Use both platforms on a daily basis at work, and fail to see how Win7 resembles OS X. Sure, there may well be a few similar similar/common concepts, but that is a good thing... noone should be tied to a single OS over a single exclusive tool or methodology.

Again, unqualified opinions with no explanation! If the only basis for your opinions are from using an earlier pre-release build of Win7, then it really doesn't count for much!

What exactly is the problem with SUSE? It is far and away superior to Ubuntu, which you claim as a better alternative to Windows. As to OS X.... how many power users do you find using OS X by default?

Really? Truly? Funny how some of us - myself included - made the opposite transition! Was a time I swallowed all the propaganda rained down from Apple, all the while gritting my teeth at all the limitations and quirks. I may be forced to move btwn Windows and OS X at work, but Apple will never again hold a place in my home, period!

Not sure why you're complaining about not being able to find the actual source of files/folders found in the new Libraries.... the source location is clearly displayed when you open a Libraried folder. In my case, I have several folders attached to each Library - for example, I have a Downloads Library, linking to Downloads folders from both Win7 and Vista, as well as a Downloads folder on my external drive - and the location of each directory is clearly labelled.

As to Win7 being "Macified", exactly how so? I hear this fly-by comment from time to time, yet no-one ever qualifies it! Again, as someone using OS X and Windows (both Vista and Win7), I honestly see no basis for such opinions.... they're nothing alike beyond a few small common points.



Been had dual-boot configuration for Vista and Win7 since RC release, and have to say have been delighted with what I've seen. Vista wasn't too bad if you could ignore the performance issues, but Win7 works well.... very well. Driver support has in no way been a repeat of early Vista release scenarios. Stable as all hell. Much better thought out, especially in terms of new Libraries and task-bar improvements.

Perfect? No, but then am yet to discover that "perfect" OS, and doubt that any such OS will ever exist.

As long as I got use from my Window XP PC I will not change and beside I had another notebook running Ubuntu Linux latest 9.10 Karmic Koala and I am very impress by its performance and ease of use despite my notebook is already 7 years old. I am not going to dig deep into my pocket for some fancy interface and look. Call me cheapskate if you want. As long as it meets my requirement everything else doesn't matter.

Nice one kaninelupus. If mac was so good and ms soooo bad, strange that most users use ms products. Win 7 is a good OS and the people who are running it down probably realize that and are trying to justify their dislike of Microsoft. There was a post in Microsoft Windows 7 news that Snow Leopard was faster then Win 7, but what was interesting that he commented that he use a mac and win 7. He also stated that he found there were programs that ran better on a mac but also programs that ran better in win 7, so he did not not care which ran faster just that he used the OS which suited his needs. Basically, like you said, no OS is perfect. At least it was an informed comment and not one fueled by passion.