You may well find yourself somewhere between these two extremes, though, and so the 'best' OS to use will be a more difficult decision. But don't worry — help is at hand. We've taken a test PC and laptop, installed XP, Vista and Windows 7 on them and applied a number of testing real-life benchmarks to see which will come out on top.
We're aware that speed isn't everything, though, so we've also explored the new features that each OS has introduced. To make life easy for you, we've split our findings over eight categories, with an overall verdict at the end. It's often said that recent versions of Windows have become bloated, and it's hardly unreasonable to expect each new OS to perform better than its previous iteration. Thus, it should come as no surprise that the lightweight OS runs quickly on today's processors.
Newer OSes can optimise for modern hardware and include more powerful features, but is this extra functionality really just slowing us down? To find out, we decided to test each operating system's performance on an average PC. We installed XP, Vista and Windows 7 in that order all bit versions on the machine's GB hard drive and ran a number of real-world benchmarks to find out which OS was best.
The boot time test provided no surprises — Vista took the longest time to get started, XP came in second place and Windows 7 was the fastest. We bear good news. Even the beta of Windows 7 can beat Vista's sluggish start. At first it seemed like our file transfer benchmarks would deliver the same results.
Vista produced poor copy speeds in our small file tests, XP again placed second and Windows 7 came out on top. Both were beaten by the speedy Windows 7, though. This proved true for our application tests as well.
Once again, however, both were trounced by the newcomer. You might have spotted the theme here. Windows 7 delivered excellent results, beating or coming close to the performance of the lightweight XP in just about every category.
Windows XP and Vista are both operating systems by Microsoft. XP backdates Vista by about 6 years. XP was heralded as reliable and user friendly. By the time, Vista was launched, majority of the public was used to XP, and some were even hesitant to switch to Vista.
Even though the number of Vista users surpassed Microsoft expectations, they did not surpass the number of XP users. Most people prefer XP, over Vista, claiming that is it much more user friendly and efficient that Vista. They also criticize Vista for have additional hardware requirements that XP.
Microsoft included a number of additional upgrades and features in Vista refer table , some of which users claimed impeded usage instead of enhancing it, e. The UAC, meant to block software from silently gaining administrator privileges without the user's knowledge, has been criticized for generating prompts at every turn possible, even at basic commands such moving something in the Start Menu. All in all, Vista failed to persuade users to shift from XP, with many users even skipping Vista entirely and waiting for the next thing to come along.
Please refer table for additional differences in Vista and XP requirements, features and criticisms.
0コメント