Windows XP or Windows 7

[davisonal]

I just want to have a discussion regarding the reliability of these two operating systems. Which out of Windows XP and Windows 7 is more reliable from data security point of view.

Since I am an XP user for years and had to use a third party data recovery software to recover my data one deleted from recycle bin. So, I want to know if there is any solution available in Windows 7 .

[meowing]

I'm forced to use and admin Win7 for work-related matters, and I assure you:

I still get stuff done MUCH faster in XP x64. If anything, Win7 is made for non-computer-savvy users, not for us experts. I strongly dislike the slowing and utterly dumbed down GUI of Win7, which comes out more complex for people like me. It's similar to the GNOME versus others in unix/linux world. It's a difference of philosophy regarding what is important for the user. I don't like systems that don't allow me to look and work under the hood. XP x64 by far STILL outruns my performance tests as well. I don't need fancy 3d interfaces to work with, it's NOT easier or quicker, rather I find that it slows me down while working.

I've been using computers ever since the early days, I liked the simplicity of DOS too. I'm 44 years of age, that may have something to do with it. I'm old-school and I use PC's to produce, create and actually admin and DO stuff with. Windows 7 is for those who consume and entertainment purposes only. And even then, I'd much rather edit video on XP64 than on Win7. XP x64 is not slower on new hardware. And is still kept up to date as well.

Edited February 2, 2011 by meowing

[jaclaz]

I just want to have a discussion regarding the reliability of these two operating systems. Which out of Windows XP and Windows 7 is more reliable from data security point of view.

Since I am an XP user for years and had to use a third party data recovery software to recover my data one deleted from recycle bin. So, I want to know if there is any solution available in Windows 7 .

The more (or less) probabilities to recover deleted data are pretty much OS independent (and have no real connection with "security" or "reliability") but quite heavily filesystem dependent.

Assuming that you use NTFS on both there won't be ANY difference.

If - by any chance - you used that "third party utlity" installing it on the actual OS that was running when the files were deleted, you did it wrong , those tools needs always to be used when booted from another OS (possibly also booted from another disk), and you can use the SAME "third party tool" under another XP install to recover files on BOTH a Windows 7 and a XP without any difference worth of note.

jaclaz

[allen2]

That was exactly what i was thinking when i remembered that Win7 have the shadow copy ability (which is a lot better than XP restore point) and if you manage the shadow copies efficiently you should be safe unless you have an hard drive failure.

Edited February 2, 2011 by allen2

[jaclaz]

That was exactly what i was thinking when i remembered that Win7 have the shadow copy ability (which is a lot better than XP restore point) and if you manage the shadow copies efficiently you should be safe unless you have an hard drive failure.

Well, it depends obviously on how often you do the shadow copy, and if it was properly configured, and if you have enough space, and if you included the folder in the shadow copy...

http://sourcedaddy.com/windows-7/restoring-file-shadow-copies-previous-versions.html

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2342534,00.asp

The default should not have changed since Server 2003:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc728305(WS.10).aspx

Frequency at which Windows Server 2003 creates shadow copies

By default, Windows Server 2003 creates shadow copies at 7:00 A.M. and at 12:00 noon Monday through Friday. However, you can change the schedule to better accommodate users. Keep in mind that the more shadow copies you create, the more disk space the shadow copies can consume, especially if files change frequently. When you determine the schedule, avoid scheduling shadow copies to occur more than once per hour.

I don't see it as such a great and effective increase of "safety", which is IMHO mainly in the user's head.

Quite the opposite, at least in my circle of less computer savy friends, this (and similar added features) are seen as an authorization to thoughtlessly do any stupid deletion/change/whatever and to never backup data.

jaclaz

[allen2]

I totally agree with you, it isn't a mean to backup data (even when you can set it like in windows 2003 R2 and store the snapshots on another drive) but it can help to restore a file deleted the day before.

[meowing]

That was exactly what i was thinking when i remembered that Win7 have the shadow copy ability (which is a lot better than XP restore point) and if you manage the shadow copies efficiently you should be safe unless you have an hard drive failure.

Come on, be honest:

How often have you actually been *required* to use the shadow copy ability (which is yet another resource heavy indexing system slowing down and constantly monitoring each and every move that has been made in the OS), ever?

How often did you encounter a 'problem' that could only be recovered using that shadow copy?

I simply have not needed it once in the 17+ years I'm running machines on Win95 or newer operating systems.

I already made backups. Which I also extremely rarely needed to use for some type of recovery. At least not often enough to warrant a HUGE space and power hungry shadow copy system to be active ALL the time.

I use ERUNT with XP x64 Edition. Which is more than enough for the able computer owner/user to recover 99% of real-life occurring problems one might encounter with current-day hardware. NOT ONCE have I needed more to fix a problem I've encountered regarding the OS.

In the 10 years that I'm running ERUNT combined with a rare need of 'SafeMode' startup it has served me just fine. I did not need a Volume Shadow Copy OR System Restore system, ever. I make backups already. Which I never really needed to use, by the way. I might have used a disk backup once, simply because it saved me some time. But I could already solve ALL problems I've ever encountered with ALL Windows-machines I've administered/managed/maintained/used.

Which also underlines what I mentioned before:

It's not the system, it's the user. If the user is computer-wise, he/she doesn't need Windows to be at the Windows 7 level. The need for Windows 7 therefore doesn't exist in theory, it only exists for stupid (for the lack of a better term) or unexperienced computer owners.

Edited February 4, 2011 by meowing

[allen2]

You completly misunderstood the way i would use shadow copy: First i would create at least one primary partition for the system (about 60GB for the system) then create another one for the datas, and then setup shadow copies to be active on the data partition and only on this one. This way when you trash a file on the data partition, you'll be able to recover it if shadow copy has run between its creation and its deletion.

Also it seems you never setup shadow copies correctly as it won't run all the time if you tell it to take snapshots of the partition at 04:00 AM (then it will only begin a 04:00 AM) and take the required time to complete (should be less than one hour if the drive is fast enough and activity on this partition is low).

The way the OP said to consider the choice was that he could recover easier the data he removed so i think windows 7 might be safer for him (i never told it would be faster).

Of course if everyone were to use computer a better way, does they really need to use a gui OS in the end (most people i know use it primarily to check their emails, do internet surfing and tracking home accounts ) ?

Most of those usages doesn't really need any kind of "great" OS, you just a good OS (even a command line based OS would do).

For the computers you managed, you have an huge "luck" or perhaps your computer users cann't power on thier computer, because in my ten years working in the IT for different companies, i never once encountered a user that didn't remove the wrong file in his homedir folder. Everyone can make error you know.

Edited February 4, 2011 by allen2

[samurusawyer]

Compare Windows 7 vs. Windows Vista vs. Windows XP vs. Linux vs. Mac OS X

What do you all people think which is the best Operating System so far, Windows 7, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Linux or Mac OS X. Now with the arrival of Windows 7, will you all shift gears towards Windows 7.

Some key features for all the Operating System are as follows:

Windows 7 Features:

* There will be a OSX-like dock, though how OS X-like is yet to be seen.

* Multi-touch gestures in photogalleries like two-finger zoom, flicking, and panning. Think of the photo app on the Microsoft Surface table.

* Multi-touch paint program where you can draw with 10 fingers (again, think of what you've already seen in Surface)

* Multi-touch piano app

* In-depth mapping application that pulls from Microsoft's Live Maps and Microsoft Virtual Earth

Windows XP Features:

* Enjoy Music & Video with Windows Media Player

* Explore Digital Photography with Windows XP

* Learn more about Gaming with Windows XP.

* Create Home Movies with Windows Movie Maker.

* Find out more about Windows XP Professional operating system.

* Learn about the ultimate Photo, Music, & Movie Pack for XP

* Protect Your new Computer.

[Joseph_sw]

i have a program that dynamically creates an excel worksheet for its presentation.

while that program works on winXP (both x86 & x64) with office 2K, XP, 2003 & 2007,

that same program failed to do its job on Win7 with office 2007, windows 7 complaining that program using obsolete functions or stuff like that.

and yes, i tried those so-called 'compatibility' tab, only resulting in same, non-working solution on win7.

[MagicAndre1981]

if apps are coded badly it's not Vistas/7s fault Try to run the tool with a standard user account in XP and I think it will also fail