We do compare new things to old things, yes. Though in the technology world comparing two operating systems made 8 years apart typically doesn't happen. I see many more XP vs Windows 7 than I did Vista vs Windows 98.
Printable View
In my opinion speed is irrelevant, naturally a newer version is likely to be quicker, but I don't see this as the point. The fact is that the BETA of Windows 7 has been out for a very short period of time in the scale of software development. Therefore, we must look at how stable 7 is. Yes it may seem perfectly stable on the top, but it really hasn't been widely available long enough for a conclusion to be drawn, and there could well be some serious holes beneath the surface, as there generally are in unstable software.
Based on that, I would stick with a stable system such as Vista, or even XP. Just my opinion.
Can I just say (without causing a out-roar) that I never remember OS X 10.5 being benchmarked against OS X 10.1. Similar time difference..
I'm sure the people at least vaguely interested in Macs cared about it at the time as well as the people with a reasonable interest in technology who probably cared about seeing whether it was any good.
Why do you post to deliberately cause arguments? Do you want to come across as arrogant and for people not to like you? At least try to post constructively at some point in the foreseeable future :S.
Well he's making very generalised assumptions that are extremely unlikely to be true.
If he's going to be right about almost everything, which it seems to me like his aim, then he needs to grow up a little and make absolutely sure he is thorough in what he posts.