Comments on: Is Windows 7 less bloated than Vista?

By: Michael Pietroforte

Michael Pietroforte — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:31:34 +0000

Jack, give it a try. I am sure after a few weeks you'll wonder how you could stick with a boring OS like XP for such a long time. Simplify, these bundled apps are one reason. But this doesn't explain why Win7 works fine with 512MB. Ron, in my view money milking is quite OK. My point is that Microsoft could milk more money if they sell OS apps separately.

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:16:53 +0000

It’s not bloat until it’s on my HD.

Code on the install disk/iso is just “spare parts” waiting to be installed. On the other hand, if they put it on my hd without asking me and I have no use for it, THAT is BLOAT. Like the 64 bit code in the recovery partition on my 32 be laptop.

I really like your suggestion that Windoze be modularized and we just install the parts we need. I know the only reason MS didn’t include Bitlocker and Applocker in the Business Pro Versions of Vista & 7 where they really are needed, is that they are trying to milk more money out of companies by forcing them to upgrade. Without those features to differentiate them, PRO and Enterprise are basically the same.

By: Simplify PC Solutions

Simplify PC Solutions — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:57:30 +0000

At first blush, my guess would be that Windows 7’s smaller footprint is the result of fewer bundled apps. Remember, Microsoft is no longer preloading Photo Gallery, Movie Maker, and all that other software.

By: Jack Hughes

Jack Hughes — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:38:02 +0000

I don’t have a problem with bloat per se, but the bloat has to deliver something I want. I don’t think vista got that right.

By: El tamaño de las diferentes versiones de Windows | CyberHades

El tamaño de las diferentes versiones de Windows | CyberHades — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:02:23 +0000

[...] 4Sysops Comparte esta entrada: [...]

By: Michael Pietroforte

Michael Pietroforte — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:37:34 +0000

Aaron, thanks. Is this with or without SP2?

Christoph, the drivers certainly are a huge part. After all the main task of an OS is to manage hardware. Windows is really bloated because it supports so many different devices. That’s why I like Windows and dislike OS X. Vista SP2 and Windows 7 should have the same number of drivers. Of course, hardware vendors optimized their code too. I think the fact that Windows 7 is much faster Vista is a further hint that much of the code has been optimized.

Joe, I think programs such as Windows Mail don’t need that much space.

Nick, thanks for the info. Are these 598MB the size of the ISO file? You think the drivers are bloat too? I wonder how your Windows would boot-up without the drivers

Chrissy, thanks. This is what I guessed.

By: Chrissy LeMaire

Chrissy LeMaire — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:35:01 +0000

Interesting to see the breakdown!

Win95 OSR2’s ISO is about 82MB.

By: Nick Hammaker

Nick Hammaker — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:27:52 +0000

I have a copy of Windows 95 (with USB support) that also include the “CD Sampler” so here’s the breakdown:

Whole CD – 598MB
win95 directory – 79.1MB
drivers folder – 47.7MB
funstuff folder – 150.1MB
sampler, help, other folders – 92.4MB
demos folder – 218.2MB

So f you got rid of all the bloat/fluff on the CD, Windows 95 alone is 79MB or so. Quite “bloated” compared to Win3.1, but I think it was worth the upgrade.

By: 4sysops - Is Windows 7 less bloated than Vista? | WinSe7en

4sysops - Is Windows 7 less bloated than Vista? | WinSe7en — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:54:56 +0000

[...] than Windows Vista SP2. What do you think makes the difference in size? See the original post at: 4sysops – Is Windows 7 less bloated than Vista? Tags: Beta, Vista Categories: WebLinks Views: 0 views Posted By: Joe Last Edit: 13 Jan [...]

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:53:17 +0000

With Windows 7 moving to ‘Live’ software, some of the removed MB could be the services that are now available for download that tie into the Live services.

By: Christoph

Christoph — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:58:36 +0000

“This can mean only that Microsoft optimized the code”

*rolleyes*

Well, we all know that most of the Vista DVD are drivers. So of course, if the .ISO size of 7 is 500MB less, that this could of course only mean, that they optmized the code so much, that they reduced installation size by 2GB uncompressed.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:45:49 +0000

Windows Vista Enterprise ISOs have only the single edition – x86 is 2.14 GB and x64 is 2.81 GB.

I don’t understand people’s obsession with “bloat”, it’s a very subjective concept really.

By: Soeren P

Soeren P — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:22:10 +0000

Bloated is ok with me if I am able to select what bloat to install…

I have an image of an original Windows 98 SE (danish):
The dirs add-ons, cdsample and tools: 344MB
Driver dir: 96MB
win98 dir: 111MB
around 550MB all in all.

Unfortunately I cannot find my Win95 right now.

By: Windows Vista Articles on 13 Jan 09 | Microsoft SharePoint & Windows (Vista, Azure, 7) Cloud & Social Computing Space

Tue, 13 Jan 2009 06:55:38 +0000

[...] Is Windows 7 less bloated than Vista? (4sysops) [...]