GUI slowness was something I inmediatly noticed the very first time I booted Windows Vista. While XP SP3 was able to draw dialog boxes, menus and buttons at blazing speeds Vista crawled in comparison.

Later I learned the source of the problem was the new WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model), which among others thing such as heterogeneous display adaptors completly lacked of 2D hardware graphics acceleration, making all GDI and GDI+ applications to render in software mode which means: slower and with an higher cpu usage.

When Microsoft announced Windows 7, and its new driver model (WDDM 1.1) I thought I finally would be able to use Windows at the same speed I was used to in XP since WDDM 1.1 finally was going to get back some hardware accelerated 2D functions.

Sadly...it seems those functions are not the ones which make the XP gui so fast in comparison. So in Windows 7 we still are stuck to software render for the gui.

Windows 7 has introduced new apis and technologies to build hardware accelerated interfaces...the problem is, 99% of the system application and Windows applications are built around GDI and GDI+.

To sum up: Windows 7 GUI is almost 5 times slower than Windows XP SP3 GUI. Which in addition to many other annoyances in general usability and system responsivity means XP still the fastest and more responsive OS from Microsoft.

I guess I'll check Microsoft progress again in two or three years with Windows 8.

VIDEO DEMONSTRATION: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-gqx18UTM&fmt=18

Edit: Video showing high cpu usage in Explorer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToFgYylqP_U

Some people are just never happy..

And some can't see the evidences by themselves.

8 years...5 times slower. Good work Microsoft.

Hi there,

What do you expect with windows xp hardware on a windows 7?
First off all you should consider after windows xp there where HUGE grapichs changes.
Also even if microsoft post the minium, specs this doesent main its recommeded for you and other people.
The windows 7 introduces so many new things even like windows xp simulation so all older program will run on it.
Windows Vista at the beginning was not like we expected but also software companys make mistakes and even the MACOS does have alot things that just enoying. We are in 2009 now and windows xp hardware is from 2002. so again what do you expect?. The Computer world is changing verry fast and also the hardware does. Buy one new pc with windows 7 and come here again to discuss about the performance. If you buyd a pc for windows xp just keep it windows xp and don't upgrade to windows vista /7 becouse it isent build for that.

Good luck!

Lol, you clearly have no idea about computers. Probably you didn't fully understand what I said in my post.

The gui is slow you're posting it, Why the gui is slow ? ??

So what exactly does this impact? Your inability to click 5 times as fast? Some example of why this is important would help me understand the significance.

Edit: Nevermind, just watched the video and I have to say that this is just nitpicking, trying to find everything they possibly can to smash Windows 7. It's a bit pathetic to be honest and just goes to show that there are people out there that will waste their time with these meaningless comparisons.

Ok, Microsoft should definitely fix this. I mean honestly the GUI isn't that slow, but it should still be fixed. Honestly though, maybe the benchmarks will say differently, but I find Mac OS X to be FAR worse. Try resizing an iphoto window. Check out that lag. Try dragging a large icon around the screen (large cover-flow icon) and watch it skip as you drag it across. Open a safari or firefox youtube video and click something on the menu bar. Watch that video lag like hell. Anyone play free rider for fun? Try playing that on full screen in Mac OS X, its like playing with a slow motion cheat code it's so choppy, but the same on XP/Vista/Seven and it works perfectly with no lag. I'm a Mac fanboy to be honest but I still see it's flaws. All of this experience came from hackintoshes and Mac Pro's at retail apple stores. (These little glitches annoyed me so much I went to the apple store and tested them on their best rigs) And honestly, they shouldn't be happening even on my hackintosh as I have an 8800GT, same as VooD. These little lags and glitches are found throughout OS X. I think my point is every OS has its flaws, and if your really gonna bitch about some black artifacts while resizing some windows and your going to stay on an OS that is 8 years old just because of that, I think you have a problem buddy. I still don't like Windows, I think it should be better, but I think most would agree that XP's flaws far far surpass seven's flaws. Leopard has flaws, seven does, vista does (obviously =P) and so does XP.

Let say the black artifacts are an extra, what it really annoys me is the average slowness of both the GUI and the system itself. The fact there are lots of unnecesary features using cpu time, lots of programmed tasks, lots of usability mistakes (lack of up level button for example), an unnecesary cluttered control panel and configuration windows, 20 ways to setup a same setting, lack of classic start menu (the new one is a nightmare for expert users),etc...

But, on top of all that, the fact Windows XP SP3 is a lot faster, and 7 doesn't offer any significant improvemente over XP (I can't imagine anything I need to do which I couldn't do faster or easier on XP) is what makes make stay away from 7.

All I can say is try yourself. I wouldn't call meaningless to have a 8 years old OS performing almost 5 times better than the brand new Windows 7.

If you need more info, check MSDN forums, it's not something it suddenly came to me. This problem has been present in Windows since the very first Vista beta, and generated many questions to Microsoft from developers which suddenly found their applications GUI performing a lot worse and using way more cpu than they should.

All of us had big expectations with Windows 7, but that doesn't mean we have to look away as if there were no problems at all and Windows 7 was finally the solution to all Vista problems. Windows 7 have some design problems, and the one regarding GDI slowness is probably one of the biggests.

Okay, so it uses more CPU than it should. Shouldn't really be a problem unless you're using a program that is CPU intensive such as gaming/rendering/video editing. And even still when those programs are doing their thing, you shouldn't be trying to pull resources from it anyway. The only group I could see this affecting are with people who have ancient computers with crappy CPU's.

When it comes to your "It's been 8 years WTF MICROSOFT" statement, I'm not exactly sure what your point is. I'm not extremely savvy on how making an operating system works, but I'm sure they choose to have the CPU render the GUI for compatibility rather than performance. Either way, you call it a problem yet haven't given a clear cut example like "Oh man, my program fails to function because the GUI renders so damn slow!". So I still find this whole thing meaningless nitpicking.

Wow... VooD... I just cannot believe Microsoft...

I thought they'll fix the 2D rendering slowness by Win 7 (because I noticed it in Vista too)... but wow.. who? Who the hell IS in charge of Windows 7!!?? or Vista??!

I don't know how much this is going to effect me as a Windows 7 user but.. C'MON Microsoft... Get it TOGETHER!!

and btw..

@ Hoplita..



L.O.L you crack me up..

I have an nVidia 7600; and what is this?

FYI: GDI is not used to draw Windows, it is used to draw fonts and other vector graphics.

They choose software render because they found too difficult to combine the new graphical engine with the old one. If you want to learn more about it read this: http://blogs.msdn.com/directx/archive/2009...in-windows.aspx

GDI has dozens of functions: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd...28VS.85%29.aspx

GDI hardware acceleration in Windows 7 using WDDM 1.1 drivers has only these functions hardware accelerated: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd434692.aspx

I show in the video how slow is the services.msc window, and the graphical artifacts it has, but it's not the only one. Probably is one of the applications where this issue is more easily spotted but there are many others in a lesser degree depending on how they call GDI functions.

Windows 7 has several integrated solutions to circumvent the lack of 2d graphical acceleration...the problem is those solutions require full rewrite of the every single application's gui in order to use the new direct2d and directwrite, including the ones bundled with the os (file explorer, dialog boxes, management windows, etc...) and that's not going to happen in years, not from Microsoft itself, nor from 3rd party developers. I don't see Adobe porting their suite to Direct2D any soon..and anyway, the system will always stay GDI/GDI+ based. Probably until the next Windows version.

What I explain in the video is a reality, it have been already discussed for years since Vista was released (the problem started there), and many developers had complaints about. It's definetively not a false statement, and all you have to do to believe it is try it by yourself.

All of us had big expectations with Windows 7, but that doesn't mean we have to look away as if there were no problems and Windows 7 was finally the solution to all Vista problems. Windows 7 have some design problems, and the one regarding GDI is probably one of the biggests

We will not see any better results over the time other than the ones related with the improvement in cpu speeds.

WDDM 1.1 drivers makes mandatory this new "partial" GDI hardware acceleration. So any driver which claims to be 1.1 is already accelerating as much as it ever will.

Too bad, the results I got were based on WDDM 1.1 drivers (both from nvidia and Microsoft itself).

So this is all we get. Microsoft had to include this partial GDI acceleration, because those functions were way too slow in software mode, but it seems they thought the rest of them were not.....(which is not correct).

About the real world impact. I can clearly see the real world impact of this decision as soon as I boot Windows 7 and start working. There is people who's not able to see the difference between a game running at 60 fps from the same game running a 30 fps. There's also people not able to ear the difference between a 128kb mp3 and a real CD Audio.

All I can say is, there is a real difference, a difference you can meter, and at least me and some other people are able to feel in every day Windows 7 use.

Probably many people is blinded by the novelty and don't want to accept there are some problems with the new and overrated Microsoft system.

I think I will give up trying to make you people see the reality. It's really exhausting trying to demonstrate 1+1 = 2 over and over. The facts are there, I gave you the proofs, Microsoft addmited the problem, many developers complaint about, what else do you need?

bye

I don't need anything. I just wanted a clear cut example of how this adversely affects you and even though you wrote a novel up there, you completely ignored actually giving one and going with statements like "All I can say is, there is a real difference...". My only argument is that you're seemingly trying to smash the new operating system because your windows don't render as fast as XP, and thus make it sound like Windows 7 is obsolete from this issue (I'll call it issue since it doesn't really justify the word "problem").

I'll just leave it with what the second poster said.

"Some people are just never happy.."

Do the test yourself, then talk. I have nothing else to add.

I run 7 smoothly on my Wind. You cant get slower than that and it rocks.

You really haven't read anything I've said, have you? I'm not denying your statistics, I'm saying that they have no impact on anything other the fact you notice it to be slower.

It seems you are the one who haven't read anything. Even developers had complaints about this. And if the fact an os 8 years newer has worse GDI perfomance (the api which builds 98% of windows gui) than XP is not something with "impact" I can't imagine what else could be.



Check again: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd...28VS.85%29.aspx

There are lots of GDI functions involved in drawing Windows interface. From blitting to line drawing, color filling, etc...

Read this: http://blogs.msdn.com/directx/archive/2009...in-windows.aspx

running 32 bit apps' on 7 x64 is a tad pedestrian !!

I'll be interested to see how Final Cut holds up on SL

?

They complain that it's slower. Is that all? Is that the only problem they are facing? Because once again you have yet to give any specifics.

As I said, some people isn't able to see the difference between 30 or 60 fps, or an audio CD and a 128kbps. Probably you are one of those.

Why don't you test by yourself what I show in the video about MMC's windows?

Or, why don't you put icon view, then go to c:\windows\system32 and try to scroll up and down while you look at your cpu usage?

I'll save you the effort. You'll get nearly 100% cpu usage, bad scrolling response, and the movement isn't any near of smooth. By comparison in XP you'll use about 15% cpu, and you'll get a supersmoth scrolling, the same happen in MacOS X, smooth and responsive scrolling, low cpu usage.

Anyway I don't understand why you keep posting here. You think Windows 7 is great? Ok. Then go a create a new topic talking about...I won't write anything there for sure.

Bye

I don't think it's great. It's nice, not great. No need to get defensive I was just trying to figure out the logic behind this post and why you call it out like is a serious OS breaking problem. I just realized there is no logic to it and people just like to bitch about anything and everything. Good research though.

Again, if a GUI system almost 5 times slower than the one in XP doesn't seem a problem to you I don't know what will ever be.
I don't know what do you expect from each new Windows version...but I think most of us expect improvements, and in this area (and some others) the results are MUCH worse.

Maybe it's just I expected a much better OS after 8 years of development, and maybe it's you are easily satisfied.

Im running windows Seven X64 RTM.. any slow issues here? Nope

lets see the specs are as followed

AlianWare Aurua
AMD Phanton X4 2.2GHZ
16 GIG ram
7.1 Sound
Nvidia G260 896MB

nope no issues here.. oh did I forget to tell u it runs faster and draws 2d/3d images quicker then windows xp sp3 dose?


it must be that x64 with 16 gig that dose it compared to x86 with only 3 gig usable?

my point is don't expect to run a os that is 9 years newer then your hardware.. and if you do run it. you by rights have no rights to complain about it.

and if your looking for a os that lets say over 9 year dosn't improve much run linux.

for example Fedora Core 1-11 not much as changed beside a few kernel updates with ether KDE or Grome slightly updated.. in the end FC11 is almost the same FC1. Were it can run the same packages as well as install and run the same performance on the same hardware over a 9 year period

what your really looking for is not change at all.. your one of those people that alwazs live in the past and can never seem to jump into the flowing stream of ever changing life

You know...

I've been reading this topic and feel a little bad for VooD for getting all these "attacks". What he simply did was to show you that Microsoft has left out the 2D performance issue with Vista and carried it through Windows 7. I myself thought that this would be solved because almost EVERY program that uses a window/scrollbar/menu system "GDI" based. It seems that he is right and that Windows 7 still doesn't fix the problem with WWDM 1.1? (in his video and my very own test)

Nothing mentioned anything about Windows 7 being "bad" . Heck, I'm planning to run it on my rig once I build it in Oct. Looking at the review and having tested the beta version, it seem like an awesome operating system.

C'mon ppl, stop picking on the guy. He did nothing wrong!

@ ChoclateJeff

Yeah your right and maybe drawing is a bit slower etc. But I find the OS is smooth. After a long time Micorsoft made a half-decent OS. I only use Windows for Games. And they run faster on 7 than on XP. Maybe thats due to 64-bit or whatever, but they are smoother and better.

Of course MS can never ever produce software as good as OSX, which is why OSX will always be my main OS. I dunno about 2D drawing or whatever, but with 4 Cores I really couldn't care less.

I was merely looking for an example of how this adversely affects tasks done while using Windows 7. He doesn't give one. So even with all his research and comments, I still believe that this is just a case of trying to find anything and everything with wrong with said product. I kept my posting as neutral as possible.

Are you blind?



It's like talking to a wall.

No, stop taking it personally. I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, no need to get so defensive. I just don't think you understand what I'm asking for here; all you give is examples of scrolling and how it uses too much CPU, that's ALL.. You post something on a forum and expect people to follow your opinion blindly? In a perfect world maybe.

Relax, I'm just trying to find the significance in this other than the fact that scrolling uses too much CPU and that developers bitch about it.

omg....so what did you give me in order to illustrate what you say other than your standart "it's ok here"? I gave you real data, I even recorded it in video because I suspected something like this would happen (people blinded by their "fanboysm"), provided documentation, what else do you need? "E pur si muove"?????

About the scrolling (in fact all of GDI based functions)...I guess you have never used real time priority software. Just imagine this: I'm working on the final mixing for an album in Protools and I'm already using almost 4 of my cores at 100%. Now, while I play the song I decide to open the mixer view, and scroll it in order to get access to a non initially visible bus so I can change its level and hear the results at the same time....and what happens?

The song stops:

"Your CPU has no enough power to play this project"

That's right, GDI used so much cpu time from one of my cores that Protools had not enough power processing to keep the song playing.

Or in case, you make your application to have the highest priority you would find the scrolling so slow that it would be very difficult to work with.

I'm not wasting a single second with your comments anymore, specially given that all of your arguments are exclusively based on your subjective statement : "I don't see any problem", "It's fast enough for me", etc...

I really wish I could just ignore all of the Windows 7 problems as you do, but I can't.

So please. If you don't agree with what I explained (and demonstrated), just ignore this thread and enjoy your Windows 7.

Bye

VooD I actually tried to do what you did in your video.. nope I just can't seem to do it on my ring

I even tryed it in classic view no go there ether...

Thank you for giving a clear cut example other than the scrolling but First and foremost, I already posted before saying that I was not denying it, I cannot deny clear cut evidence. You make the implication that I'm fanboy, yet I have not once even defended this operating system in this entire topic, I said Windows 7 was nice.

Lets get one thing square here, if you're going try and quote me (or even attempt to make it seem like I said something), make sure I've said it to begin with. I never said anything about it being fast enough for me, I never even cared to try it (the test to see if it uses boatloads of CPU). Oh but wait I'm a fanboy I should have Windows 7 installed and up and running at all times right? Nope, I use OSX exclusively at the moment because Windows screws up too much for my liking.

All your assumptions and your extremely defensive attitude make me wonder why you even posting things on a discussion board. You posted it here for feedback, because if you didn't want anyone talking to you about this you wouldn't have posted it on a DISCUSSION board. I'm trying to not be dick about it, but you insist on crying like a baby who just got their candy stolen. So how about you put your big boy pants on and learn to discuss and read things properly, without putting words in people's mouths and actually reading what people ask for instead of being like "omg u r blind?!"

Thanks.

hmm I tried your idea with my windows xp sp3 and when I resize the service windows it lags with white..... a lot of white.. I even manged to freeze it twice.

I also noticed your running 8600GT 256 with is 4.0 Pixal shader but only 8-16 pipelines depending your who made the 8600GT your running...

Im running a card that has 36 Pixel pipelines


for anyone out ther that runs windows hold down the windows key(beside alt) + "E" for about 10 seconds.. now thats interesting stuff if u ask me

@VooD,
Tried what you did on your video, not happening on my Win 7 RC x64 and Vista X64. Notice we almost have the same spec except for the video memory. There must be something wrong on your system.

I've tested that on several different computers, with both ATI and nvidia cards. The problems has nothing to do win x64, number of pixel shaders, or ram. The problem is tha lack of GDI 2d acceleration which is something Microsoft removed since Vista. Read the video description, for detailed info.

(can anyone post a video showing smooth column resizing in services.msc, and low cpu usage while scrolling c:\windows\system32\ in icon view? )

Anyway the main point is not the artifacts in the composition system. Is the general slowness the lack of GDI acceleration causes. Try yourself any GDI test in both XP and Windows 7 and compare the performance. (I wonder if most people just stops the video after the first 20 seconds...)

Even Passmark's coder has confirmed this behaviour, and the huge performance difference between XP and Windows 7 GUI system. And believe me, they have tested this in many many many different computers. It's their job.

Benchmarks: Windows 7 RTM versus Vista, XP





liked it enough to dump my osx

Errr..there is only one benchmark comparing it with XP (and at least for me XP still boot faster). Anyway, dumping osx for Windows 7 is too much.

Why do we keep comparing VISTA/7 with XP!!????....XP is almost 8 years old now!!.... When XP was released back in 2001-2002 it faced same criticism that vista/7 face today!.. They didn't like the theme.. thought 128 MB ram was too much to ask!

And I can definitely say that Vista/7 are faster when GDI is concerned.. just try the following tests->
1)Create a form with visual studio with 50% opacity. try resizing it by code and measure the time taken using a stopwatch(system.diagnostics) and then compare it in Vista.
2) create a form with some background image and add about 50 labels with transparent background. Try refreshing them and match the time!

Also the icons in Vista are using PNG compression.. thus making the whole process even more resource hungry..
Whether its XP or Vista..GDI was always rendered through CPU..
GPU comes into the picture only with Direct X.

Biggest problem in Vista is the background indexing... System really gets a big boost by switching that off!.
And XP has to boot faster!.. Its running on a machine almost 12-20 times the power that it was originally meant to run!
Try windows 98,it would run even faster!!!

Also check out Leopard on a macbook with GMA 950 GPU.. You can see a lag in the dock animation and also the genie effects!!

Its easy to complain and criticize things!.. Windows has got so many options for a developer!..If you want your application to be graphic intensive then its wise to use WPF!!..And if thats not enough use DirectX to render your components!

I run and old copy of adobe premiere CS on win7x64 and it runs like a sack of sh1t compared to XP.
I'm the first to admitt I now very little about this but I'm under the impression the 32bit libraries aint up to much.
FCP (32bit) on leopard is fine.

That's correct, they had 8 years to improve the code and build a faster os, but they obviosuly didn't.

I've already tried 3 different GDI tests (one built specificly to test render time in windows 7 vs xp by a person who initially didn't believe my results). All of them scored MUCH better in XP.

That's not correct. Check the documentation on this thread or in the video's description.

And that's related somehow with Windows 7 lack of hardware GDI?

The problem is 99% of nowaday''s windows apps are GDI based, and so does most of the os components, and since microsoft decided no longer to support full hardware gdi acceleration they will draw everything slower and using much more cpu than they did in XP.

Yes! 8 years!!.. and how can you say things haven't improved!!... just because GDI is slow(according to me its not)!!
there are tons of drawbacks!.. but they don't negate the features!..
Its not just building a faster OS.. Its about evolution as a whole!...
As for application incompatibility.. or apps being slower!.. Yes I have to agree!.. on that!!..

But again the question is why are they getting slow!???..
There's lot more to to take care in case of vista/7... than in case of XP. Incase of vista the windows are rendered much more smoothly and perfectly than in case of XP... Not all components are rendered through GDI!.. The glass or Aero part in Vista and 7 is rendered differently than rest of the window..
Plus there are a lot of old APIs which though are supported by Vista.. but their implementation internally is not same as it was in XP or before..A lot of applications simply don't support Aero.. they switch to standard theme!.. but their new versions work just as they would on XP.
One thing for sure is that Microsoft is having tough time balancing between Hardware Acceleration and CPU rendering(software) as there are still a lot of machines out there that simply don't have enough graphic power!

I would not say that, Windows at the moment is perfect!!.. but its exciting to see the development thats going on!.. It's come a long way since the Vista RC1... which was slower than XP running in a virtual machine... to "7" which actually promises to bring the performance back.. without losing frills of Vista!...

Also just finished writing code for my app(InSight Desktop Search)... and had tough time getting the animations right!.. in lot of cases XP would render the app in 15 ms while Vista on same machine would do it in about 2-5 ms!!..
Also controls flicker while we hover another window over the application in case of XP.. while in Vista its smooth!!.. So as far as I have experienced..Its better in Vista/7!.

And I have read whatever thats there on this post!.. and again GDI is not rendered by hardware!!

As per your posted Videos:
*Cpu usage being higher is also due to the fact that.. as we scroll HDD is being accessed and that involves CPU!!!!!!!!!!
We have not actually considered what happening when we scroll?? Is it just drawing of icons...?????
leaving everything else aside.. just considering the fact that icons in case of vista are having "png" compression thus better support for alpha channel..CPU hike can be expected!!!!!
*There are just a few GDI features that support hardware acceleration!!!!.
*As of what I know..listbox..panels..etc are controls are rendered through CPU only!(not considering WPF Apps and DirectX rendered controls)
Also GUI(controls) are more graphically complex in case of Vista/7

The only point I want to make is that!... its about time that hardware acceleration reaches every part of whats being drawn on screen..And at same time not just compare it with XP!.. Its not that XP had hardware acceleration and Vista/7 don't!!!
I think a fare comparison would be if we create a test that only involves the drawing capability of GDI!..

just to shuffle things up all this talk about GUI and slowness. and in some cases OSX how come no ones charmed in about X.11/Xorg Gnome/KDE/Xface? or dose linux really suck that much that no one talks of it..

actually linux really dose suck that bad but thats no my point

Windows Vista and 7 have double buffered vertical syncronization, that's why you get flickering in XP and not in Vista/7. Also I believe transparecies are managed by the new compositing system which uses full direct3d acceleration (which has the potential to overpass the old gdi functions)



http://blogs.msdn.com/directx/archive/2009...in-windows.aspx : "With the release of Windows Vista, GDI hardware acceleration was removed. " Cards even as old as the first geforce had full gdi hardware acceleration. Please, make a more in depth research. GDI hardware acceleration has been present in Windows for years, and even some brands such as Matrox made of its GDI acceleration one of their main selling point (by arguing theirs was faster than the competency).

Yep, you can see how in the Windows 7 part, at first all the 4 cores are used as the png decoding and hd accessing is done, but once is cached in ram, there's still one full core used at 100%.

Never wondered what that pretty slider at Windows XP video properties did? I will give you the answer: switching between different 2d hardware acceleration levels

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms797889.aspx

GDI operations are in fact executed at driver level in the video hardware.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms799616.aspx


That's exactly what Passmark PerfomanceTest GUI perfomance test does, and so does CrystalMark GDI test, and the same goes to the small GDI test a guy coded in order to test this issue. All of them showed a huge perfomance difference between Windows XP and Windows 7.

OP is an idiot. 2D performance is better thanks to Direct2D.

Oh and there is another little thing. You are talking about an unreleased OS. Snow Leopard on my Macbook Pro isn't exactly great either.

I know this is a Mac forum but I don't see the need for blind bias.

QFT.

Im running windows 7 and i can tell you it pisses all over xp & vista ,,,

[ironic]Nice scientific statement, I got a ford T and it pisses all over ferrari and lamborghini[/ironic]

lol

heres ignorance^^^^

just becuz windows 7 GDI in your view blows out the a@@ dose not mean it takes the entire os down!

as for the statement above in the long run windows Seven dose in fact piss all over Xp and vista

after all theres more to a os then GDI or are u blinded by the fact that this small irreverent GDI problem have your eyes distorted for the real view of windows seven?

oh talking about the lack of GDI have you ever wonder why this really is! Or are u still gripping to the past... if you havn't got from underneath your rock let me give u what you been missing

"DirectWrite is one of the new additions to the DirectX family of APIs in Windows 7. DirectWrite enables better readability, adds support for a large variety of languages and scripts, and in conjunction with Direct2D provides superior rendering performance for Windows applications. Applications can also use DirectWrite with GDI and carry forward existing investments in the Win32 code base. You can read more about DirectWrite here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd...28VS.85%29.aspx