Sign In
Register
Help
Driving a new car – The Vista Decision
It's always there. The question is asked every day. Which operating system should I get, and What about Vista? This article describes my thoughts on the newest Microsoft desktop operating system, and why you will move on.
When I was young, I wanted a car. It really didn't matter what kind of car it was, but everybody else had a car, and I had to have one. After having a car for only a little while I realized that having a car was much more enjoyable if it was a little newer, a little faster, and had more features than the rest. So, that old Classic Caprice had to go. Boy, I sure loved the new sports car, and had many good trips and times I had in it. Eventually, as my life changed and family evolved, so did my car. I was more mature, responsible, and smarter. I needed a car that would reflect myself as an individual, and the car had to have all the features to support every asset of my life. We all have had to change our vehicles to accommodate our lifestyle as it changed. In the end we came out with a car more expensive, more reliable, and packed with more technology.
The Windows operating system has always been an ever changing entity. We as consumers and end users sometimes feel like the Guinea pigs of the computing world. Or do we? I read every day about people complaining about Vista. It's too expensive, it's not reliable, it doesn't have the features that justify moving from the reliable previous version XP. WHAT? Is it me, or does no one remember the issues that Windows XP had, still has, and will continue to have? Let's see; I remember installing 50+ updates to XP before service pack 1 ever came out. I remember the lack of drivers and support for hardware in the beginning; not to mention the fact that we are still finding OS vulnerabilities to this day for XP. If there was ever an operating system that needed help it was XP.
I have been using Vista for over 2 years now, and was involved in the beta testing. I have seen where this operating system started, and what improvements and fixes were incorporated into the final release to the public. I was a true believer until Vista RC1 (Release Candidate 1) that it was doomed to fail. Microsoft did one good thing when releasing Vista, that was test it, and not release until it was ready. When I say ready, I mean that it was functional, and it had been tested enough that it was time to give it a road trip to find it's true performance issues, and reliability factors.
Here are some benefits, at a glance, that I think everyone should think about.
Installation - Basically, insert DVD, boot, input product key, select installation type, and wait for it to finish.
Features - Enhanced graphic user interface, full collaboration software (i.e. email, calendar, fax, instant messaging, document sharing, etc), user and OS security, file organization, backup and file encryption, mobile PC capabilities, improved networking feature, and more.
Versions - Although looked at as a bad thing, Microsoft released several versions of the operating system which allows the user to get what they need for the right cost. Starting with the Vista basic version and continuing to Ultimate, Vista provides the user with the ability to purchase the version that applies to their environment and computing needs.
Using Vista is a new experience, and one that I find really enjoyable. The issues that I have run into with the OS are problems with older hardware, and third party program compatibility. Is it a show stopper? Not at all, and most major vendors of software have released a Vista version or a patch to allow it to run.
Car manufacturers put out new models every year, and almost every one of them has some sort of recall. Not one car manufacturer is responsible for making every consumer happy; every manufacturer of vehicles has multiple models.
Microsoft produces operating systems probably on an average of five to seven years. They have the responsibility of providing a product in minimal selections of version to the major population of people. Having that kind of responsibility would seem overwhelming, but has proven to be a task that Microsoft successfully takes on.
Vista in whatever flavor you choose will be your new car.
James Patterson
VP / Director of Technology
JP2 Technologies, Inc
Your Feedback: An Open Letter to Microsoft About Vista
MultiQuote
#83
Evildave 
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 31 March 2008 - 09:58 PM
Yes, I like the car metaphor.
Microsoft is marketing pretty-painted crap like the American car companies have always done.
Oil, for this example, is computer power, as measured by 'Moore's Law'.
In the 80's, American cars got bigger. SUVs became more popular. Because oil was cheap, we made big, crappy cars. The car companies lied about the safety of their SUVs. At the same time, they were marketed as 'safer', when in fact they were more likely to roll over if you made a sudden turn to avoid a collision. Twenty or so years later, and all those big cars seem a bit silly now that fuel prices are edging past $4 a gallon.
So here we have Vista. Efficient like a Hummer H2. Safe like an '84 Ford Bronco with under-inflated (per Ford's specification) Firestone tires so it rides 'smooth'. All the acceleration, handling and ease of parking of a zeppelin. Green like rust on an AMC Gremlin. Reliable as entropy
And at the same time we also have a little 'hiccup' in Moore's law where the installed consumer hardware curve doesn't quite match up with expectations because everybody is trying to save a buck or two, seeing as a 'dollar' is worth about half as much as it was last year, and as a result everything (except real estate) is costing twice as much. Real estate, being the major investment of the 'little guy' is falling faster than the dollar, while at the same time the very value of the dollar it's valued by is shrinking away, too.
So thanks a LOT Microsoft. Vista will run GREAT if only you will pay twice as much for your PC hardware! Just take out another equity mortgage... oh wait, you have no equity now. Well, too bad you bought that desktop machine, now that you're gonna be homeless.
We'll paint 'go fast' lines down the side of the case and dump a whole bottle of 'new car smell' perfume in the keyboard. That'll make Vista a winner.
Microsoft is marketing pretty-painted crap like the American car companies have always done.
Oil, for this example, is computer power, as measured by 'Moore's Law'.
In the 80's, American cars got bigger. SUVs became more popular. Because oil was cheap, we made big, crappy cars. The car companies lied about the safety of their SUVs. At the same time, they were marketed as 'safer', when in fact they were more likely to roll over if you made a sudden turn to avoid a collision. Twenty or so years later, and all those big cars seem a bit silly now that fuel prices are edging past $4 a gallon.
So here we have Vista. Efficient like a Hummer H2. Safe like an '84 Ford Bronco with under-inflated (per Ford's specification) Firestone tires so it rides 'smooth'. All the acceleration, handling and ease of parking of a zeppelin. Green like rust on an AMC Gremlin. Reliable as entropy
And at the same time we also have a little 'hiccup' in Moore's law where the installed consumer hardware curve doesn't quite match up with expectations because everybody is trying to save a buck or two, seeing as a 'dollar' is worth about half as much as it was last year, and as a result everything (except real estate) is costing twice as much. Real estate, being the major investment of the 'little guy' is falling faster than the dollar, while at the same time the very value of the dollar it's valued by is shrinking away, too.
So thanks a LOT Microsoft. Vista will run GREAT if only you will pay twice as much for your PC hardware! Just take out another equity mortgage... oh wait, you have no equity now. Well, too bad you bought that desktop machine, now that you're gonna be homeless.
We'll paint 'go fast' lines down the side of the case and dump a whole bottle of 'new car smell' perfume in the keyboard. That'll make Vista a winner.
#84
anfy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 43
- Joined: 07-February 08
Posted 31 March 2008 - 10:21 PM
Evildave said:
Yes, I like the car metaphor.
Microsoft is marketing pretty-painted crap like the American car companies have always done.
Oil, for this example, is computer power, as measured by 'Moore's Law'.
In the 80's, American cars got bigger. SUVs became more popular. Because oil was cheap, we made big, crappy cars. The car companies lied about the safety of their SUVs. At the same time, they were marketed as 'safer', when in fact they were more likely to roll over if you made a sudden turn to avoid a collision. Twenty or so years later, and all those big cars seem a bit silly now that fuel prices are edging past $4 a gallon.
So here we have Vista. Efficient like a Hummer H2. Safe like an '84 Ford Bronco with under-inflated (per Ford's specification) Firestone tires so it rides 'smooth'. All the acceleration, handling and ease of parking of a zeppelin. Green like rust on an AMC Gremlin. Reliable as entropy
And at the same time we also have a little 'hiccup' in Moore's law where the installed consumer hardware curve doesn't quite match up with expectations because everybody is trying to save a buck or two, seeing as a 'dollar' is worth about half as much as it was last year, and as a result everything (except real estate) is costing twice as much. Real estate, being the major investment of the 'little guy' is falling faster than the dollar, while at the same time the very value of the dollar it's valued by is shrinking away, too.
So thanks a LOT Microsoft. Vista will run GREAT if only you will pay twice as much for your PC hardware! Just take out another equity mortgage... oh wait, you have no equity now. Well, too bad you bought that desktop machine, now that you're gonna be homeless.
We'll paint 'go fast' lines down the side of the case and dump a whole bottle of 'new car smell' perfume in the keyboard. That'll make Vista a winner.
Microsoft is marketing pretty-painted crap like the American car companies have always done.
Oil, for this example, is computer power, as measured by 'Moore's Law'.
In the 80's, American cars got bigger. SUVs became more popular. Because oil was cheap, we made big, crappy cars. The car companies lied about the safety of their SUVs. At the same time, they were marketed as 'safer', when in fact they were more likely to roll over if you made a sudden turn to avoid a collision. Twenty or so years later, and all those big cars seem a bit silly now that fuel prices are edging past $4 a gallon.
So here we have Vista. Efficient like a Hummer H2. Safe like an '84 Ford Bronco with under-inflated (per Ford's specification) Firestone tires so it rides 'smooth'. All the acceleration, handling and ease of parking of a zeppelin. Green like rust on an AMC Gremlin. Reliable as entropy
And at the same time we also have a little 'hiccup' in Moore's law where the installed consumer hardware curve doesn't quite match up with expectations because everybody is trying to save a buck or two, seeing as a 'dollar' is worth about half as much as it was last year, and as a result everything (except real estate) is costing twice as much. Real estate, being the major investment of the 'little guy' is falling faster than the dollar, while at the same time the very value of the dollar it's valued by is shrinking away, too.
So thanks a LOT Microsoft. Vista will run GREAT if only you will pay twice as much for your PC hardware! Just take out another equity mortgage... oh wait, you have no equity now. Well, too bad you bought that desktop machine, now that you're gonna be homeless.
We'll paint 'go fast' lines down the side of the case and dump a whole bottle of 'new car smell' perfume in the keyboard. That'll make Vista a winner.
I'm sorry but I'm afraid you haven't given many objective points in your argument. Actually, maybe not the sorry part.
To be honest, I was under the impression that Vista is still not as secure as it's said to be, but reading the recent article about the MacBook Air/Vista/Ubuntu hacking contest proved otherwise.
Vista, MacBook Out--Only Linux Left in Hacking Contest
The MacBook Air was out on the second day (according to the article, the computer was hacked in 2 minutes), and Vista was considerably harder to hack, especially with SP1. The person who hacked the Vista machine had to use a bug in Java to hack into Vista, and it took 5 days (two whole days of work). The Java exploit is also a vulnerability for Macs and Linux. The Linux machine had its vulnerabilities too, but people didn't want to put in the work to write the exploit.
On the note that you have to pay twice as much for a computer -- that's a total lie. It's not that people have to pay twice as much for a computer powerful enough to run Vista -- people are expecting to pay half as much and still run it. My $1400 laptop (now worth less than $1000) from last summer runs Vista Ultimate 64-bit perfectly fine, and that was barely higher than the average price of a laptop. A desktop with similar specs shouldn't run more than $500~600. Many users have also reported Vista crashing a lot less than XP (personally neither crashed very much for me). I think many of us forget the troubles we had when XP first came out too. Things just take time to settle in.
Btw, not that this matters, but IMO, american cars for the most part look fugly compared to german and japanese cars. No offense to those who do own american cars, but that's just my opinion :P
#85
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 01 April 2008 - 10:21 AM
My $2500 laptop that I paid for last summer (from Dell) DOESN'T run it anymore. Actually, it's still taking up space on a partition that doesn't get booted. Of course I'm not 'objective'. I got BURNED. Linux runs quite nicely, and older Windows OSs run A-OK in a virtual machine window under Linux.
Microsoft is applying the same high standards as AMC did when their brand new Gremlins were rusting in the showroom, and consumers are defending Microsoft for it.
"Holy $#@%! We've been working on this thing long enough! JUST SHIP
IT!"
If you want a comparable Software industry story, Once upon a time, Sierra On-Line
shipped a game that would not install and run on ANY machine without a patch. They knew it, and they shipped
it anyway because they had set a delivery milestone with the retail
chains that were expecting to put it on the shelves, and they'd lose that shelf space.
Ford quite recently had a wonderful recall. it seemed the transmissions on their diesel pickups were failing at an unacceptably high rate. The fix? Make all the consumers bring their trucks in to the dealer and have the engine re-chipped not to have as much power as they were promised when they purchesed them, or void the warranty. That went over ever so well with all the people who spent $50,000 on a 'heavy duty' pickup with tons of horsepower and torque in order to tow a heavy trailer. Now less expensive components on the engines go 'pop' when they take hills with a load. Great, a pickup truck shaped passenger vehicle is just what they all wanted. Not anything that could do a JOB. Nope.
That's another good match with Microsoft shipping Vista with promises of power, and delivering a useless pig.
The other small point is that when people are expecting to pay half as much for a machine that runs Vista OK it is exactly the same thing as saying that computers that run Vista 'OK' cost twice as much as consumers want to spend. Go to a retail store like 'Best Buy' or whatever, and you'll find brand new Vista machines with 512MB or RAM. They're 'Vista Capable'. It says so on the sticker. See? It even boots. Sure, that's just about all it will do without a major upgrade (or replacing the OS with something a little less BLOATED), but hey, consumers are IDIOTS.
Microsoft is applying the same high standards as AMC did when their brand new Gremlins were rusting in the showroom, and consumers are defending Microsoft for it.
"Holy $#@%! We've been working on this thing long enough! JUST SHIP
IT!"
If you want a comparable Software industry story, Once upon a time, Sierra On-Line
shipped a game that would not install and run on ANY machine without a patch. They knew it, and they shipped
it anyway because they had set a delivery milestone with the retail
chains that were expecting to put it on the shelves, and they'd lose that shelf space.
Ford quite recently had a wonderful recall. it seemed the transmissions on their diesel pickups were failing at an unacceptably high rate. The fix? Make all the consumers bring their trucks in to the dealer and have the engine re-chipped not to have as much power as they were promised when they purchesed them, or void the warranty. That went over ever so well with all the people who spent $50,000 on a 'heavy duty' pickup with tons of horsepower and torque in order to tow a heavy trailer. Now less expensive components on the engines go 'pop' when they take hills with a load. Great, a pickup truck shaped passenger vehicle is just what they all wanted. Not anything that could do a JOB. Nope.
That's another good match with Microsoft shipping Vista with promises of power, and delivering a useless pig.
The other small point is that when people are expecting to pay half as much for a machine that runs Vista OK it is exactly the same thing as saying that computers that run Vista 'OK' cost twice as much as consumers want to spend. Go to a retail store like 'Best Buy' or whatever, and you'll find brand new Vista machines with 512MB or RAM. They're 'Vista Capable'. It says so on the sticker. See? It even boots. Sure, that's just about all it will do without a major upgrade (or replacing the OS with something a little less BLOATED), but hey, consumers are IDIOTS.
#86
anfy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 43
- Joined: 07-February 08
Posted 01 April 2008 - 11:39 AM
Evildave said:
My $2500 laptop that I paid for last summer (from Dell) DOESN'T run it anymore. Actually, it's still taking up space on a partition that doesn't get booted. Of course I'm not 'objective'. I got BURNED. Linux runs quite nicely, and older Windows OSs run A-OK in a virtual machine window under Linux.
If rgreen4 up there can run Vista on his 4 year old P4, I can run it on my cheap (compared to yours) laptop from last year, and millions of other consumers run Vista fine on cheaper machines, then perhaps you did something terribly wrong.
> Microsoft is applying the same high standards as AMC did when their brand new Gremlins were rusting in the showroom, and consumers are defending Microsoft for it.
"Holy $#@%! We've been working on this thing long enough! JUST SHIP
IT!"
[/quote]
and there you go with your over-dramatization that won't buy anyone...
> If you want a comparable Software industry story, Once upon a time, Sierra On-Line
shipped a game that would not install and run on ANY machine without a patch. They knew it, and they shipped
it anyway because they had set a delivery milestone with the retail
chains that were expecting to put it on the shelves, and they'd lose that shelf space.
[/quote]
MS would get the shelf space whenever they ship it so this isn't a comparison.
That said, Vista was rushed to the shelves (it's come a long way before then, and it was arguably almost ready), despite MS's efforts to not let the deadline control their quality (bill gates stressed that they didn't use the deadline as their goal instead of product quality). However, it's come a long way now and for the most part everything works.
> Ford quite recently had a wonderful recall. it seemed the transmissions on their diesel pickups were failing at an unacceptably high rate. The fix? Make all the consumers bring their trucks in to the dealer and have the engine re-chipped not to have as much power as they were promised when they purchesed them, or void the warranty. That went over ever so well with all the people who spent $50,000 on a 'heavy duty' pickup with tons of horsepower and torque in order to tow a heavy trailer. Now less expensive components on the engines go 'pop' when they take hills with a load. Great, a pickup truck shaped passenger vehicle is just what they all wanted. Not anything that could do a JOB. Nope.
[/quote]
Irrelavent.
> That's another good match with Microsoft shipping Vista with promises of power, and delivering a useless pig.
[/quote]
Subjective with nothing to back it up.
IMO, if Vista is sacrificing power for stability and security, and it still beats XP in half the benchmarks (journal articles like to say XP beat Vista in half the benchmarks... the reason people hate Vista so much without actually using it is mostly due to media bias), it's doing a good enough job.
> The other small point is that when people are expecting to pay half as much for a machine that runs Vista OK it is exactly the same thing as saying that computers that run Vista 'OK' cost twice as much as consumers want to spend. Go to a retail store like 'Best Buy' or whatever, and you'll find brand new Vista machines with 512MB or RAM. They're 'Vista Capable'. It says so on the sticker. See? It even boots. Sure, that's just about all it will do without a major upgrade (or replacing the OS with something a little less BLOATED), but hey, consumers are IDIOTS.
[/quote]
dude... 512mb is barely enough to run XP if you're running any programs on top of a fresh install...
What I mean by people are expecting to pay half as much is, back in the day when XP first came out, you'd spend $1k or more on a computer that would run XP nicely.. now that computers are so much cheaper (with comparison to the machines a few years ago at similar power), people expect to spend $500 on a computer and run the latest software.
I take it that you haven't been to Bestbuy in a while, because in all the flyers I see, desktops are all shipped with 2GB-4GB of RAM, starting at $700~800 with a monitor.
#87
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 01 April 2008 - 02:34 PM
Of course they do sell 512MB machines. These just happen to ship with Linux and run just fine, with tons of memory left over to run your apps.
www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8625295&st=Notebook&lp=28&type=product&cp=5&id=1193452147742
And the Ford recall is pertinent in the scope of discussion of how Microsoft is just like U.S. car companies... shipping undesirable junk to people too dumb to know the difference and having lots of recalls to "fix" things.
And of course lots of this is 'subjective'.
For instance, I SUBJECTIVELY don't like my computer to sit and beat on the hard drive while I'm working because it decided that RIGHT NOW is the best time to re-index, defrag and update security settings. I'm sure other people subectively LOVE the convenience of having their computer turn into a virtually unresponsive brick while they use it, with only a flickering hard drive light to tell them something (besides their stopped work) is happening. I'm sure other people subjectively like this behavior, making sure their computers will work 'better' someday in between all the disk seeking.
I SUBJECTIVELY don't like to pay for a work in progress. Vista seems like a big, rotten lemon to me, but perhaps some people like being put off for lengthy periods waiting for a 'service pack' to fix things the see wrong with it though it usually doesn't do much of anything.
I have 4GB of RAM. SUBJECTIVELY, I would much prefer to load things into it on DEMAND, and not wait while the OS to load everything it can find on the hard drive into a massive cache 'Just In Case' I want to use it later. Other people don't seem to mind waiting a long, long time for their PC to boot, and then love to see IE pop up right away when they open it to start installing malware.
I don't understand why people would staunchly defend such rubbish for their own ENTIRELY subjective reasons, and suck up to Microsoft like they do.
Microsoft has always turned out crap that needed tons of patches... so it's OK that Microsoft turns out MORE crap that needs lots of patches? We set a precedent of low quality and everybody just accepts it? Seems like that to me.
I guess it's just low standards. It's OK that Microsoft consistently ships garbage that you're forced to pay for when you buy a PC, it's OK that the government can't manage to do anything right, and it's OK that high schools graduate illiterate people. Keep those standards low, low, low, and you can always be impressed by a dancing paper clip that doesn't cause an immediate blue-screen.
Or perhaps it's just the idea that unless it eats lots of resources, it's not 'powerful'. In old Hollywood movies, you always saw the tape drives spinning. Got to SEE activity to believe anything is happening, and all that. Obviously a computer that animates a 'wait' cursor while the hard drive light blinks and flashes is the very pinnacle of busy-looking behavior, indicating 'something powerful' must be happening. Unfortunately, the 'power' is all stench.
www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8625295&st=Notebook&lp=28&type=product&cp=5&id=1193452147742
And the Ford recall is pertinent in the scope of discussion of how Microsoft is just like U.S. car companies... shipping undesirable junk to people too dumb to know the difference and having lots of recalls to "fix" things.
And of course lots of this is 'subjective'.
For instance, I SUBJECTIVELY don't like my computer to sit and beat on the hard drive while I'm working because it decided that RIGHT NOW is the best time to re-index, defrag and update security settings. I'm sure other people subectively LOVE the convenience of having their computer turn into a virtually unresponsive brick while they use it, with only a flickering hard drive light to tell them something (besides their stopped work) is happening. I'm sure other people subjectively like this behavior, making sure their computers will work 'better' someday in between all the disk seeking.
I SUBJECTIVELY don't like to pay for a work in progress. Vista seems like a big, rotten lemon to me, but perhaps some people like being put off for lengthy periods waiting for a 'service pack' to fix things the see wrong with it though it usually doesn't do much of anything.
I have 4GB of RAM. SUBJECTIVELY, I would much prefer to load things into it on DEMAND, and not wait while the OS to load everything it can find on the hard drive into a massive cache 'Just In Case' I want to use it later. Other people don't seem to mind waiting a long, long time for their PC to boot, and then love to see IE pop up right away when they open it to start installing malware.
I don't understand why people would staunchly defend such rubbish for their own ENTIRELY subjective reasons, and suck up to Microsoft like they do.
Microsoft has always turned out crap that needed tons of patches... so it's OK that Microsoft turns out MORE crap that needs lots of patches? We set a precedent of low quality and everybody just accepts it? Seems like that to me.
I guess it's just low standards. It's OK that Microsoft consistently ships garbage that you're forced to pay for when you buy a PC, it's OK that the government can't manage to do anything right, and it's OK that high schools graduate illiterate people. Keep those standards low, low, low, and you can always be impressed by a dancing paper clip that doesn't cause an immediate blue-screen.
Or perhaps it's just the idea that unless it eats lots of resources, it's not 'powerful'. In old Hollywood movies, you always saw the tape drives spinning. Got to SEE activity to believe anything is happening, and all that. Obviously a computer that animates a 'wait' cursor while the hard drive light blinks and flashes is the very pinnacle of busy-looking behavior, indicating 'something powerful' must be happening. Unfortunately, the 'power' is all stench.
#88
crazy4laptops
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,642
- Joined: 20-November 07
Posted 01 April 2008 - 02:47 PM
speaking of cars, vista is like a BMW with a scooter engine. No power, but it looks great in the showroom.
#89
anfy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 43
- Joined: 07-February 08
Posted 01 April 2008 - 04:24 PM
Evildave said:
Of course they do sell 512MB machines. These just happen to ship with Linux and run just fine, with tons of memory left over to run your apps.
www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8625295&st=Notebook&lp=28&type=product&cp=5&id=1193452147742
www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8625295&st=Notebook&lp=28&type=product&cp=5&id=1193452147742
I'm pretty sure most people would agree that an EEE is not a "normal PC".. it's a totally different class. you'd never use it as your main computer. Plus, most people who get EEE install XP on it anyway. And no, it doesn't have "tons of memory left over to run your apps"... it does basic web surfing, word processing, and picture viewing. Even if you wanted to run "Tons of apps" after upgrading your RAM, what can you run on linux? application support is minimal.
Quote
And the Ford recall is pertinent in the scope of discussion of how Microsoft is just like U.S. car companies... shipping undesirable junk to people too dumb to know the difference and having lots of recalls to "fix" things.
MS never recalled anything, so I don't see your point. Some people love their ford cars, some people don't (like me). So what? Doesn't make it junk. If you don't like it, you don't buy it.
Quote
And of course lots of this is 'subjective'.
Last time I checked, if something works, it works, and if it doesn't, it doesn't. Nothing subjective about that. At that, Vista works for the majority of the population, to a very satisfying degree.
Quote
For instance, I SUBJECTIVELY don't like my computer to sit and beat on the hard drive while I'm working because it decided that RIGHT NOW is the best time to re-index, defrag and update security settings. I'm sure other people subectively LOVE the convenience of having their computer turn into a virtually unresponsive brick while they use it, with only a flickering hard drive light to tell them something (besides their stopped work) is happening. I'm sure other people subjectively like this behavior, making sure their computers will work 'better' someday in between all the disk seeking.
Have you tried OS X's Time Machine? it does that every hour, and I don't complain (too much). At the moment, my Vista laptop isn't doing any HD writes/defrags/reindexes/updates. My computer is extremely responsive 99% of the time, so please tell me exactly what you're trying to do that's killing your computer.
Quote
I SUBJECTIVELY don't like to pay for a work in progress. Vista seems like a big, rotten lemon to me, but perhaps some people like being put off for lengthy periods waiting for a 'service pack' to fix things the see wrong with it though it usually doesn't do much of anything.
Vista (especially after SP1) has worked perfectly fine for me, and it doesn't seem like that to me.
I have 4GB of RAM. SUBJECTIVELY, I would much prefer to load things into it on DEMAND, and not wait while the OS to load everything it can find on the hard drive into a massive cache 'Just In Case' I want to use it later. Other people don't seem to mind waiting a long, long time for their PC to boot, and then love to see IE pop up right away when they open it to start installing malware.
Loading something from HD on demand is always slower than having it already cached in your RAM. My windows media player starts up in 2 seconds flat after a fresh reboot. Can you do that on demand? If you really hate superfetch and prefetch, you can turn it off, but it'd just make your computer slower. For your information, when I first installed Vista (I finally got around to doing a clean install without OEMware), it would boot up just as fast as OS X and Ubuntu... what slows down the boot time is all the applications a typical Windows user would launch at startup... OEMware, download managers, Skype, email notifiers, instant messengers, AV, firewall, etc. The OS itself is fast.
I don't understand why people would staunchly defend such rubbish for their own ENTIRELY subjective reasons, and suck up to Microsoft like they do.
If I'm saying that my computer is responsive 99% of the time, and you tell me it's a brick and it's crap... who is more subjective?
Microsoft has always turned out crap that needed tons of patches... so it's OK that Microsoft turns out MORE crap that needs lots of patches? We set a precedent of low quality and everybody just accepts it? Seems like that to me.
Name one piece of software that doesn't have updates or patches.
I guess it's just low standards. It's OK that Microsoft consistently ships garbage that you're forced to pay for when you buy a PC, it's OK that the government can't manage to do anything right, and it's OK that high schools graduate illiterate people. Keep those standards low, low, low, and you can always be impressed by a dancing paper clip that doesn't cause an immediate blue-screen.
I haven't seen the paperclip in ages (I always turned it off, and it was a 2-click process that takes 0.5 seconds, so I don't know why you complain). "ships garbage" doesn't describe anything but your lack of words to objectively state why you don't like something. Nobody's perfect. Not MS, nor Apple, not Linux.
Or perhaps it's just the idea that unless it eats lots of resources, it's not 'powerful'. In old Hollywood movies, you always saw the tape drives spinning. Got to SEE activity to believe anything is happening, and all that. Obviously a computer that animates a 'wait' cursor while the hard drive light blinks and flashes is the very pinnacle of busy-looking behavior, indicating 'something powerful' must be happening. Unfortunately, the 'power' is all stench.
My HD light blinks minimally, and personally I don't care as long as my system is responsive. After using Vista and OS X both for a while extensively, my conclusion would be that, with a comfortable amount of programs installed and running, both use resources about the same. If you are suggesting that my OS should come with absolutely NOTHING installed, I personally would prefer a working browser, media player, media center, games, firewall, and lots of other features -- without resorting to 3rd party apps.
I'm starting to suspect that something is wrong with your computer, or you managed to FUBAR it somehow. Would it be a lot to ask to post your specs and explain to us why your high-spec computer runs like "garbage" while our low-spec or ancient machines are extremely responsive and runs everything we need?
#90
rgreen4
- Moderator
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 7,709
- Joined: 22-October 06
- Location:S. Georgia
Posted 01 April 2008 - 06:14 PM
Don't bother Evildave with facts. He has his mind made up. His obvious hatred for Microsoft in general and Vista in specific comes through all of his posts.
On the other hand, ask him a question about a problem you have, and he comes through with thoughtful detailed answers.
On the other hand, ask him a question about a problem you have, and he comes through with thoughtful detailed answers.
#91
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 01 April 2008 - 07:10 PM
What can I run on Linux? OpenOffice, Vmware, VirtualBox, Mozilla, GNU development tools, Flex development tools, web development tools (not to mention being able to trouble-shoot servers in their native habitat), Google Earth, MP3 players, video players of any sort, games of all descriptions... pretty much anything there's an app for in Windows, there's an equivalent app in Linux, and it's usually FREE.
What do I do that makes my computer a brick when running Vista? Generally speaking, running Vista is what made my computer act like a brick. All of the nasty behaviors are absent when it boots Linux.
It's why I don't boot Vista anymore. When I need a Windows app, I run it in Windows 2000 or Windows XP in a virtual machine behind a NAT firewall so the typical Windows 'kill me' packets can't get in.
Of course MS never recalled anything, they don't learn any lessons, either. Would China have recalled any lead tainted baby toys if they could just slap a patch up on a web site? Sierra On-Line didn't 'recall' their non-functional game, either, though there were truck-loads of returns. Lots of software ships that doesn't need a single patch to run just fine the first time, and every time. Vista shipped in a very sorry state.
Loading everything you could possibly want off a hard disk is ALWAYS slower than simply loading what you need, when you need it. I can wait a couple of seconds for a program to load the first time, but times thousands of possibilities is very slow.
What do I do that makes my computer a brick when running Vista? Generally speaking, running Vista is what made my computer act like a brick. All of the nasty behaviors are absent when it boots Linux.
It's why I don't boot Vista anymore. When I need a Windows app, I run it in Windows 2000 or Windows XP in a virtual machine behind a NAT firewall so the typical Windows 'kill me' packets can't get in.
Of course MS never recalled anything, they don't learn any lessons, either. Would China have recalled any lead tainted baby toys if they could just slap a patch up on a web site? Sierra On-Line didn't 'recall' their non-functional game, either, though there were truck-loads of returns. Lots of software ships that doesn't need a single patch to run just fine the first time, and every time. Vista shipped in a very sorry state.
Loading everything you could possibly want off a hard disk is ALWAYS slower than simply loading what you need, when you need it. I can wait a couple of seconds for a program to load the first time, but times thousands of possibilities is very slow.
#92
anfy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 43
- Joined: 07-February 08
Posted 02 April 2008 - 01:27 AM
Evildave said:
What can I run on Linux? OpenOffice, Vmware, VirtualBox, Mozilla, GNU development tools, Flex development tools, web development tools (not to mention being able to trouble-shoot servers in their native habitat), Google Earth, MP3 players, video players of any sort, games of all descriptions... pretty much anything there's an app for in Windows, there's an equivalent app in Linux, and it's usually FREE.
I'm pretty sure that among other things, professional graphics designers won't be too impressed with GIMP compared to Photoshop and the rest of the Adobe Suite. Personally, even though I'm not a professional graphics artist, I hated Gimp after using it for a few months in a course at school. Although that's just one application, there's others that have very industry-standard programs in Windows and OS X that simply are hard to replace with opensource. I've tried OpenOffice too, but I didn't like the interface in general (not as slick and user-friendly as MS Office, or maybe I'm just used to MS Office), although OpenOffice's math application was pretty cool. Sure, it's free (and that's generally a good thing), but for people who can afford it, some open source alternatives just don't quite cut it. For software development and server applications, Linux might be a more ideal choice, but for the everyday consumer or other professional environments, it doesn't quite match up to Windows. I'm certain that games on Linux (I'm not a gamer myself, but I know many) have far fewer selection, and even if run on Vmware, are crippled graphically. Again, just because Linux suites your purposes, it doesn't mean it's for everyone (same goes for Windows, but that's not what I'm suggesting, whereas you are suggesting nobody should use Windows cuz it's crap).
Quote
What do I do that makes my computer a brick when running Vista? Generally speaking, running Vista is what made my computer act like a brick. All of the nasty behaviors are absent when it boots Linux.
Which nasty behaviours? Can you please explain why my cheap laptop from last summer has absolutely NO TROUBLE running Vista, and same with my friends' computers?
Quote
It's why I don't boot Vista anymore. When I need a Windows app, I run it in Windows 2000 or Windows XP in a virtual machine behind a NAT firewall so the typical Windows 'kill me' packets can't get in.
My Windows hasn't been killed by many packets yet, and if you don't visit "questionable sites", generally this isn't a problem for most people.
Quote
Of course MS never recalled anything, they don't learn any lessons, either. Would China have recalled any lead tainted baby toys if they could just slap a patch up on a web site? Sierra On-Line didn't 'recall' their non-functional game, either, though there were truck-loads of returns. Lots of software ships that doesn't need a single patch to run just fine the first time, and every time. Vista shipped in a very sorry state.
Can you please name me some software that don't need patching? As far as I can see, pretty much every piece of software on my computer goes through constant updates and patches, be it Firefox, Office, Adobe, or anything else. Don't tell me Linux doesn't need patching either, because it obviously does.
Quote
Loading everything you could possibly want off a hard disk is ALWAYS slower than simply loading what you need, when you need it. I can wait a couple of seconds for a program to load the first time, but times thousands of possibilities is very slow.
Like I said, if you don't like Superfetch and Prefetch, turn them off. That results in a slower system though.
#93
BobJam
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 28-March 08
- Location:Bullhead City, Arizona
Posted 02 April 2008 - 04:45 AM
Hey Evildave,
Your remark here caught my eye:
Since I don't want to put words in your mouth, I'll ask you to clarify. Are you saying here that VISTA users are . . . "dumb"??
That's what it looks like to me. If so, I hardly think that the universe of VISTA users are . . . "dumb". Maybe a few, for reasons probably other than using VISTA, but certainly not the majority.
I haven't made the leap to VISTA myself, but if your goal is to convince potential VISTA users that it's "crap", then I'm afraid your anger has obscured any argument you might have. In other words, any factual statements you might make are clouded by your very apparent anger with Microsoft. It's a bias that dilutes any reasonable argument you might have. You may indeed have some reasonable points, but your arguments are interspersed with so much vinegar, that the reader throws the baby out with the bathwater.
It's almost as if Microsoft (and Ford Motor Company) has called your baby ugly, or something like that.
We all rant from time to time, and also get angry, but your ranting and anger really doesn't shed much light on VISTA. All I really get out of it is that you don't like VISTA, Microsoft, or Fords.
I've heard some logical arguments by VISTA proponents . . . I'd like to hear the other side besides just "it's crap" and a lot of ranting.
Can you chill a little bit, and just make some unemotional points?? As I said, I'd like to hear the other side argued as well as the VISTA proponents have.
I think you may have some valid points, but I'm having a hard time sorting them out from all your ranting.
Your remark here caught my eye:
Evildave said:
And the Ford recall is pertinent in the scope of discussion of how Microsoft is just like U.S. car companies... shipping undesirable junk to people too dumb to know the difference and having lots of recalls to "fix" things.
Since I don't want to put words in your mouth, I'll ask you to clarify. Are you saying here that VISTA users are . . . "dumb"??
That's what it looks like to me. If so, I hardly think that the universe of VISTA users are . . . "dumb". Maybe a few, for reasons probably other than using VISTA, but certainly not the majority.
I haven't made the leap to VISTA myself, but if your goal is to convince potential VISTA users that it's "crap", then I'm afraid your anger has obscured any argument you might have. In other words, any factual statements you might make are clouded by your very apparent anger with Microsoft. It's a bias that dilutes any reasonable argument you might have. You may indeed have some reasonable points, but your arguments are interspersed with so much vinegar, that the reader throws the baby out with the bathwater.
It's almost as if Microsoft (and Ford Motor Company) has called your baby ugly, or something like that.
We all rant from time to time, and also get angry, but your ranting and anger really doesn't shed much light on VISTA. All I really get out of it is that you don't like VISTA, Microsoft, or Fords.
I've heard some logical arguments by VISTA proponents . . . I'd like to hear the other side besides just "it's crap" and a lot of ranting.
Can you chill a little bit, and just make some unemotional points?? As I said, I'd like to hear the other side argued as well as the VISTA proponents have.
I think you may have some valid points, but I'm having a hard time sorting them out from all your ranting.
#94
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 02 April 2008 - 10:58 AM
But ranting is a fun pass-time.
Typical computer users are dumb, VERY dumb about computers. The same way most people are dumb about physics, chemistry, medicine, etc. Even their own cars. Computers are a specialty. I wouldn't trust Joe-Average to pick an OS any more than I'd trust him to perform surgery on me, or even interpret a code thrown by my car's OBDII.
I think everyone in the world (except Microsoft) can agree that for Joe User, upgrading the OS from Windows.crap to Windows.latest.crap on an existing computer is the single stupidest thing possible to do with their computer. In that manner, if you go and purchase Vista, install it on your computer, beyond all the dire warnings and complaints you've heard and read, it would probably be a fundamental act of stupidity. At least back up your previous OS with CloneZilla or Drive Image or Norton Ghost before you try it. BTW, stores don't take returns on PC software, so you'll be out $150 if it turns out that you hate Vista, too. If you can hold your water, Microsoft is promising another OS in a year or two, and perhaps that won't be quite so WinME-like.
...
I did disable superfecth & whatever other B.S. is built into Vista, BTW. By NOT RUNNING Vista. That improved everything immensely. The fact that you're completely satisfied is a subjective call. Maybe you lucked out and got a system that has good drivers and hardware support for all the DRM crap Microsoft added to continuously scan the computer in a paranoid manner because it doesn't trust you. Super.
I like OpenOffice. I switched when it was still StarOffice. Gave away my new set of Office 2000 CDs that day, even though StarOffice at the time had a pretty crappy UI. I find I can't stand operating Microsoft Office now, because now I'm used to OpenOffice. This is one of those things that you 'get used to' a certain way, and you always end up liking it the way you're used to doing it. If it's a pissing contrest between GIMP and Photoshop, I actually like Paint Shop Pro 8 far better than either. Don't bother with newer versions. They suck now. If I had PSP 7, I might run it under WINE, but I don't.
My Dell Vostro 1700 (AKA Inspiron 1720) with the WUXGA display, 4GB or RAM, and all the trimmings doesn't work as well under Vista Business as it does under Ubuntu Linux . Boots faster, snappier response, doesn't waste my time 'scanning' its self in any manner while I'm working, doesn't need antivirus and anti-spyware software, loads apps quickly, boots quickly, always shuts down successfully, never needs 'defrag', has multiple 3D desktops, and special desktop effects (if you want them) that make Vista look like a toddler's pitiful cry for help. It's nice having as many virtual desktops as I like. It's nice having a good and proper command line interpreter like BASH and GNU tools (MS CMD sucks, too) in the shell. While I was at it, I switched my Motion M1400 tablet over to Linux as well. Only thing it lacked was a bluetooth driver, but one USB bluetooth dongle later, it was 100% functional.
It boots up and only needs about 286MB of RAM to work perfectly WITH the 3D desktop extensions. When I run the OpenOffice, it takes only 18MB more. Yeah, it takes three seconds to load all of that because they don't 'preload' all of its bits and pieces, but I'm a patient man. I can wait three seconds. Firefox needs all of 60MB to run. When I boot up my trusty, rusty Win2K virtual machine to do some work in Flash, it jumps all the way up to 878MB because I allocated 512MB for the vuirtual machine. Almost 25% of my system memory.
On a 512MB machine like the EEePC, I'd still be able to run that virtual machine with 192MB or RAM if I just dropped the 3D desktop extension, and for a Windows 2000 virtual PC, that's still a boatload of RAM to use. That Win2K VM takes 15 long seconds to boot fresh, and it has all kinds of software running on it. The 1.2GB XP VM takes 25 seconds, but that was admittedly while the 512MB Win2K machine was already running.
The Gimp only needed 16MB to load up a big, fat picture of me. It took three seconds to load cold. The interesting thing about a lot of these POSIX pased projects is, they run a LOT better under Linux than they do on their ports to Windows. They don't need a big, fat, buggy emulation layer between them and the OS to operate.
So, I can have two fat VM sessions, an OpenOffice, word processor, the GIMP, this session of Mozilla, a couple of command shells, all running on four different virtual desktops, and I can still middle-click on the desktop and see them all projected onto a cube and rotate them very smoothly, and in the middle of that cube with transparent sides, I can see the backside of all the other windows, even windows playing video, on all the other faces, and there are 3D fish swimming inside of it. 2.3GB of RAM used, no swap (virtual memory) used at all, and very little CPU time being reported. The fan hasn't even kicked on audibly yet.
Vista would ALWAYS be sitting there beating on the hard drive for the first 15 minutes after I booted it. It chokes HARD with two virtual machines, demands a swap file and this much desktop clutter would be murder without a second or maybe even third monitor, while it's readily manageable under Gnome with Compiz. When I go on battery power, there are all kinds of useful charge state graphs and indications and power controls available to me.
So, yeah. From my 'subjective' experience, Vista is not nearly as good as Linux. I also had a virtual machine of Vista, but I deleted it because the XP VM does better with far fewer resources. After all, why should I give it 2GB to crawl when I can give an XP machine 1GB to run OK, or a Win2K VM 512MB to be swimming in RAM?
Typical computer users are dumb, VERY dumb about computers. The same way most people are dumb about physics, chemistry, medicine, etc. Even their own cars. Computers are a specialty. I wouldn't trust Joe-Average to pick an OS any more than I'd trust him to perform surgery on me, or even interpret a code thrown by my car's OBDII.
I think everyone in the world (except Microsoft) can agree that for Joe User, upgrading the OS from Windows.crap to Windows.latest.crap on an existing computer is the single stupidest thing possible to do with their computer. In that manner, if you go and purchase Vista, install it on your computer, beyond all the dire warnings and complaints you've heard and read, it would probably be a fundamental act of stupidity. At least back up your previous OS with CloneZilla or Drive Image or Norton Ghost before you try it. BTW, stores don't take returns on PC software, so you'll be out $150 if it turns out that you hate Vista, too. If you can hold your water, Microsoft is promising another OS in a year or two, and perhaps that won't be quite so WinME-like.
...
I did disable superfecth & whatever other B.S. is built into Vista, BTW. By NOT RUNNING Vista. That improved everything immensely. The fact that you're completely satisfied is a subjective call. Maybe you lucked out and got a system that has good drivers and hardware support for all the DRM crap Microsoft added to continuously scan the computer in a paranoid manner because it doesn't trust you. Super.
I like OpenOffice. I switched when it was still StarOffice. Gave away my new set of Office 2000 CDs that day, even though StarOffice at the time had a pretty crappy UI. I find I can't stand operating Microsoft Office now, because now I'm used to OpenOffice. This is one of those things that you 'get used to' a certain way, and you always end up liking it the way you're used to doing it. If it's a pissing contrest between GIMP and Photoshop, I actually like Paint Shop Pro 8 far better than either. Don't bother with newer versions. They suck now. If I had PSP 7, I might run it under WINE, but I don't.
My Dell Vostro 1700 (AKA Inspiron 1720) with the WUXGA display, 4GB or RAM, and all the trimmings doesn't work as well under Vista Business as it does under Ubuntu Linux . Boots faster, snappier response, doesn't waste my time 'scanning' its self in any manner while I'm working, doesn't need antivirus and anti-spyware software, loads apps quickly, boots quickly, always shuts down successfully, never needs 'defrag', has multiple 3D desktops, and special desktop effects (if you want them) that make Vista look like a toddler's pitiful cry for help. It's nice having as many virtual desktops as I like. It's nice having a good and proper command line interpreter like BASH and GNU tools (MS CMD sucks, too) in the shell. While I was at it, I switched my Motion M1400 tablet over to Linux as well. Only thing it lacked was a bluetooth driver, but one USB bluetooth dongle later, it was 100% functional.
It boots up and only needs about 286MB of RAM to work perfectly WITH the 3D desktop extensions. When I run the OpenOffice, it takes only 18MB more. Yeah, it takes three seconds to load all of that because they don't 'preload' all of its bits and pieces, but I'm a patient man. I can wait three seconds. Firefox needs all of 60MB to run. When I boot up my trusty, rusty Win2K virtual machine to do some work in Flash, it jumps all the way up to 878MB because I allocated 512MB for the vuirtual machine. Almost 25% of my system memory.
On a 512MB machine like the EEePC, I'd still be able to run that virtual machine with 192MB or RAM if I just dropped the 3D desktop extension, and for a Windows 2000 virtual PC, that's still a boatload of RAM to use. That Win2K VM takes 15 long seconds to boot fresh, and it has all kinds of software running on it. The 1.2GB XP VM takes 25 seconds, but that was admittedly while the 512MB Win2K machine was already running.
The Gimp only needed 16MB to load up a big, fat picture of me. It took three seconds to load cold. The interesting thing about a lot of these POSIX pased projects is, they run a LOT better under Linux than they do on their ports to Windows. They don't need a big, fat, buggy emulation layer between them and the OS to operate.
So, I can have two fat VM sessions, an OpenOffice, word processor, the GIMP, this session of Mozilla, a couple of command shells, all running on four different virtual desktops, and I can still middle-click on the desktop and see them all projected onto a cube and rotate them very smoothly, and in the middle of that cube with transparent sides, I can see the backside of all the other windows, even windows playing video, on all the other faces, and there are 3D fish swimming inside of it. 2.3GB of RAM used, no swap (virtual memory) used at all, and very little CPU time being reported. The fan hasn't even kicked on audibly yet.
Vista would ALWAYS be sitting there beating on the hard drive for the first 15 minutes after I booted it. It chokes HARD with two virtual machines, demands a swap file and this much desktop clutter would be murder without a second or maybe even third monitor, while it's readily manageable under Gnome with Compiz. When I go on battery power, there are all kinds of useful charge state graphs and indications and power controls available to me.
So, yeah. From my 'subjective' experience, Vista is not nearly as good as Linux. I also had a virtual machine of Vista, but I deleted it because the XP VM does better with far fewer resources. After all, why should I give it 2GB to crawl when I can give an XP machine 1GB to run OK, or a Win2K VM 512MB to be swimming in RAM?
#95
KellieCM
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,411
- Joined: 27-June 07
- Location:San Francisco, CA
Posted 02 April 2008 - 11:04 AM
Thank you to all that participated in this thread. It was used to generate our "open letter", which appears on page 108 of the May 2008 issue of PC World. (With "Best Free Stuff" on the cover)
#96
mirrormaster
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 21-February 08
Posted 29 April 2008 - 08:13 AM
To Whom:
Vista would be great is i had 4 gigabytes of memory a 250 gbs hard drive and 750 dollar nVid card, but i have a friend that has vista on a notebook with 1 gb of memory and a 80 gb hard drive and wireless setup. One word to describe it - SLOW !!!! I will stick with my Giga-byte gama78ms2h mobo, black edition brisbane 5000+(oc'd to 3.1 stable - didn't touch board), with ATI vid card - i like the way it plays the 'orange box'. Waiting on SP3 - find out tonite.
Don't think i'll be trying vista -- i'll wait on Windows 7. Hope MS treats vista like ME - like to see MS support XP for at least another 18 to 24 months and then comes with 7. I'll wait and guess what the universities in the local area are waiting also. They are holding on to Windows XP Prof.
Mirror
Vista would be great is i had 4 gigabytes of memory a 250 gbs hard drive and 750 dollar nVid card, but i have a friend that has vista on a notebook with 1 gb of memory and a 80 gb hard drive and wireless setup. One word to describe it - SLOW !!!! I will stick with my Giga-byte gama78ms2h mobo, black edition brisbane 5000+(oc'd to 3.1 stable - didn't touch board), with ATI vid card - i like the way it plays the 'orange box'. Waiting on SP3 - find out tonite.
Don't think i'll be trying vista -- i'll wait on Windows 7. Hope MS treats vista like ME - like to see MS support XP for at least another 18 to 24 months and then comes with 7. I'll wait and guess what the universities in the local area are waiting also. They are holding on to Windows XP Prof.
Mirror
#98
oregonnerd
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 139
- Joined: 14-July 08
Posted 17 September 2008 - 12:34 AM
I got a recurring hex error before the OS came on, just after choosing to boot to Ubuntu. Trying to install under Vista failed as well, possibly because of the chip architecture and the fact that it is (contrary to my practice) out-of-the-box, Dell.
--Glenn
P.S. One thing that can be fixed is the death of the screensaver once you dare use MS wireless mouse and keyboard--Windows. CCleaner is probably the easiest way to do it, but navigate to c:windowssystem32igfxtray.exe and disable it and voila...screensaver and shutdown. On XP it's another "tray" command (exe) that I can't recall offhand--not the AVGtray, oddly enough, if using the AVG antivirus package.
--Glenn
P.S. One thing that can be fixed is the death of the screensaver once you dare use MS wireless mouse and keyboard--Windows. CCleaner is probably the easiest way to do it, but navigate to c:windowssystem32igfxtray.exe and disable it and voila...screensaver and shutdown. On XP it's another "tray" command (exe) that I can't recall offhand--not the AVGtray, oddly enough, if using the AVG antivirus package.
#99
caimito
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 25-February 07
Posted 08 October 2008 - 09:03 AM
I finally broke down and did two firsts. I bought a laptop, and it has windows vista. Previously I had always insisted I would stick with XP. My desktop still has xp on it. I have heard all the horror stories over the past two years about annoying confirmations, hype about visual niceties without any real substance, and lack of hardware compatibility. I can honestly say that I have not experienced much grief with any of these items so far. Vista has worked well without any great flaws. That being said, Vista is really previous versions of windows with a new dress. That's it. Some things are more difficult, like finding where Vista hides files, and tracking down control over features you know exist. But other than enhanced security, what else have we received in this package? Nothing that impresses me enough to actually buy the package retail. If I had to purchase it, the only reason would be if MS ever deactivated all copies of XP. The Vista project has just been about churn, not improvements. In fact, one of the most basic things of windows has not changed since before there ever was windows. The main hard drive is still the "C" drive. How long has it been since anyone used the floppy disk drives designated "A" and "B"??
