I'm not terribly excited. Windows XP works just fine for me, and if I buy a new PC then I'll be putting Linux on my old one anyway, so I can finally get around to figuring it out.
I'm not terribly excited. Windows XP works just fine for me, and if I buy a new PC then I'll be putting Linux on my old one anyway, so I can finally get around to figuring it out.
Bow before the mighty Javoo!
Heh, I've seen smurf-loads of torrents on the Internet for Longhorn/Vista in beta stage. ;P Of course, I haven't download any.
I declare this post ... legendary!Originally Posted by ZeZipster
Basically whay windows promiced Loghorn (Vistas development name) would be capable of.
Bipper
Which is exactly the same thing I am planning to do right now, with the distanto goal to be able one day to leave Windows forever, or at least no longer be a slave of it. You see, I just sent an MP3 to a friend of mine (classical music, so I suppose it's not copyrighted), and his new MSN beta blocked the file as being potentially dangerous (sure, why not. For the major's incomings, maybe.) and possibly deleted it. I want to be free to share my files with whomever the smurf I want to, and that's a good reason not for choosing Vista alone.I'm not terribly excited. Windows XP works just fine for me, and if I buy a new PC then I'll be putting Linux on my old one anyway, so I can finally get around to figuring it out.
We were discussing microsoft and their operating systems and web browsers last night in #fat_chocobo, and I realized that Microsoft only releases a new version of Internet Explorer if they have a new operating system close at hand.
IE 1.0 debuted pretty much with Windows 95. IE3 was fairly close to the secondary releases of '95. IE4 was such a few months after windows '98. IE5 was about a year after '98 SE, but windows 2000, IE5.5 and Windows ME were all within a very close span in 2000.
IE6 came out barely months before Windows XP, and neither have seen a significant update since that time.
The time between XP and Vista will be comparable in length to that between '95 and ME. And there was a lot of things between Win95 and WinME.
What's been between xp and now? a couple of service packs.
It's very clear that the web browser is a secondary concern-- I'd imagine they think it can take care of itself.
But does that mean they shouldn't update it after years because they don't have a new operating system to pair it with?
Dvorak seems to think they should give up on it altogether. I gotta agree with him.
Well, it looks nice. And about the graphics card thing; what do you think your 3D card is doing when you're not playing a game? Pretty much nothing. Why shouldn't windows use those hundreds of megahertz to run the GUI instead, and at the same time free some CPU cycles?
And about huge RAM usages, that might be because of the new preloading technology. If RAM isn't used, it'll use it to preload parts of programs you tend to use at different times. For example, if you tend to play FFXI or WoW at the afternoons every day, it'll load lots of resources into RAM a bit before that, so that those programs can launch real quick. Ofcourse, Vista might not always be able to predict what you're going to use. However, if you run low on RAM, it's supposed to clear that stuff from memory instantly. If it works.
From what it seems, running admin as default is supposed to go away too, and they've implemented technologies that will let even poorly programmed programs that earlier required administrator rights, still be able to run as a restricted user. You will also be able to downprioritize interrupts from certain programs, so that virus scanners will affect you productivity (or gaming) far less than it would by simply downprioritizing the CPU usage.
I think Vista will be pretty good. If you look at the giant leap Windows XP was from Windows NT 4, then imagine a similiar leap in technology from XP to Vista, I think it will be cool. I'll get it if it doesn't have too much DRM crap in it. I suppose I will still be able to run Winamp and get regular MP3s, so I guess I'm okay. I might have to get a cracked version if the price tag is too high though :p.
Last edited by Mirage; 04-26-2006 at 12:05 AM.
everything is wrapped in gray
i'm focusing on your image
can you hear me in the void?
I just got XP recently, so I'm not exactly looking to buy Vista anytime soon. Maybe in a couple years if it turns out better than expected and has some to-die-for feature I don't know about yet. As of right now, though, I haven't seen a thing about Vista that makes it interesting other than the fact it looks nice. And I'm not paying 150 bucks, or howevermuch it's going to cost, for something that just looks nice.
I generally wait a year before installing the lastest Microsoft OS, just to see how it fairs. (I went from windows 3.1 straight to win98 straight to windows XP pro, for obvious reasons) Thus, I'm marginally excited, and only if they do get a very stable and efficient OS by the end of the first release year.
Yeah, suffice it to say, I'll be making good use of my Linux installs for the next few years.
I'll probably end up getting it, thanks to planned obselesence of winXP. I'm worried however -- will the interface force my cpu to be running cycles ad nauseum? Wouldn't that lower its life, etc?
http://www.crystalxp.net/dl/en.gal.130.htm
Congrats. You have Vista.
Well I see my earlier post was deleted; I'll attempt to put it more politely...
Quit trolling (again). You know what I mean, and if you think Linux has more compatability than Windows and works with more hardware than Windows then you've either never used Linux, never used Windows, barely touched both, or just plain know nothing about either operating system. Linux is the exact opposite; it's compatable with the least and Windows is compatable with the most; quality is a matter of opinion and grounds for argument of course.
I will never switch to Linux (but I have had the displeasure of using it over the course of six or so months) until, like I already said and you completely ignored, or just failed to read, it surpasses all other operating systems, including Windows, in terms of compatability, user friendlyness, and range of products I can get for it at reasonable prices. And don't start with that "BUT ALL LINUX'S PROGRAMS ARE FREE HAR HAR HAR!!!1"...I video edit and play games on my computer, and there's not a single decent editing program for Linux that wouldn't cost a [img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img]load of money to get up and running, and lets not even get into games.
I like Kung-Fu.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
