| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Aunt Pappy |
|||
|
Hatebrigade, Vista runs slow with 2GB. It's just crap....pure and simple.
|
|||
WiscBadger95 |
|||
pinkleponk wrote: You aren't the first person to make that comparison. Vista is just a "filler" OS until Microsoft comes out with the real successor to XP. |
|||
Piranhahaha |
|||
|
Interesting timing -- the Washington Post tech columnist wrote about XP vs. Vista this week:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403552.html I've never fooled around with Vista, but I think XP's fine. Speaking of which, what does Windows Media Center do that XP Home or Pro doesn't? |
|||
quietsurvivorfan |
|||
smartguy24 wrote: I have always used windows explorer to navigate through my files. I know a lot of people use the so called user friendly function that opens what looks like an internet explorer window, but that function drives me nuts. I like the windows explorer way to navigate to files much better. I don't know if that function exists in vista. I probably need to go test drive some of the computers out on display somewhere and see what is up. My CPA still is having problems sending email from her vista machine. This is going on 2 weeks now. She said files just disappear in vista, too.
Last Edited By: quietsurvivorfan
05/15/08 10:33 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
quietsurvivorfan |
|||
r wrote: Upgraded to what? I thought office 2007 was their latest version. Isn't outlook part of that? |
|||
quietsurvivorfan |
|||
Aunt Pappy wrote: What is the new OS they are working on? WHen will that be released? I usually upgrade my notebooks every 4 years or so, so I usually upgrade the hell out of the machine which really amps up the initial cost. This one I have here is 4 years old, has a gig of ram, XP is running great. I am only using about 25 gigs on my hard drive (I don't download music or movies) Hmmm sounds as if I am talking myself out of upgrading right now. On the machine prior to this, I skipped the ME version and got NT for my computer. I also had a LAN back then. Leave it to MS to create another ME type of problem before they get their REAL system out there. I even waited about a year for XP to mature before I finally got this one, I don't exactly remember when XP first came out. I did find networking much easier on XP.
Last Edited By: quietsurvivorfan
05/15/08 10:36 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
Piranhahaha |
|||
|
My understanding is that it's at least two years off, to which I'll add a third to let the bugs settle out.
Yeah if your current machine is fine, don't bother. I thought you were a Mac chick? Anyhow, I'd bet Real won't play nice with Vista. |
|||
quietsurvivorfan |
|||
|
My company runs on Macs. I have both machines, but am still getting used to the Mac. In fact I would be a happy peep if I could finally convert over totally. I
know I can set up the dual operating system on the macbook, but haven't done that yet. I would be totally happy if I could figure out how to make the mac
touch pad perform the equivalent of the right click on the windows machine. Also, if I could get used to using the mac touchpad to simulate the click button
better. And because I am not scrolling well on the mac, I find it much faster to do spreadsheets on the windows machine. So yeah, I have both computers, but am
sort of in between each of them. I have an imac still in a box because I haven't been able to take the time to get it set up in the office at my desk. As
soon as our company gets our trading symbol, I will be hiring an IT type geek after I get an in house CFO. We have been resource thin in start up mode.
P, Real had problems on Vista for sure during BB feed season this year. And a lot of peeps had to go back a version from the latest Real version to get the best feed watching. I hope those bugs are worked out in time for season 10 on July 12 when BB starts. |
|||
LaurenTheLush |
|||
|
I have Vista and I HATEEEE it.
|
|||
Apprentice Talker |
|||
|
I like Windows XP. Vista is totally slow and I hate it.
|
|||
hippo2002 |
|||
|
My laptop can only run XP,so far so good.
|
|||
CBRetriever |
|||
Piranhahaha wrote: It's designed to do media things (run video, make music and video recordings and manipulate them, etc). You usually have to get the software to do some of that, but the Windows media center programs came preloaded on my XP machine when I bought a media center pc. |
|||
Vector13 |
|||
|
XP definitely. Vista has gone too far!
|
|||
ilikelissie |
|||
|
One word: SUSE.
|
|||
Snakes And Arrows |
|||
|
This should give you some idea of what is going on....
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Microsoft Gives Up on Vista By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols The question now isn't "Is Vista Dead?" It is. The real question is: Can Microsoft get Windows 7 out in time to save its desktop domination? I think Microsoft "could" pull it off. Here's how. Vista is dead. That's not what Bill Gates said at a seminar on corporate philanthropy in Miami on April 4, but it might as well have been. What Gates actually said, according to the Reuters report, is that he expects that the next desktop version of Windows, Windows 7, would be released "sometime in the next year or so." Goodbye Vista. It has not been fun knowing you. I predicted that Microsoft was giving up on Vista in January. It seems I was right. Microsoft's own top brass had hated Vista when it first came out, why should they expect anyone else to like it? Vista SP1 has proven to be a painful upgrade and its performance still lags behind XP SP2 and, the still unreleased XP SP3. Worse still, from a Microsoft executive's viewpoint, Windows is actually losing desktop market share to Mac OS X and Linux. Microsoft never loses desktop market share. But with Vista Microsoft is finally losing customers. I think Microsoft saw the handwriting on the wall early on. The company started playing up Windows 7 as early as July 2007. Now, Microsoft's business plan is always to get its customers to upgrade to the next version. It's how they make their billions. But, in this case, Vista was barely out the door. Can Microsoft actually make a Windows 7 that can ship by 2009 that will win customers? Vista was infamous for its blown deadlines. Windows 7 must not only replace the failed Vista, it has to convince Microsoft's customers that Windows 7 will really be better than XP. That isn't going to be easy. I find it more than a little telling that Microsoft has given XP Home a new lease on life for UMPC (Ultra Mobile PCs). Still. I think Microsoft has one card up its sleeve that just might keep its customers happy and make it out in 2009: Server 2008 Workstation. In stark contrast with Vista, Server 2008 works extremely well in eWEEK Labs and in my own Linux-dominated office. Even with some security troubles, Server 2008 is a darn sight better than Vista or Server 2003. Cleaned and Speeded Up So, what Microsoft could do is use Server 2008's kernel as the core of Windows 7. On top of that it adds a cleaned and speeded up Aero Glass interface, Silverlight and Internet Explorer 8. At the same time, Microsoft should dump the Vista user interface command structure and return to XP. One reason why people don't like Vista is not only is it slower than XP, it requires them to relearn how to do bread-and-butter operations. While Microsoft is at it, they can also throw out such annoying 'Vistaisms' as requiring users to answer seemingly endless menu choices on whether they really want to install a program or what have you. To make darn sure that Windows 7 doesn't have the software compatibility problems that still plague Vista SP1, they can also add an XP compatibility layer. This would actually be an XP VM (virtual machine) running with Server 2008's Hyper-V virtualization. If an application doesn't run with the native Server 8 core, no problem; just automatically run it in the XP VM. Old Windows hands will recall that Microsoft once used a similar approach in Windows NT 3.5 with a WOW (Windows on Windows) sub-system that let users run Windows 95 applications on NT. If Microsoft were to take this path, I can actually see the company delivering a new desktop operating system by 2009 that users would actually want to use. If they try, as they did with Vista, to reinvent the desktop operating system wheel, there's no way they'll get anything out until 2011 that users will want to run. And, by then, Microsoft's problem may be convincing Linux and Mac OS users to come back to Windows rather than trying to get XP users to upgrade. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Microsoft-gives-up-on-Vista/ |
|||
PassionatePiscesMan |
|||
|
What ever happened to Bob?
|
|||
Vector13 |
|||
|
Hasta La Vista Baby.
|
|||
yosimtesam |
|||
|
to add to the mix,
I think vista's primary problem from inception was drm built into the kernal and requiring a special hardware chip on the graphic card/motherboard to assertain if you were running illegal copyrighted material. Xp has drm; but not at the kernal or hardware level. This added layer of drm on both hardware and software levels sucks the life out of vista; it has to scan the bus every 10 ms, do things with the graphic card in mili seconds just for the sake of copyright. This all comes at an expense. Xp does not have a "kernal drm" or hardware drm requirement; thats why its much faster. |
|||