Jamesy - you asked for one, so I ll give you one - the file handling. It s shoddy and slow. As for windows 7 - depends if the touch-screen is an option. I don t want to be poking at the pretty pictures like some form of retarded ape - it s ineffieicent. Provided they give command-line alternatives, I ll consider it. EDIT: Jamesy; just compare the file copy speed either over a network, or onto a USB stick. No magic involved - Vista ius just sloooow. SP1 is supposed to address this. EDIT: Jamesy, just because you, personally, have experienced no problems does not mean they do not occur. Your sample size (one) is too small to form a broad opinion. I ve seen more than a few Vista boxes (as I have to repair them). The file copying is certainly an issue, as it a bizarre and unpredictable inability to detect certain wireless networks, on a seemingly random basis. I don t actually hate Vista - but if you re going to blame performance issues on hardware, then even you have to give that MS brought the problem on themselves, to an extent, by dropping the recommended specs in order to help Intel ship their older units. Furthermore, I don t wish to be told when I have to upgrade my hardware - which MS is effectively doing by pulling XP from general sale. Overall, I simply don t think Vista offers enough to justify forcing the nation to upgrade all of its computers. There is literally nothing you can t do on XP, that Vista magically allows you to accomplish. Vista s OK, once you disable UAC (which is totally unneccassary for the average domestic box). However, I ll probably skip it, and wait for Windows 7 - simply because the new OS is written from scratch, whereas Vista is yet another layer of cruft on the mouldy old ball of code that started with NT. EDIT: Also, your comments about Linux merely confirm that you ve never actually bothered to use it.
Since I was smart enough to read the PC World articles about Vista for months in advance, I don t even own Vista yet and don t plan to until I have to buy a new computer. Each of us should learn to separate the industry-driven product hype from the reality of what s in a product. Microsoft just shuffles the OS like a deck of cards, adds a few bells and whistles, puts a new package over it and then hypes it way out of proportion so the uninformed will buy it. And they do. nuff said.
What problems with Vista might these be? I have had enough of people banging on about Vistas problems without actually specifying a single one.. Yeah, it looks pretty and so it uses a little more memory, it s not the end of the fu*king world.. You know, when XP was released, people were still using like 64/128MB of RAM, so is it any wonder it uses less memory than Vista? I have used it for about nine months now, in that time I have not had one problem caused by it. This far and away makes it the most stable and compatible operating sytem I have ever used. Hell, do you remember Windows 98? When do you think the BSOD rose to infamy? Windows XP was a big bundle of security holes upon release. It was positively lame pre SP2. Oh, and when it was released everyone banged on about it s memory usage. As for Windows 7, it all depends. It s most touted feature is it s fancy touchscreen interface. I am not sure how that is going to pan out. Can t see it be a reality for anyone but laptop/tablet pc users. Still, it s exciting for those who welcome progress. ADD Medium Dave, saying that does not magically make it so... How is the file handling shoddy? It may be slightly slower than xp but it s all relative as XP was designed for slower hardware. Vista is a new OS for new hardware. I use two 500MB drives in raid0 as my primary disk and its performance is very fast, a lot faster than any XP system I have used. ADD Actually Dave, my computer sits happily on a network connected to three systems running XP, two network printers and a NAS device. I had absolutely zero trouble getting it setup up and working on the network and by a long margin it is the fastest system to copy files from and too. Because of Vista? No, probably not but the modern os goes hand in hand with modern hardware. As for the USB issues. I have never experienced them, I max out the bandwidth of usb while transferring files to and from USB devices. Here s a clue for Vista haters. Don t install it on your four year old laptop... -- To the Linux monkey. If all I wanted to use my computer for was a bit of word processing and some browsing then I agree, Linux would be a great option. Unfortunately because I do a lot more, it s woefully inadequate. To use it with modern hardware is like buying a mansion and then living out of one small room.
when they released that piece of crap vista i have switched to ubuntu linux on my desktop p/cs and am working on getting both my wireless laptops running linux. i don t plan on ever buying any windows op sys again ever. especially since dell and sears and walmart now sell computers with linux on them also ibm computers are available with linux. if more of you windows user see the linux light more computer makers will sell linux machines.
I couldnt possibly say, seeing as I ve never used it (its not even in public testing yet). Micro$oft might have learned from their mistakes with vista (although thats probably very doubtful seeing as vista was in development for almost 7 years)
like any other windows ill wait till at least 7.1
MAYBE BUT THE ADVANCE NEWS IS IT WILL B TOUCH SCREEN TECH SO U WILL NEED A NEW MONITOR
0 comments:
Post a Comment