This winter I build a new PC, selecting an Asus Mobo. Unfortunately Linux was not embedded yet.
I added Vista as a secondary OS on its own HDD and after playing with it for one month or so, uninstalled it.
Now everyone in the PC Press is focusing on Windows 7 - that's how bad Vista is.
Will MS finally get it right? MS, the brain dead monopoly?
At least this time around, MS has a real incentive to make it work.
Just imagine how pissed off MS is regarding the Asus/Linux initiative, given how they want to own both the internet and your desktop.
You power on your new PC, 5-10 seconds later your Linux OS is booted and you can now browse, check your emails, post on the Asylum, all without having to wait for Windows to load. Assuming all you want to do is browse at the time that is.
From: there...no..there..... Insane since: May 2001
posted 07-10-2008 15:01
quote: SleepingWolf said:
5-10 seconds later your Linux OS is booted
that's a little bit off don't you think My linux box does boot a bit faster than windows xp but not within 5 - 10 seconds.
Vista seems to be headed down the path that Windows ME did. Vista isn't *too* bad,then again I haven't used it that much, but I do know that if you don't have about 4gb ram, a hefty cpu and a good video card, it will drive you nuts.
CPrompt:
As WS pointed out, it is embedded. In fact they promote it as "Instant-on". Perfect for doing some quick work without having to wait for a non flash linux or full Windows.
quote:ASUS P5E3 Deluxe mobo boots in five seconds with embedded Linux
WS:
Yeah, if they screw up it will hurt them bad. Think of how many people use PCs just to surf the internet and do their emails. Also, once these users get the hang of Linux they might install the full OS, not to mention it will make it easier for OEMs like Dell etc to offer Linux (in fact I think many are already doing it). Then if they add OpenOffice and other alternatives to MS products...that would hurt.
From: there...no..there..... Insane since: May 2001
posted 07-11-2008 16:02
ok. Gotcha on the Motherboard thing now. I didn't quite get what you were saying.
As far as Blaise's questions, here is an article on that. It does have a Mozilla based browser and Skype. The process it uses is called Slashtop
Pretty interesting stuff.
as far as MS getting it right, I am sure there will be some quirks but when you go to buy a new computer just like every other place, Windows 7 will be the OS installed on it. I'm not talking about building your own or some special deal through Dell where you can opt to get no OS or Linux. I'm talking about walking into Best Buy like the average person does and picking up something. It's a shame really. I'd like to have a Mac but I can't shell out that kind of cash for it.
From: The Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-06-2008 14:06
The problem with that little "experiment" is that it does not show us what the peeps were showed.
I mean, I could whip up some real nice Eye Candy, then call it an OS (heck, a skin will do!) and then "show" it to people and then say "guess what? this is WinXP!"
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
I don't know if you have heard about Mojave before but the story goes like this, apparently...
Microsoft took a cross section of people that had tried and failed with Vista, and took them to a private testing of a 'new product' called Mojave, essentially it was Windows Vista set up by Microsoft technicians, they took videos of the testers and the Mojave site is the product of these.
Does this mean that you need a Microsoft technician to get vista working well then?
I'm more than sick of all this mindless Vista bashing. I've been using Vista for about a year now without any problems. Some things could be better but guess what same could be said for XP and especially ALL linux distros. It's not windows' or microsoft's fault that so few people use linux. Blame the stupid software developers and hardware manufacturers who don't make drivers, programs and games for linux. And ffs someone make a linux distro which actually works and recognizes my lcd monitor's native resolution. Every time I try to install a linux distro it either crashes, doesn't recognize my processor WTF!? or fucks up the screen so that even the display setting equivalent has no idea that my screen could be bigger than 800x600 ffs. I have to edit x11.config (or whatsitsname) every damn time. I don't have time for this SHIT. And c'mon I don't want a 10 step installation guide for Flash. I want to press "Install", "Next", "Next", "Finished". I want something that my mother could handle.
If Linux was one big organization then at the current state of it I think people would bash linux many times more than microsoft/windows. Linux, namely Ubuntu feels like it's in it's early teenage years of becoming a truly multifunctional and usable desktop OS that most people are used to with windows or osx.
From: The Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-07-2008 14:13
My question back to you, Arthurio, is WHY should I leave WinXP for WinVista?
In other words, what is WinVista offering me, that WinXP does not?
IMHO and experience, WinXP offers me a better PC experience than WinVista.
So I seriously fail to see why I should "upgrade" (more like downgrade here) to WinVista just because M$ wants to fill it's pockets.
If they had truly wanted to bring out a better OS, then they should have. That they did not, just goes to show that M$ has become a bloated, complacent beast that is not connected to its customers needs and wishes.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
I don't think Microsoft is making you upgrade your current XP license to Vista. The problem arises when you buy a new computer then you have to choose between Vista, Linux etc.
But yeah if you look at it this way then there's isn't much that's better with Vista except for better looks, fewer viruses, DX10, games work better in windowed mode, most professional applications run a little faster, start menu is more usable, search features are better, better and more usable explorer with zoomable pictures, more secure built-in firewall, easier file sharing with better permissions management and possibly more depending on personal preferences such as improvements in 'Media Center', Movie maker and other bundled programs.
Lets just imagine that Vista was before XP and microsoft was "forcing" us to upgrade to XP. WHY would I leave Vista?
From: The Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-07-2008 17:21
To be honest (though you know it is the other way around - M$ is attempting to get their customers to upgrade to Vista), I prefer WinXP to Vista.
For looks, I have the Aero skin for my WinBlinds. Looks exactly like Vista, without the bloat.
As for Viruses...??
I don't have viruses on my WinXP machine. I am behind a Router, with a good Firewall, I have my Spybot with Tea Timer running, and I use FF with my beloved NoScript, Adblock Plus, Flashblock, and JavaScript Options.
I have not had a virus in years.
And yes, Microsoft is trying to get me to upgrade to Vista, by stopping support for WinXP. And as you have pointed out, if one buys a new computer (though I do not buy complete PCs, I put them together myself), then one is left with the unenvious option of choosing Vista, Linux, or Mac OS (or one installs WinXP from his install disk, which is what I do).
DX10 does nothing for me - I do not play games that require it.
Most professional applications run faster?! I seriously doubt that! Not when compared to my revved WinXP system, they do not!
As for the Start menu, yes, it is more "usable" in Win Vista, but I normally do not use the Start menu, anyway. And as for search features, I use Google Desktop. Works much better than anything M$ produces, and is much faster.
And then throw in all the problems that Vista introduces - and I seriously do not see a reason to upgrade.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: Czech Republic via Bristol UK Insane since: Feb 2002
posted 09-02-2008 12:02
I have been using Vista for ages now, currently run Vista Home Premium 32 bit (SP1) on my Laptop and Vista Ultimate 64 bit (SP1) on my desktop, the only reason i went 64 bit on the desktop was bcs i Have 8GB of Ram on board, and the Intel Quad Cores seem to perform better, from a cold boot I am in Vista working in less than 2 minutes. Photoshop cs3 opens in less than a few seconds. If i use a 4GB usb flash disk that vista can use as a fast cache then it runs even faster.
Since SP1 i have never had a Fatal error, very few application crashes. Even games run faster in Ultimate than in XP Pro SP3 (Have it installed under a dual boot on the desktop)
TBH the amount of time i spend in XP now i will probably zap the partition and use it for data.
quote:Whether you?re coming from XP or Vista, Windows 7 offers a massive leap forward in usability, security, and support for new hardware and technology, especially for enthusiasts and power users. For anyone who regularly keeps many windows open at once time, the new Taskbar is worth the price of admission alone. For XP users, the security improvements are equally worthy of praise, while Vista users will be thrilled with the much improved, much less annoying UAC. Add in support for new hardware technologies, more new features, and the kernel improvements that should allow you to get more from your multi-core CPU, and Windows 7 becomes a tidy, compelling package to all Windows users.
Best of all, the new OS simply feels faster than Vista or even XP. As one editor said after a session testing the OS, it?s the best of both worlds?the user interface speed of XP and the features and security of Vista and more. That?s something to be lauded.
Great news for some?
For me, I know how to switch from one app to another, it's really not that difficult, so no thanks for the new Taskbar.
Security? I'm behind hardware and third party software firewalls. All my data is backed-up externally, no personal identifiers on my PCs (not to mention AV protection).
UAC? I'm on XP so that's a non-issue. It's also a non-issue for Vista, I turned off UAC from the onset.
Hardware support for new technologies? I'll upgrade if and when the time comes for that killer new technology hardware - what could it be a new phone??
"Feels faster than Vista" - wow, that's meaningful. Let's wait to see benchmarks that say it blows the doors off of XP. Don't hold your breath.
No thanks Microsoft. I think Dvorak said it best:
quote:Having followed Microsoft's exploits since its inception, I can safely say the best anyone can hope for with Windows 7 is moderate success. For all of the fanfare surrounding the new OS, Win 7 is really just a Vista martini. The operating system may have two olives instead of one this time out, but it's still made with the same cheap Microsoft vodka.
posted 07-10-2008 14:38
My linux box does boot a bit faster than windows xp but not within 5 - 10 seconds.
