I use Vista on my new PC here and I love it.

+1 for ubuntu. I think that paying upwards of $300 for an os is not a wise investment considering there are many linux desktops that are available for free with *almost the same polished look and feel as Microsoft products.

Yes, they have the same look and feel as MS products but there are no decent software apps. To get anything done you'll end up running your old apps in wine so you might as well just have a microsoft os.

I have the Vista CDs, Full licence, but am simply not upgradeing.

I thought it was stated by Microsoft themselves that in a couple of years the new os to replace Vista is going to be rolled out...... might as well wait and skip over Vista altogether if at all possible ( I have vista on one of my laptops and it is too much of a hassle to switch it over to XP or I would do it.... I for sure would have bought it with XP instead of Vista if the choice had been offered) :2 cents:

lol these threads are always the same :1orglaugh

i run vista on a laptop, the only problems i've had is if i leave it running for a few days then it runs a bit sluggish until it's rebooted. Also, i don't like the fact that it still takes ages to unzip or move a large file :(

I use Vista and haven't had any problems with it whatsoever. I use the entire Adobe cs3 suite every day, and I don't notice my laptop slowing down one bit. I have no reason to hate it.

Hating Microsoft has become very fashionable lately. I have a client who is deathly afraid of upgrading to Vista, solely because of what a creative agency told him. This creative agency is full of mac users. Why would they ever say anything positive about windows?

It's really sad that our decisions to use products are made for us by clever marketing strategies.

http://castingoutnines.files.wordpre...mac-people.jpg

My older, slower machine running XP outperforms my newer, faster machine running Vista. Besides that annoyance Vista works well for me and runs all of my programs. The only thing that failed for me was an older Creative Labs Extigy (external) sound box.

m

See the results for yourself.
 

Results of the Mojave Experiment - Today July 29th @ http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/

I've been doing pretty well on Vista, and I'm a hardcore user with 3 quadcore 3D rigs, and serious network activity. I abuse the fuck out of my setup on a daily basis, and other than the initial security setup(so the machines can talk to each other properly), everything has been beautiful, and I'd never go back to XP.

This just in: When someone says your shit sucks, you can trick them by being subversive to try to make yourself appear as just an innocent bystander and not the provoker of the action which caused someone to call your shit, well, shit.

Also, a dog eating bees:

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/2...ingbeesdn7.jpg

hmmmmmm...

Of all names to call the operation...

"Mojave" as in Dry Humor.

the real code is "Nella"


http://s1.directupload.net/images/080407/24odltux.jpg

it crashed on me non stop out of the box for 3 days..then i got all the drivers i needed to downgrade* to xp.
vista would fail miserably while attempting to do some very basic tasks.
and i run quad core 4 gig ram so its not the hardware...

Vista was brilliant. How else could Microsoft have united so many of their customers for one of their other products?

Which cases? Please explain in detail. Windows 2000 isn't "much better" than XP, it's pretty much the same fucking thing. XP was Microsoft's way of introducing the NT kernel to the masses after testing the waters with 2000 Professional.

I wouldn't be sitting here typing this in windows XP if windows 2000 was anything special, turn off all the fucking eye candy and XP and 2000 are pretty much indistinguishable from one and other. As far as kernel level things go, if anything has been slowed down in XP it's due to security additions/fixes, and we're talking a few hundred cps, not anything drastic like you are implying.


So please, I'm really interested in hearing what's so much faster/better in 2k than in XP. I want to know what I am missing.

What languages? What kind of tools? Is there a lot of lowlevel MSDOS programming in Windows 2k? You're dropping this in here like a guy whipping his cock out to compare it to everyone elses, so why not spill the beans. I assume by low level you are talking assembler, I'm game, speak to me. Tell me how windows XP and 2000 differ on a "core level".

Speed and "horsepower" isn't the issue. As asked many times previously, did ya follow the hardware and software compatibility lists?

1 single driver/software conflict or issue can mar the performance of Vista.

Too many people are forgetting the most basic rule of all: Make sure the system is 100% compatible (not just performance wise) before loading the OS.

You can have a supercharged engine but if one component isn't sealed right, connected properly or carries the flow of fuel in a correct way, the engine isn't worth crap.

Respect the OS. Do your research.

We use Macs, but I use a Vista laptop and desktop and I've never had a problem with it. It is not the best OS ever, but no OS ever is. It has its flaws, but to be honest it works.

I've never been a Microsoft lover and will use anything that is not Microsoft if I can. Unfortunately, due to compatibility with some of the stuff I use and like, the OS is not one of the things that I can change so easily.

And Linux for the desktop? Don't get me started... lol

80x86 Assembly language, C/C++, C#.

"A low level MSDOS programming in Windows 2k"??? What are you talking about? Can you please try to re-phrase your question above?

You can't read. Right? I never stated that XP and 2k have a different core. Both are NT 5.x systems. So on "core" level they are really same.

"Microsoft has managed to prove that if you have a friendly expert on a controlled machine (with Vista pre-installed) showing a carefully selected subset of Vista features to an ignorant XP user for a few minutes, the XP user will often say he finds Vista acceptable. Wow."

http://wilshipley.com/blog/2008/07/m...ience-bad.html

Explains the reasons why the 'experiment' is flawed in 4 different ways.

Regardless of the clear and obvious fact that the Mojave Experiment isn't a 100% scientifically accurate "experiment" and leans more on the side of being a marketing ploy, every "experiment" is controlled to a certain degree. What is implied on that blog involves a jaded interpretation and a snide overreaction that doesn't fit what MS set out to do.

He sounds like just another blogger who took things a bit too "personal", despite his occasional "smoothing things over" with a compliment or two. The Mojave strategy clearly accomplished its mission with the participants. It took persons who were anti-Vista and got them to, at the very least, consider trying it further.

THAT is a success! THAT is exactly what MS should be doing to counteract the hasty judgments of a tech industry that has become far too cynical when it comes to Microsoft for its own good.

Also, the blogger's arguments for users "hacking together their machines and then expecting their software to work" doesn't stand solid in the face of Microsoft's specific HCL and SCL. Microsoft is tightening the reins (especially in terms of security) regarding what their software runs on and what software runs on top of it. It was only a logical step given the potential security nightmare that is Windows XP.

The last argument about having an expert tutor is invalid because that is exactly what Microsoft has made available online. Anyone can go to Vista's website and virtually test drive all of the features, plus find thousands of pages of info on how to efficiently and effectively use Vista. Plus, you can't expect Microsoft to have "Microsoft stores" because of the obvious monopoly cry that would ensue and the limitless variations in system component configurations.

Despite it all though, the campaign is getting people talking. Hopefully people at this point will see the venom spewed against Microsoft for what it really is and give them credit and support for moving in the right direction.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:
bump