The Second Coming of Vista: Microsoft Strikes Back

[enewmen]

Agree with most here.
Vista 64 runs all my old and new Windows apps. So it's FINALLY better than XP. So M$, please encourage more developers/companies to take advantage of Vista and 64bits! Less boated is always welcome.

About Samsung, notice the G810? Nothing less that kick ass. Looks like Apple will get knocked silly from all sides.

 

[Guest]

We still can't get bit-perfect audio from Vista. nuff said.

 

[Zorg]

I will echo the fact that Vista is DRM pigsh!t. They will get my copy of XP when the security updates stop, and maybe not even then. I wonder how MS is going to pig up Windows 7. Maybe we will have to rent it per year along with Office, that should be a good revenue stream for them.

 

[Guest]

Ogre, you know that your position in a company is inversely proportional to the knowledge you have. Saying that, if you have been a CIO for 5 years, you are 5 years behind. Your biggest concern is syncing your mail to your phone. The reason it's called an analyst opionion is exactly that, it's an analysis not a fact. He's entitled to his opinion. Like it or not. I'm so tired of this MS bashing. Microsoft brought computing to the world. Your 1st PC had MS-DOS, not HP/UX or AIX or Unix. Face it, OSS should be buried. No standards, complicated, user-unfriendly and defenately not more secure and it's bloat-ware. Who needs 35 text readers called II VI PI UI FI bla bla bla on a CD? And dont dare say OSS is more secure. Don't believe me, go check www.zone-h.org. Tell me now who's ahead of the game. I personally think that if you want to play with the big boys, you better handle yourself like one. Round 1 FIGHT!

 

[badboy4dee]

Vista SUKS Major A** guys. Sr.Lan Admin at a company that is the LARGEST in what we do. We are not going to Vista because it just doesn't work worth a crap with any Enterprise apps or company developed apps. If we are able to get it to work (I use "work" loosely here) it's just to hard and expensive. Buggy to make changes and omfg how slow can an OS get?? I really wish Toms would stick with the articles that are pro I.T. and not M$. You go Zorg & bf2gameplaya lets not EVEN GET INTO M$ DRM, OS SUPPORTED SPYWARE CALLED "FEATURES". I can't tell you how much info/data we have to filter/block from M$ because of their "features". Believe me M$ isn't only wanting you $$ here folks, put a sniffer on the wire running M$ and watch the sparks fly. There's a reason why PCI standards are blocking soooo much of M$ crap.

Silent Majority.

 

[badboy4dee]

Just had to add this... why are the major SAN/NAS players NOT using M$ crap??? They are using Linux/Unix variants. Not M$ because they need extreme stability and reliability in these environments. Processing Teraquads of Data all the while spewing extra packets back to M$ and anybody who can terror a wire. Granted Hasta-LaVista is a retail package and not intended for SAN's or the like but the point is M$ stuff is VERY bloaty and just not something people want. Given the choice people are going to MACs or Linux. Some are even on DIAL UP still!

Silent Majority

 

[Guest]

I thought about switching to Mac when I installed Vista shortly after it was released and discovered the nasty slow file copy problem. I switched back to XP and started investigating Macs - reading forums, going to the Apple store and playing with Macs. After few months of learning/observing, I realized that it's also not all that rosy in the Mac world. Users are also posting problems in forums, many times problems are excused as features, e.g. you can't do this or that, because Apple thinks it's not good for you. I'm also into photography and so I played a lot with Aperture on 8core Mac Pro and was surprised that the application hung on few occasions for no apparent reason. I also felt that everything required way to many mouse clicks. It certainly was a different experience and not one without problems, so I decided to not make a move and wait it out. Six months later Microsoft issued patches for the slow file copy bug, I installed Vista 64bit and never looked back. It never crashed on me, it's fast, it can address my 8gb of RAM, it has great new features. Yes it is missing certain features here and there, but it's hard to satisfy every user and it's certainly not a reason to call it junk. I still read Mac forums every now and then out of curiosity, but I do not see any ground breaking reason to switch - it's just not worth the effort to me. I'm sure there are people for who Macs are perfect and there's nothing wrong with that. We all have our preferences. I personally would like to see a stronger Apple so that we can have a meaningful competitor to Microsoft and therefore better products in both camps.

 

[Scotteq]

*Notes that any comments which are even vaguely pro-Vista get rated down. Feel free*

Been using Vista since release, and Vista 64 for the last 10 months. I'll repeat what has already been said: It's been no harder to learn/use/operate than any other OS I've played with/ V64 has been practically bullet proof since day 1, runs everything I've put on it, and believe it or not: I've had zero trouble finding drivers for my components.

I would opine a great part of the trouble with Vista can be found between the LCD and the seat.

 

[badboy4dee]

LOL Scotteq, a lot of trouble with Vista or ANY issues in I.T. can be attributed to trouble between chair and keyboard. Learning an OS suks at times but like you said no harder than any other mainstream stuff. I find it hard that p6889k using an 8core mac opted for V64 because an app hung a few times. Had to be expensive to switch from an 8core Mac to a dual? V64. For most people not going to a Mac/Apple is because it is cost prohibitive. Apps are not as affluent as well as support and feature set as p6889k mentioned. But if you already have a workstation class machine a few hiccups is acceptable when offset with the performance. Anybody can work on M$ I'm living proof! LOL

Silent Majority

 

[nukemaster]

[citation][nom]badboy4dee[/nom]Just had to add this... why are the major SAN/NAS players NOT using M$ crap??? They are using Linux/Unix variants.[/citation]
Well lets see now? linux is FREE? maybe that reason. Because its open source and easy to modify for those who are used to it?

My NAS runs Windows XP MCE, records tv and does many other things. i like versatility.

 

[iocedmyself]

WTF is wrong with people. Since vista came out pretty much all i've seen is people saying things along the lines of

"ZOMG my 1.8ghz single/dual core cpu and 1 - 2gig of ram and 8800G** isn't enough to run vista. DX10 is slow and doesn't look as good as DX9 on my 8800G*** It was enough to run xp great so vista must suck. i will not even try 64bit version since it is going to be slower since 32bit stuff is faster on 64bit cpu's."

or

"I have 4gigs of ram and 32bit vista still runs really bad. I still run out of memory all the time. Vista sucks XP FTW!"

or

"i just installed 64bit vista ultimate because everyone who likes vista says it's better then 32bit. But it still runs slow with my $500 2 gig PC 1066/1200/1333"

or

"my $1600 core 2 duo quad extreme QVC6851.32 Insane overclocking overpriced edition kickz a$$ in XP, i get uber fps in all my dx9 games at 2048x1536 with my $700x2 8800G**+ OC edition SLI combination toaster set up. But all my games go 1/2 as fast in DX10 and it says my cpu is running a lot slower then xp. There for the only thing that could be wrong is Vista. Vista sucks. Nvidia and intel didn't done do nothing wrong"

Things of that nature, with that king of logic and basic level of communicating the english language.

Core 2's were optimized for Xp, or 32bit in general because intel doesn't not fare well in 64bit computing. Also true that the 8800 nvidia series is a DX9 card with TOKEN DX10 extensions thrown in as a marketing ploy. This is why the card was released near a year before any DX10 games. This is also why nvidia is getting it's head donkey punched by Ati's 4800 cards.

64 bit Vista is better in multicore performance, better in internet speed, better in multi-tasking, file system performance, all the overall maintinece and system protection that the user needed to be responsible for in XP. It is in fact better in just about every way so long as you have proper hardware config and are running the 64bit version for which it was intended to be soley released for.

Sucky hardware intended to excel in outdated application standards doesn't mean vista sucks. It means your hardware sucks on vista.

My AMD hardware has enjoyed a consistent 15%-20% performance increase in 64bit vista over 32bit xp.

 

[antilycus]

Here's the problem. People are stupid. The changes in VISTA are too large for the general public to handle. On top of that their product scheme is bad. If you thought XP HOME (cant join a domain) was bad, get grip on the 6 different VISTA offerings.

Plain and simple, there isn't a single company on the planet that will update to Vista (new shops might choose to install vista from the start) unless the HAVE to (and there is no need to right now).

It's great that this user's opinion thinks that Microsoft Vista SP1 is cool for gaming but for those of you who don't know MS makes their money from Companies. Not the retail sector. IF people cant use their laptops @ work (we dont allow vista) they wont buy it.

So while it may be a better technology, that doesnt mean it was a smart move to change everything. HUMANS DONT LIKE CHANGE and even if you can grasp it, others cant. Accept it, move on and stay away from VISTA.

IT DIRECTOR and MANAGER for 14 locations nation wide. Not one machine has VISTA on it.

 

[Mante]

[citation][nom]jobhead[/nom]the only people that use macs are arty farty wanks that dont have the brain power to operate windows, very sad , xp is a sh*t tin better than any apple os[/citation]

You have no idea what you are talking about, where the fu** do you think programers work???? windows??? hahahaha. (noob)

 

[Mante]

[citation][nom]jobhead[/nom]the only people that use macs are arty farty wanks that dont have the brain power to operate windows, very sad , xp is a sh*t tin better than any apple os[/citation]

You have no idea what you are talking about, where the fu** do you think programers work???? windows??? hahahaha. (noob)

 

[Mante]

[citation][nom]jobhead[/nom]the only people that use macs are arty farty wanks that dont have the brain power to operate windows, very sad , xp is a sh*t tin better than any apple os[/citation]

You have no idea what you are talking about, where the fu** do you think programers work???? windows??? hahahaha. (noob)

 

[antilycus]

Again, anyone who thinks the retail sector is important to MS, you wre simply wrong. YOu wont see 64bit take off in the work place because their applications ( alot of which are made in house ) are designed and created in 32-bit. ALso on top of that the INTEL CORE 2 architecture is 32-bit. Designed for 32-bit as well.

Intel gladly admitted that they have no place in the 64 bit world, which is why they created the CORE 2 DUO chipset/architecture. SO great, your home computer does well on 64 bit. But the rest of the corporate world is on 32 bit.

Here's a little hint. If you have never heard of the AS/400 or have no idea why its used so widely, your opinion is a bit dated because you can only see one side.

 

[antilycus]

Again, anyone who thinks the retail sector is important to MS, you wre simply wrong. YOu wont see 64bit take off in the work place because their applications ( alot of which are made in house ) are designed and created in 32-bit. ALso on top of that the INTEL CORE 2 architecture is 32-bit. Designed for 32-bit as well.

Intel gladly admitted that they have no place in the 64 bit world, which is why they created the CORE 2 DUO chipset/architecture. SO great, your home computer does well on 64 bit. But the rest of the corporate world is on 32 bit.

Here's a little hint. If you have never heard of the AS/400 or have no idea why its used so widely, your opinion is a bit dated because you can only see one side.

 

[Milleman]

Yepp...
Don't we just hate all the DRM shit in Vista...!

Vista is a gaming and DRM multimedia platform. An XBOX 360 for the PC hardware.
Nothing more, nothing less. I want a real O/S that is clean from DRM and only deal with the stuff I want it to deal with. That is why I moved to Linux instead of converting to Vista. If I wanna play a game...? Then I just use the 360. It cost me less to purchase a 360, than to do all necessary upgrades just to do the same things in Vista, as I've already been doing in XP.

For now on... For real tasks, I'll use Linux. For games, I turn on Xbox!

 

[Milleman]

Yepp...
Don't we just hate all the DRM shit in Vista...!

Vista is a gaming and DRM multimedia platform. An XBOX 360 for the PC hardware.
Nothing more, nothing less. I want a real O/S that is clean from DRM and only deal with the stuff I want it to deal with. That is why I moved to Linux instead of converting to Vista. If I wanna play a game...? Then I just use the 360. It cost me less to purchase a 360, than to do all necessary upgrades just to do the same things in Vista, as I've already been doing in XP.

For now on... For real tasks, I'll use Linux. For games, I turn on Xbox!

 

[Milleman]

Yepp...
Don't we just hate all the DRM shit in Vista...!

Vista is a gaming and DRM multimedia platform. An XBOX 360 for the PC hardware.
Nothing more, nothing less. I want a real O/S that is clean from DRM and only deal with the stuff I want it to deal with. That is why I moved to Linux instead of converting to Vista. If I wanna play a game...? Then I just use the 360. It cost me less to purchase a 360, than to do all necessary upgrades just to do the same things in Vista, as I've already been doing in XP.

For now on... For real tasks, I'll use Linux. For games, I turn on Xbox!