If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
Mike T. writes:
What world are you living in? I assure you that there are indeed billions of ibm-compatible (so-called) personal computers in use in the world right now. Only if you include every PC ever made and still able to boot. Many PCs are far too old to support any recent version of Windows. Whoa. Granted, many systems are still running Windows prior to XP. But if you look at the XP computers alone, they would account for billions of potential systems to run Vista. There are not billions of copies of XP running. There is no need to upgrade to Vista unless you want Aero (the new GUI), but that won't stop many people from installing Vista on systems that are not Aero-capable. Vista can be installed in an XP-like mode (without Aero). Many people just have to have the latest OS, even if they can only run a crippled version of it. True, although these are almost never people who actually use their computers for productive work. Installing the latest OS and doing useful things with a PC tend to be mutually exclusive. Unless there is nobody above you. That's only possible if you're the owner of your own business. But do keep in mind that the majority of businesses that lose their IT capability fold within the six months following the loss. Actually, I see 'Vista-ready' as benefitting hardware manufacturers/vendors, and actually HURTING Microsoft. I think that the idea of "Vista-ready" is a huge red flag to intelligent computer users who see computers as tools, but it might seduce casual users and geeks. Meanwhile, I don't doubt that hardware components (especially mainboards, RAM, higher-end dual-core CPUs and high-end video cards) will be in MUCH greater demand over the next year or so, directly related to the release of Vista. Maybe. But sooner or later even Joe Blow is going to see the light and stop dropping thousands of dollars on new machines just to achieve near-parity with the system he already had. Certainly corporate users already understand this, much to Microsoft's chagrin. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
Mike T. writes:
You'd have to see it to understand. The XP GUI didn't seduce me in comparison to the NT GUI; I'm quite certain that nothing that Aero has would seduce me, either. I still run the classic Windows GUI on XP; it's more compact, puts less of a load on the hardware, is more streamlined, and requires no adaptation. Every time I install XP on a machine, I switch it to the classic Windows GUI. If you are running a large monitor like we are, Aero is much better suited to that. Fonts/icons/etc. scale better, making everything easier to see, read and manipulate. With XP, I have to tweak the HELL out of it to make it somewhat usable on (for example) a 19" LCD monitor. Why? XP looks great on my LCD monitor. The only thing I did was turn on ClearType. But Aero was quite usable at the default settings, as far as the GUI is concerned. Even my wife noticed right away (and she's not a computer person). She was impressed with Aero. It's not just eye candy, it actually adds greater usability. Virtually everything about modern GUIs is eye candy, and with each new release of an OS, the candy gets more elaborate, busy, and space-consuming. It's like the automotive industry a few decades back when every new model of a car had 20 pounds more chrome than its predecessor. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
"johns" wrote in message oups.com... My BFG GF7900GTO is just about the top video card on the market, and Vista crippled its performance by nearly 30%. This box is a top game box, and yet Vista struggled on it. I think Vista has a severe problem with memory management, and that is why the hard drive was hard on all the time. It sounded just like Tivoli ... big Bro's keylogger for the Feds. I put the system back to XP this morning, and it was like a cool breeze on a hot day. What a relief. johns Are you sure you weren't hacked? I installed XP once while connected to the lan. In the 30 seconds or so it took to install a good firewall, the system was hacked. The problem is, there are no good firewalls for vista, or at least none that I've found. -Dave |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
Maybe. But sooner or later even Joe Blow is going to see the light and stop dropping thousands of dollars on new machines just to achieve near-parity with the system he already had. Certainly corporate users already understand this, much to Microsoft's chagrin. Well, if you look at it that way, Vista could be a huge boon . . . to linux. Nothing wrong with that. -Dave |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
johns writes:
My BFG GF7900GTO is just about the top video card on the market, and Vista crippled its performance by nearly 30%. This box is a top game box, and yet Vista struggled on it. I think Vista has a severe problem with memory management, and that is why the hard drive was hard on all the time. You should not assume that high disk activity is a sign of poor memory management. It probably indicates design flaws, but they aren't necessarily flaws in memory management. I put in a nice video card more or less incidentally, and it runs the handful of games I have quite nicely. Of course, for all other purposes, it runs like greased lightning. I see no reason to sacrifice this just to give Microsoft more money. You know what kind of upgrade I'd _really_ like to see? One that preserves the _same identical_ functionality, but with 50% better performance. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Mike T. writes: You'd have to see it to understand. The XP GUI didn't seduce me in comparison to the NT GUI; I'm quite certain that nothing that Aero has would seduce me, either. I still run the classic Windows GUI on XP; it's more compact, puts less of a load on the hardware, is more streamlined, and requires no adaptation. Every time I install XP on a machine, I switch it to the classic Windows GUI. Why? XP looks great on my LCD monitor. The only thing I did was turn on ClearType. Virtually everything about modern GUIs is eye candy, and with each new release of an OS, the candy gets more elaborate, busy, and space-consuming. It's like the automotive industry a few decades back when every new model of a car had 20 pounds more chrome than its predecessor. Again, you'd have to see it to understand. I can tell you, without a doubt, Aero (on Vista) will surprise you. I know that, as I've read your expectations of it. Aero makes huge demands on hardware, which is bad. I believe it does offer real value in return, though. For starters (pun intended) the Start menu doesn't fill the whole fricking screen, like it does in XP. It's much more intuitive and easier to operate than the XP Start Menu. The eye-candy is there, for sure. But with Aero it is LESS busy and LESS space-consuming. XP can look good on an LCD monitor. The default settings on the XP GUI don't look good, though. If you have a large monitor running 1280 X 1024 (for example), you need binoculars to read anything, unless you are sitting 3" from the monitor. You can set fonts to "large", but this makes little difference. You can crank up the dpi above large to a custom setting to make fonts readable. But, the drawback is that not all applications will display menus correctly at custom dpi settings. Compare that to Aero . . . the settings chosen by default were easy to read. No tweaking required. Icons were reasonably sized with Aero also, as opposed to virtual background noise on the XP desktop (at default settings). Before someone gets smart, I have 15/20 vision. But the difference (in Aero, as opposed to the XP GUI) goes beyond the desktop. With Vista, Microsoft renamed Outlook Express. It is now something like "Microsoft Mail". And the new Mail app. is much easier to use at default font sizes. It is a different look. Both 'prettier' and easier to read. If all Vista apps. scale fonts similarly, Aero will be a blessing to all Windows users who spend more than a few minutes a day using their computers. To be fair, Vista adds more junk to the desktop. BUT, it turns off/hides with a single mouse click. And you probably won't want to disable it, anyway. I'm talking about the new gadgets area (not sure of the proper name for it). But it has an RSS reader, a ANALOG (looking) clock and a picture viewer on it, by default. Of course, it is totally customizable, and the whole thing is optional. Turn it off, and the Aero desktop is cleaner than you're used to if you run XP. In fact, you see more of the desktop with Aero. Even the little clutter that is there is see-through. It's a trip to see both the taskbar AND the wallpaper behind it. -Dave |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:11:34 GMT, Gank
wrote: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:18:38 -0400, Mike T. wrote: The Aero interface alone is worth the upgrade. Why is that worth upgrading? Why would I want to run an OS that makes my video card work all the time like it is "running a game"? Screw that ****e. I agree. I'm looking for better performance, not bloatware. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
You know what kind of upgrade I'd _really_ like to see? One that
preserves the _same identical_ functionality, but with 50% better performance. It's called linux. Well, to be fair, there are still some things that linux won't do. Maybe it should be called linux, 2010. -Dave |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
"johns" wrote in message
oups.com... My BFG GF7900GTO is just about the top video card on the market, and Vista crippled its performance by nearly 30%. This box is a top game box, and yet Vista struggled on it. I think Vista has a severe problem with memory management, and that is why the hard drive was hard on all the time. It sounded just like Tivoli ... big Bro's keylogger for the Feds. I put the system back to XP this morning, and it was like a cool breeze on a hot day. What a relief. johns You sure its not summat else with Vista? I've 'only' got a 6600GT card and it hardly got pushed by Vista, which also seemed to hardly be pushing my XP3500 either. It's just Vista I didn't like. SteveH |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on Vista
You sure its not summat else with Vista? I've 'only' got a 6600GT card and
it hardly got pushed by Vista, which also seemed to hardly be pushing my XP3500 either. It's just Vista I didn't like. SteveH Not disagreeing with you, but what did you not like about it? -Dave |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vista Driver Requests | Quaoar | Dell Computers | 1 | June 10th 06 11:55 PM |
Vista Driver Requests | Tom Scales | Dell Computers | 2 | June 10th 06 03:22 PM |
A78nx vista 5308 working with sata | jshafer817 | Asus Motherboards | 0 | March 23rd 06 05:39 PM |
installing XP 64 on Turion 64 laptop freeses Same for Vista builds | Hontas Farmer | AMD x86-64 Processors | 1 | February 19th 06 06:15 AM |