0
101 Jan 19, 2008 at 17:05

Hi folks,

I bought my first notebook recently and it came with vista. Since I wasn’t in the mood to spend even more money on a XP license I said to my self: “heck - give it a try…”.

I’m in the second week of using it now, and I start to like it. It took a while to get everything configured to my taste, but now it’s working fine. It’s nowhere as bad as other people told me. :-)

The only thing that drove me nuts was, that file-extensions are disabled by default. I wasted half a day to find out why I was able to open a file called whatever.txt and not a file called data.txt.txt. Vista silently added the extra file extension while I renamed it.. Bäh..

Nils

#### 49 Replies

0
167 Jan 19, 2008 at 20:21

Some things about Vista are nifty. I’m sticking with XP on my machines for now, though. Vista’s UAC is probably the most annoying thing about it. I applaud MS for trying to enhance security, but UAC is so much clunkier than the analogous mechanisms in OS X and Linux….I hope they fix it in a patch someday. Also - the amount of RAM it wants is truly ridiculous…not a problem perhaps for those new laptops coming out with at least 2GB, but definitely a problem for me on my 512MB laptop and 1GB desktop, especially since I want to be able to run VS, Photoshop, Maya and so forth. (I’ve used ReadyBoost and it helps…but I worry that I’m significantly shortening the thumb drive’s life.)

File extensions are disabled by default in XP, too…that’s one of the first things I change every time I have a fresh install of XP. :)

0
179 Jan 20, 2008 at 01:48

From what I heard by others, they downgraded to XP afterwards to gain much added speed. For me, I’ll wait. Like when XP came out, I was still using 2K for a good year and a half before I jumped ship. I will probably do the same with Vista when I buy a system with it preloaded.

0
101 Jan 20, 2008 at 03:20

My partner in the Mattathias BASIC project uses Vista. It crashes quite often for him causing him to need to reboot in the middle of an instant messenger session. I’m glad that my main XP box is stable on 128 megs of RAM and a big swapfile. ;-)

I was glad to buy my dual-core laptop at 50% more than it goes for with Vista on it just to be spared the new operating system. I eventually wiped XP off of it in favor of Linux and don’t know how long it will be before I switch back if ever. (Need I say that I’m a retro gamer anyway and am satisfied with all of the SDL-based offerings for the Linux OS?)

0
102 Jan 20, 2008 at 09:50

Vista generally works fine on new systems. The first few months it had lots of driver issues but nowadays that’s largely fixed. But I wouldn’t upgrade to Vista on a system that was running XP before.

0
102 Jan 20, 2008 at 09:58

@Reedbeta

Vista’s UAC is probably the most annoying thing about it.

Just disable it.

Also - the amount of RAM it wants is truly ridiculous…

It doesn’t need a lot of RAM. It just uses a lot of RAM if you have it. It caches things more agressively, in the good sense.

0
102 Jan 20, 2008 at 11:16

To be honest, Vista sucks in my eyes. The latest version of XP is like 10, 20 times more stable and all-kinds-of-hardware-friendly. And I’m speaking after some nifty experience here… First a neighbour of mine bought some Vayo machine (I insisted Lenovo but nobody hears…). It had Vista preinstalled and although I did expected some problems, I would’ve never thought that it will not recognize something simple as a DVD-Rom (Damn Small Linux was working just fine…). There is also a great deal of pain with all kinds of USB devices (mice, keyboards, cameras, etc.) and a hell great deal of pain with networking. Network hardware is not beeing recognized like it should and if it does, than the configuration ist just f**king HORRIBLE. Legacy VPN connections are not beeing supported any more (you either have to use some kind of proxy or tunneling addresses). Not to say anything about the crazy system requirments. All what the hell is the deal with “Every notebook comes with Vista preinstalled!”, which of course boots the price up with 200 EUR for something I can do in 20 seconds with a nice Linux or even XP. All my machines (Including a Celeron 768 MHz, 192 RAM, ATI Radeon 9250) run PuppyLinux (one computer runes Gentoo too) and I’m completely satisfied with it. Vista can go to hell…

0
102 Jan 20, 2008 at 21:35

@Mihail121

Legacy VPN connections are not beeing supported any more…

You can enable it in the registry, but they highly advise to use CHAP version 2.

I think that with Vista Microsoft wanted to get rid of all bad legacy stuff. They’re much stricter with drivers and everything. Heck, they’re criticised because they follow standards more closely and enforce higher security. :unsure: I just consider it temporary growing pains, and I’m convinced that SP1 on a modern system will be very enjoyable.

But everyone’s milage varies. Personally I’m tempted to try Linux every year or so, but I get frustrated with command line stuff and always end up returning to Windows…

0
101 Jan 20, 2008 at 23:57

i’m using vista on my 2710p from hp. it’s a slow machine (1.2ghz dualcore ULV), but a modern one. i have no issue that for example mihail described at all, on several machines when using vista. no crashes, no network problems, nothing. it runs very fast, stable, etc.

but what i can say is, sp1 will rock very much. i’m running on it (latest release), and it makes the os much snappier, even more than before.

and then, one day, i’ll get my ssd, and then, everything’ll be fine…

(anyone having 1599$around wich he doesn’t need? :)) 0 102 Jan 21, 2008 at 00:46 @Nick You can enable it in the registry, but they highly advise to use CHAP version 2. I think that with Vista Microsoft wanted to get rid of all bad legacy stuff. They’re much stricter with drivers and everything. Heck, they’re criticised because they follow standards more closely and enforce higher security. :unsure: I just consider it temporary growing pains, and I’m convinced that SP1 on a modern system will be very enjoyable. But everyone’s milage varies. Personally I’m tempted to try Linux every year or so, but I get frustrated with command line stuff and always end up returning to Windows… I don’t like the word ‘enforce’. You can’t just follow the standards, for the stanards are not beeing followed by most of the people out there. I won’t comment the higher security, since as proven on the first day of Vista’s release, nothing is perfect, nor it will ever be. Everything’s just relative and monkey talk, although I’m certain the operating system will become stable and secure in the near future. We are testing a great deal of operating systems here at the university and working closely with many developers (including MS). Linux is of course no match for Windows (especially for the latest XP from October ‘07) but at my opinion nothing beats Solaris, except for some very minor driver glitches. Vista is also no match for FreeBSD in terms of network security and stability. The only problem free OS’s have to deal with, are non-free specifications of hardware interfaces. Otherwise they would be as successful as Vista or even more (excluding ReactOS, that OS is just horrible…). Ok, to be short. If I had a great computer (Lenovo, AlienWare or Asus) I would probably run Vista for some very specific tasks (compilation, testing, etc.) and just use PuppyLinux for everyday work, since I do like to know what happens in the system and what the system is currently doing or what it’s currently transmitting (and where) and to have out-of-the-box access to 30 file-system types and etc. etc. etc. even if performance is not so great. @Nick: Don’t forget to try it this year too!!! There is nothing more exciting than watching a BASH-master operate on a UNIX-derivate :P 0 103 Jan 22, 2008 at 11:02 If you want to move your game programming from dx9 to dx10 you need Vista. Id still be on dos if I could, I only learn new things when I have to. 0 101 Jan 22, 2008 at 18:03 @rouncer Don’t worry though, when OpenGL 3.0 comes out it will run on XP. You won’t need DirectX 10 after that. 0 101 Jan 22, 2008 at 19:09 When OpenGL 3.0 comes out we’ll all be using Windows 7 with DirectX 12. You won’t need to support DX10 by that time anymore :) 0 101 Jan 22, 2008 at 19:30 Or you could just code for OpenGL, and ignore DirectX all together, bypass the problem entirely. But about Vista: With its draconian DRM built into the OS kernel itself, I have no desire to submit myself to that, nor any family members. I would like to watch/listen to my media on whatever device I want, not only on ones certified by Microsoft. 0 101 Jan 23, 2008 at 14:46 @Nodlehs But about Vista: With its draconian DRM built into the OS kernel itself, I have no desire to submit myself to that, nor any family members. I would like to watch/listen to my media on whatever device I want, not only on ones certified by Microsoft. It has been built into kernel since Windows ME… 0 101 Jan 23, 2008 at 18:00 @Kenneth Gorking It has been built into kernel since Windows ME… HDMI/HDCP was built in since ME? I didn’t know Microsoft could transcend time. 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 11:16 @Nodlehs But about Vista: With its draconian DRM built into the OS kernel itself, I have no desire to submit myself to that, nor any family members. I would like to watch/listen to my media on whatever device I want, not only on ones certified by Microsoft. You rather buy media legally and not watch/listen to it at all? :wallbash: DRM is Digital Rights Management. Every time you buy media, it comes with a license agreement, and DRM software both allows you to do the things agreed in the license, and prevents others from doing things they didn’t pay for. I realize that DRM has teething problems, but it’s essentially a good thing. The film and music industry depend on being able to sell disks that can’t be copied. You can bash certain draconic DRM implementations, but not DRM as a whole… 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 12:39 @Nick You rather buy media legally and not watch/listen to it at all? :wallbash: DRM is Digital Rights Management. Every time you buy media, it comes with a license agreement, and DRM software both allows you to do the things agreed in the license, and prevents others from doing things they didn’t pay for. I realize that DRM has teething problems, but it’s essentially a good thing. The film and music industry depend on being able to sell disks that can’t be copied. You can bash certain draconic DRM implementations, but not DRM as a whole… It get’s more capitalistic with each day… 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 13:30 @Mihail121 It get’s more capitalistic with each day… With all due respect that’s a worthless statement without proposing an alternative. :geek: 0 103 Jan 24, 2008 at 13:46 How much better is opengl 3.0 gonna be for ya when your coding the exact same thing with different words. 0 103 Jan 24, 2008 at 14:28 If microsoft is the royal programming stuffaround then your going to be doing alot of that anyway even with opengl. 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 14:47 OpenGL 3.0 would run on Windows XP, Vista, Linux, Mac OS… If they do things right and release it soon then it would be a very interesting option over DirectX 10. If. 0 103 Jan 24, 2008 at 15:18 I know your right, I should learn both im just too lazy. Youll still need the bitching card for it - I think you can get it now for half a grand. I cant wait for it myself - I want displacement mapping really bad. 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 16:38 Half a grand? In Russian Rubles or something :)? I just ordered a 8800GT for €200, and there are a lot of reasonably priced mid-end cards from nVidia and ATi in the €100-€150 pricerange (hell, you can even get a 8400 GS with 256 mb DDR2 mem for €35) 0 141 Jan 24, 2008 at 16:46 I just had a computer failure and had to get a Vista machine. I would recommend holding off as long as possible with it. Little things don’t work like I wanted to play around with Java’s light weight game library. Turns out it doesn’t work with 64 bit Vista. It’s not that much, but things work differently, you have to recompile things to get them to work. It kind of sucks, really. It’s still too early. Personally, I would call it in alpha stage. 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 17:09 @Nick With all due respect that’s a worthless statement without proposing an alternative. :geek: What kind of an alternative I should be proposing? Or do you believe, Microsoft is doing everything, so the users can feel fine? No, they are doing it, to win money. They are cooperating with every part of the industry to lock on the standards and fight against piracy or whatever they call it (I personally think that art ist for the people…) to make a very good deal of money. Is Microsoft going that poor, that they need the money of the music and movie industry??? An alternative would be a highly modular system with open interfaces, dynamic and stable, modifiable, not ‘enforcing any standards’ but supporting as much devices and driver types as possible, user-friendly, transparent. Under those conditions I’m ready to pay money for it. I’m sure that if the casual user knew, what’s going on inside the system, he will never ever EVER install or even buy Vista. 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 18:08 @Nick You rather buy media legally and not watch/listen to it at all? :wallbash: DRM is Digital Rights Management. Every time you buy media, it comes with a license agreement, and DRM software both allows you to do the things agreed in the license, and prevents others from doing things they didn’t pay for. I realize that DRM has teething problems, but it’s essentially a good thing. The film and music industry depend on being able to sell disks that can’t be copied. You can bash certain draconic DRM implementations, but not DRM as a whole… Ummm… why would I not be able to watch/listen to my media? The only thing DRM hurts is the customers. If I pay for some song off of iTunes, and I want to listen to it in linux… I can’t, unless I circumvent the DRM built into the Apple format. If I steal the song, I can play it anywhere I want… just who is DRM helping? I don’t want to turn this thread into a huge discussion on DRM, but I do think it has a place as it is a component of Vista. The new DVD ‘Live Free Die Hard’ (link) has a digital copy BUILT IN… This is as far from DRM as could ever be imagined. DRM should rightly be called digital restriction management, all it does is restrict what the purchaser can DO with the media, it in no way empowers them to actually USE what they purchased. Nick, I would have thought you as a developer would already know, trying to stop someone from stealing your software is a useless exercise and a waste of resources. Time and time again every software known to man has been cracked, DRM ships with its KEY to unlock it even! Talk about broken by design. ugh. 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 18:18 @Mihail121 No, they are doing it, to win money. That’s why it’s called a “business”. Microsoft’s singular purpose is to generate profit for the shareholders. To expect otherwise is childish. @Mihail121 Is Microsoft going that poor, that they need the money of the music and movie industry??? If everyone had that attitude, then we’d still be living in caves. Bettering one’s standard of living is a tremendous motive for advancement. Who are you to judge how prosperous another’s life should be? @Mihail121 I’m sure that if the casual user knew, what’s going on inside the system, he will never ever EVER install or even buy Vista. I disagree and think you are extremely overestimating the “average user’s” expectations. EDIT: As a side note, I have no intention of installing Vista anytime soon, and I usually split my use of Linux and Windows XP about 50/50. 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 20:21 @Nodlehs Ummm… why would I not be able to watch/listen to my media? The only thing DRM hurts is the customers. If I pay for some song off of iTunes, and I want to listen to it in linux… I can’t, unless I circumvent the DRM built into the Apple format. If I steal the song, I can play it anywhere I want… just who is DRM helping? I don’t want to turn this thread into a huge discussion on DRM, but I do think it has a place as it is a component of Vista. I agree that that kind of DRM doesn’t help - it only hurts the paying customers. Which is why more and more online music stores switch to plain old MP3’s. However, you need to realize that the hassle you’re experiencing isn’t inherent to DRM itself. You’re confusing the concept of DRM with the implementations you have seen so far. However, with the current state of hardware, it’s almost impossible to implement DRM in a nice and clean way. The license should be personal, and I should be able to run the media on every device I want to, as long as I’m able to identify myself, and no one else can identify himself as me. So this will only work if every piece of hardware implements the same system, and furthermore everybody needs some sort of personal noncopyable key to identify yourself with. 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 20:32 @.oisyn However, with the current state of hardware, it’s almost impossible to implement DRM in a nice and clean way. The license should be personal, and I should be able to run the media on every device I want to, as long as I’m able to identify myself, and no one else can identify himself as me. So this will only work if every piece of hardware implements the same system, and furthermore everybody needs some sort of personal noncopyable key to identify yourself with. If such a system could be implemented, I would buy products protected that way. Unfortunately, even if we had the hardware and software to implement such a system, it would never happen. I am fine with the owner of the music I buy saying I can only listen to it on one device at a time, as you said, it would need to be able to authenticate that I am ME no matter what device I am using. Unless capitalism changes, there is no way you would get all hardware/software companies (or a significant market share of them) to buy into it. 0 102 Jan 24, 2008 at 21:26 @Mihail121 No, they are doing it, to win money. If that is your belief I would buy some Microsoft shares. I personally think that art ist for the people… So you’re ok with copying everything and the artists getting nothing? I’m sure that if the casual user knew, what’s going on inside the system, he will never ever EVER install or even buy Vista. Nobody cares as long as they can browse the web, edit their vacation pictures, and play WoW. Besides, Microsoft can not afford doing things the avarage user would disaprove of. But please educate on reasons why I should uninstall Vista right this minute… 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 21:37 DRM is essentially trying to protect a free market good from being copied… That is to say it is only trying to ensure the same rules as the most common economic system used in the world. There is nothing wrong with the idea of DRM, it is only making sure that the producers/creators get paid for what they made. However, if you are arguing that there is something wrong with the current implementation of DRM (such as not being able to play a protected file on Linux, using the example earlier) then I totally agree, but its if its a sacrifice the producers are willing to make us pay, then we have to live with it. If you are trying to say that we should be able to freely distribute our music to others, for them to listen to unlimitedly (without compensation to the owners of the music) then I totally don’t agree. 0 101 Jan 24, 2008 at 21:51 @Blaxill (such as not being able to play a protected file on Linux, using the example earlier) then I totally agree, but if you are trying to say that we should be able to freely distribute our music to others, for them to listen to unlimitedly (without compensation to the owners of the music) then I totally don’t agree. I agree, as I posted above@Nodlehs I am fine with the owner of the music I buy saying I can only listen to it on one device at a time, as you said, it would need to be able to authenticate that I am ME no matter what device I am using. I have no problem buying my movies/games/music. I don’t feel the need to ‘share’ my media with others. People made an investment in real money to create what I consume, they should get compensated. Unfortunately, a lot of media merchants think that I should only be able to play X media on Y brand device. IE: Vista requires me to have HDCP through the entire chain to be able to watch the full meal deal, god forbid I have a monitor that doesn’t have HDCP, I must be a ‘pirate’ arrrr matey! 0 101 Jan 25, 2008 at 19:41 Up until this Christmas I was using Windows 2000 Professional and my “family” computer still uses it. I got a new computer that I have been desperately needing, as far as you can need a computer anyways. It runs XP, I thought maybe with the money I won, I did 4-H rabbit contest and sold my rabbit for$200, about getting Vista but I decided that there were some quit dramatic downfalls to buying it. Mainly, I can not generate that kind of money quickly seeing is how I am too young to work.

0
141 Jan 25, 2008 at 22:27

You got a nice price for your rabbit, though. I’ve been having trouble with Vista up until the time I updated my video driver. Now it works great.

0
103 Jan 30, 2008 at 02:13

Most people who think they are cool dont use vista yet, and always have
a toy linux box in their house.

oh, and never use yahoo.

0
101 Jan 30, 2008 at 08:26

Had to get Vista for DX10… Noticed that the free version of DevStudio 2008 (Enterprise edition) has a couple of issues though…. the linker occasionally fails and I end up doing a clean rebuid. Also I can’t get drivers for my ADSL modem, and I haven’t bothered to get a wireless card for it yet so I’m using my laptop for downloads… have to get this sorted out soon….
Other than that it’s worth it just for DX10…

0
101 Jan 30, 2008 at 16:27

i find it funny to see people cry around “vista needs me to change stuff”. we want progress, not? vista is a progress, but this means, some compatibility to stuff that didn’t progress will just not exist anymore.

of course it sucks my scanner doesn’t work anymore. but blame vista for it? it was made for win98, and the company producing it changed it’s owner-company 3 times now. it’s 10 years old now. i don’t expect it to work.

everyone crying for security and stability and new features should know better. to get there, one has to leave stuff behind, that was just not working right by default.

i really like xp, and have no problem using it and supporting it on systems that have it. but for a new computer you buy, vista is simply the best. at least if you buy from a company that’s worth the money (f.e. hp..). from day one, a modern system is 100% stable and never fails except for a hardware fault. vista security bugs still have to show up, there isn’t anything major that happened during the first year. this is actually impressive, as it is one of the main targets to attack.

linux fanboys that can’t respect and accept windows are just boring. geeks trying to be cool. linux is great and works great, where it works. same for windows, xp as vista.

there are currently two points i have with vista, that don’t work as expected. the big one is winsxs, the never-stop-growing-folder .. and the small one is the startmenu-search, wich shows up shortcuts to the found files, instead of real references. means, i can’t dragdrop from the startmenusearch into live messenger to send a file..

else, i haven’t found real problems with it at all. and this as a home-user, as a professional user, as dj, as supporter, as programmer, as administrator, and as teacher to dummyusers.

0
101 Jan 30, 2008 at 20:58

If I were to buy, I would wait for atleast another 6 months to let them work out the majority of the major bugs that are not already worked out. But hey, that is just me.

0
141 Jan 31, 2008 at 05:22

i find it funny to see people cry around “vista needs me to change stuff”. we want progress, not? vista is a progress, but this means, some compatibility to stuff that didn’t progress will just not exist anymore.

Most of us didn’t want progress. At least Microsoft progress. This is something that gets jammed down our throats because Microsoft is a monopoly, or close to one and they decided they would make an OS with higher specs to sell more OS’s, therefore making more money. There really is nothing better here. I don’t buy the security stuff they talk about. It’s just different, like the next version of Office, so people have to upgrade. Carmack said dx10 was an artificial split and I believe him more than Bill Gates. I have Vista because my computer tanked and I needed another one. They all mostly have Vista on them. It’s an O.K. OS but nothing to brag about in my book. It uses too many system resources and has a pretty picture. The windows do look better than XP, but that wouldn’t be very hard would it? You couldn’t make uglier windows than XP if you tried. But then, who cares? They’re just windows, not applications. We have a right to complain that drivers don’t work. They have a monopoly and they should see to it that they give backwards compatibility if they’re going to force people to buy their next OS.

0
101 Jan 31, 2008 at 16:39

we have a right to complain to the driver developers of actual hardware, when drivers don’t work. not to microsoft. their interface is given to the developers over 2 years ago, and they KNEW they have to support it. that is NEVER microsofts fault.

dx10 was not really an artificial split, but it was a marketing split, too. there are real technical reasons behind it, everyone interested in how the os really differs, not just the “fancy looking windows”, can get this info. there are quite huge leaps in the lowlevel going on in vista. but if you don’t look at them, you should not complain.

people want backwards compatibility, that’s why vista IS very backwards compatible to stuff that is sometimes programmed in a terrible way. it is a quite big deal to get that stuff working without making a system very unsecure.

if you don’t believe in security, then you may not have worked as an it-supported in pre-sp2 days with xp. xp made a great way since then, but it’s nowhere close to vista.

oh, and about using too many system resources. it actually uses ALL system resources. that’s a difference to most os’ out there. and this is espencially apparent on slower systems.. but of course, if you limit it’s resources, it’ll quickly gets a performance drop.

i can take out one, two gb of ram out of an xp machine and don’t see a difference, as it never touched them at all. but what did i pay for ram, if my system never used it? vista does, and this is a HUGE gain. living on a 4200rpm hard drive, having 30 to 15mb/s bandwidth, with huge latency, it’s very feel able once you get onto the disk. happily, my system has much less need to do so than any xp system before did.

i’m actively fighting against all vista bashers, because they’re just not cool at all. it’s just primitive sheep-acting. something new means chance, always. if it hadn’t, people wouldn’t like it because it didn’t brought change.. they always just have to bash. it was the same in xp days “uhh i love my 2000, it’s so much better..” (even win98 fans where there those days hehe).

vista isn’t perfect, but definitely very good.

btw, i never say anything about alternatives, because they are existing, and are just that, alternatives. having an alternative is always great, but doesn’t have anything to do with bashing vista.

0
101 Jan 31, 2008 at 16:43

@onyxthedog

If I were to buy, I would wait for atleast another 6 months to let them work out the majority of the major bugs that are not already worked out. But hey, that is just me.

most bugs are out right now. at least the majority of the major ones :) there’s now one year of bugfixing going on, and it already feels much different to day one.

but i’d suggest to wait for sp1, as it’s days/weeks away (i hope), and will mean another fresh dvd to install from.

once sp1 is out, i’ll get an ssd (64gb, 1.8”), and reinstall with a 64bit version. currently i’m on 32bit because of some beta software that was 32bit only.

0
102 Jan 31, 2008 at 20:54

Come on, you don’t just throw your parents of the house, ‘cause their old so you don’t want to support them. Not supporting devices and stuff is just … monopolistic as already mentioned. Hell I PAID REAL MONEY for that devices and for the OS so nobody has the right to tell me ‘Driver/Devices not supported - please upgrade’ - wtf?? I don’t get the point somehow… we are to be modern? How? By making an OS eating tons of resources and never really introducing anything new (and as a computer scientist I tend to know what new is) but to set a whole bunch of restrictions on me, the user that actually paid 200 EUR to get the system. Boo, Woo… security. Do they beat FreeBSD in security? No… but the difference is that FreeBSD, as a UNIX derivate, supports nearly every interface out there and is easily tailored to your needs and taste. And why don’t we keep personal information for the users too? I ran a song 2 days a go with MPlayer, it showed me both covers of the album, which I didn’t have on the PC. Great! - I thought, really neat, but wait…. is somebody transmitting info, what I’m playing on the computer??? Ehm, yeah, ok… nice

0
102 Jan 31, 2008 at 23:37

@davepermen

once sp1 is out, i’ll get an ssd (64gb, 1.8”), and reinstall with a 64bit version.

Might be in a week or two already. ;)

I want a 128 GB SSD for my laptop for at most 300 €. But I’m afraid I’ll have to wait another year or two for that and might just buy a new laptop then as well. :cool2:

0
102 Jan 31, 2008 at 23:59

@Mihail121

Come on, you don’t just throw your parents of the house, ‘cause their old so you don’t want to support them. Not supporting devices and stuff is just … monopolistic as already mentioned. Hell I PAID REAL MONEY for that devices and for the OS so nobody has the right to tell me ‘Driver/Devices not supported - please upgrade’ - wtf??

This happens all the time. Just think of hardware. If I wanted to upgrade my older desktop with a Pentium 4 (Northwood) I would need not only a new CPU but a new motherboard (LGA 775), new memory (DDR2/3), a new graphics card (PCIe), and a new hard disk (SATA).

Sometimes it’s just necessary to throw away more old parts than at other times. Windows XP is over seven years old now, older than any other software running on my system. So you have to look at Vista as a new operating system, and you’ll realise it’s actually amazing how much old stuff it still supports.

By the way, Linux is by far the worse O.S. when it comes to compatibility. Packages for a certain distribution often don’t work on others. And if you compile stuff from source you’re greeted with a million errors about dependencies with other libraries. Oh and they better be the right version with that now deprecated function… :wallbash:

0
179 Feb 01, 2008 at 00:28

@Mihail121

Come on, you don’t just throw your parents of the house, ‘cause their old so you don’t want to support them.

@Nick

This happens all the time.

haha.

0
101 Feb 01, 2008 at 01:10

ooo, I want to do out of context quoting too!
@Mihail121

Come on, you don’t just throw your parents of the house, ‘cause their

@davepermen

vista bashers

@Mihail121

@Mihail121

@Nick

to … Linux

0
101 Feb 02, 2008 at 16:06

@Nick

Might be in a week or two already. ;) I want a 128 GB SSD for my laptop for at most 300 €. But I’m afraid I’ll have to wait another year or two for that and might just buy a new laptop then as well. :cool2:

hehe, can’t wait. then again, i have to. money’s not ready yet.. but espencially, as i’m running on a 4200rpm drive, it’ll be a huge change, thus paying the price for a new laptop is sort of worth it (as it’ll be a performance difference as if i’d have a new laptop).

it’ll be a funny system.. ssd with 60-80mb/s, 2.5gb ram, 1.2ghz c2duo.. i’d prefer that combination (on a bigger one, i’ll use an mtron at 100mb/s) to a faster cpu and slower disk anytime, it’s very balanced then for usage..

about trowing parents out of house.. indeed, that’s why a lot of seniors get put into those senior houses (how’re they called? :) i just think of grandpa simpson :))

and yes, it supports hell of a lot of hardware. it’s not microsofts job to support all hardware. it’s their job to support hardware that works according to standards, but not old funky devices that just worked because of some funky buggy insecure device driver just for that component. they just provide a platform, if the company producing the device doesn’t support it, it’s their fault.

like it was nvidias fault to not get the vista drivers out over months after the release of vista. ati delivered, even in the beta days, with ease.

oh, and, nodlehs, you quoted me out of context!!! BASTARD!!!! :)

0
101 Feb 03, 2008 at 12:11

I have a Vista and XP, I like my XP though :)

0
101 Feb 07, 2008 at 08:21

I’ve spent a total of 45 minutes working with a vista machine so I cannot argue ether way. I don’t plan on switching ANY of my machines to vista until XP fails to meet my needs, so far that has not happened. I run XP or Linux or a dual-boot of both in the case of my laptop.

I see Dell is now offering new notebooks with your choice of Vista or Linux (ubuntu). So that offers at least ONE alternative if your buying a new computer and don’t want Vista.

Bootes