Printable View
honestly, do they think all this fluff adds to the user experience somehow?
I can't see the appeal, its just a blatant rip of macosX, and I find that gets in the way far too much for my liking. Plus its making this machine with 2GB RAM horribly slow compared to if it was running XP.
no sir, I don't like it. being forced to support this shit is a joke
:spock: :mr_t:
thank god I know how to use a computer and don't need 5000 windows telling or suggesting what to do next.
I installed Vista this weekend on my Laptop. Runs just fine, about as well as XP did, no performance hiccups, and it's only got 1Gb of RAM.
I installed it for much the same reason I install Linux on my portable machines from time to time, I got bored and wanted to screw around with a new OS for a while.
I had to do some command line things in it the other day, and god damn it's hard not to type *nix commands in there. The amount of times I did an ls instead of a dir was stupid. Been using a *nix shell at work way too much lately. :p
Thats because a nix shell is :buttrock:
Disable the 'Themes' service. That'll take you back to the Win2k style interface... that might help you out.
meh, if it was my pc maybe
the 'recipients' are expecting the full Vista experience.
:oh_no:
I've been playing with it off and on for the last six months because of my job, but I gotta say Vista blows. The only version that's really worth it is Ultimate, and that's like $450.
It's really nothing more than a marketing ploy to get people to buy new PCs.
Microsoft worked on this for 5+ years and THIS is the best they could come up with? :oh_no:
I know I’ll get flamed for this comment but how long has OSX been around now? March 2001? Ok, OSX has been around for 6 years and it still blows away the pile of shit MS took 5 years to get on the market. (Granted there have been updates for OSX but you get the point) For the most part, I’ve read nothing but complaints about Vista.
It still blows my mind that a company with MS’s resources can continue to release shitty OS’s…
When creating a new product you have to start from the ground up. Microsoft probably didn't do this and vista is the resulting product. All the probably did was revamp the existing code to new standards of bling and add a ton of security. In my opinion you cant really do this as it causes problems as old code basically has to be rewritten and optimized to run with the new features. Not to mention all they did was steal other peoples ideas making it even harder to implement since they didnt visualize the ideas themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix Down
I ran Vista beta for a while just so I could get used to the OS for when we upgrade the base machines here at work. After I gave a presentation on some of the features, I went back to XP.
It's like seeing an old friend again!
Real men don't use Windows anyway... :D ;)
lolvista. what a joke
:tickled:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takumaji
Feh, gamers sure as hell use it. Or are you saying that gamers aren't real men, Mr. Neo Pope? :loco:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takumaji
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I've got Ultimate running, but that's because I didn't have to pay for it. I wouldn't pay for this as an upgrade that's for sure, but 99% of the people get their OS with their PC and don't buy updates for it anyway.
I don't quite see what all the bitching is about though.
its because microsoft has to support the millions of legacy programs that people still use.Quote:
Originally Posted by smokehouse
it was a non issue going from os9 to osx because of the significantly smaller userbase, and just the fact that there arent as many os9 apps as there are windows apps.
if people actually used macs before osx dont you think the now non-existant support for os9 wouldve caused some kind of uproar?
You can run Classic apps through OS9 emulation in OSX. Its kind of a major feature.Quote:
Originally Posted by not sonic
im aware. thats not an ideal solution especially considering it runs noticeably slower on the same hardware.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesagwa
i also thought that was no longer supported on the intel macs.
Probably not, but it gave time for the apps that were OS9 only to either upgrade or be replaced.Quote:
Originally Posted by not sonic
:shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by JHendrix
What, I'm a grad student, school has a site license for MS stuff that applies even to us older gits. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by kernow
OSX ftw :emb:
hehQuote:
Originally Posted by JHendrix
I can see why some people (retailers, admins, CEOs, etc.) bitch about Vista, XP is good enough for them but they know that the release of a new Windows OS creates lots of market pressure which inevitably leads to blowing money on a pretty GUI plus a number of incompatibilties between the old and new OS that come in handy for MS to sell more software packages (Office comes to mind).
Parts of the IT world are really tired of these updates, you know.
People in my office hate Vista, they're a bunch of old fogies that are stuck in the Win2k and XP days.
I actually really like it, I'm trying to wrestle me a Vista PC...or even better an Intel Mac + Parallels + Vista. :D
And the other parts of the IT world realize that these updates keep them employed...:shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takumaji
Funny, I don't really care all that much about Vista at all, I'm just messing around with it. But stuff like that I think is just a wee bit off base Tak. Ironically I came out of a "briefing" with one company we work with that supplies the OS for our systems here, and it was all about how they're adapting to all the latest changes and stuff in the Linux Kernel to deliver a Real Time version of a particular distribution that we need for our next-gen systems.
That's how things work in the OS world. Things change, improvements are incremental, things break as a result, and people are paid to fix them.
lol@vista
see OSX is nice and all
but its still too flowery for me
its hardly flexible either
linux is the best, I don't consider usibility as a needed feature high on my list. so vista and osx both lose for me. OSX aint flexible enough, or tweakable enough, or cheap enough.... or fast enough? :emb: plus it has a suite of applications I'd never use, plus theres so much shareware (shareware? this only exists for mac nowadays), plus stuffit? lol whats that about
:spock:
lol stuffit
Yes, that's good old Redmond philosophy, but not mine. My job in the IT biz is to solve problems, not artificially create new ones and then come up with some sort of magic cure that creates even more of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by JHendrix
Hahahaha, what a retard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Setsuna1982
I like how it starts by stating "PC users are fat"
my pc have vista. It works lighting fast, i've never encountered an error yet (and it have been installed for 1 month and a few days, turned on around 18h a day), i don't have any compatibilty problems...
my gf have it too, same experience. And her brother. And my sister. And my cousin. And my cousin´s gf and her family. So we are all lucky because vista works better than xp in our pc's or there are a LOT of people who say that windows vista is awful for the same reason that they want a nights sequel without having played the original nights? :rolleyes:
Sure it have many cosmetic changes etc, but certainly works better than xp. And it plays divx without any copyright chek or whatever
Try to use Nero 7Quote:
Originally Posted by Setsuna1982
I use cdrecord and mkisofs
never had a problem yet
Dude, I'm specifically talking about the work that I and another company had to do in order to get a real time version of a Linux distro out because of all the changes and standards that are going on in the kernel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Takumaji
There are more features, better performance, and all that stuff done as a result, but there's still all sorts of crap that broke with the changes, drivers that had to be modified, all that crap....cept it was becasue of developments in the Linux kernel that did that.
Luckily there's a patch for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68k
The classic (OS9) environment in Mac OS X is NOT emulation, and it runs at basically full speed. Some apps (games mostly) that tried to access the hardware directly often didnt work very well, but other than those, classic actually has BETTER support for older applications.Quote:
Originally Posted by not sonic
Classic is not supported on intel macs because it was not emulation, and now it would require PPC AND 680x0 emulation.
OS X >>>>>>>>>>>> windows, including vista. what a joke.
OS X is also > linux, as it has all the flexibility and power of *nix, PLUS the best and most consistent UI and commercial application support that linux doesnt have.
lol at your sig.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Xi
lol computers
nopeQuote:
Originally Posted by Rassilon
*shrug*, I don't rely on commercial applicationsQuote:
commercial application support that linux doesnt have.
http://www.starc.com.ar/NG/kraftwerk_robots.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Magnaflux
OS X >>>>>>>>>>>> windows, including vista
you know when this statement will be true ? if apple ever gets their heads out of their asses and makes a version for regular pc's. the money they could make from that and this silly little thing called "market share", they'd have more than the 3-5% that they have now...oh wait that would require them to do some work...guess i'm just talking all crazy now
you're dead wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by kernow
OSX is full BSD unix. You can run any shell you want (default is bash), you can run any x11 windows environment (but apple's x11 integrates with the rest of the OS more seamlessly), you can compile any application you want the same as in other unix/linux OSs.
Linux is definitely several million times better than windows, but it has nothing on OS X.
You can be "stuck" in the present?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoriquaSNK
Ugh. Vista. Why can't the World just use Unix?
:lol:Quote:
Most iPod commercials feature guys with long hair, chicks roller skating, and guys wearing fedoras. I have dandruff, and I buy most of my jeans from a grocery store. I feel like in order to have a Mac, I need to be:
Hahaha, so the guys at Apple don't work?Quote:
Originally Posted by THE FN SHOW
hah, flexible my ass, how many live cd's or embedded hardware devices do you see running OSX? how many supercomputers with 8000 CPU's do you see running OSX? the top 5 supercomputers run linux, how many clusters run osx? pfft
so youve never heard of viginia tech's PPC G5 cluster running OSX?Quote:
Originally Posted by kernow
It was ranked at 3rd fastest in the world (at the time), and took less than 3 months to get running, and cost 1/10th of what similar clusters running other HW/SW.
you mean the default recording suite that i've installed since day 1 and I haven't encountered a problem yet? yup, I tried it. now whatQuote:
Originally Posted by 68k
Using the best windows platform (win2k) makes you an old fogie?!Quote:
Originally Posted by BoriquaSNK
I hope that was sarcasm haha.
Yeah, Windows Key + Tab :lolz:Quote:
Originally Posted by kernow
What a waste of time.
I'm happy using Vista for free at work, but there is no way I would pay to upgrade my home machine. Like someone else mentioned, the only way I would buy Vista is if it was an OEM with a new PC, and even then, I think I am going to wait for OSX 10.5 and get an iMac instead.
I was supposed to get a free copy of vista with my laptop, but the windows upgrade people keep sending me bad links and even a wrong phone number....
....maybe it's a sign, lol.
At least I could resell it on ebay or something though :(