Old 1st July 2007, 23:02   #81
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
The main problem with windows I have surmised adequately in what I said.

As for the second part no I'm not calling anyone an idiot or liar. What I am saying though is that they are misunderstanding a fundamental part of Vista and that it as yet does not have a new kernel. As I said that won't be addressed until server 2008 is released. At the moment it still uses the basic core of XP and then other new software/features have been built onto/added to that.
Um.. it's my understanding that the kernel is where the most significant changes happened for Vista.
Vista uses the NT 6.0 kernel while XP used NT 5.1 (or 5.2 for 64 bit systems) and win2000 used NT 5.0

now, Vista is still using the NTFS file system even though the longhorn Beta's biggest promise was the WinFS file system. WinFS is slated to debut win Server 2008.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 23:35   #82
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
WinFS is slated to debut win Server 2008.
It was announced some time ago that it wouldn't be in Vista ever. So if Vista is getting the 6.1 kernel it most likely won't get WinFS.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2007, 00:15   #83
k_rock923
\m/
(Forum King)
 
k_rock923's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: /bin/bash
Posts: 7,850
Send a message via AIM to k_rock923
I heard rumors that server 2008 would allow for installing it sans gui. Basically, you'd boot into power shell. Anyone else hear anything about that?

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
k_rock923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2007, 10:07   #84
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
now, Vista is still using the NTFS file system even though the longhorn Beta's biggest promise was the WinFS file system. WinFS is slated to debut win Server 2008.
I don't think that's right. If it's going to appear anywhere I suspect it'll be later, although many of the features developed for WinFS have been integrated into SQL Server and ADO.NET.

And WinFS was a layer on top of NTFS, not a physical filesystem (they claim "FS" stands for "Future Storage" in this context to avoid problems with that distinction), so technically NTFS would still be used as the core filesystem.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 00:17   #85
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Apparently it is still an NTFS file system, as linux mounts it that way.

The kernel? I dunno. I would suspect there would have to be something quite different about it to handle protected memory and the noticeable improvement in multitasking.

Quote:
probably the most noticeable thing with Vista has been that it will contain a programs's nonresponsiveness.
Also, when you kill a bad program, it kills faster and is less likely to leave the system unstable.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 02:46   #86
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
And WinFS was a layer on top of NTFS, not a physical filesystem (they claim "FS" stands for "Future Storage" in this context to avoid problems with that distinction), so technically NTFS would still be used as the core filesystem.
No shit.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 10:01   #87
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
No shit.
The point is that you were talking about the filesystem being replaced, which is absolutely not the case. The main filesystem change for WinFS is, if I remember correctly, Transactional NTFS (which is hell of a neat, but changes things so significantly that I doubt it'd be used in most end-user apps). Most, if not all, of the user-facing features of WinFS (was versioning a WinFS feature? that's not included) are already in Vista. As neat a technology as it was it's not something that's going to be missed by anyone but technologists.

And yes, in other parts the kernel recieved a major overhaul.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 18:14   #88
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
The kernel? I dunno. I would suspect there would have to be something quite different about it to handle protected memory and the noticeable improvement in multitasking.
The noticable improvement in multitasking you're noticing is almost certainly from the improved I/O scheduler.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Also, when you kill a bad program, it kills faster and is less likely to leave the system unstable.
Again, probably related to the I/O improvements. Windows can now reliably cancel I/O.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 21:24   #89
Smeggle
Just Strolling By
(Major Dude)
 
Smeggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: A Long Winding Road.....
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
This paragraph is pretty wrong. It's using an updated version of the same kernel as XP, and Server 2008 will too. Also, there is very little wrong with that kernel, which is why there isn't anything to be "addressed" here.


Windows Defender is a constituent part of Vista, and as such its updates should be available through Windows Update.


You're going to feel silly when you read the EULA for the "third party security software" and find it has the exact same clause. This is a risk that comes with security software and companies need to protect themselves against litigation.

If they removed something that you didn't want them to, they'd still need to be able to explain why it was seen as a threat, so I really wouldn't worry. This is paranoia.
Sorry zoot but I think you maybe have misunderstood what I was relating to. Yes, in Vista Windows Defender is a built in part of the installation and as such can be said to require to receive it's updates via Auto Update (And B.I.T.S. <- - Theres a reason to that rollseyes btw)..

I'm speaking of it though in relation to XP and in XP it is not an update as it is not a part of teh OS and nor should it be in either system. Even Kaspersky recently slated it in an article I read and I fully agree with what he said and it confirmed stuff that I have said ever since it first appeared.

It is in areas like this that Microsoft get it wrong. WIndows Defender should be treated as a stand alone program and so should it's updates. This would make it way more secure and trustworthy.

Q. how can you trust something to protect you when once again Microsoft place it into there normal way of doing things?

Tying it in with the rest just like Messenger, outlook, windows explorer, internet explorer [insert windows program Ad Infitum...

What I am getting at though is this - If I 'Refuse' that as an update and 'request' that they 'Never' offer me that update again, why then the following month does it appear in the updates? (This is with XP btw not VISTA - different issue altogether)...

And no other Security Software that I know of and I have tested a lot over the years, no other security software ever removes other security programs that I have implicitly installed. Windows Live Center does and Windows Defender (Again on XP) - That is not only wrong on so many levels it is also Illegal, maybe not Stateside but definitely in Europe.

I've seen there update service restore default settings over the settings previously set by an end user, I've seen stuff that should be switched off that has been switched back on and other system wide changes made. Some I agree are inevitable but a lot of them do not need to occur. It happens due to shoddy programming and not having teh installation or update maintain requested settings or settings as set by the end user.

For the ordinary end user anyway a third of XP can be turned of as it is just not needed and they will never ever use it so what is the point of it running away, chatting merrily away online, (Probably cause it's bored that you won't use it or pissed of for the same reason). Whats the point to something running and using up system resources when it is never ever going to be used by the end user?

Absolutely none! Why does windows explorer need to connect to the internet? Whats it doing? Surfing the net cause it's fecking bored while the end user is playing with Internet Explorer? Why does messenger sit there merrily chirping away online (even when your not signed in) when it has no need? why doe sit need to run when outlook is open? It has no need to really. Not if the program had been written correctly in the first place (Outlook that is). Outlook should not need messenger to receive and send e-mail but it does (Thank fuck for Thunderbird)...

And is Vista any better? No, in fact it's worse. default setup makes it virtually unusable with that stupid User Agreement (BUG) control shite. Any time you want to do something you get asked multiple times.. I think the record I have upto now was 6 for trying to use just 1 program!

I'm willing to give anything a chance and heck i gave Millennium more than a good chance in fact it lasted on my spare test drive at the time way longer than Vista has.

Upto now every tech site I visit ( and with stumbleupon I hit a good 50+ a night) that discuss Vista I would say the ratio of positive to negative is 2 - 8 - thats 2 positives to 8 negatives!

As for Vista and it's (supposedly) new kernel? yes it was supposed to get a complete new kernel from the ground up but that never happened because they couldn't get it to run stable. it had to be put back and the Vista features built onto the older XP kernel all be it with modifications and certain areas of the core re-written. This goes back to 2004/2005 - summer 2005 being the first official supposedly release date for what then was known as Longhorn.

So no Vista as yet does not run on the new kernel (6.1.0.0) it runs on the XP 6.0.0.0 - 5.1.0.0 core was updated during sp2 if memory serves me correctly - pretty sure Atmo can correct that if not....

Music is Life, Love and Happiness :|: Life is Music. Serren - 1985 - 2005
Religion? Religion is a Blasphemy against humanity - From the film What the Bleep do we know

siggy link So stumbling? whats it all about
Smeggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2007, 22:49   #90
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
Absolutely none! Why does windows explorer need to connect to the internet? Whats it doing?
It doesn't, unless you tell it to. Bear in mind you might have some form of extra app which needs a net connection though.
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
Why does messenger sit there merrily chirping away online (even when your not signed in) when it has no need?
Right click on the system tray icon, "Exit". It will exit.
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
why doe sit need to run when outlook is open? It has no need to really. Not if the program had been written correctly in the first place (Outlook that is). Outlook should not need messenger to receive and send e-mail but it does (Thank fuck for Thunderbird)...
It doesn't. I use Outlook at work without messenger installed. And I used Outlook at my old work without messenger installed.
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
And is Vista any better? No, in fact it's worse. default setup makes it virtually unusable with that stupid User Agreement (BUG) control shite. Any time you want to do something you get asked multiple times.. I think the record I have upto now was 6 for trying to use just 1 program!
Either the program was poorly-written, or you're trying to use it in a stupid way. The fact that XP let you use programs in a stupid way isn't a good excuse.
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
So no Vista as yet does not run on the new kernel (6.1.0.0) it runs on the XP 6.0.0.0 - 5.1.0.0 core was updated during sp2 if memory serves me correctly - pretty sure Atmo can correct that if not....
No, it wasn't. The Vista kernel is a significant change compared to the version deployed with XP SP2. I don't know where you're reading these things but they're consistently inaccurate.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2007, 15:19   #91
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
No, it wasn't. The Vista kernel is a significant change compared to the version deployed with XP SP2. I don't know where you're reading these things but they're consistently inaccurate.
Just to lend zootm my voice a bit -- Vista's kernel is significantly different from XP's. In fact, which is the only reason people are having so many problems with Vista (that is, poorly written/nonexistent drivers, because due (in part) to the kernel changes, old drivers often do not work).

I don't mean to be a jerk about it, but while you're reading someone's biased analysis of the Vista kernel changes (which, for the 64-bit version, prevents his companies program from working the way it used to), we're reading the lists of *actual changes*, and can tell you that they're significant. You can go read about them too, if you like.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2007, 20:04   #92
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
I really think this is a testament to how predetermined public sentiment is about things. Recent studies indicate that: people tend to only remember things they want to hear, that they confuse familiarity with superiority, that a novice is more likely to rank himself as expert than an intermediate user is (driving was the variable tested), that a person will actively seek out sources of information that collude with the person's pre-existing opinion, and vice versa...

Really, it changes your perspective on how public opinion and the human mind works. People will think what they want.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2007, 12:03   #93
P$ycHo™
Flakmonkey!
 
P$ycHo™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DM-Campgrounds
Posts: 1,870
many developers change to Linux
P$ycHo™ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2007, 12:37   #94
tuckerm
Forum Emo
 
tuckerm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 8,365
Quote:
Originally posted by P$ycHoâ„¢
many developers change to Linux
I call your bluff. Where did you get that statement? Did you just make that up?
tuckerm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2007, 14:30   #95
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by P$ycHoâ„¢
many developers change to Linux
I'm calling bullshit on this too. I'm fairly sure you've no idea what you're talking about.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2007, 19:00   #96
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
He's probably referencing "Developers cooling on Windows desktop, study finds".

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2007, 00:17   #97
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
I don't think this is as much 'cooling on Windows" as linux and appliance computers being a new market.

I'm sure that people are writing more software for Windows than they ever did. Linux is a long way from being a consumer desktop.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2007, 09:41   #98
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by xzxzzx
He's probably referencing "Developers cooling on Windows desktop, study finds".
I think that in a lot of those cases, people are developing cross-platform apps, as much as anything. Interesting though.

Most development I see these days is essentially into web applications, which tend to be pretty platform-agnostic. ASP.NET is harder to use well on Linux (as good as the Mono project is, it's yet to provide an IDE even close to VS) and Ruby on Rails can be hard to use on Windows (I hear it's hard to make it interact well with IIS). But in general I suppose that a lot of developers now get to choose their own tools, which can only be good.

Personally, I use a Windows system at work and I work from home on this machine, which uses Linux. All of my development tools are cross-platform, and thanks to IEs4Linux I can even test websites without having to remote desktop to my work machine.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 21:18   #99
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
Read carefully, then get out your flame throwers

To anyone except for the techie, Vista is nothing more than XP with a better gui and a more of a pain in the ass security system.

Ok. Once again, but just the first part.

To anyone except for the techie ... blah blah blah blah.

Focus.

To anyone except for the techie .... blah blah blah.

Vista deserves to fail. MS should have to make people beg to install it.

How long will they keep support of XP until they force people to use Vista? At the rate Vista is going, we will be luck to get another year out of XP.

[puts flame retardant suit on]

You may now flame the hell out of me
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 22:08   #100
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Re: Read carefully, then get out your flame throwers

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
How long will they keep support of XP until they force people to use Vista? At the rate Vista is going, we will be luck to get another year out of XP.
Mainstream support for XP professional will expire 4/14/2009. Self help support and security updates will cease 4/8/2014.

Microsoft was going to try to expire support sooner, but were scared by a poll of their customers who favored a lynching if mainstream support of XP had expired last year as planned.

Part of it is that when the expiry of XP was considered, it was anticipating that Vista would be available a couple years earlier.

This doesn't seem too unreasonable.

Last edited by rockouthippie; 10th July 2007 at 22:25.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 22:12   #101
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
indeed it does not.
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 22:12   #102
ujay
Forum King
 
ujay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 6,072
Quote:
Mainstream support for XP professional will expire 4/14/2009. Self help support and security updates will cease 4/8/2014.
Lets hope they get an SP3 out then, the number of updates on a fresh install is up around the 90s now.

UJ
ujay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 22:32   #103
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
To anyone except for the techie, Vista is nothing more than XP with a better gui and a more of a pain in the ass security system.

Ok. Once again, but just the first part.

To anyone except for the techie ... blah blah blah blah.

Focus.

To anyone except for the techie .... blah blah blah.
This is a stupid argument. Just because people cannot easily or immediately see the improvements does not mean that they will not benefit from them. When people move back they will notice a significant loss because it's significantly better.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Vista deserves to fail. MS should have to make people beg to install it.
Why does it deserve to fail? It's quite possibly the largest software project of recent years, and has been rolled out reasonably smoothly and with pretty much minimum fuss. They slipped past their own deadlines but this is hardly unusual in software terms.

Furthermore, it should only fail if its competitors are good enough to make it fail. They are not. Linux has a price advantage but it's still sadly deficient in a number of areas.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
[puts flame retardant suit on]

You may now flame the hell out of me
I see you are a master of irony.

Quote:
Originally posted by ujay
Lets hope they get an SP3 out then, the number of updates on a fresh install is up around the 90s now.
Second half of this year, apparently. It won't be a big functionality change like SP2 was though, mostly just a patch rollup.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2007, 23:16   #104
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
Quote:
This is a stupid argument. Just because people cannot easily or immediately see the improvements does not mean that they will not benefit from them. When people move back they will notice a significant loss because it's significantly better.
Zootm. Take average idiot off the street. Maybe you got one that thinks their OS is Office XP (yes, I do mean OS); maybe you got one who still does not have anti-virus programs. I don't care which really. Sit said individual down infront of their computer currently running XP. Then sit them down in front of a Vista box. Ask them their opinion. Most will plainly tell you they don't see the difference (aside from the obvious bling bling). Case in point: I/O improvments. Most people don't multi-task because that would require additional thought on their part (remember these are the people who think their OS is Office 2000). They also are not going to give two hoots that the optimization of the FS makes their file open 5 ms faster (these are people that bought USB2 external hard drives because its faster even though their computer only supported USB 1.1). The don't give a rats ass about the security improvements because they are not running anti-virus software to begin with and they currently run as admins.

Then show them the new and improved security center and ask them what a pain in the ass they think it is; then ask if they even understand (or care to) what it is doing for them. Finally, let them dribble and cream themselves over the new gui.

Then tell em it is going to cost $500 (picking a number and throwing it out. Let me point out that the majority of computer users in the world do not have a p4 or better) in computer upgrades to run Vista.

See what they go for.

MS deserves to fail for this. People don't care how large of a project it was nor do they care how smoothly it rolled out.

Remember this is the average computer user we are talking about here. This is by no means you, nor anyone else in here for that matter....

People just don't care about what was done in Vista, which is why MS is having a hard sell with it. Then add the hardware requirements to run it well .... and, well, MS deserves to fail for this.

90% of making a product sell is knowing your market.... I guess MS missed the ball.
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 05:09   #105
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
REDMOND, Wash., March 26, 2007 — Initial sales figures from Microsoft show its new operating system Windows Vista made a splash in its debut. In the first month of Windows Vista’s general availability, sales exceeded 20 million licenses, more than doubling the initial pace of sales for its predecessor, Windows XP. These initial figures reflect the broad interest in the security and usability enhancements in Windows Vista.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/f...istaDebut.mspx

People are buying Vista. They will continue to buy Vista for a decade or so. It is the new de-facto operating system standard for computers.

I think if you compare Vista sales to some pipe dream that you've heard from MS marketing, it looks like it fails. If you look at what MS really expected from Vista sales, it's probably right on the money.

If you buy a computer now or you bought one recently, it most likely has Vista. It'll stay that way.

Let's say you even built a computer out of 5 year old scrap parts and didn't have an OS. As long as the thing is in the ballpark... like 1Ghz clock speed and 512 M of ram, Vista is gonna work fine.

So, it's a replacement for XP on anything you are remotely likely to run it on. It's an improvement for the newest machines.

Compared to how completely, utterly screwed up XP was when it was new, I think Vista is a triumph for MS.

This is a decent product. I give it a B-. It's a far cry from early XP which was OH F*CK! XP improved from OH F*CK! after a couple of service packs. Give Vista a couple of service packs and it might be truly gifted.

Last edited by rockouthippie; 11th July 2007 at 05:24.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 07:06   #106
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Most will plainly tell you they don't see the difference (aside from the obvious bling bling).
And this would be the only difference they'd notice immediately in changing to OS X, or moving from Windows 3.1 to Windows XP. So?

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Case in point: I/O improvments. Most people don't multi-task because that would require additional thought on their part (remember these are the people who think their OS is Office 2000).
When their apps crash less often and more cleanly, they have obtained a benefit. Also, I don't think you're giving the "average" user enough benefit here.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
The don't give a rats ass about the security improvements because they are not running anti-virus software to begin with and they currently run as admins.
The fact that they need to run security software a lot less should benefit them profoundly, then. And the annoying popups telling them in clear terms that they're at risk should at least encourage them to exercise a little more caution.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Then tell em it is going to cost $500 (picking a number and throwing it out. Let me point out that the majority of computer users in the world do not have a p4 or better) in computer upgrades to run Vista.
It's not. Vista does not cost significantly more than XP did.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
MS deserves to fail for this.
Why? You still haven't given a reason. I realise that you want them to fail but that's not a reason that they will.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
People just don't care about what was done in Vista, which is why MS is having a hard sell with it. Then add the hardware requirements to run it well .... and, well, MS deserves to fail for this.
The hardware requirements are pretty modest (other than the recommendation for a DirectX 9 card, and an amount of memory which is quite frankly required to run XP satisfactorily, the requirements have been pretty much standard on even basic machines for years now). And most people will obtain a copy of the software when they upgrade their computer anyway.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
90% of making a product sell is knowing your market.... I guess MS missed the ball.
The sales figures do not seem to back this up.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 10:42   #107
k_rock923
\m/
(Forum King)
 
k_rock923's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: /bin/bash
Posts: 7,850
Send a message via AIM to k_rock923
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Linux has a price advantage but it's still sadly deficient in a number of areas.
Zootm, you know this. The idea of Linux has nothing to do with Windows. That's not the point of the whole thing.

That is all I'm going to get into this argument. fc*uk and I already duked it out in GD

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
k_rock923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 13:47   #108
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by k_rock923
Zootm, you know this. The idea of Linux has nothing to do with Windows. That's not the point of the whole thing.
Yes, but it's still a competing desktop OS, or at least it can be. The advantages of the system are largely not user-obvious, and the more "obvious" features are currently behind Vista and OS X for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't mean that it can't be counted as a competitor, especially when it is being offered as an alternative by at least one major supplier.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 14:30   #109
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
fc*uk:

You're dismissing the benefits even as you acknowledge them. The average user doesn't do a ton of multitasking, that may be true. But that doesn't mean that they don't benefit from the improved I/O (think defragmenters or virus scanners installed by an OEM). Not at all. The "5ms" improved start up time? Try twice as fast, or more. (Particularly considering they aren't using their memory for anything else!)

Add to that stability improvements, vast UI refinements, and the additional (improved, mind you!) security, and Vista is the very first O/S Microsoft has put out that's really concentrated on making a clean, usable experience.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 19:12   #110
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Yes, but it's still a competing desktop OS, or at least it can be.
Nothing is a significant competitor to Windows. Not even OSX. The reason linux isn't a competitor is the same reason OSX isn't.... no drivers... Since it can never be cost effective to develop those drivers....

As far as multitasking.... I think people would love to multitask. It's just that prior to Vista, it was as likely to crash the box as work.

I'm not patting MS on the back too hard. Really XP, and maybe even Windows 98 should have had the multitasking support we are now finding in Vista.

It took 10 years too long to make Windows work right. I say take it where you can get it ... I guess...
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th July 2007, 22:16   #111
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
zootm .... xzxzzx ..... roh .... k_rock

OK. I think you all have figured out that I am really not disagreeing with any of you too much. Your info is all very factual and it is all highly accurate. I would be a fool to argue much of anything any of you have said and I mean that sincerely and honestly.

So, why the hell am I debating this??????

As I know I have been called out on this, I now do the same: I'm not too sure how well you know the average user.

So, clearly something is wrong. You think I'm off base; I think you are off base. In reality we are probably the extremes and the reality is somewhere in the middle.

I have worked in technical support for years. I was continually amazed at "the average Joe". Holy shit!!!!

I still don't think that the average user cares. They want a computer for internets, emails, and dah resume. Not too much else. Oh, digital photoz.

Maybe zootm is right and I do not give the end user enough credit. But from what I have seen, I am still giving them too much... Ya'll are all superusers, which most people are not. We care about this stuff; they do not,

To me it seems that to most people vista costs too much to run well. Hence, its not worth it. However, my definition of run well is probably too extreme and most people will probably wait on things whereas I will not.

And personally, for what it is worth, I sincerely hope that MS does not fail. I have what you would call a vested interest in them .... though that still does not mean I will continue to support them. And yes, k_rock, you have every right to call me a hypocrite now especially after my MS is immoral speech...
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 00:53   #112
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Nothing is a significant competitor to Windows. Not even OSX. The reason linux isn't a competitor is the same reason OSX isn't.... no drivers... Since it can never be cost effective to develop those drivers....
That is not true (both of them).

The reason why OSX isn't a true competitor is that its hardware restricted. If I could legally light up OSX on my AMD machine, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I can't because Apple doesn't allow OSX on unauthorized hardware. I could crack it, yes sure but it wouldn't be legit.

If Apple were to announce that OSX would be allowed to be opened up to other hardware like Windows is now, it would scoop up a lot more marketshare(and support) than it has now.

Linux on the other hand has a problem with fragmentation in its ranks. Too many forks and distributions. However, it doesn't necessarily have a problems with drivers that much anymore. That used to be the case a few years ago but not so much anymore. Especially since quite a few linux developers put their services up to hardware makers to help them write drivers.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 02:35   #113
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
I too would jump on OS X in a heartbeat if it were legally ported to any i386...
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 04:17   #114
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
I too would jump on OS X in a heartbeat if it were legally ported to any i386...
Ah-HA! Traitors in my internets!

Mutiny is afoot, gentlemen...
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 12:36   #115
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Maybe zootm is right and I do not give the end user enough credit. But from what I have seen, I am still giving them too much... Ya'll are all superusers, which most people are not. We care about this stuff; they do not,
I'd say that as a support technician you're likely to have met the very low end of the market, proportionally, which is likely to skew your view.
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
The reason why OSX isn't a true competitor is that its hardware restricted. If I could legally light up OSX on my AMD machine, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I can't because Apple doesn't allow OSX on unauthorized hardware. I could crack it, yes sure but it wouldn't be legit.
I think it's important to remember that OS X, as it stands now, isn't really a software product; it's the bundled software with Apple's hardware, the combination makes a Mac. Also, OS X is nice but it's neither as advanced as its legions of fans would have you believe nor as

Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
Linux on the other hand has a problem with fragmentation in its ranks. Too many forks and distributions. However, it doesn't necessarily have a problems with drivers that much anymore. That used to be the case a few years ago but not so much anymore. Especially since quite a few linux developers put their services up to hardware makers to help them write drivers.
The driver problems are more limited now, yes. Hopefully good ATI drivers will come since (I think?) AMD are releasing the ATI graphics drivers open source at some point, as well.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 15:33   #116
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
As I know I have been called out on this, I now do the same: I'm not too sure how well you know the average user.

So, clearly something is wrong. You think I'm off base; I think you are off base. In reality we are probably the extremes and the reality is somewhere in the middle.
A favorite quote of mine from my favorite pithy evolutionist (Dawkins):
"...when two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong."



Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
I have worked in technical support for years. I was continually amazed at "the average Joe". Holy shit!!!!

I still don't think that the average user cares. They want a computer for internets, emails, and dah resume. Not too much else. Oh, digital photoz.
I've worked in technical support. The "average user" was not that bad; but due to the type of support I was providing, I probably got a sample more representative of a higher-end user than you did.

That having been said, my prototypical model for "average user" is my mom. My mom is not at the 50th percentile as a computer user. She's not within a standard deviation of mean. She uses her computer for email, online shopping, and some light word-processing tasks, and even then, stores the resulting documents on paper. She started "seriously" (basically, at all) using computers less than five years ago. She's had an email address for less than that. There is no user you'd expect to care at all about Vista less familiar with a computer than my mother.

And she likes it. Now, she doesn't really care much, either. It came on her new (sub-$600) laptop. But she has no problems with it. I set it up to work with the wireless network at my parent's house, set up the printer, her wireless mouse, etc. And with the exception of the encryption on the wireless network, and enabling the printer to work over the wireless network instead of physically plugging it in, do you know how much work it took to get each thing working?

I plugged it in.

The printer was the most impressive&mdash;no dialogs at all. I just plugged in the USB cable, a little notification saying "new printer, please wait..." popped up in the corner for about five seconds, and the printer was installed and working.

I set up a two clock widgets on the desktop for her&mdash;one local time, one GMT +1 (Copenhagen, Denmark). I helped her configure the colors she wanted, etc, and she's been running without trouble ever since (except that one of those widgets got the wrong time on it&mdash;I suspect she'd been messing with it).

No, the "average user" isn't going to upgrade to Vista. But the "average user" never upgrades their O/S anyway. They buy a new computer with the upgrade already on it. And Vista will benefit them, both directly and indirectly.

Quote:
Originally posted by fc*uk
Maybe zootm is right and I do not give the end user enough credit. But from what I have seen, I am still giving them too much... Ya'll are all superusers, which most people are not. We care about this stuff; they do not,

To me it seems that to most people vista costs too much to run well. Hence, its not worth it. However, my definition of run well is probably too extreme and most people will probably wait on things whereas I will not.
Not worth what?

What do you expect the "average user" will pay for Vista? Why do you think the "average user" would buy an O/S?

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 18:45   #117
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
That is not true (both of them).

The reason why OSX isn't a true competitor is that its hardware restricted. If I could legally light up OSX on my AMD machine, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I can't because Apple doesn't allow OSX on unauthorized hardware. I could crack it, yes sure but it wouldn't be legit.

If Apple were to announce that OSX would be allowed to be opened up to other hardware like Windows is now, it would scoop up a lot more marketshare(and support) than it has now.

Linux on the other hand has a problem with fragmentation in its ranks. Too many forks and distributions. However, it doesn't necessarily have a problems with drivers that much anymore. That used to be the case a few years ago but not so much anymore. Especially since quite a few linux developers put their services up to hardware makers to help them write drivers.
Aw cmon. Windows has 99% of the market share. If you could legally light up OSX ..... It wouldn't work.... NO DRIVERS.

Linux has more problems than a fragmentation in it's ranks. It has vast patent problems. It would be possible right now to make a linux distro that would be a pretty good consumer desktop. The problem is that by the time you added enough patent encumbered code to make it happy, you'd get sued off the planet. Or you'd have to charge for it.... like Linspire...... not a great success. Really the problem isn't in the linux distros themselves. It's a fragmentation in the methods for semi legally adding "bad" and "ugly" code.

Quote:
Especially since quite a few linux developers put their services up to hardware makers to help them write drivers.
What drivers? Trying to find supported hardware for linux leads you exclusively to nvidia graphics cards. It leads you exclusively to postscript printers or a handful of supported printers. I don't buy hardware expecting it to have linux drivers. Buying hardware for linux boxes means checking whether you have drivers before you buy. Then you can pray the drivers actually work.

Like it or not. Windows is the defacto OS standard.

I think it's just silly to consider a 1% consumer desktop market share in OSX and linux as any sort of competition to windows.

Linux does compete in the server market, but it's got a long way to go before you see a penguin popping up on peoples desktops. That would probably take another 10 or 20 years to let the patents expire. If linux ever became a real concern, it would get sued. By my interpretation, Ubuntu treads on really thin ice legally. If you remember it was lawsuits that removed "bad" and "ugly" code from the standard RedHat distros 10 years ago. Boy were people irate when you couldn't even play an MP3 without compiling. Fedora has stayed with the letter of the law and made it hard to use the encumbered code. Ubuntu's claim to fame is that it made it easier..... and probably illegal.

Really, at least in the US, if you downloaded and installed any of the bad and ugly code to make Ubuntu's media players work, you are guilty of patent infringement. If you have videolan or mplayer, you have "crack tools" on your computer. The "experimental" license is bullshit.

Using videolan is also technically a crime in the US. Telling people about videolan is also a crime. That's because of it's DeCss code in addition to infringing patents. Why do you think they have to host their web in Hungary?

If linux ever did gain market share, it would get beaten like a red headed stepchild. It remains viable only because it isn't worth suing over. If it ever was worth suing over..... wave bye bye....

Last edited by rockouthippie; 12th July 2007 at 19:33.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 20:27   #118
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Aw cmon. Windows has 99% of the market share. If you could legally light up OSX ..... It wouldn't work.... NO DRIVERS.

Vista doesn't have great drivers either, so how much different would it be for OSX to get drivers? Not to mention that OSX already have drivers from a lot of the major players. Some of those same companies for Vista had to rewrite the drivers for the bulk of their products.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2007, 21:20   #119
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
Vista doesn't have great drivers either,
For the average user, Vista has great drivers. For the advanced user, Vista has almost perfect drivers. Anything that does not function with Vista right now, this moment, can only be attributed to completely defunct companies, awful customer support, or truly ancient hardware from the last millennium, none of which I've experienced problems with yet. (Yes, seven years is 'ancient' in computer years.)

Back when I got Vista free, that first month, drivers sucked. The X-Fi soundcard alone caused headaches, as did networking adapters. Video performance was a jump back from XP. But by now, ALL these problems have been cleared for roughly 98% of users. There are still very few driver problems, but no more than existed in XP with the same hardware (and, for properly written drivers, problems are fewer than on XP because the code is cleaner.) I've been browsing the support forums of the companies I had problems with, and valid complaints are going down--not up.

I think people saw all the release-day driver problems with Vista and assumed they were Vista problems rather than third-party problems. But time has shown that wasn't the case.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2007, 04:26   #120
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Hey look guys. I fired up Vista and I didn't have to know a damn thing. XP can't say that. XP installs require me to find my motherboard disks, my graphics driver disks. Not even the ethernet driver gets installed.

Vista was pop the disk in and bingo!.

I've been using two almost identical Athlon X2 computers. One with XP, the other with Vista. Screw XP.

After beating on Vista for years, I have to admit, it's beauty. It fixed about everything I hated about XP.

People are going to pick on the security scheme. I think that's beauty too. It nags you, but it has a really good grasp of what is dangerous. One thing is for sure.... A non-administrator user would have a hell of a time damaging the OS. Keeping kids from deleting your system files and loading malware is a triumph all by itself.

It's faster too. Especially with multi-core processors.

I've been waiting for this OS for years. Windows that isn't f*cked up. I am truly surprised. How much better is Vista than XP? A whole lot. What is better? You name it.

It's almost like it isn't Windows

Last edited by rockouthippie; 13th July 2007 at 04:42.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > Breaking News

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump