-rolleyes I really like a link to the MS buying their own product... there just isn't a need to do that. If you control a large business, you have a large influions on what others do and in this cause force them to ship only Vista machines. They could just discount the product running XP and sell for cheap. There is a recent "research" on how Vista handles memory usage and its been determine that it loads the most used data on the ram to increase performce unlike XP where it would just dump out the memory. ...to lazy...it may suck in your eyes but they have an impact on where we are today. Its just pointless to argree with people who don't know anything or even as much as support their opinion. Thats what really ticks me off.
meh. i dont need to prove anything to anyone. so no point making a big fuss out of this. if youre implying that i dont know anything, go ahead. i dont really care. i may be right/wrong, fine. we're humans after all. now if you are frustrated about my last set of posts, then i retract them. pretend they never existed. now lets be mature people and get over this. good day to you.
i have mix feelings about vista like design i give a thumbs up but the fact that its still new is a thumbs down to many bugs etc with it
Being currently a user of Windows Vista. I would like to share my views on this new operating system from Microsoft. First, it looks great. I love the transparency, the fading out when you close a window and Aero in general. Its a vast improvment of the boring looking Luna theme that XP used. The icons look a lot better, being bigger and more customisable. Its a hell of a lot smoother clicking on view then the sizes of the icons change from only text based, to bigger icons when you don't have a library to go through(and vice versa ofcourse). Searching has become a lot easier for the average user. Clicking on start brings a little box to type in whatever your looking for and there it is in a few seconds. This is ofcourse if you have indexing on, which I disabled because it kept accessing my hard drive. The Flip 3d I see no point in, but I like the new alt-tab where you can actually see what you are tabbing too with a big clear picture of the window. The Windows sidebar has also become integrated into my daily computer hours. I simply cannot live without it now. I see a lot of potential with the gadgets when it really starts taking off. As for the shortcoming of Vista. Its simply to early for any working drivers to be released and many businesses has failed to meet the deadline. This means that a lot of applications and games are underperforming or just not working at all. For example my X1950XT doesn't work with games at the moment unless I disable hotkey poller and keep it at 2d mode. Many of the security options available for Vista is totally absolutely pathetically useless. Take UAC for example. Everytime you do something it pops up with a box asking if you are sure you want to do this etc. The sheer repetition of clicking on ok forces any user to turn it off. It doesnt prevent users from doing something stupid. Its just a stupid hinderance in itself. Vista also takes a lot of computer power to run so I can see that becoming a potential shortcoming for home users. Anyways sorry for the longish post. I thought it was appropriate giving Vista a complete low down for people who are still deciding whether to buy it or not. I'll say wait till atleast SP1 to hit the market before purchasing it. As many problems will be fixed by then.
Accoording to an expert, Vista works best with 4 GB. Windows Vista spec is 'unrealistic' Minimum RAM offers sub-XP performance Patrick Thibodeau Microsoft’s official minimum spec for Windows Vista "really isn't realistic”, according to David Short, an IBM consultant who works in its company's Global Services Division. Microsoft says PCs with just 512MB of RAM can accommodate Vista, but Short says users should consider 4GB of RAM if they really want optimum Vista performance. With 512MB of RAM, Vista will deliver performance that's "sub-XP," he warned. Short has been beta testing Vista for two years and was at the IBM-oriented Share user group conference Florida last week discussing some of Vista's performance requirements. His XP system has 2GB of RAM, which he calls the "sweet spot" for that operating system, but on Vista, 4GB of RAM may be closer to its "Nirvana”, he said. That's due in part to Windows SuperFetch, which takes data from the hard drive, stores it in the available RAM and makes it readily accessible to the processor. SuperFetch depends a great deal on user predictability and takes snapshots of user activity. If SuperFetch determines that an application is launched at a particular time, it will have it loaded into the available RAM. With more RAM, there's more caching and better software response, said Short. Hardware vendors, of course, will offer systems built on Microsoft's minimum hardware requirements called Windows Vista Capable, configured with 512MB of system memory and a processor that is at least 800MHz. But their heart may not really be in it. For instance, Dell offers a Windows Vista Capable configuration that isn't capable of much, according to what Dell says about it on its website: "Great for ... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games." Dell recommends 2GB of system memory. Microsoft may be using PCs loaded with 4GB of RAM for some of its customer demos; At least that's what Ann Westerheim, president of technology consultancy Ekaru, reports. A Microsoft representative recently demonstrated Vista on a system with 4GB of system memory to some of its customers, and the performance was so impressive that it drew some "ohs and ahs" from the audience, said Westerheim. Westerheim said that for her personal use she may configure a system with 2GB RAM, only because of the cost of loading 4GB on a laptop. Mueez Deen, director of graphics memory and consumer DRAM at Samsung Electronics, also recommends 2GB of RAM, calling that amount the "optimal density for the complete Vista experience - economically and technologically."
Rubbish, 1GB works absolutely fine with Vista. Its only when you count in games and some applications that 2GB will ever be needed. Edit: 4GB is overkill. We are talking about home users not software developers. Going by that logic then 1000000GB of RAM will be best with Windows Vista.
Vista with Aero is actually out-dated even before launch. There are OSes available with less high Hardware requirements. You can think of: - Apple MacOS X 10.5 (Codename: Leopard, which will launch very soon) - Ubuntu 6.10 Linux with XGL and Kiba-Dock [youtube]bYsxaMyFV2Y&eurl=[/youtube]
oh no its vista. stay with xp. there is just so much drm in it. and what a memory hog. you need at least 1gb just to even use it decently.
yeah, im turning into a mac fan now too... right now im using windows XP media center.. but my next computer will no doubt be a Macbook Pro... as soon as they come out with a Quad core processor for it
get it only for the looks. cuz vista is buggy, has drm, requires a faster pc, and 64bit appl arent quite settle in yet. so for now, all you are getting is a pretty OS. Heck, DX10 games dont even exist yet. Price on vista is bound to drop.
^ theres the 32bit version dx10 is right round the corner plus dx10 graphics cards kick ass and thats all that matters but yeh vista is still way too early for me to purchase I just hate the way theres different packages, basic is useless and if u want any decent features, your pretty much lumped with ultimate which is extortion here in the UK
