everyone can see windows is clearly headed for extinction... WHY IN GOD'S NAME WOULD I PAY OVER $900 FOR AN OPERATING SYSTEM AND SUITE OF PROGRAMS I CAN GET FOR FREE?!!... for free, i'm talking absolutely free.. and they work better than microsoft office or xp.. its called linux and openoffice.. they do all the same things, and use java no less. hell, you don't even need linux to use openoffice... and it does all the same things as good or better than microsoft office.. FOR FREE. i'll never use another piece of microsoft ware ever again, i mean.. its obvious i won't have to.
Get ready to pull out your VISA credit cards & rack up some big bills if you want all the Mac OSX Tiger (err...MS Vista OS) features.
The stats that Microsith are "recommending" are just the MINIMUM people. IF you want ALL of the "new fangled cool features" that you've been promised for year after year after year from Billy BOB, dump your beige PC crate, big a BIG NEW FULLY LOADED PC for BIG BUCK$$$, THEN you can have the FULL VIEW "Vista" AND be able to run your programs / games / etc. at a decent speed.
Total BLOATWARE wrapped up in vaporware promises & sliding delivery date.
PATHETIC Jurassic Park under performance at its' finest. (And people still think that Macs are too expensive) The days of cheap PC's & WinOS are dead people, Citizen Gates needs a new pair of shoes, since most PC people are not upgrading as scheduled by Microsith as Win 98 & 2000 are majority of today's users).
LIFE LESSON CITIZEN GATES & BIG BROTHER BALMER:
Under promise & over deliver. ( Instead of MS/C-NOT PR of OVER promise & NOT delivering)
I just don't get what the big deal is about the OS? I don't care about the OS, I want my programs to be effective and easy to use. Peel-away windows? Transparent windows? Jeez, who cares? I'm not "using" my operating system, I'm using my operating system to run my SOFTWARE! It makes no sense to spend more money on a box just to run the OS. The OS should be invisible. It's a platform. I have recommended to everyone in my shop who is thinking of getting a new computer to get one before Vista ships, as I have found XP to be both stable and capable. And to Onizuka who said that MS has 90% because of illegal business practices, that's hogwash. MS has its huge market share because it LICENSED its software. You want market penetration for a new product? Let EVERYBODY to sell it.
Good points! For $300 what are you getting? The ability to set a wallpaper image, look at a screensaver or change color schemes of application windows?
I think the public can see the rationale in spending $300 for a piece of software that will do video editing, or word processing, or some other useful functionalities. The public sees Windows as a necessity to run their applications -- not an application in and of itself.
But I think Vista is destined to be Microsofts first major flop since Windows ME and MS Bob. All these different versions, Aero or no Aero, Ultimate, Premium, Basic.
I just want an OS that facilitates running the applications I use. Vista is too much of everything. If I want all that other crap, I would just buy an "Add-on" bundle to get the added functionality.
There are many little add ons you can get for Windows and that removes their control over the Operating System. I used to run a desktop with Windows 3.1 that was nearly identical to the original Windows 95 desktop, complete with recycle bin and a "Start" pull down dynamic menu (though mine didn't say "Start" on it).
Back at that time I had a friend who was beta testing Windows 95. He showed me the goods, then I showed him mine and he was amazed at how much of the new features I could accomplish in Windows 3.1. There already exist windows shells that enhance the graphical features of Windows. Microsoft is just putting them out of business. :)
Sadly the option doesn't work for me (also a tech profesional) I need a portable device with serial ports (usb-serial) and running custom windows only Applications.
SO either I have 2 laptops, one for all the documentation, Timesheets, wireless networkd, internet .... etc (My Mac)
and one for the Communication apps (phone system programming software as an example.) on a different machine.
Having one bit of hardware (macbook Pro) that can do both, means one less thing I have to carry.
Dual boot if I have to. But parallel (VT Tech, version of Virtual PC, only fast) if I can instead.
Why ... Because why do I need to carry extra hardware if I dont have too?
I can imagine coder who write for Multiple platforms would be even happier.
Just give me a OS that works, personally I don't care about translucent windows with fancy icons. I am just looking for an OS that works right. It seems kind of crazy that an OS has bigger system requirements than most of the PC games I own. :( wierd
What about legitimate users who don't want eye candy?
I don't care if Aero is available for pirates; what's more important is: Will Vista allow legitimate, licensed users to continue using the classic Windows interface--the one that doesn't require $3000 worth of hardware and doesn't consume 90% of the available processor power on the system?
My 2.8GHz Pentium tower plus an Nvidia 6200 video card cost less than that... Then I was able to swap my RAM around and ended up with a Gigabyte in my new computer.
First... The truth never grows old. Microsoft has a greater market share (not %90 as some have been saying). Mac OS is a more stable OS with less problems. People say that those statements are worn out because they lack a good response to them and therefore try to minimize them. Accept it... those are the current truths about each system. BTW, I don't care about market share... didn't most people think the world was flat at one point? Also, a more stable system is not too important as long as it is reasonably stable and the user is willing to trade that for something they vaue more, like lower initial cost or software.
With that being said, this whole OS war is very silly. It's very similar to gangs fighting over neighborhoods when not one of them owns ANY part of the city. This whole propaganda war only makes sense for those of us with a vested interest. People with stocks in one of these companies would count. The people who get money from these companies count. They have money directly involved. The rest of us are just consumers. Why should you or I care what someone else buys? Both companies will be around for a long time making lts of money. Even if they aren't, so what. There will always be computer makers and software developers.
Now... I bought a Mac and I usually tell my friends to get a windows machine (not always). They tell me what they need and I tell them what fits. It's that simple. Getting emotionally involved... why?
For the Little Rascals fans... "Flash Gordan... Tarzan... Oh Mr. Hood!"
First... The truth never grows old. Microsoft has a greater market share (not %90 as some have been saying). Mac OS is a more stable OS with less problems. People say that those statements are worn out because they lack a good response to them and therefore try to minimize them. Accept it... those are the current truths about each system. BTW, I don't care about market share... didn't most people think the world was flat at one point? Also, a more stable system is not too important as long as it is reasonably stable and the user is willing to trade that for something they vaue more, like lower initial cost or software.
With that being said, this whole OS war is very silly. It's very similar to gangs fighting over neighborhoods when not one of them owns ANY part of the city. This whole propaganda war only makes sense for those of us with a vested interest. People with stocks in one of these companies would count. The people who get money from these companies count. They have money directly involved. The rest of us are just consumers. Why should you or I care what someone else buys? Both companies will be around for a long time making lts of money. Even if they aren't, so what. There will always be computer makers and software developers.
Now... I bought a Mac and I usually tell my friends to get a windows machine (not always). They tell me what they need and I tell them what fits. It's that simple. Getting emotionally involved... why?
For the Little Rascals fans... "Flash Gordan... Tarzan... Oh Mr. Hood!"
vista=XP with sugar coating, disable the visual effects.
when vista releases we'll get everyone doing the same they did with windows xp- disabling all visual effects. The effects in windows xp added little in the way of practicality to windows xp, and made it go frightningly slow. In OSX the special effects add practicality to the system (just look at expose)and look great without slowing down the system. Until microsoft realises and perfects this theres no point to it.
i use xp-pro with all the eye candy off i dont want the featuresin vista i prefer the gritty look of win2000, and would be quite happy with a copied version just so it saves me the trouble of having to find the menus to turn everything OFF.
Trying to have consumers measure bandwidth to determine eligibility requirements is absolutely unacceptable. An easier way would simply be to post minimum system requirements which meet or exceed the bandwidth requirements. More than likely anyone running a dedicated grpahics cards 256 megs with a fairly new processor running PC2700 DDR or DDR2 or higher would meet this requirement.
Making Vista not work properly if it is pirated will just direct all those users to Macs. As mentioned in a post below, Vista truly is XP with sugar coating. Microsoft does "me too" products, not innovation. If you want that, I think the obvious choice is Apple computers.
yeah, I am on my way to buying a used Dual 1.25ghz G4 over another windows machine, I am sick of the bullsh*t, and I dont play games right now, so I dont need the most commonly used OS on the market...and I have been a "Mac Addict" since elementary school.....the time has come....
Also, with a little effort you can get x86 working on a normal Dell PC with all the bells and whistles; no restrictions. If it really does prove that hard (I can?t imagine it will be) to crack windows so it doesn?t call home and disable the eye candy it?s very likely the pirate base of users might just migrate to mac, which in turn might end up being a not so good thing for mac. Heh? theres always linux =P
It sounds to me like microsoft is not only trying to sell its os but is branching out into system sales. Id settle for an os that works like microsoft claims it will.
Linux displays those same dynamic file generated icons already, and DOESN'T require a monster system to pull it's stuff off. I mean, who really needs 3D flips between windows?
In my humble opinion Microsoft should do a check to see if the software is legal and if not, dump the program to an appropiate message to the cheap individuals that wont buy the product but in no case should M$ allow the program to run if it's not legal.
You don't need to be and IEEE Electrical Engineer to figure this out. Memory bandwitdth is easy to figure out....just download Belarc advisor....for free.
Money money money. Is that all they ever care about? Who cares is someone steals their OS. They make enough money already that can feed this country! GREETY!
Manage updates with the Download App
On another note, I wonder when somebody's going to make a Linux distro named "Hasta" so that it can be Hasta-la-Vista?!?
If you're not into Vista Aero graphics, get a computer with Vista Basic preinstalled.
Vista hasn't even been released yet, so all of this condemnation and hand-wringing seems a bit premature.
The stats that Microsith are "recommending" are just the MINIMUM people. IF you want ALL of the "new fangled cool features" that you've been promised for year after year after year from Billy BOB, dump your beige PC crate, big a BIG NEW FULLY LOADED PC for BIG BUCK$$$, THEN you can have the FULL VIEW "Vista" AND be able to run your programs / games / etc. at a decent speed.
Total BLOATWARE wrapped up in vaporware promises & sliding delivery date.
PATHETIC Jurassic Park under performance at its' finest.
(And people still think that Macs are too expensive) The days of cheap PC's & WinOS are dead people, Citizen Gates needs a new pair of shoes, since most PC people are not upgrading as scheduled by Microsith as Win 98 & 2000 are majority of today's users).
LIFE LESSON CITIZEN GATES & BIG BROTHER BALMER:
Under promise & over deliver.
( Instead of MS/C-NOT PR of OVER promise & NOT delivering)
It makes no sense to spend more money on a box just to run the OS. The OS should be invisible. It's a platform.
I have recommended to everyone in my shop who is thinking of getting a new computer to get one before Vista ships, as I have found XP to be both stable and capable.
And to Onizuka who said that MS has 90% because of illegal business practices, that's hogwash. MS has its huge market share because it LICENSED its software. You want market penetration for a new product? Let EVERYBODY to sell it.
I think the public can see the rationale in spending $300 for a piece of software that will do video editing, or word processing, or some other useful functionalities. The public sees Windows as a necessity to run their applications -- not an application in and of itself.
I just want an OS that facilitates running the applications I use. Vista is too much of everything. If I want all that other crap, I would just buy an "Add-on" bundle to get the added functionality.
Back at that time I had a friend who was beta testing Windows 95. He showed me the goods, then I showed him mine and he was amazed at how much of the new features I could accomplish in Windows 3.1. There already exist windows shells that enhance the graphical features of Windows. Microsoft is just putting them out of business. :)
Honnestly, Microsoft is off its rocker with Aero and I would disable it anyway.
SO either I have 2 laptops, one for all the documentation, Timesheets, wireless networkd, internet .... etc (My Mac)
and one for the Communication apps (phone system programming software as an example.) on a different machine.
Having one bit of hardware (macbook Pro) that can do both, means one less thing I have to carry.
Dual boot if I have to. But parallel (VT Tech, version of Virtual PC, only fast) if I can instead.
Why ... Because why do I need to carry extra hardware if I dont have too?
I can imagine coder who write for Multiple platforms would be even happier.
share (not %90 as some have been saying). Mac OS is a more
stable OS with less problems. People say that those statements
are worn out because they lack a good response to them and
therefore try to minimize them. Accept it... those are the current
truths about each system. BTW, I don't care about market
share... didn't most people think the world was flat at one point?
Also, a more stable system is not too important as long as it is
reasonably stable and the user is willing to trade that for
something they vaue more, like lower initial cost or software.
With that being said, this whole OS war is very silly. It's very
similar to gangs fighting over neighborhoods when not one of
them owns ANY part of the city. This whole propaganda war only
makes sense for those of us with a vested interest. People with
stocks in one of these companies would count. The people who
get money from these companies count. They have money
directly involved. The rest of us are just consumers. Why should
you or I care what someone else buys? Both companies will be
around for a long time making lts of money. Even if they aren't,
so what. There will always be computer makers and software
developers.
Now... I bought a Mac and I usually tell my friends to get a
windows machine (not always). They tell me what they need and
I tell them what fits. It's that simple. Getting emotionally
involved... why?
For the Little Rascals fans... "Flash Gordan... Tarzan... Oh Mr.
Hood!"
When will Microsoft just finally buy Apple, and get rid of Mac OS X?
I think since Apple has gone to Intel, and now you can boot windows straight of the hard drive, it will happen in the near future...
I give it ten years....
share (not %90 as some have been saying). Mac OS is a more
stable OS with less problems. People say that those statements
are worn out because they lack a good response to them and
therefore try to minimize them. Accept it... those are the current
truths about each system. BTW, I don't care about market
share... didn't most people think the world was flat at one point?
Also, a more stable system is not too important as long as it is
reasonably stable and the user is willing to trade that for
something they vaue more, like lower initial cost or software.
With that being said, this whole OS war is very silly. It's very
similar to gangs fighting over neighborhoods when not one of
them owns ANY part of the city. This whole propaganda war only
makes sense for those of us with a vested interest. People with
stocks in one of these companies would count. The people who
get money from these companies count. They have money
directly involved. The rest of us are just consumers. Why should
you or I care what someone else buys? Both companies will be
around for a long time making lts of money. Even if they aren't,
so what. There will always be computer makers and software
developers.
Now... I bought a Mac and I usually tell my friends to get a
windows machine (not always). They tell me what they need and
I tell them what fits. It's that simple. Getting emotionally
involved... why?
For the Little Rascals fans... "Flash Gordan... Tarzan... Oh Mr.
Hood!"
The effects in windows xp added little in the way of practicality to windows xp, and made it go frightningly slow.
In OSX the special effects add practicality to the system (just look at expose)and look great without slowing down the system.
Until microsoft realises and perfects this theres no point to it.
and the sad part is they copy the look of Mac OS X well....of course, loves Apple computers...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.jmusheneaux.com/images/gates.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.jmusheneaux.com/images/gates.jpg</a>
yeah, I am on my way to buying a used Dual 1.25ghz G4 over another windows machine, I am sick of the bullsh*t, and I dont play games right now, so I dont need the most commonly used OS on the market...and I have been a "Mac Addict" since elementary school.....the time has come....