Vista any good ?

[Justin]

Not over here.

Oh, right. My bad. You live in a country where it's ok to benefit from
someone else's work and never pay them.

Have fun!

 

[Paul-B]

Oh, right. My bad. You live in a country where it's ok to benefit
from someone else's work and never pay them.

Have fun!

For "country" read "continent".

 

[Stephan Rose]

Justin wrote:

That's VERY common. I as well am not ready to move forward with Vista. I
still need lots of drivers in order to move forward. 300+ machines. As
well as our main accounting package is not up to speed yet. SAP.

Good luck =)

I doubt the 6 year old machine is doing very well with XP. It certainly
isn't pushing any limits.

It isn't pushing limits no, but it actually is doing very well with XP. All
it has to do is run an IDE to write occasional software for PIC processors.
Not exactly a pushing-edge task. =)

I bet they all run Win98 flawlessly. So why upgrade to XP?

Because XP is actually stable, unlike Win98 =) XP actually makes sense!

Well, if you don't need the added features then of course you don't need
Vista. I just hate to see people make claims that they wont update "just
because" of everything they read when knuckleheads like alias run around
screaming bloody murder about Vista.

Not entirely true. Even if I don't need it or want it, eventually I am bound
to end up with an app that does...and then the "fun" starts...=)

Such as?

Generally video / ram were the biggest complaints. I don't really remember
all the details for each report...it was sometime shortly before Vista's
release. =)

What model? If it's one of the tanks then yes, they did.

Your guess is as good as mine. I'd have to actually look at the thing to
remember the model number. =) If HP actually *did* make drivers for
it...then I'd be impressed....with HP =P

I can't agree with that. I wont pretend to fully understand all the
politics between MS and hardware vendors but it clearly seems to be "the
people" that drive this force.

1. If you want Windows then you buy a PC.
2. If you want Mac then you buy Apple.
3. There is absolutely no "strong drive" for Linux. Period. If there
was, then people would be cashing in (retailers).
4. Build your own. Mom/Pop store.

The consumer has choice.


Yup, it was a choice. However, "making it XP compatible"...costs money.
I
can understand why they didn't. In fact there where many reasons that I
read. Off the top of my head, costs and the need to drive forward. They
wanted devs to create DX10+Vista apps and not have to worry about making
DX10+XP+Vista apps.

Of course they want devs to do that!!! Requires every gamer to buy Vista!

Are you saying the guidelines do not allow for efficient work-flow or
work-flow that makes sense? I think you'd have a fight on your hand there
with the devs.

Oh I would have plenty of fights with the devs regardless. =)

Do they allow for an efficient work-flow? Depends on the application. There
may be some apps they are great for! There may be some they are not so
great for. Some parts of the guidelines may be great, others may be not so
great.

It depends on the app, what it is trying to accomplish and do.

I don't like stuff like this being imposed on developers. It ultimately
leads to developers implementing certain things in a certain way JUST
because the guidelines say so...not because it necessarily makes sense just
so they are allowed to put that shiny sticker on their box.

That's not really helping anything.

I do understand microsoft in trying to make every app look and behave and
act the same. The idea itself is not all that without merit in a perfect
world. We don't live in one. Existance of Vista is proof enough of that

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Scott]

Can anyone tell me if vista has any good points at all over xp ?

Here's the best info I've found so far.

http://tinyurl.com/3xaqvz

--
Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
NOTICE: In-Newsgroup (and therefore off-topic) comments on my sig will
be cheerfully ignored, so don't waste our time.

 

[Alias]

Here's the best info I've found so far.

http://tinyurl.com/3xaqvz

Cute

Alias

 

[Justin]

Because XP is actually stable, unlike Win98 =) XP actually makes sense!

Eh, I still have a Win98 machine. It's sitting right next to me. It's been
running for over 5 years. I remember I had to replace some parts around
that time. Other then that the OS has been running since before I started
working here back in 99. It runs a few different apps.

Not entirely true. Even if I don't need it or want it, eventually I am
bound
to end up with an app that does...and then the "fun" starts...=)

Well yeah, that imposes a need for it's new features ;p At least the app
needs it's new features. Unless the dev just had a stick up their rear and
stamped it with Vista Only for no good reason.

Generally video / ram were the biggest complaints. I don't really remember
all the details for each report...it was sometime shortly before Vista's
release. =)

Did it complain about Aero or about video in general? All you need to for
Memory is 512. Although I think that starter version can use even less.

Of course they want devs to do that!!! Requires every gamer to buy Vista!

True. But it also sparks development by making development more
streamlined.

 

[Justin]

I don't care where you are. Stealing is stealing. If you want my apps you
HAVE to pay for them. Luckily I'm not so big that anyone has cracked my
security routines.

 

[Nina DiBoy]

Do you know if this can run on VirtualPC 2007?

ss.

Dunno. It has my attention, and I would love to try it, but not rushing
due to the fact that I have not yet researched the license implications
of it yet. If you try it out, let me know how you fare!

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"DRM is not added to anything in Vista."

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Stephan Rose]

Eh, I still have a Win98 machine. It's sitting right next to me. It's
been
running for over 5 years. I remember I had to replace some parts around
that time. Other then that the OS has been running since before I started
working here back in 99. It runs a few different apps.



Well yeah, that imposes a need for it's new features ;p At least the app
needs it's new features. Unless the dev just had a stick up their rear
and stamped it with Vista Only for no good reason.

Not necessarily, plenty of developers will target it just to avoid
compatibility issues...not because there is a feature they actually need
or even use. I'm not saying there won't be apps that will have to go that
way because there is something they essentially need...there will be.

Did it complain about Aero or about video in general? All you need to for
Memory is 512. Although I think that starter version can use even less.

Even if the starter version would technically be viable, it is on a lower
level than XP Pro is...so it doesn't make sense. That'd just be running
vista for the sake of running vista. And I think we both know how much I
like vista

True. But it also sparks development by making development more
streamlined.

I don't really know what's streamlined about totally changing the way the
API works and making all developers essentially re-learn their task. DX10
is fundamentally different in every way from DX9.

That is something though MS has always done throughout the history of DX and
it's something that has always bugged me as it prevents developers from
taking their existing engines and upgrading them to the newer interface
without a complete re-write. That isn't really something that is beneficial
to anyone.

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Justin]

That is something though MS has always done throughout the history of DX
and
it's something that has always bugged me as it prevents developers from
taking their existing engines and upgrading them to the newer interface
without a complete re-write. That isn't really something that is
beneficial
to anyone.

So you're eventually going to move to Vista right? Do you want to see Win9x
looking apps on Vista? I don't and neither does MS. Thus the push.

 

[Stephan Rose]

So you're eventually going to move to Vista right? Do you want to see
Win9x
looking apps on Vista? I don't and neither does MS. Thus the push.

No. I will have a computer around somewhere with Vista on it for testing
purposes. That'll be about it. That's a far cry from me "moving" to Vista
as its use will really be limited to...

- Copy source code over and compile it natively under that OS.
- Run it...does all the cross platform stuff work?
- Sit someone down at the machine with more patience than I have to use the
app and test it...
- Sit myself back down in front of my Ubuntu system...

Everything else I do new from here on out will run Ubuntu.

As far as the app's look is concerned...apps actually have very little
control over that relatively speaking.

You can take a Win9X app, add a manifest.xml file for it to the directory it
runs in and it'll look like an XP app...it's that manifest file that
determines what DLL windows loads for the app to render its controls and
that is what determines the look of the app.

The app has no major control over how buttons, list boxes, list views, text
boxes, and so on are drawn...

The only exception are custom controls written by the programmer to do a
task that windows has no control for. That is of course always going to
look the way the programmer wrote it.

The thing is, it is entirely unnecessary to be incompatible to existing
applications while adding new features.

Look at OpenGL, throughout its history it has maintained compatibility with
existing code while still adding all the necessary features to make it just
as powerful as the latest DirectX.

When OpenGL adds new things...I know my engine will still work. The new
features I can then use as I need them without needing to throw away all my
existing code. I can then implement any new features I need, upgrade the
looks maybe by using more advanced rendering techniques on an existing
stable and tested engine. That is far more preferable than having to write
a new one because the entire API has changed.

There is only one thing that is hurt by compatibility: The pocketbook of
companies that profit from incompatibility by forcing people to get
upgrades they don't really need.

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Guest]

Vista sucks!

The only reason I'm here today is to find out if I can delete this piece of
crap (excuse my language), and "upgrade" to Windows XP!

I bought this computer that had Windows Vista pre-installed. (Pentium 4, 3.2
GHz, 512 MB RAM, 160 GB HDD)
At first, it was "pretty", so I thought Microsoft had developed a very good
OS.
(The reason I mention this is that a lot of people will see the "eye candy"
in the computer stores (without trying to run applications and programs), and
think that Vista is an improvement to XP... It ISN'T!)

It is a memory HOG!
My old 1.3 GHz, 512 MB RAM computer, running Windows 2000 is three times
faster than this "hog"!

Everything that you knew and loved in XP is "incompatible" with Vista!
(Well, ... not everything, but over half of the programs that you "TRY" to
install!)

Do yourself a favor... Get Windows XP and forget about Vista!

 

[Guest]

None!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! we are just forced into, even having to buy all new
software!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Not Me]

Some claim better security.
I don't see it myself.
Vista runs as designed on my system, I just plain don't like it.
It is the first version of Windows ever that I don't feel is better than the
last.

 

[smithy]

yep, do a search in google xp vs vista, i made the move to vista, we'll i'm
back with xp pro.

i'll give vista another go when sp1 or more like sp2 is out, otherwise your
waiting your time and money just yet

smithy

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

What new software did you have to buy?

None!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! we are just forced into, even having to buy all new
software!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[unhappy vista user]

ABSOLUTELY NOT! WITH XP, PERIPHERALS OPERATED BETTER, LESS HASEL AND LESS
COMPLICATION. SCANNERS ARE ABOSLUTELY HELL TO OPERATE.

 

[Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]]

Please read ActiveWin review:
http://www.activewin.com/reviews/software/operating-sys/vista/

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

ABSOLUTELY NOT! WITH XP, PERIPHERALS OPERATED BETTER, LESS HASEL AND LESS
COMPLICATION. SCANNERS ARE ABOSLUTELY HELL TO OPERATE.

My scanner works under Vista just as it did under XP. What difference have
you noticed?

 

[Bell407pilot]

I spent allot of money to upgrade to Vista 64 to utilize more memory and have
a stronger platform. What I ended up with was hundreds of dollars of out of
pocket expense and I cannot use the Vista 64 box for my business. I cannot
edit or view RAE format images I can no longer import video with an ATI card
these are just few problems I have encountered with no solutions from MS. I
have use an older XP Pro box to get anything done. I cannot use Vista 64 for
any of my business needs. Below are a few items.

No more tape drive support - Had to buy third party software.
No support for ATI Video Capture Devices – No solutions available
No Support for RAW Image Support – No solutions available
All kinds of bugs such as not being able to retrieve updates because of a
corrupt file that MS cant figure out. – I guess wait for MS to find a solution
Major programs like Photoshop, Light room, Elements no longer run in the 64
environment – No solutions
Nikon says they have no plan to make software compatible because MS will not
release certain information. (Not sure what this all about but this what I
was told when I called them) No Solutions.