Excellent SP1 review...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frank
  • Start date Start date
I especially like the part where it says:

"Even governments are finding they need to move to Vista as of late,
as new encryption standards come in to play which only Vista
supports.'

Frank
Click to expand...

False trolly, and you know that.
 
Not even in your stupid dreams....

I have stated that SP1 will not save Vista. And this is true.

Sure SP1 has improved vista (even though its still worse than XP) but the
damage has been already done.

Vista has gotten so much hate from everyone that its name has been connected
with IDIOCY, and so have you.

Companies and governments will HOLD ON TO XP and wait for windows 7.

You can try searching all day and all night, the truth is that you will not
find many articles
that are PRO-vista.....

most bash it to smithereens and for good reason.
 
Frank said:
http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3233

I especially like the part where it says:

"Even governments are finding they need to move to Vista as of late, as
new encryption standards come in to play which only Vista supports.'

Frank
Click to expand...

I especially like the part that says:

"Among the 24 pages(!) of hotfixes that have been rolled into Vista SP1".

Kind of confirms that Vista wasn't working quite as well as Vista Fanboys
like Francis have been insisting around here.

Cheers.

--
What does Bill Gates use?
http://tinyurl.com/2zxhdl

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm
 
The amount of patches that Microsoft has released this year for Windows XP
is still right around double what they had to release for Windows Vista. No
company is going to write perfect code unless they know exactly what
hardware the software is going to run on, NEVER gonna happen for Microsoft.
Everybody is right, if you run a Linux system, you wont need the antivirus
software, why on earth would the people who write a virus point them at an
OS with 10% market share when they could write them for a Windows box with
90% market share (not accurate %'s but gets my point accross). I have used
a couple different Linux variations, not a bad experiance, they were stable,
but how many years though have they had 1000's of people spending time
working on that OS? I would hope it would run well. Windows Vista was the
most heavily tested Windows OS to date, there were something like 15,000+
beta testers, but not even close to that amount for Microsoft Programmers
who could actually work on the product and make the improvements. Microsoft
is a company, one of their goals is to turn a profit (the reason they aren't
open source), and even Microsoft cannot afford the payroll for the amount of
people working on the Linux OS's. Windows Vista took 6 years to RTM,
Windows Vista wasn't just a continuation of Windows XP, they started from
scratch. One of the reasons they started over was the fact that the old
product needed change, the only problem with that is the fact that people
HATE change. If they included every change that needed to be made in
Windows Vista, people would have even more complaints that everything is
different than it used to be. The biggest complaint that people hear with
Vista is the UAC, if you don't like it, it takes 6 clicks from the desktop
to turn it off. One thing to remember is Windows Vista was feature complete
at RTM, don't expect new features, expect greater stability and increased
performance (don't expect Vista SP1 to scream on your PIII with 512megs of
RAM).

I'm sure I'm one click (Send) away from being flamed, but keep in mind a
couple things while your doing it, that I DO have an open opinion, I DO use
Linux, and while I haven't had the oportunity to use Leopard yet, I AM
familiar with the Apple OS, but most importantly WE are in a Windows Vista
newsgroup (the focus of my topic).
 
NoStop said:
Frank wrote:




I especially like the part that says:

"Among the 24 pages(!) of hotfixes that have been rolled into Vista SP1".

Kind of confirms that Vista wasn't working quite as well as Vista Fanboys
like Francis have been insisting around here.
Click to expand...

No, it only confirms that MS is taking care of it's product and it's
customers.
Install urbuttoo and then spend hours doing the 150+ security, etc updates.
You're an MS hater as we all know nostop. I can't figure out exactly why
you're always here other than you're really and truly mentally deranged
or just plain old jealous of Vista users.
Actually you come off as a rather pathetic human being.
Frank
 
software, why on earth would the people who write a virus point them at an
OS with 10% market share when they could write them for a Windows box with
90% market share (not accurate %'s but gets my point accross). I have used
Click to expand...

Your point's wrong, though. It's much harder to write viruses
for Linux systems. Not only is the basic architecture less susceptable
to subversion but the vast majority of Linux installs are professionally
run data center sites. The payback woould be immense - imagine controlling
the Google webfarm as a botnet - but so much more difficult that the cost
is still higher than the potential profit.
 
I completely understand your point here, but the majority of virus' are
released to the home user, and we all know how careless they can be. Most
home users have no problem logging in as root for day to day stuff and
allowing anything that pops up to go ahead and do its thing. Which is why
Microsoft has hidden the root equivalent in Vista, and also a drawback of
UAC. Along with the fact that if Linux did gain market share, the cost per
infection would go down dramatically because it would affect a larger base
of people and would be more appealing the the people who write the viral
code.

I'm not trying to say that I'm 100% right, or you're not, but after reading
these newsgroups I'm thinking that people here preach one side of a story
and then scream obscenities if anybody approaches the other side of it. I
wanted to try and put something down that tries to show both sides, so
people had hopefully a better understanding of what they are dealing with
instead of the "or just install ????, that will fix everything" answer they
get when they post.
 
Frank said:
No, it only confirms that MS is taking care of it's product and it's
customers.
Click to expand...

As it should you shit for brains. People have purchased that pathetic p.o.s.
and Microsoft should fix the damn thing. No arguments here. The problem is
that Vista is essentially unfixable, hence the scramble to get Windoze 7
out.
Install urbuttoo and then spend hours doing the 150+ security, etc
Click to expand...

Bullshit as usual. It might take YOU hours. Any other human being can just
let the updates roll in in the background in under 20 minutes while
continuing to use the OS.
updates. You're an MS hater as we all know nostop.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do hate Microsoft. Anyone familiar with the history of Microsoft also
hates Microsoft. So what else is new?
I can't figure out
exactly why you're always here other than you're really and truly mentally
deranged or just plain old jealous of Vista users.
Click to expand...

I'm not the least bit jealous of Vista users. That would be like being
jealous of someone having cancer. You sure are THE Usenet Village Idiot,
aren't you.
Actually you come off as a rather pathetic human being.
Click to expand...

I do? That must be a compliment coming from a brain injured asswipe like
YOU.
Frank
Click to expand...

Cheers and LOL!

--
What does Bill Gates use?
http://tinyurl.com/2zxhdl

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm
 
Wyo2aZ said:
The amount of patches that Microsoft has released this year for Windows XP
is still right around double what they had to release for Windows Vista.
No company is going to write perfect code unless they know exactly what
hardware the software is going to run on, NEVER gonna happen for
Microsoft. Everybody is right, if you run a Linux system, you wont need
the antivirus software, why on earth would the people who write a virus
point them at an OS with 10% market share when they could write them for a
Windows box with
90% market share (not accurate %'s but gets my point accross).
Click to expand...

Well your "point" is bullshit. Over half the Net runs on Linux, so there is
plenty out there, with fast connections to be attacked. Why isn't it being
successfully attacked? The reason is simple - Linux is immune to viruses
because of the way its permission system is built and the fact that
kernelspace is completely separated from userspace. It has NOTHING to do
with market share. That's just Microsoft FUD.

Cheers.


--
What does Bill Gates use?
http://tinyurl.com/2zxhdl

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm
 
home users have no problem logging in as root for day to day stuff and
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that. Part of the problem is of course that
unskilled "home users" don't run Linux so who knows what they'd actually
do?
and then scream obscenities if anybody approaches the other side of it. I
Click to expand...

AND I ****ING HATE THAT SHIT DAMMIT!!!!

Lol :-)
 
On the Bridge! said:
Not even in your stupid dreams....

I have stated that SP1 will not save Vista. And this is true.
Click to expand...

Since when does the computing community listen to a putz like you?

You can chirp all you want and people will still purchase Vista. Since you
don't like Vista, why not migrate to Ubuntu and go over to the Ubuntu group
and help those poor souls trying to figure out what to do with Ubuntu once
they get it running. That should keep you busy for the next 10 years.

Bye bye now.
 
fanboy !!

the wharf rat said:
Your point's wrong, though. It's much harder to write viruses
for Linux systems. Not only is the basic architecture less susceptable
to subversion but the vast majority of Linux installs are professionally
run data center sites. The payback woould be immense - imagine
controlling
the Google webfarm as a botnet - but so much more difficult that the cost
is still higher than the potential profit.
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top