K
Kulas
Is it plain bloatware?
J
Julian
Kulas said:
As opposed to which other types of bloatware?
J
Jon
Kulas said:
It's has more original features than your post does.
C
Carey Frisch [MVP]
Windows Vista is not "bloatware" as you imply.
It is considered "the" state-of-the-art operating
system available today. I use Windows Vista
100% now and it is considerable more secure
and stable than Windows XP ever was or will be.
It is considered "the" state-of-the-art operating
system available today. I use Windows Vista
100% now and it is considerable more secure
and stable than Windows XP ever was or will be.
M
Mike
Julian said:
Well - enhanced, extraordinary, special-deluxe bloatware obviously!
Mike
J
Julian
Jon said:
Forgive him; for he knoweth not what he says...
R
ray
No, it is complex bloatware
B
Bill Yanaire
It's polyunsaturated bloatware of the worst kind.
Millions and millions of lines of code that slow down Vista. That's why you
need at least a dual core 2.4 Ghz machine to use it.
Millions and millions of lines of code that slow down Vista. That's why you
need at least a dual core 2.4 Ghz machine to use it.
B
Bill Yanaire
It is considered the "state-of-the-art" OS by the Microsoft fanboys. By
everyone else, it's bloated, beta, and full of bugs!
Just FYI
everyone else, it's bloated, beta, and full of bugs!
Just FYI
P
Peter
Absolute crap.....you just hate M$ and that's a fact.
M
Mike
Bill Yanaire said:
Tell that to my 1.6 Ghz Pentium M ThinkPad T41. Runs Vista just fine.
Mike
B
Bill Yanaire
It's not a FACT. You have no idea. It's documented that Vista has millions
and millions of lines of code. To run those millions and millions of lines
of code, it takes lots of horse power. Yes you can run with a 2 GHz Pentium
but it will be slow. You can run with 512MB of RAM, but it will be slow.
It isn't absolute crap. You are a MicroSquish Fanboy pure and simple.
That's your right. Keep your head in the sand.
For the rest of us, we will be here in reality - Just FYI
and millions of lines of code. To run those millions and millions of lines
of code, it takes lots of horse power. Yes you can run with a 2 GHz Pentium
but it will be slow. You can run with 512MB of RAM, but it will be slow.
It isn't absolute crap. You are a MicroSquish Fanboy pure and simple.
That's your right. Keep your head in the sand.
For the rest of us, we will be here in reality - Just FYI
M
Mike
Peter said:
Yep. I installed it on a 1 Ghz P 3 with 512 megs RAM at work - because
that was all I had available for testing at the time. The
install/first boot took forever, but after that it settled down and ran
surprisingly well. Much better than I thought it would based on the
install speed. Not fast (at all), but acceptable for what I was using
it for, which was compatibility testing for our software.
Mike
M
Mike
Bill Yanaire said:
Another programming neophyte heard from.
I can write a 10 line program that takes 24 hours to complete. I can
write a 100,000 line program that finishes in minutes.
As in many other areas of life, it's not the size that matters, but what
you do with it!
Mike
P
Paul Smith
That's funny I run it on my 1.8Ghz Pentium M here.
--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/
*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
P
Paul Smith
Kulas said:
Windows Vista makes Windows XP look like the 6 year old OS it is.
--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/
*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
B
Bill Yanaire
Yes, Vista "runs fine" if you don't do anything with it. Try something that
taxes the processor a bit. I have a machine, 3 GHz 1 GB RAM and Vista is a
dog compared to XP on the same machine.
taxes the processor a bit. I have a machine, 3 GHz 1 GB RAM and Vista is a
dog compared to XP on the same machine.
R
Richard Rasker
Excuse me? Any other modern OS outperforms Vista in almost every single
respect, with just a quarter of hardware resources. I have Linux boxes
with 1GHz CPU and 256MB of RAM running a full-fledged KDE way snappier
and more stable than Vista on a 2.8GHz machine with 1GB of RAM.
And add another 256MB of RAM and a good graphics card, and Beryl on the
same Linux box leaves Vista's Aero looking very silly indeed.
Yeah, considerd by Microsoft, you and other Microsoft fanboys. The rest
of the IT world knows better: it's half-baked DRM-riddled beta bloatware,
shoved onto the market and down buyers' throats prematurely for the
single purpose of making money for Microsoft. It's almost as bad as
Windows Me. And just as with Windows Me, there appear to be lots of users
with little or no problems -- but there appear to be almost as many users
with serious problems. And that is unacceptable for a new product.
Computerdealers say that between 20 and 50% of new Vista users return
their machines with more or less serious problems within a few months at
most, and most of these people want XP installed instead -- but that
turns out to be impossible in a lot of cases.
Now would you consider a product with between 20 and 50% dissatisfied
users as a result of serious problems "state of the art"? Or would you
consider a product that is shunned by the vast majority of businesses
"state of the art"?
If I would dare delivering to my customers the product quality Microsoft
delivered with Vista, I'd be out of business within a month at most.
Those convicted criminals in Redmond only get away withit because they're
the bully on the block, telling the PC market what to offer and when.
Even if this were true, what has this to do with the bloat factor?
Richard Rasker
M
Mike
Bill Yanaire said:
Sounds like my desktop. 3 Ghz 2 GB RAM. Vista is faster than XP on
that machine.
Mike
J
Julian
Mike said:
Besides... PC users don't run the source code on their computers.