MICHAEL said:
* Lang Murphy:
"Vista works as fast on most tasks here than XP, and is some cases faster."
Lang,
Your statement above really says it all, and is my biggest complaint
about Vista. After more than 5 years, a supposed $6 billion spent, and
more powerful computers- we get an OS that performs "as fast on most
tasks than XP" and in "some cases faster". So, Vista's performance is
mostly about equal to that of XP, except there are times when it's not,
and then there are a few times when Vista might be faster. That basically
sums it all up.
-Michael
Well, take a collection of files (something like MP3) and try drag and
drop copying them to another folder or network location, My experience
is this will take maybe an hour and when you go back to look it's quit
on some file or other, so you either have to manually check what's been
copied and sort it out yourself or else remove the offending file and do
the whole thing again.
This is true of XP and Vista in any combination.
Do the same between any two versions of Linux (Have tried quite a few)
and guess what, it all gets copied and takes < half the time, across a
network or not. I've done it enough times now that there does seem to be
a clear pattern, it's not just a few "Bad files".
So, given that an OS does not know what it's copying so there's no
reason for it not to like the tunes or whatever, one has to question why
the MS systems fall on their ass and Linux apparently does not.
Considering that moving data is a fundamental requirement for any OS
this seems odd.
Vista drag and drop sure "Looks" prettier, but come on, looks are not
everything.
IMHO the cosmetic changes in Vista simply work to give the impression
that it is not "Same old same old" when in fact if one looks a bit
deeper it really is, and many of the bits that do appear to have at
least been re-written appear to have problems.
I had never bothered to look elsewhere for either email, newsgroups or
an OS but when circumstances make one look and one finds better
alternatives for so many functions guess what...
The biggest danger to MS that I see on the horizon is that while Linux
is a collection of different bits from different groups many
distributions are getting to "Feel" a lot more integrated while the
"Windows" product like is going the other way.
I don't think this is Microsoft's fault, I think the original PC
architecture has influenced it and the desire to provide backward
"Compatibility" has influenced it but it's not something MS can simply
ignore.
Add to this the risk which is now apparent that due to some fault or
other MS can potentially shut down half the country at a stroke and the
advertised or implied ability for your PC to be a centerpiece for
entertainment etc being compromised by such as DRM there are some very
logical reasons for not wanting all your eggs in one basket.
