Vista advantages

[MarcusB]

I was testing Vista for one year and at the end I am going back to the XP.

I not interested in appearance. The system should work and I do not care
if it have transparent windows or not. It have to be fast and have all
function I had in former System (Windows XP in my case)

What am I lacking in Vista:

1.No search i context menu
2.No drag and drop to command prompt
3.No folder backup (ntbackup)
4 Eating more than 1GB ram
5 More clicking to get to the same properties



Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista? It is your last
chance to convinced me.


MarcusB

 

[Alias]

I was testing Vista for one year and at the end I am going back to the XP.

I not interested in appearance. The system should work and I do not care
if it have transparent windows or not. It have to be fast and have all
function I had in former System (Windows XP in my case)

What am I lacking in Vista:

1.No search i context menu
2.No drag and drop to command prompt
3.No folder backup (ntbackup)
4 Eating more than 1GB ram
5 More clicking to get to the same properties



Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista? It is your last
chance to convinced me.


MarcusB

You shouldn't. You should check out Ubuntu, a real operating system. You
can get it FREE at http://www.ubuntu.com/

Alias

 

[Richard Urban]

If you have an older computer, it sounds as if you do as you say you are
going back to XP, you are likely better off doing so on older hardware.

Sooner, or later, the hardware will fail and you are going to have to make a
choice - maybe 2 years down the road. Be prepared.

 

[+Bob+]

Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista? It is your last
chance to convinced me.

a. It's not anyone's job here to convince you of anything
b. Vista has no advantages over XP, and many bugs and feature
reductions. Just go install XP and be done with it.

 

[Gordon]

I was testing Vista for one year and at the end I am going back to the XP.

I not interested in appearance. The system should work and I do not care
if it have transparent windows or not. It have to be fast and have all
function I had in former System (Windows XP in my case)

What am I lacking in Vista:

1.No search i context menu

Why would you need that? There's a Search box at the top of the Windows
Explorer window...

2.No drag and drop to command prompt

Eh? The command prompt is a TEXT based function - how or why would you "drag
and drop" to a TEXT function?

3.No folder backup (ntbackup)

Start-All Programs-Maintenance-Backup and Restore Centre. (At least there is
here on Home Premium)

4 Eating more than 1GB ram

If your machine only has 1GB RAM then you shouldn't have either bought it
with Vista on, or installed it yourself.

5 More clicking to get to the same properties

What "more" clicking? Could you be a bit more VAGUE?

Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista? It is your last
chance to convinced me.

Well when you've addresses all your errors above, then maybe.

 

[Leroy]

Windows Vista vs. Windows XP: The duel
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/windowsvista/torres_duel.mspx

 

[Frank Holman]

Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista?

If you need others to hold your hand on such a decision, you need help
that you can't get here.

 

[Frank Holman]

Yeah its trueth,u will go again at vista when u gain ur new pc after
this taht u have atm..But even if u get new pc u will have problems to
find drivers of motherboard or other devices at windows xp..At least
this is one of the problems i have with my pc [b,c i cant find
solutions to vista error's-problems]

Another moron who can't type full words or sentences.

 

[pupick]

There is no rational reason for anyone to ever use Vista 32 if they have a
satisfactory XP setup.
If Vista is preinstalled on a new computer and is compatible with your
existing software and peripherals there is no great advantage to going back
to XP, although XP will be slightly faster overall, something not noticed
unless you dual boot, unless you have to in order to run specific programs.
Vista 64 on the right hardware, if you have compatible peripheral drivers
and use only compatible programs, is a semi-winner. You get access to an
additional gb of ram for all programs and Vista 64 seems to be less sluggish
than Vista 32. Alas Vista 64 shares all of the numbskull design decisions
built into Vista 32.
Win 7, at least judging by my experience with the public 64 beta, is Vista
with a different GUI. Microsoft promises better performance but driver
incompatibilities prevent many of us from checking out that claim.

 

[olfart]

Windows Vista vs. Windows XP: The duel
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/windowsvista/torres_duel.mspx

written 2 1/2 yeaqrs ago DUH

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

I was testing Vista for one year and at the end I am going back to the XP.

I not interested in appearance. The system should work and I do not care
if it have transparent windows or not. It have to be fast and have all
function I had in former System (Windows XP in my case)

What am I lacking in Vista:

1.No search i context menu
2.No drag and drop to command prompt
3.No folder backup (ntbackup)
4 Eating more than 1GB ram
5 More clicking to get to the same properties



Can any of you tell me why should I stay with Vista? It is your last
chance to convinced me.


MarcusB

Re point no. 4, that is what Win 98 users thought about XP.. the difference
was that doubling RAM back then could cost you as much as 'first and last'
on a rented apartment. Now you can do it for the price of a take out family
pizza + fries + pop..

 

[Mike Torello]

Re point no. 4, that is what Win 98 users thought about XP.. the difference
was that doubling RAM back then could cost you as much as 'first and last'
on a rented apartment. Now you can do it for the price of a take out family
pizza + fries + pop..

<chuckle>

Years ago, I bought my mom a 1Mb stick of RAM for her Packard Bell
486. It set me back $100.

 

[+Bob+]

Re point no. 4, that is what Win 98 users thought about XP.. the difference
was that doubling RAM back then could cost you as much as 'first and last'
on a rented apartment. Now you can do it for the price of a take out family
pizza + fries + pop..

Fact remains that Vista requires twice the CPU and memory to equal the
performance of XP - and even then the I/O to disk, network, or USB in
Vista still sucks.

 

[JerryF]

Yes the same can be said in moving from DOS 4.0 to Win
3.1

I say lets stay with DOS!

 

[Nil]

Eh? The command prompt is a TEXT based function - how or why would
you "drag and drop" to a TEXT function?

Because it's handy, and it works in XP.

Well when you've addresses all your errors above, then maybe.

Consider the same.

 

[Gordon]

Because it's handy, and it works in XP.

So just HOW do you "drag and drop" to a COMMAND LINE? Idiot.

 

[Richard Urban]

And Windows XP required more than 10 times the amount of RAM that windows 98
did.

SWEET SPOT: the point where adding more RAM offered no appreciable
performance increase

Windows 98 sweet spot was 32 meg

Windows XP sweet spot was 384 meg

Blows your dim argument right out of the water.

 

[Peter Foldes]

No not that at all. His spillchecker und grimmer chuker is wroken.

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

Yeah its trueth,u will go again at vista when u gain ur new pc after
this taht u have atm..But even if u get new pc u will have problems to
find drivers of motherboard or other devices at windows xp..At least
this is one of the problems i have with my pc [b,c i cant find
solutions to vista error's-problems]

Another moron who can't type full words or sentences.

 

[Charlie Tame]

Do we mean copy and paste here... I just did that with "drag and drop"
from your reply in a command window (And right here) and that for sure
works in XP Pro, I do not have a Vista machine handy here at work.

I also was able to drag a picture from the desktop and the command
window translated that to the path to the actual picture and return
opened it using the default program. Again I cannot try this on Vista.
So yes, it could be useful.

 

[Alias]

The only reason why Ubuntu would be considered worthless, is if it was
examined by a complete moron.

like you.

People don't know much about ubuntu, if they did they would start using
it...
Any person of 80 or higher IQ would realize this if the information was
presented to them in a correct way. They would just say, why have I been
using microshaft for so long
if I could get a fast, secure, and free OS?

The fact is that you know what ubuntu is (at least in a superficial stupid
way) yet you don't like it...

That makes you dumber than the dumbest dumbfuck that have ever been born.