Vista Appraisal

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Hughes
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob Hughes

Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob
 
That depends on the end users perspective
And eventually, assuming you wish to use a supported o/s, there will be no
win alternative
 
DL said:
That depends on the end users perspective
And eventually, assuming you wish to use a supported o/s, there will be no
win alternative
Click to expand...

"Eventually" is years off and by that time Windows 7 will be out.

Alias
 
Bob said:
Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob
Click to expand...

If XP does everything you need, there is no need to get Vista.

Alias
 
Bob Hughes said:
Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob
Click to expand...


More features = less boring
 
Bob Hughes said:
Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob
Click to expand...

You want me to keep my emotion out of my reply? You said KEEP EMOTIONS OUT
OF MY REPLY???? Why I oughta.....
 
Bob Hughes said:
Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob
Click to expand...

Though I am not a Vista fan it does have a few features that you may find
useful.

Here is one if you do publishing

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/default.mspx


Also, with each reboot, a restore point is created
so any files that have been deleted or changed can be restored by simply
right-clicking on the folder
they were in and opting to restore previous version.

Additionally Vista has built-in non-destructive repartitioning
and a memory check diagnostic.

Due to Vista using considerably more resources than XP...
none of the above reasons are sufficient for me to use it...
but Vista does have at least a few possibly useful features.

Additionally, Vista has added security as compared to previous versions of
Windows...
though of course, some people consider it extreme nagging <G>
 
philo said:
Though I am not a Vista fan it does have a few features that you may find
useful.

Here is one if you do publishing

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/default.mspx


Also, with each reboot, a restore point is created
so any files that have been deleted or changed can be restored by simply
right-clicking on the folder
they were in and opting to restore previous version.

Additionally Vista has built-in non-destructive repartitioning
and a memory check diagnostic.

Due to Vista using considerably more resources than XP...
none of the above reasons are sufficient for me to use it...
but Vista does have at least a few possibly useful features.

Additionally, Vista has added security as compared to previous versions of
Windows...
though of course, some people consider it extreme nagging <G>
Click to expand...


But that is why Vista uses more resources. It has the ability to recover in
a way that XP can't and never will be able to do. That is a good thing,
isn't it?

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
Mike said:
But that is why Vista uses more resources. It has the ability to recover
in a way that XP can't and never will be able to do. That is a good thing,
isn't it?
Click to expand...
What if Microsoft was capable of producing an operating system that didn't
require restore points? Are they so unsure about the stability of their OS
that they need to include this bloatware "feature"? Seems that everytime
there's a problem with an update or an app install, the "solution" is to
rollback to an earlier restore point and the need to keep such a load of
them. Why not just produce a STABLE operating system to start with with the
ability to easily fix the thing if something goes wrong? That's how it's
done in the Linux world.

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
 
Alias said:
If XP does everything you need, there is no need to get Vista.

Alias
Click to expand...

STFU you lying linux troll. You have no idea about Vista, the very best
OS available today, because you don't use Vista.
So stop your lying.
Frank
 
NoStop said:
Mike Hall - MVP wrote:



What if Microsoft was capable of producing an operating system that didn't
require restore points? Are they so unsure about the stability of their OS
that they need to include this bloatware "feature"? Seems that everytime
there's a problem with an update or an app install, the "solution" is to
rollback to an earlier restore point and the need to keep such a load of
them. Why not just produce a STABLE operating system to start with with the
ability to easily fix the thing if something goes wrong? That's how it's
done in the Linux world.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
STFU you lying linux troll. You don't have Vista, the very best OS
available today, and you don't use Vista. In fact you can't stand
anything from MS cause you're jealous of them and you're financially
broke and forced to use that POS toy os urbuttoo.
So get lost you cross-dressing RS/alias arse kissing POS loser.
Frank
 
Wank said:
STFU you lying linux troll. You have no idea about Vista, the very best
OS available today, because you don't use Vista.
So stop your lying.
Frank
Click to expand...

It woke up. It went to its computer and spewed the same garbage it
always does.

Alias
 
Frank said:
STFU you lying linux troll. You have no idea about Vista, the very best
OS available today, because you don't use Vista.
So stop your lying.
Frank
Click to expand...

You're starting to sound like CNN that tells viewers 10 times an
hour ... "the best political team on television". It's the old Nazi way of
propaganda. Say it often enough and dumwits will start believing you.
Computers however are "logic machines". No amount of mindless propaganda
like, "the very best OS available today" will change anyone's mind, since
the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Vista is a train wreck and
everyone but Francis and his butt-buddies knows this.

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
 
Alias said:
It woke up and it thinks I will pay attention and heed its stupid
demands. LOL!

Alias
Click to expand...

Only half of it woke up. The other half was left on the battlefield in the
great war it fought. Unfortunately, the part that "woke up" is so anal
retentive that it can only copy and paste its profanity and insanity.

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
 
NoStop said:
What if Microsoft was capable of producing an operating system that didn't
require restore points? Are they so unsure about the stability of their OS
that they need to include this bloatware "feature"? Seems that everytime
there's a problem with an update or an app install, the "solution" is to
rollback to an earlier restore point and the need to keep such a load of
them. Why not just produce a STABLE operating system to start with with the
ability to easily fix the thing if something goes wrong? That's how it's
done in the Linux world.

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
Click to expand...

It seems you are being disingenuous in regard to restore points. Mac calls
it "Time Machine" and *NIX calls it TAR/DUMP. It may come down to what each
person's definition of a restore point is and how it should be used, but the
concept is the same. Whether due to software or hardware, the OS can recover
and heal. If Windows didn't have this feature then the same people
complaining about Restore Points would complain that it didn't have Restore
Points. The mindless bashing is tedious after a while.
 
Mike Hall - MVP said:
But that is why Vista uses more resources. It has the ability to recover in
a way that XP can't and never will be able to do. That is a good thing,
isn't it?
Click to expand...


Yes...
and if one has some good H/W it would be fine.

I just happen to have old junk H/W...so I'm staying with Win2k, XP and
Linux.

I'm sure I'll be using Vista as soon as the quad-core cpu's with 4 gigs of
RAM
start ending up in the junk!
 
PNutts said:
It seems you are being disingenuous in regard to restore points. Mac calls
it "Time Machine" and *NIX calls it TAR/DUMP. It may come down to what each
person's definition of a restore point is and how it should be used, but the
concept is the same. Whether due to software or hardware, the OS can recover
and heal. If Windows didn't have this feature then the same people
complaining about Restore Points would complain that it didn't have Restore
Points. The mindless bashing is tedious after a while.
Click to expand...

In all fairness to XP and Vista...though system restore is enabled by
default...
it can simply be turned off.
Though my XP installation has been extremely reliable for years...
there was one time I did use system restore.
Whatever problem I had...I'm sure I could have fixed without it...
but it was nice having that option.

As to Linux...the approach there is certainly a good one...though different
of course.
As long as you have all your settings and data in the /home partition
you could go as far as completely detroying you OS
and simply doing a reinstall and getting right back where you left off.
 
Back
Top