January 1st Code Project Poll
-
John Cardinal wrote:
The complaining always seems to come from people how have "tried it but didn't like it".
Well of course... you think if they tried it and liked it they would complain??
I wasn't clear, I meant people who try it casually for a short time, fail to learn how to use it expecting I guess that it will be the same as XP, get pissed off largely due to their lack of knowledge and spout off here about how much Vista sucks and revert back to XP. There is a learning curve and now that I'm over it I'm quite happy with it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
So your original gripe should have been stated: "...AFAIK most people here who HAVE FAST COMPUTERS AND are actually using it every day for any length of time are quite happy with it." :| That's really inclusive.
I thought it was a given that most developers that are attempting to use Vista would at the very least read *something* about how it works and what is different and what it's requirements are, install it on a modern computer or failing that be smart enough to understand that if they are not installing it on a modern computer it's not likely to be very fast since many of it's features were designed for modern hardware and not blame the operating system for sucking when it fact it's just state of the art.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
I thought it was a given that most developers that are attempting to use Vista would at the very least read *something* about how it works and what is different and what it's requirements are, install it on a modern computer or failing that be smart enough to understand that if they are not installing it on a modern computer it's not likely to be very fast since many of it's features were designed for modern hardware and not blame the operating system for sucking when it fact it's just state of the art.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
So the only ones that are allowed to gripe about it are those who have state-of-the-art computers with all the latest do-dads? I'm sorry, but that's not how the world works.
-
Hmm..I thought it was just a given that you would use it with newer faster hardware. Hardly Vista's fault really. Should microsoft be writing new OS's for ancient hardware? Blame your hardware sure but don't blame Vista for doing what it was designed to do. I find it blazingly fast on my system but I got a new system at the same time because from what I read before it was even released it appeared that new hardware was a necessary prerequisite.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
but don't blame Vista for doing what it was designed to do
Hmm...it was designed to take up 3GB and ship on a DVD...and it does:doh:. You are right, it's doing what it's designed to do. Mission accomplished.:rolleyes:
John Cardinal wrote:
Should microsoft be writing new OS's for ancient hardware?
No. But the thing is, the purpose of an o/s isn't to occupy and cripple the hardware without regard to how powerful it is, that's what spyware and viruses are for;P. It's there to bridge the gap between the hardware and the user, and be a platform on which the other software runs (including the afforementioned malware). If i wanted any extra crap i would buy it separately and load the crap modules afterwards. But no, the o/s should not be so dependant of hardware, unless you are talking processor architecture. In that case loading a different driver does not solve the problem of course. You know, my friend, i don't know how well i can explain this to you, but it's actually quite rude of them to include all the crap just because they can:sigh:. I'm buying new hardware not for them, but for myself;). And what good does it do me to kill my productivity with the just-because-they-can crap. So you can't persuade me to upgrade. Vista is not on my budget nor on my agenda. If IE 8 came out only supporting Vista, chances are i'll have a bootleg copy running in a virtual machine for the browser testing. But it's not for me. In fact, I keep a 500Mhz, 128MB, Win98 machine around to test my code on to make sure it's as efficient as i can possibly make it. I stopped upgrading Photoshop at version 7, because i tried the next version and it was too bloated. Illustrator at version 10.3, same reason. Flash at verson 7 was well, because 5 was old, 6 was buggy, and as 8 came out, i decided it was a bit bloated as well. I have XP Pro running here on a 3.0 Ghz machine with 1.0GB of RAM, and i still hate XP as much as when it first came out. I'll be adding another stick of RAM after i find the time to run memtest on each, and i will have 2GB and i'll still hate it. I wish i could go back to Win2K but i don't have a license and there's no sense in that since they'll be dropping support for it soon if they haven't already. And i'll say this again....when i update my hardware, i expect to enjoy the difference in speed and productivity, rather than to play catch up with a bit of software that
-
Hmm..I thought it was just a given that you would use it with newer faster hardware. Hardly Vista's fault really. Should microsoft be writing new OS's for ancient hardware? Blame your hardware sure but don't blame Vista for doing what it was designed to do. I find it blazingly fast on my system but I got a new system at the same time because from what I read before it was even released it appeared that new hardware was a necessary prerequisite.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
Edina is right in that Vista needs new hardware but vendor as selling substandard hardware with Vista on it. This means that end users think that VIsta is slow, badly designed and worse than XP. I have a neighbor who sold Vista on a Intel Celeron Laptop with 512mb of memory, unsurprisingly the laptop started up and then decided that life was not worth living and took the next 30 minutes to get onto the desktop. On the flip side Vista has it's own fair share of faults, mainly not being compatible with older software, even Microsoft's own software. I am a .NET programmer and was very surprised to find that I could not use parts of Visual Studio without running it in administrator mode. I then found that some other programs could not perform the tasks they needed without going into Administrator mode. This seems odd to me because it creates a loop hole in the security setup. It would not take mush for a hacker to design something that runs in VS knowing that it will probably be run in Administrator mode on a Vista machine and then take over the machine. I am sure there other apps in a similar situation. Overall vista has done nothing new, was not as great an improvement as XP was over previous versions.
-
I wasn't clear, I meant people who try it casually for a short time, fail to learn how to use it expecting I guess that it will be the same as XP, get pissed off largely due to their lack of knowledge and spout off here about how much Vista sucks and revert back to XP. There is a learning curve and now that I'm over it I'm quite happy with it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
I tried it from the initial beta through to the full release... I DO have a powerfull computer! I DO use it for both work and games! and I DO HATE VISTA!! Fair enough that a lot of people didnt give it a chance, but as a beta tester i saw it come out with alot of bugs, and then the release come out, again with a lot of bugs. I saw all the hardware/software conflicts. Same that you would expect from any new program, but on a much larger scale. And yes, I reverted back to XP. And none of this was due to my "lack of knowledge"! Everybody is different, and everybody has an oppinion, and my guess is that much of the world shares my oppinion... espesially china http://megagames.com/news/html/software/244copiesofvistasoldinchina.shtml^]
-
eggie5 wrote:
What are the most likely predictions of 2007?
...2008?
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
No, this was an end-of-2006 poll, rating various predictions for 2007
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
:zzz: This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired. AFAIK most people here who are actually using it every day for any length of time are quite happy with it. The complaining always seems to come from people how have "tried it but didn't like it". I'm much happier with Vista than I was with XP. Admittedly I do use my computer to make money and rarely play games on it. I'd buy a new game console if I cared enough about games.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
More Vista Bashing? Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank. Seriously I have been using Vista for 6 months and while it does have its problems and I don't see that there is any compelling reason to switch from XP now, Vista is better than xp was in its first year and it is xp's successor if you insist on running windows. I say do what I do and make you system dual boot with Ubuntu.
When prediction serves as polemic, it nearly always fails. Our prefrontal lobes can probe the future only when they aren’t leashed by dogma. The worst enemy of agile anticipation is our human propensity for comfy self-delusion. David Brin Buddha Dave
-
More Vista Bashing? Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank. Seriously I have been using Vista for 6 months and while it does have its problems and I don't see that there is any compelling reason to switch from XP now, Vista is better than xp was in its first year and it is xp's successor if you insist on running windows. I say do what I do and make you system dual boot with Ubuntu.
When prediction serves as polemic, it nearly always fails. Our prefrontal lobes can probe the future only when they aren’t leashed by dogma. The worst enemy of agile anticipation is our human propensity for comfy self-delusion. David Brin Buddha Dave
Well, I use Vista on my laptop, at the moment. Quite frankly, I find it to be incredibly faster than XP. And the huge amount of device drivers that come packaged with it are a plus. However, I'm not saying it is without flaws. One of the biggest problems I have with Vista is the lack of DOS programs fullscreen. While there are ways to work around it (DOSBox, for instance) it is still a pain. DirectX programming seems to be giving me a bit of a hard time too, but whatever. I, unlike many other people, am not having any problems with Vista not supporting any software. I'm having difficulty in that my software doesn't support Vista, not the other way around. And.... I tried the Linux route.... it would have been fine (I had a Linux class in college, so I'm pretty familiar) but I couldn't get my wireless card in my laptop to work, so it was kinda pointless. But overall, Vista's problems are more like inconveniences than problems. If you'll excuse me then, I'm going to do what I can to stay on top of technology... Or at least try to keep up.
-
:zzz: This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired. AFAIK most people here who are actually using it every day for any length of time are quite happy with it. The complaining always seems to come from people how have "tried it but didn't like it". I'm much happier with Vista than I was with XP. Admittedly I do use my computer to make money and rarely play games on it. I'd buy a new game console if I cared enough about games.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired.
What I find most ironic is that most of the same complaints were the complaints about XP. There were threads informing people how to turn off the "unnecessarily flash XP CPU expensive paint-job" and talking about the hardware problems, complaining that this manufacturer didn't supply Windows 98 drivers and only XP and demandng that the vendor should support 98 because it was a better OS and no one was ever going to go to XP. There were threads talking about the problems, the crashes, and everyone rallied together and hurrah'd 98, and compared XP to ME on steroids, (and probably horse-steroids at that). Now I smile and roll my eyes, because most of it is all the same complaints. Vista is too flashy, XP was too flashy, Vista doesn't support my hardware, XP doesn't support my hardware, Vista is taking too much CPU/GPU, XP is taking too much CPU/GPU, Vista is the new ME, XP is the new ME, They can pry my XP disks from my cold dead fingers I am never going to Vista, they can pry my 98 disks from my cold dead fingers I am never gong to XP, I'll wait for Vista service pack 1, I'll wait for XP service pack 1, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had Vista drivers I took the printer back and complained, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had XP drivers I took the printer back and complained. What is old is new again, what they hated, they loved, what they said they would never use, they are using. The answer is simple. As I said then, and will again when they are complaining about Vista 2010: use what you want, but what use is complaining? You can use the new stuff, and get used to it, help get it debugged, or you can wait and use something else. If you wait, don't complain when MS stops support for the old stuff, they are a business, they are in this to make profit (don't fool yourself, even google is), a non-saleable and only supportable OS has no profit. And there is still Linux. You can switch your bugs for different bugs and parade your decision is better and not just "different". Or you can grumble and growl and scream and yell and act like a 6 year old being taken to the doctor to get a shot, dragging your feet and screaming for help to stop the process.... But Vista is here. Love it or leave it, it is here. As developers, we forget that we sometimes have to support customer preferences rather than just our own. I don't forget because I can't. I have to support XP, Li
-
John Cardinal wrote:
This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired.
What I find most ironic is that most of the same complaints were the complaints about XP. There were threads informing people how to turn off the "unnecessarily flash XP CPU expensive paint-job" and talking about the hardware problems, complaining that this manufacturer didn't supply Windows 98 drivers and only XP and demandng that the vendor should support 98 because it was a better OS and no one was ever going to go to XP. There were threads talking about the problems, the crashes, and everyone rallied together and hurrah'd 98, and compared XP to ME on steroids, (and probably horse-steroids at that). Now I smile and roll my eyes, because most of it is all the same complaints. Vista is too flashy, XP was too flashy, Vista doesn't support my hardware, XP doesn't support my hardware, Vista is taking too much CPU/GPU, XP is taking too much CPU/GPU, Vista is the new ME, XP is the new ME, They can pry my XP disks from my cold dead fingers I am never going to Vista, they can pry my 98 disks from my cold dead fingers I am never gong to XP, I'll wait for Vista service pack 1, I'll wait for XP service pack 1, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had Vista drivers I took the printer back and complained, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had XP drivers I took the printer back and complained. What is old is new again, what they hated, they loved, what they said they would never use, they are using. The answer is simple. As I said then, and will again when they are complaining about Vista 2010: use what you want, but what use is complaining? You can use the new stuff, and get used to it, help get it debugged, or you can wait and use something else. If you wait, don't complain when MS stops support for the old stuff, they are a business, they are in this to make profit (don't fool yourself, even google is), a non-saleable and only supportable OS has no profit. And there is still Linux. You can switch your bugs for different bugs and parade your decision is better and not just "different". Or you can grumble and growl and scream and yell and act like a 6 year old being taken to the doctor to get a shot, dragging your feet and screaming for help to stop the process.... But Vista is here. Love it or leave it, it is here. As developers, we forget that we sometimes have to support customer preferences rather than just our own. I don't forget because I can't. I have to support XP, Li
I agree totally. I use Vista because as a developer I need to keep up with the latest and greatest. I like it very much despite some issues.
When prediction serves as polemic, it nearly always fails. Our prefrontal lobes can probe the future only when they aren’t leashed by dogma. The worst enemy of agile anticipation is our human propensity for comfy self-delusion. David Brin Buddha Dave
-
John Cardinal wrote:
This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired.
What I find most ironic is that most of the same complaints were the complaints about XP. There were threads informing people how to turn off the "unnecessarily flash XP CPU expensive paint-job" and talking about the hardware problems, complaining that this manufacturer didn't supply Windows 98 drivers and only XP and demandng that the vendor should support 98 because it was a better OS and no one was ever going to go to XP. There were threads talking about the problems, the crashes, and everyone rallied together and hurrah'd 98, and compared XP to ME on steroids, (and probably horse-steroids at that). Now I smile and roll my eyes, because most of it is all the same complaints. Vista is too flashy, XP was too flashy, Vista doesn't support my hardware, XP doesn't support my hardware, Vista is taking too much CPU/GPU, XP is taking too much CPU/GPU, Vista is the new ME, XP is the new ME, They can pry my XP disks from my cold dead fingers I am never going to Vista, they can pry my 98 disks from my cold dead fingers I am never gong to XP, I'll wait for Vista service pack 1, I'll wait for XP service pack 1, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had Vista drivers I took the printer back and complained, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had XP drivers I took the printer back and complained. What is old is new again, what they hated, they loved, what they said they would never use, they are using. The answer is simple. As I said then, and will again when they are complaining about Vista 2010: use what you want, but what use is complaining? You can use the new stuff, and get used to it, help get it debugged, or you can wait and use something else. If you wait, don't complain when MS stops support for the old stuff, they are a business, they are in this to make profit (don't fool yourself, even google is), a non-saleable and only supportable OS has no profit. And there is still Linux. You can switch your bugs for different bugs and parade your decision is better and not just "different". Or you can grumble and growl and scream and yell and act like a 6 year old being taken to the doctor to get a shot, dragging your feet and screaming for help to stop the process.... But Vista is here. Love it or leave it, it is here. As developers, we forget that we sometimes have to support customer preferences rather than just our own. I don't forget because I can't. I have to support XP, Li
Thou art expostulating religious doctrine to the temple criers.
-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
Thou art expostulating religious doctrine to the temple criers.
-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
dan neely wrote:
Thou art expostulating religious doctrine to the temple criers.
of course, everyone else is at the bar drinking until they see clearly what they are going to do.... "Sssseeee, I got the ansssswer rrrright hhherre! Welll all orrrder anotherrr rrround and thennnn go downnn as a grrrroup to Micrrrrossssffft headquaterssss and demand, that'ssss right, DEMAND they keep ourrrr XP arrround!" *thud*
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
More Vista Bashing? Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank. Seriously I have been using Vista for 6 months and while it does have its problems and I don't see that there is any compelling reason to switch from XP now, Vista is better than xp was in its first year and it is xp's successor if you insist on running windows. I say do what I do and make you system dual boot with Ubuntu.
When prediction serves as polemic, it nearly always fails. Our prefrontal lobes can probe the future only when they aren’t leashed by dogma. The worst enemy of agile anticipation is our human propensity for comfy self-delusion. David Brin Buddha Dave
I've recently installed both Kubuntu(Feisty Fawn) and Vista on machines and I can safely say that I have found the Kubuntu experience far more enjoyable. Vista seems to be missing all the new features that I would expect of an OS that should be 5 years more advanced than XP. XP was a step-change from Win2K and worked well for me from RC onwards. Vista just doesn't seem to give me the benefits that I should expect from an OS that takes considerably more resources and requires a whole new PC to get up and running. I don't think that Vista is particularly bad but I do think that it has left a lot of people highly disappointed. I can't think of a single killer feature that is present in Vista that i would pay money to have on my machine. After a 5 year wait and lots of talk about some truly great features, WinFS for example, MS have left alot of people disappointed. If I had spent my own money on Vista rather than having it provided for me at work I would be very upset indeed. Russell
-
John Cardinal wrote:
but don't blame Vista for doing what it was designed to do
Hmm...it was designed to take up 3GB and ship on a DVD...and it does:doh:. You are right, it's doing what it's designed to do. Mission accomplished.:rolleyes:
John Cardinal wrote:
Should microsoft be writing new OS's for ancient hardware?
No. But the thing is, the purpose of an o/s isn't to occupy and cripple the hardware without regard to how powerful it is, that's what spyware and viruses are for;P. It's there to bridge the gap between the hardware and the user, and be a platform on which the other software runs (including the afforementioned malware). If i wanted any extra crap i would buy it separately and load the crap modules afterwards. But no, the o/s should not be so dependant of hardware, unless you are talking processor architecture. In that case loading a different driver does not solve the problem of course. You know, my friend, i don't know how well i can explain this to you, but it's actually quite rude of them to include all the crap just because they can:sigh:. I'm buying new hardware not for them, but for myself;). And what good does it do me to kill my productivity with the just-because-they-can crap. So you can't persuade me to upgrade. Vista is not on my budget nor on my agenda. If IE 8 came out only supporting Vista, chances are i'll have a bootleg copy running in a virtual machine for the browser testing. But it's not for me. In fact, I keep a 500Mhz, 128MB, Win98 machine around to test my code on to make sure it's as efficient as i can possibly make it. I stopped upgrading Photoshop at version 7, because i tried the next version and it was too bloated. Illustrator at version 10.3, same reason. Flash at verson 7 was well, because 5 was old, 6 was buggy, and as 8 came out, i decided it was a bit bloated as well. I have XP Pro running here on a 3.0 Ghz machine with 1.0GB of RAM, and i still hate XP as much as when it first came out. I'll be adding another stick of RAM after i find the time to run memtest on each, and i will have 2GB and i'll still hate it. I wish i could go back to Win2K but i don't have a license and there's no sense in that since they'll be dropping support for it soon if they haven't already. And i'll say this again....when i update my hardware, i expect to enjoy the difference in speed and productivity, rather than to play catch up with a bit of software that
Well, I do understand where you're coming from, I guess the problem is that your opinion is at odds with what the majority would expect which is newer and ever cooler and better things in the realm of computers. You are looking at the operating system from a technical efficiency perspective, something which the great majority of computer buyers simply don't care about. The fact is that when I had a slower computer and ran xp on it, it was fast enough for what I do with no noticeable lag. Now I have a newer computer with Vista and it's fast enough for what I do with no noticeable lag and on top of that it's fresh looking, has lot's of cool new features and as a developer I have to be on top of it since the great majority of my customers are going to be using it down the road. Sure I bet DOS or CPM would absolutely ROCK on my quad system, that's kind of the argument you're making.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
Edina is right in that Vista needs new hardware but vendor as selling substandard hardware with Vista on it. This means that end users think that VIsta is slow, badly designed and worse than XP. I have a neighbor who sold Vista on a Intel Celeron Laptop with 512mb of memory, unsurprisingly the laptop started up and then decided that life was not worth living and took the next 30 minutes to get onto the desktop. On the flip side Vista has it's own fair share of faults, mainly not being compatible with older software, even Microsoft's own software. I am a .NET programmer and was very surprised to find that I could not use parts of Visual Studio without running it in administrator mode. I then found that some other programs could not perform the tasks they needed without going into Administrator mode. This seems odd to me because it creates a loop hole in the security setup. It would not take mush for a hacker to design something that runs in VS knowing that it will probably be run in Administrator mode on a Vista machine and then take over the machine. I am sure there other apps in a similar situation. Overall vista has done nothing new, was not as great an improvement as XP was over previous versions.
MCEdwards wrote:
but vendor as selling substandard hardware with Vista on it.
That's a bad thing, no doubt, but again, it's hardly Vista or Microsoft's fault if it runs slow and it does not mean that vista "sucks".
MCEdwards wrote:
was not as great an improvement as XP was over previous versions
I agree with that, but there was a lot of room for improvement in those days.
MCEdwards wrote:
Vista has it's own fair share of faults, mainly not being compatible with older software, even Microsoft's own software
You are confusing cause and effect here if you are laying blame on Vista for that. Vista finally enforced all the security that was always there (for the most part) in the file system etc. Lot's of older apps never took proper precautions to run with the required permissions only and wrote all over the file system willy nilly. The visual studio people are just as much to blame and anyone else but to be fair they had a much larger chunk of code that needed to be updated to conform and in areas they didn't conform they often had good reason to. We ran into that when we did early testing with Vista and rectified it before Vista was even released. Others could have done that (if their company still existed). What you describe is an indictment against all those older software companies not the Vista people. There was literally years of lead up time to get their software patched and updated.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
I tried it from the initial beta through to the full release... I DO have a powerfull computer! I DO use it for both work and games! and I DO HATE VISTA!! Fair enough that a lot of people didnt give it a chance, but as a beta tester i saw it come out with alot of bugs, and then the release come out, again with a lot of bugs. I saw all the hardware/software conflicts. Same that you would expect from any new program, but on a much larger scale. And yes, I reverted back to XP. And none of this was due to my "lack of knowledge"! Everybody is different, and everybody has an oppinion, and my guess is that much of the world shares my oppinion... espesially china http://megagames.com/news/html/software/244copiesofvistasoldinchina.shtml^]
ender1988 wrote:
I DO have a powerfull computer!
So did I when Vista was in Beta, it was very powerful but it was old, the hardware was old and I didn't expect it to run Vista and didn't even try. I think it's safe to say that if you bought a new computer in 2007 that was designed to use with Vista and you bought new versions of the latest software you would not see any issues. We're talking about a difference of time frame here, Microsoft releases Vista for the new market, in a couple of years it will be a moot point. Don't think that this whole issue and discussion didn't go on when XP first came out from Windows 95 users because it did. Vista doesn't "suck" inherently. It does have a few bugs, nothing earth shaking that I've seen and I'm sure most will be rectified before the year is out. I just get tired of otherwise logical people going all "slashdot" all over Microsoft unreasonably.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
ender1988 wrote:
I DO have a powerfull computer!
So did I when Vista was in Beta, it was very powerful but it was old, the hardware was old and I didn't expect it to run Vista and didn't even try. I think it's safe to say that if you bought a new computer in 2007 that was designed to use with Vista and you bought new versions of the latest software you would not see any issues. We're talking about a difference of time frame here, Microsoft releases Vista for the new market, in a couple of years it will be a moot point. Don't think that this whole issue and discussion didn't go on when XP first came out from Windows 95 users because it did. Vista doesn't "suck" inherently. It does have a few bugs, nothing earth shaking that I've seen and I'm sure most will be rectified before the year is out. I just get tired of otherwise logical people going all "slashdot" all over Microsoft unreasonably.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
I think it's safe to say that if you bought a new computer in 2007 that was designed to use with Vista and you bought new versions of the latest software you would not see any issues.
I dont think it is safe to say anything like that. If it is so good, how come they are rushing Vista SP1 through so fast? because they have urgent fixes Why is it so big? Because they have a LOT of things they need to fix ps, my compupter was purchased about 2 weeks after the beta was released so it was up to standards and had more then enough grunt to run it (oh and it even had the little sticker saying it was designed for windows vista) Can you sentence a homeless man to house arrest?
-
John Cardinal wrote:
This Vista hate fest is starting to get tired.
What I find most ironic is that most of the same complaints were the complaints about XP. There were threads informing people how to turn off the "unnecessarily flash XP CPU expensive paint-job" and talking about the hardware problems, complaining that this manufacturer didn't supply Windows 98 drivers and only XP and demandng that the vendor should support 98 because it was a better OS and no one was ever going to go to XP. There were threads talking about the problems, the crashes, and everyone rallied together and hurrah'd 98, and compared XP to ME on steroids, (and probably horse-steroids at that). Now I smile and roll my eyes, because most of it is all the same complaints. Vista is too flashy, XP was too flashy, Vista doesn't support my hardware, XP doesn't support my hardware, Vista is taking too much CPU/GPU, XP is taking too much CPU/GPU, Vista is the new ME, XP is the new ME, They can pry my XP disks from my cold dead fingers I am never going to Vista, they can pry my 98 disks from my cold dead fingers I am never gong to XP, I'll wait for Vista service pack 1, I'll wait for XP service pack 1, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had Vista drivers I took the printer back and complained, I bought a new printer and the vendor only had XP drivers I took the printer back and complained. What is old is new again, what they hated, they loved, what they said they would never use, they are using. The answer is simple. As I said then, and will again when they are complaining about Vista 2010: use what you want, but what use is complaining? You can use the new stuff, and get used to it, help get it debugged, or you can wait and use something else. If you wait, don't complain when MS stops support for the old stuff, they are a business, they are in this to make profit (don't fool yourself, even google is), a non-saleable and only supportable OS has no profit. And there is still Linux. You can switch your bugs for different bugs and parade your decision is better and not just "different". Or you can grumble and growl and scream and yell and act like a 6 year old being taken to the doctor to get a shot, dragging your feet and screaming for help to stop the process.... But Vista is here. Love it or leave it, it is here. As developers, we forget that we sometimes have to support customer preferences rather than just our own. I don't forget because I can't. I have to support XP, Li
El Corazon wrote:
we can eat our spinach and learn to enjoy it
Is it that: a) We have learnt to enjoy it? b) they have flavoured it (fixed all the bugs, etc) enough that we can swallow it now? c) they have shoved it that far down our throats that we no longer taste it?
El Corazon wrote:
Just don't ask me to try the liver.
Did you try the liver? no? here try some liver ;P
-
John Cardinal wrote:
I think it's safe to say that if you bought a new computer in 2007 that was designed to use with Vista and you bought new versions of the latest software you would not see any issues.
I dont think it is safe to say anything like that. If it is so good, how come they are rushing Vista SP1 through so fast? because they have urgent fixes Why is it so big? Because they have a LOT of things they need to fix ps, my compupter was purchased about 2 weeks after the beta was released so it was up to standards and had more then enough grunt to run it (oh and it even had the little sticker saying it was designed for windows vista) Can you sentence a homeless man to house arrest?
ender1988 wrote:
how come they are rushing Vista SP1 through so fast?