Windows 7
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
I suspect it may be BitDefender AV but naturally Vista gets the blame.
Can't say since I didn't install any games.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
Hated Office 2007, went back to 2003 version.
I use Office 2003 at work which makes it more difficult to do some things in SharePoint, but since I get paid to write custom software I can't complain. What didn't you like about Office 2007?
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopesOne look at the UI, tried to find help, uninstalled it. Went back to my old, comfortable 2003 where I know what button to push to acheive the minimum requirements for my needs.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
No I have SQL 2008 developer version with VS 2008 on Home Premium. I have terrible trouble installing SQL 2008 on my old machine because of the service pack on the dotnet runtime 3.5. No matter what I did I could not convince SQL it was installed. I ended up with no SQL, and could not uninstall VS. I figured if I was going to trash and reinstall I may as well do it on a new machine. Installed SQL & VS before anything else and they work well. I have never worked with SQL Express but it sounds like a permissioning issue if you can get a SQL connection
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Yeah, I think it is a permissioning error too. My Sys Admin brother in law has spent three days trying to figure it out. (With no luck yet) The odd thing is that I have a similar set up on another laptop where I can connect to exactly one database and not any new ones which I create as admin etc... I give up. I think I will install the Standard edition of SQL 2008 i have on the Windows Server 2008 box and use remote connections - if they will work...happy weekend...
I don't speak Idiot - please talk slowly and clearly
-
Ed.Poore wrote:
provided your hardware has the necessary drivers
Brand spankin new HP desktop, I'd be astonished if there was not driver support for anything in a new HP box. Thanks for the info...
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
HP desktop
Oooh, HP. (Sorry I never bother with pre-made computers). I tend to find them bad deals when I consider I've got so many hard-drives lying around that can be used, monitors etc. I prefer to have complete control over what I get, usually with pre-built ones it's a compromise between one thing and another, or bloody expensive compared to building it. You might be lucky, you might be not. It may be worth trying to install as many manufacturers drivers as possible since they tend to be better suited I find.
-
There is nothing wrong with Vista, really. Personally, I think its a huge improvement over XP in all areas...visuals, performance, stability, security, usability, etc. The real problem with Vista wasn't really Vista itself, but rather marketing. Microsoft failed dismally when it came to marketing Vista properly, as a worthwhile upgrade and as a true improvement. All the naysayers and Apple had a field day with the 'gap' left by the mediocre vista marketing story. The other problem was that hardware vendors and many software vendors were not ready with Vista-capable drivers and software when the OS was released, leading to a good 6 months of problems and issues with missing or faulty drivers and incompatible software for people. Not really Micosofts fault, they had been offering Vista to developers for a couple of years before it launched...vendors just dropped the ball for some reason. Windows 7 is Microsofts chance to really spice things up and distance themselves from the marketing fiasco of Vista, and sell people on an improved UI and better usability. Underneath it all, its still really just Vista...but visually and usably its definitely something new, fresh, and enjoyable...at least in my opinion. ;)
-
Tomz_KV wrote:
I had very unpleasant experience with Vista
Can you explain?? I've worked with Vista on three computers (my desktop, my previous lap which originally came with XP, and my current laptop) for the last two years or so, and I have had no problems at all.
Luis Alonso Ramos Intelectix Chihuahua, Mexico My Blog!
There are several behaviors that frustrated me. 1. more frequent occurance of blue screen of death. I know that some says this is caused by drivers but not by operating system. I say they are the same. If one buys a new TV but no suitable plug in the world can be used to connect to power, that TV is not ready to be marketed. 2. Many programs used on XP can't be installed anymore, for example, Visual Studio 6. 3. Windows search 4 from auto update damaged index search. My outlook could not search anymore. Microsft support spent sevral weeks to fix it. The support was nice. But the problem should not occurred in the first place. These are just a few. Thanks,
TOMZ_KV
-
There are several behaviors that frustrated me. 1. more frequent occurance of blue screen of death. I know that some says this is caused by drivers but not by operating system. I say they are the same. If one buys a new TV but no suitable plug in the world can be used to connect to power, that TV is not ready to be marketed. 2. Many programs used on XP can't be installed anymore, for example, Visual Studio 6. 3. Windows search 4 from auto update damaged index search. My outlook could not search anymore. Microsft support spent sevral weeks to fix it. The support was nice. But the problem should not occurred in the first place. These are just a few. Thanks,
TOMZ_KV
Tomz_KV wrote:
I know that some says this is caused by drivers but not by operating system. I say they are the same
Absolutely not. Microsoft wrote Windows, Third Parties wrote the drivers (typically, anyway). Now if you want to argue that an Operating System should never, ever allow a driver to cause a catastrophic failure then that's another discussion.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
HP desktop
Oooh, HP. (Sorry I never bother with pre-made computers). I tend to find them bad deals when I consider I've got so many hard-drives lying around that can be used, monitors etc. I prefer to have complete control over what I get, usually with pre-built ones it's a compromise between one thing and another, or bloody expensive compared to building it. You might be lucky, you might be not. It may be worth trying to install as many manufacturers drivers as possible since they tend to be better suited I find.
Having purchased my previous box from a white box supplier and stipulating I wanted a QUIET machine and getting something that sounded like a plane landing, I mean it was really loud and irritating I decided to go for a name brand, mainly b/c I had a Lenovo in the office that was quiet as a mouse. I dislike Dell so I was looking at either a Lenovo or an HP, HP had the best deal under 2k so I went for that. Happy as a pig in mud, the dammed thing cannot be heard unless I thrash the disc using SQL or something, bliss, I don't have the constant background buzz of the hard drive anymore. The HP does have a 7200 instead of a 10k drive which may have something to do with it :( Turned out the problem was BitDefender, I got rid of the POS, games now install properly and work, I have no irritating Critical Error messages anymore. I am using Avira freebie for the moment and will purchase the full version after a suitable test period.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Jon Rista wrote:
visually and usably its definitely something new, fresh, and enjoyable
And people will still winge because like Vista it'll change the way that they have to do things, and most people don't want to do that.
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
cannot install any games
Currently installed on my Vista Ultimate x64 machine:
- Crysis
- GTA IV
- C&C3
- Test Drive Unlimited
- Unreal Tournament 3
Also had installed:
- GTA 1
- GTA 2
- GTA 3
- GTA: Vice City
- GTA: San Andreas
- Tomb Raider Anniversary
- Tomb Raider Legend
- Bioshock
- Call of Duty 4
- Colin McRae Dirt
- Delta Force Black Hawk Down
- Stalker
So you can see a real selection of games, none of them have had any issues (well GTA IV could do with a bigger graphics card I think :rolleyes:). So I don't think Vista's to blame, specially since I'm running the 64-bit edition and only Crysis (as far as I know) takes full advantage of the 6GB of RAM on the system.
Hey, Ed. How does GTA IV run on your system? I have a Dell Inspiron E531 with 4 gb, Vista Ultimate x86, plenty of hard drive space and a 512 mb nVidia 8600 GTS. The game runs sluggish even at 1024x768. And that's keeping with the defaults for everything else. :( I meet or exceed the recommended specs for the game (other than processor speed, but I doubt there's enough difference between 2.3 and 2.4 ghz to make that much difference). I'm thinking of dual booting between XP and Vista (XP for games and Vista for development. But I'm wondering if I wouldn't have better luck running Vista x64 for everything? Unfortunately, I'm maxed out at 4 gb, and I don't want to buy a new computer for one game. *sigh* Flynn
-
Hey, Ed. How does GTA IV run on your system? I have a Dell Inspiron E531 with 4 gb, Vista Ultimate x86, plenty of hard drive space and a 512 mb nVidia 8600 GTS. The game runs sluggish even at 1024x768. And that's keeping with the defaults for everything else. :( I meet or exceed the recommended specs for the game (other than processor speed, but I doubt there's enough difference between 2.3 and 2.4 ghz to make that much difference). I'm thinking of dual booting between XP and Vista (XP for games and Vista for development. But I'm wondering if I wouldn't have better luck running Vista x64 for everything? Unfortunately, I'm maxed out at 4 gb, and I don't want to buy a new computer for one game. *sigh* Flynn
I've turned the resolution right down on mine at the moment so the game doesn't lag but my specs are much different (Vista x64 on AMD Athlon X2 3800+ (2.0GHz), 6GB RAM and 320MB nVidia 8800GTS). With regards to other stuff besides games I find Vista x64 perfect. Especially with the 6GB of RAM if I ever need XP for work I just fire up a VM and it runs (at least from a usability point of view) faster than a native XP. This is almost certainly due to the fact that I install no additional crap (firewalls antivirus etc) inside it. I think what mine needs is a faster processor and perhaps a larger graphics card. I've got a 9400GT 512MB sitting here for testing which I might be tempted to see if I can get running in SLI mode to boost the graphics capabilities...