[Gandalf] wrote:
but we shall see how good an actual operating system it will be...
Only if it actually ships.
Computer Science Canada Longhorn to be Named Windows Vista |
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Longhorn to be Named Windows Vista |
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/default.mspx Microsoft wrote: Beta 1, targeted at developers and IT professionals, will be available by August 3rd 2005.
Longhorn is now going to be officially called "Windows Vista" which in Spanish means "Views". This is the first time in quite a while that windows has not been named after a year or something like "ME" "XP" "SE". Personally, I think they could have chosen a better name, but we shall see how good an actual operating system it will be... |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Longhorn to be Named Windows Vista |
[Gandalf] wrote: but we shall see how good an actual operating system it will be...
Only if it actually ships. |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
"View" not "Views" 
"Vista" a'int plural.  |
|
| Author: | lyam_kaskade [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ick. I liked "Longhorn" better. This just opens them up to bad "hasta la Vista" jokes. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 6:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
"Vista" is the Latvian word for "chicken". |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtd wrote: "Vista" is the Latvian word for "chicken". Somehow that seems appropriate.  |
|
| Author: | Drakain Zeil [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That's okay, because they'll just put out Blackcomb the year after Vista hits stores. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Idk about you guys but i am not touching that OS with a 100 foot pole. I mean an OS that comes with the spy ware perisntaled sounds fun and all but i kind of like my privecey. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Drakain Zeil wrote: That's okay, because they'll just put out Blackcomb the year after Vista hits stores.
Sooooo.... sometime after the next ice age? |
|
| Author: | timmytheturtle [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hacker Dan wrote: Idk about you guys but i am not touching that OS with a 100 foot pole. I mean an OS that comes with the spy ware perisntaled sounds fun and all but i kind of like my privecey.
it also comes with PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) requiring you to have an "Approved" monitor or else you cannot premium video content until you get one. And there is more then PVP-OPM they have a whole collection of out output protection coming. I'm not going to use longhorn myself, i'll stick with XP or move towards linux (i'll still keep XP for gaming) |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
timmytheturtle wrote: I'm not going to use longhorn myself, i'll stick with XP or move towards linux (i'll still keep XP for gaming)
Get ready for games with content that requires the same setup, and thus won't work under anything other than "Vista", and then only with approved montors. |
|
| Author: | timmytheturtle [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtd wrote: timmytheturtle wrote: I'm not going to use longhorn myself, i'll stick with XP or move towards linux (i'll still keep XP for gaming)
Get ready for games with content that requires the same setup, and thus won't work under anything other than "Vista", and then only with approved montors. Never thought of that...then it looks like i won't be buying very many games (or any) in the future |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
timmytheturtle wrote: wtd wrote: timmytheturtle wrote: I'm not going to use longhorn myself, i'll stick with XP or move towards linux (i'll still keep XP for gaming)
Get ready for games with content that requires the same setup, and thus won't work under anything other than "Vista", and then only with approved montors. Never thought of that...then it looks like i won't be buying very many games (or any) in the future Rather i think this will lead to the devlopment of better windows emulators for linux. And we can all play our games on suped out verson of wine. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why is this going to drive investments in WINE? You'll still have to have the compliant monitor to play the new content. For the old content, the old version of Windows will still work just peachy. And anybody buying a new PC from an OEM will get a compliant monitor and the new OS, so they won't even know there's a problem. |
|
| Author: | Tony [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'll just get myself a new Intel based Mac with OSX 10.5 (when that comes out) and play my games on a sparkly new PlayStation 3. All of which are likely to come out near the release of Vista  |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dang, Windows sure is going for control, they want everything to be windows-only. Still, like everything else, there will probably be 'workarounds', if not then they will surely lose customers and linux will thrive. As for Windows XP, what stops them from releasing SP3 and patching it up to work like 'Vista'? PS3 sounds pretty promising, but I still like my PC games... |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't really see what the problem with requiring a certain monitor is. I mean, obviously they're not going to have this requirement immediately from a buisiness standpoint, and then eventually all of the monitors that ship will be of the approved kind. No problem at all. And I also don't really think that the copy protection claims are founded. Like it or not, you have no right to free games or software. If anything, these features will help Windows more than anything, since finally developers will have a solid platform for which to develop security wise. |
|
| Author: | Drakain Zeil [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The problem with monitors is that buying a new one because MS wants you to is pure crap. Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Blackcomb So what's the point? Why not just make ONE os that's better, and comes out a year later? Well, no you know what the $ in M$ is for. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtd wrote: Why is this going to drive investments in WINE?
You'll still have to have the compliant monitor to play the new content. For the old content, the old version of Windows will still work just peachy. And anybody buying a new PC from an OEM will get a compliant monitor and the new OS, so they won't even know there's a problem. I did not mean WINE per say but a WINE like emulation progame. Thess new games most likey will not be comabtable with windows xp and lower so u could not get around it that way. I am not shure how the monitor thing whould work but my logic was that if it is handaled by the OS and not by the software then u could make an emulaor for linux or other OS that dose not have this new montore featture. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You know, it's not surprising that the reason why MS is making all these operting systems (apart from the loads of money) is simply to add all these even more money making features. You have to buy MS approved monitors (they make deals with those companies $$$), you have to buy MS approved products ($$$ from those companies), soon even shareware/freeware things will have to be MS approved. Then they just add the pretense of 'adding new features'. Yeah, and that makes them more money too - WMP 10, MSN 18, etc. They don't fix anything about their operating system, just adding 'sidebars' 'topbars' 'toolbars' and 'customization'. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Drakain Zeil wrote: The problem with monitors is that buying a new one because MS wants you to is pure crap.
Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Blackcomb So what's the point? Why not just make ONE os that's better, and comes out a year later? Well, no you know what the $ in M$ is for. Last time I checked, 2011/2012 isn't next year. 5 years for major version changes for the OS is a pretty decent timeline I think. 5 years ago, what did we have? Windows ME, Mac OS 9 and Linux kernel 2.0. Which of course we should have stuck with, since they were all stellar operating systems that could barely be improved upon. Like it or not, nobody ever is going to make the be all and end all of operating systems. And saying that they don't add anything to the operating system is pure crap. The kernel is optimized, finally they have better user security (doing what they should have done with 98) and they added a plethora of eye candy and search functionality. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: And saying that they don't add anything to the operating system is pure crap. The kernel is optimized, finally they have better user security (doing what they should have done with 98) and they added a plethora of eye candy and search functionality. ie. they made it more like unix/linux with a desktop....... |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: And saying that they don't add anything to the operating system is pure crap. The kernel is optimized, finally they have better user security (doing what they should have done with 98) and they added a plethora of eye candy and search functionality.
Of course they've added things. The question then: is any of it compelling? Very few people care about kernel optimizations. Give them a faster operating system and they're happy, but it's rarely a reason to upgrade on its own. Plus, most people are getting faster computers when they buy new than they need... whether they want them or not. To them, Windows XP runs fast enough. The issue for them is not speed. Besides, Microsoft has a lousy record of operating systems getting faster with each release. On the other hand, each version of Mac OS X is noticeably faster than its predecessor. Not to start a MS vs. Apple flamewar, but just a counterpoint. Security... well, security with Windows is a social problem more than a technological one. Note, I do not say it's a problem of stupid users. I do not believe this to be the case. Rather it's Microsoft bending over backwards to accomodate developers who build applications that break the rules with regards to security. It's also the fact that there aren't any strong "communities" around Windows. Mac OS X has communities populated by "normal" users. Linux distributions have the same. Via these communities users are alerted to problems They're guided away from bad software and towards good software. Windows has so such thing, so bad software is left out there for anyone to pick up and use, and the sources of it are left as the first resource of the "normal" Windows user. Microsoft can throw all the money they want at security on the technical level and it will be a colossal failure if they don't address the social issues. Lastly, Microsoft has no idea how to do eye candy well. They're just far too enamored of gradients and useless transparency. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Windows XP is also the fastest version of Windows to date. Comparisons between the two as far as speed goes is pointless, since everything is so different. Personally, I like the idea of the graphics processor handling most of the calculations for your desktop, as it frees up your CPU to do other things. As far as how good it looks, I don't think the 50xx builds are a good indication, and I think we'll see better examples of how the retail product is going to look in the upcoming beta. I guess we'll see though. It looks to me like Microsoft will have a pretty decent operating system on their hands if they pull through with most of their promises. |
|
| Author: | person [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
so basically wtd...ur sugesting that longhorn is just gonna be another piece of crap?? |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
person wrote: so basically wtd...ur sugesting that longhorn is just gonna be another piece of crap?? That seems to be the general consensus. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 6:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
person wrote: so basically wtd...ur sugesting that longhorn is just gonna be another piece of crap??
Yes. |
|
| Author: | md [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think that longhorn will be an improvement over XP, if only because of the improved security and the graphics code. I think moving the graphics onto hte video card (finally) will bring about a huge performance increase, although I'm not quite sure how it will work when you have two monitors and you are using one to play a fullscreen game... As for requiring new monitors, there are already devices on the market which sit between your unsecure monitor and the secure output on your computer. I highly doubt that this is going to be much of an issue anyways, as the downscaled graphics that are supposed to be shown if you don't have a complying monitor are actually still higher quality then the source anyways; when your scaling the image up from PAL, or HD it really doesn't matter how much you scale, your still scaling. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm so excited about Windows Vista. Not. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes. Get linux fanboys (in reference to that article) to talk about Windows. Of course, that's not biased in the least. And then the article is saying that finally Windows is as good as OSX and Linux. Only Windows has Dell pricing and Microsoft corporate support, Windows computers are cheaper than Apple computers and easier to use than Linux boxes. Hmm...scary thought though? I don't see what makes this 'crap' though. WinFS is coming out a year later as a free add-on, since it's not done yet. And DRM? Here's an experiment: 1. Get an iPod Shuffle (and probably works on an iPod too, but I don't have one). 2. Plug it into your computer, put some songs into it. 3. Plug it into a different computer. 4. Listen to your songs. Oh...wait...your songs are gone. Yet when Microsoft does it it's a bad thing. And oh no...you need a fancy computer to run all of the graphical effects maxed out. And this is a downside. Just like how Doom III and Half-Life 2 need fast computers to put their graphics to the max. Hmm... So crap? Or just a late entrance to the game? |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: Windows computers are cheaper than Apple computers and easier to use than Linux boxes.
Don't play stupid Martin, you know very well that Windows has no ease of use advantage over most modern Linux distros. No, it generally doesn't come pre-installed, but they even make installation a breeze compared to Windows. |
|
| Author: | rizzix [ Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oh! Windows is the worst piece of trash ever! Seriously I hope Vista is going to be of 100x better quality than XP. Why? I a mac fan after all, now aren't I? Why should I care? The reason is people are too lazy or simply too stupid to search for better alternatives. To consider using something "different" is beyond their capacity. It is outrageous! Why on Earth would any one even think of switching? Oh poor me, to suffer in the midst of this stupid mentality. This forces me and a good bit of the world to use such Trash against our will. Just because of this I hope it is at the least reasonably functional and stable. There's really no point in them trying to beat their competitors. They are simply too selfish to accomplish that. I don't care if they have few new features or not. I only want stability, flexibility and a major improvement in its usability. By usability I'm referring to the poorly constructed Windows User Interface. It is horrible. Switching back and forth from PC to Mac only exaggerates the flaws. I mean, to think they can practically get the whole world to use this piece of junk! Microsoft never did care about quality. It's all about the money! I'm thankful that there is a company like Apple readily challenging this selfish giant. |
|
| Author: | 1of42 [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I can't tell if that's a very random rant, or a badly written parody of one.  |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 4:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes. A company that doesn't care about money. Oh boy, we need lots of those. A company that doesn't want to make money for the people who invested in it. Apple of course sells everything at the cheapest that they possibly could caring only that the consumer is happy. What is an Apple computer but a freeBSD box with a pretty GUI and lots of off white colouring? But whatever. This topic is about Windows Vista, not OSX or freeBSD. I digress. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 4:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: What is an Apple computer but a freeBSD box with a pretty GUI and lots of off white colouring?
Again... you're not this stupid. You know there's a lot more to it than that. I can't help but think that it's pretty sad that you're having to lower your intelligence to successfully advocate for Microsoft. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 12:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I realy do not see how M$ can claim that DRM is good for the user or good for socity as a hole. It is not going to stop copying of copyrighted mataerls, there are easy ways around it and even if there was not poeleop whould just use old versons of windows or other OS like linux to do it in. The only realy benfite in DRM is to M$ in that they can make contracs with hardware companys and get more money. This is only going to hurt the end user overall as well as the hardware companys. Lucky do to the ushal M$ incompitcen there trusted computing system will not be ready for longhorn so we are saff for now. But it will not be long before such things become a reality and then we will not be far from living in a world not unlike gore orwell 1984. Also there has got to be somthing wrong with an OS when the EFF has problems with it. It realy is a sad how low M$ is going thess days.... |
|
| Author: | rizzix [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1of42 wrote: I can't tell if that's a very random rant, or a badly written parody of one.
no its not a parody. it is satiric initially (on the windows users, and not windows it self), but it abruptly gets to the point: i'm just pissed off with the windows world. and ehm.. yea i really _do_ hope m$ improves, specially with companies like Apple challenging them. bah! so how many of you guys have actually tried a using a mac? Martin wrote: What is an Apple computer but a freeBSD box with a pretty GUI and lots of off white colouring? That is such an understatement it's not funny. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, I tried it for a very short time (so I may be biased) but for me the GUI was worse than the Windows one (OSX). Everything is big and the basic things are placed in the center of the screen, wasting space and distracting you. If it came to that, I would switch to Linux. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[Gandalf] wrote: Yeah, I tried it for a very short time (so I may be biased) but for me the GUI was worse than the Windows one (OSX). Everything is big and the basic things are placed in the center of the screen, wasting space and distracting you. If it came to that, I would switch to Linux.
How is everything "big"? You do realize the Dock can be resized, moved, hidden, right? |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I know this is (strangely) off-topic by now, but the Developer Beta 1 was released today. Joy. I'm certainly not a Microsoft advocate, and I definitely AM an F/OSS enthusiast. However, unfortunatly, there ARE a few programs that simply do not have free counterparts as of yet. So while I'm not a fan of the platform, the company, or the system, I do have a Win32 partition for the odd times when there's something there that has only been developed for Windows. =/ |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
"Big" like the resolution is something completely different than what it is or something like that. I knew that you could hide and move things, but not resize. My brief trial was indeed very brief . |
|
| Author: | 1of42 [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
To make something clear: I used Macs for 5 years 5 days a week at school. I disliked it immensely. I still use Macs now for music editing, and I find the whole thing frankly annoying. I hate the GUI - I think it's too poofy, and things like the open dialogs are ridiculous, IMO. It just doesn't feel right. And I don't use it, unless I very much have to. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 6:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1of42 wrote: things like the open dialogs are ridiculous, IMO.
In what way is it ridiculous? |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 7:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have also used Mac and desktops very much like the mac one and i also found everything to be "poofy" and to big but i also shortly figgured out how to fix this and make everything just right. Tho adminity this is not strat forword how to do but only b/c there is so much more that can be costmized and chaged. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 7:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtd wrote: Martin wrote: Windows computers are cheaper than Apple computers and easier to use than Linux boxes.
Don't play stupid Martin, you know very well that Windows has no ease of use advantage over most modern Linux distros. No, it generally doesn't come pre-installed, but they even make installation a breeze compared to Windows. Hey, I think that Linux is way easier to use than Windows, but I'm using a bash terminal for probably 8 hours a day. Your average user doesn't want to have to worry about that. Ubuntu is great, don't get me wrong - I'd say it's my favourite operating system to use right now. However, it doesn't have the software scope nor the driver support that Windows does. For the most part, Windows just works as far as new hardware and software goes, and there is software to do everything. Linux still has its problems. Keeping your system up to date in Windows is trivial, as you can simply get Windows update to do it for you. Updating to the latest unstable version of debian is not a fun experience (well, it is, but for reasons that non-cs'ers/massochists wouldn't find entertaining). I see in Linux a lot of potential. But Linux too has a lot of problems. There's no Linux community. There's a debian community, a gentoo community, a mandrake (err...mandrivia) community and so on. It lacks the unification that it needs to be truely successful. And I know that Apple is more than just a pretty GUI, but not much more. It's a software package, with some really cool software. And to be honest, I really can't bash the actual Apple hardware and software, save that it's far too pricey and that there's too little room for customization, and that Steve Jobs is a prick. I think that Apple has a lot of potential, once they figure their company out and have like, a business plan. And decide that it's maybe a good time to start making some real money. And to anyone who says that people don't use Apple because they're scared to try something new - why are there so many linux users? I guarentee that the jump from Windows to Linux is far greater than that from Windows to OSX. It's as simple as Apple needing to figure themselves out and creating an acceptable business model for themselves. I think that the new line of Mac Minis is a nice effort. They can do better. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: Hey, I think that Linux is way easier to use than Windows, but I'm using a bash terminal for probably 8 hours a day. The is not a vaild statmet for the avg user, it whould be like saying u need to know how to use dos to use windows 98. Quote: However, it doesn't have the software scope nor the driver support that Windows does. For the most part, Windows just works as far as new hardware and software goes, and there is software to do everything. Also not complte true, i can not talk about Ubuntu, but some distros of linux i have used have aucatly had more suport for my hardware right off the bat then a fresh window install. Espltaly for network cards and wifi cards, i was admazed that suse could set stuff up better then windows xp in that deparment. True there are some problems with video cards but this is not the fault of linux, but of the ATI and other big video card manufutcuhers. If they realesed the sorce for there cards i bet there whould be drivers out in a few days. As for software i have found the same or an equvlent software for almost anything i use on windows and ushely it is free and open sorce. Tho this is not as true for games but that gose back to the ATI issues that are holding us all back. Also software wise the distros that i use came with and admzaing amount of software, i mean they had everything and then 5 difrent versons of it. from IM clinets, to grafpicks editors, to office apps and free games. My suse distro even came with a verson of emule and a ps1 emulator. Quote: Linux still has its problems. Keeping your system up to date in Windows is trivial, as you can simply get Windows update to do it for you. 1st of all updating windows is not trivial there has been 1000s of issues with SP2 and what it has done to some comps. 2ndly some distros of linux provied apps that make it even easyer to keep things up to date. Suse has an aumated update system that will even update other non suse software on your system compley by it's self. It is true that some of the magore update become more complicated but that is like if windows 98 had a update progame to xp. they simple do not do updates like that and rather make u buy a new os. Quote: I see in Linux a lot of potential. But Linux too has a lot of problems. There's no Linux community. There's a debian community, a gentoo community, a mandrake (err...mandrivia) community and so on. It lacks the unification that it needs to be truely successful. Maybe so but is doing prity dam good the way it is. I whould also aruge that copmared to windows there is no windows comunity. Since windows is not open sorce the devlopmet of it (not on it) is limited (tho devlopment on it will be limted soon enought with DRM and other crap they are making). Quote: why are there so many linux users? I guarentee that the jump from Windows to Linux is far greater than that from Windows to OSX. It's as simple as Apple needing to figure themselves out and creating an acceptable business model for themselves. I think that the new line of Mac Minis is a nice effort. They can do better. There is a simple reason for this; cost. I can download a linux distro and install it with no cost and no need for new software and i can still have a dule booting system if i do not like it. It is alot more cost in geting OSX..... |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: Hey, I think that Linux is way easier to use than Windows, but I'm using a bash terminal for probably 8 hours a day. Your average user doesn't want to have to worry about that.
I really want to think you're smarter than this. Sit down and explain to the same users time and time again how to remove spyware, adware, etc. Explain to them how to undo what it's done to complex systems like the Windows registry. Explain to them how to run myriad "anti" apps to try to keep their systems clean. Hold their hands as they install crappy third party software to get their USB webcam operating. The same webcam that would work seamlessly in any recent Linux distro. Tell them you can't help them when they want to know how to use that software's weird-ass interface that doesn't even remotely resemble anything else. Linux is easier, even for "normal" users, than Windows. So is Mac OS X. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I whould just like to add that it seems the only good points about windows as to why it has an advangte over linux and other OS are artfisushely created as in they have more to do with business and socity that the aucatly operating system. If linux was as popualr as windows and had the same funoding the uncomabity issues whould be non existante and there whould be no advatange to windows at all. I also blive this is why M$ is doing so many crazy things now with DRM and trusted computing, linux and os x are starting to get popualr and more and more comabital every day once they become main steam there will be no reason to use windows so M$ is grabing at any kind of help they can get from difrent indurstlys like hollieywood, the RIAA, and hardware comapys, but they are not consdering the user and what is good for them. |
|
| Author: | 1of42 [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
well, you know, you guys might be right. windows might be far worse than linux, who knows. for me, a gamer who competitively and frequently games, and uses several tools associated with it than run only for windows, as well as being fairly busy with other things, linux just doesn't offer me any clear advantage that i see. am i wrong? tell me: what, being who i am, does linux offer me that is so much better than windows? (don't tell me anything about spyware or viruses either, i haven't had a hint of either of those in at least a year) the rhetoric is nice, but once you get down to it, linux must be significantly better for me to justify the inevitably long time it takes to install and configure. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
1of42 wrote: linux must be significantly better for me to justify the inevitably long time it takes to install and configure.
It takes longer to install and configure? Perhaps a few years ago. It's certainly easier to install now, and it does a better job of configuring things than Windows does, out of the box. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gaming is on Windows simply because Microsoft has the biggest market share. That'd change in a heartbeat if another OS became big enough to warrent investing in coding for it. When you play a commercial linux game (such as Unreal Tournament 2004 or Doom III) you end up with similar performance as running the game in Windows (in fact, people have said that Doom III runs slightly faster in Linux). Unless you have an ATI card, which will give you about 0.5 frames a second on glxgears because ATI doesn't seem to believe that Linux exists. The problem is that developers don't want to waste time developing for a platform that very few people will use for gaming (for example, how many people do you know using linux exclusively, and not dual booting with OSX or Windows)? On OSX you see it as well: only the best selling games are released for that platform, since they're the only ones that can sell enough to warrent porting to that platform. For anti-spyware, I just install Microsoft Anti-Spyware and Symantic Anti-virus. It takes care of everything, including updating itself. And with Apple, you have the same problem of having to install drivers, unless you buy an Apple webcam, in which case you probably already have the drivers. In any case, driver installation is trivial, and for the most part it's done automatically (my webcam installed in Windows when I plugged it in). Worked alright in Ubuntu too, but that took a bit of hacking. Spyware and viruses are here to stay unfortunately, and don't think that that would change if Apple or Linux were the dominating market force. Granted, XP is exceptionally susceptable to it, but Vista will have a sudo system similar system to OSX and Linux. Anti-spyware and anti-virus software works well enough and runs fairly silently as it stands. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin wrote: Anti-spyware and anti-virus software works well enough and runs fairly silently as it stands.
For you, perhaps. We like to talk about "normal users" and for them, it's a huge problem, or we wouldn't hear so much about it. I frequent forums where the majority of users are what you would, I suspect label "normal". I'd say roughly 90% of the posts deal with how to handle viruses/spyware/adware/etc. And for the most part, it's repeat customers. Ironically, Windows suddenly becomes the operating system you shouldn't use unless you're an expert. |
|
| Author: | md [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't think windows is the problem... I think that the issue is that there are a whole lot of people who use computers and think they know what they are doing when they have little or no clue. Give them linux or a mac and they'll mess it up just as bad. At this point I'd actually have to say that linux and windows and mac are all about equal on usability. Windows has more software sure, but linux and mac still have an absurd amount too. The nly major difference between linux and windows is that linux might take a little more knoledge to get to work in some sutiations, these are few and far between if you are using a distro that is suited to the general user instead of a power user (ubuntu instead of gentoo). And the major difference between a Mac and windows is the hardware it runs on (or used to be), both are equal in almost all other respects. Sure a mac might cost more, but as has been pointed out many times with a mac you get lots of additional software. A windows box might only cost me $800, but to get all the software I use (at comercial rates) easily brings that up to $3000. Do I need to buy it for mac? No, because it's already there. Anyways, back to the original topic... My copy of longhorn should be here soon... and when it does get here I'll be sure to install and post some screen shots |
|
| Author: | 1of42 [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wtd wrote: 1of42 wrote: linux must be significantly better for me to justify the inevitably long time it takes to install and configure.
It takes longer to install and configure? Perhaps a few years ago. It's certainly easier to install now, and it does a better job of configuring things than Windows does, out of the box. I just listened to a friend through 3 days of compiling and installing Gentoo. That takes significantly longer, and much more effort than just inserting a cd and hitting OK every once in a while. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1of42 wrote: wtd wrote: 1of42 wrote: linux must be significantly better for me to justify the inevitably long time it takes to install and configure.
It takes longer to install and configure? Perhaps a few years ago. It's certainly easier to install now, and it does a better job of configuring things than Windows does, out of the box. I just listened to a friend through 3 days of compiling and installing Gentoo. That takes significantly longer, and much more effort than just inserting a cd and hitting OK every once in a while. Linux is about choice. You can choose to do a Gentoo install that goes like that, or you can install something like Ubuntu, Fedora Core, SuSE, Mandriva, etc. and get the nice "ok", "ok", "ok" install. |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm running this from Vista Beta 1 in Ubuntu's VMWare. I have some initial impressions, and I'll post a more comprehensive review later. There's one neat thing, though, that will definetly improve Microsoft's security track record. It's called "UAP" and it basically asks you for a password when doing things that require admin privileges. This is a big step up, because 90% of Windows users run normally as Admin accounts and then wonder why a virus is able to infect their whole system. UAP aims to solve this. The only drawback here is that UAP is turned OFF by default for some strange reason. Hopefully this will not be the case in the final release, because the types of people who need to be using UAP will not know to turn it on. Also, in the process of taking the screenshot I am posting here, I made another pleasant discovery : Paint now saves images as .PNG by default, instead of the old BMP! ^__^ |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Okay, Hikaru. Step-by-step, how did you get it working? Because it always tells me that my HD is incompatible. Problem is, everyone's virtualized HD is the same.  I know I'm doing something wrong. Don't know what though. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hikaru, how can you stand that 'non classic view'? From what you say... Well, that security thing is interesting, but the problem is with the admin's not the system. Will it be asking you for a password if you are an admin and want to get into your 'Documents'? What does UAP stand for, User Access Protection?
The new paint thing is minor, but .png is a pretty good format (just noticed). What does it do, limit the colours or something? Too bad Turing doesn't support .png's  .
How the heck could they possibly have made their 'alerts' that huge? That font is absolutely horrible. |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Eh, people mostly use Classic in XP because XP's Luna theme is so disguisting. But if they managed to pull some decent Photoshop hacks in Vista, then I wouldn't mind using it instead. I hate Classic theme, but I hate Luna more. But if they made a good, new, theme (a la OS X vs OS 9), all the better. Remember, there's a reason why it's called "BETA 1", and not "1.0" |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Notoroge wrote: Okay, Hikaru. Step-by-step, how did you get it working?
Because it always tells me that my HD is incompatible. Problem is, everyone's virtualized HD is the same. I know I'm doing something wrong. Don't know what though.Incompatible HD? That is quite strange. Did you pre-allocate the drive first? I gave mine 8 gigs. It worked so well, I'm actually storing the virtual drive on an ext3 partition, and running the same image in both Linux and Windows using the ext2fsd driver! Try again with pre-allocation and let me know if it works. It should. Gandalf wrote: Hikaru, how can you stand that 'non classic view'? From what you say... Well, that security thing is interesting, but the problem is with the admin's not the system. Will it be asking you for a password if you are an admin and want to get into your 'Documents'? What does UAP stand for, User Access Protection? Smile
The new paint thing is minor, but .png is a pretty good format (just noticed). What does it do, limit the colours or something? Too bad Turing doesn't support .png's Laughing. How the heck could they possibly have made their 'alerts' that huge? That font is absolutely horrible. I'm actually pretty impressed with the current Vista theme. I guess you have to use it to sense it. It's very flashy and shiny--I'm normally very modest with my eye candy, so this is quite an indulgence for me. Progress bars, for example, send an occasional pulse of light that reflects across the whole bar in a very pretty way. It's a minor thing, but it is stuff like that that gives it an overall polished look, as far as the GUI is concerned. As for the security thing, that prompt only comes up when you turn UAP on for the first time, not each time you are prompted. I was just showing it as an example. I didn't really find it unattractive at all. But, like I said, I strongly believe that it should be on by default. .png is an image format that uses lossless compression -- its just as pretty as bmp at a small fraction of the size. The neat thing about MS using PNG by default is that it is an open format that is immune to patents. They're also being forced by the courts to offer an open, XML-based format for their upcoming Microsoft Office 12 line. They're steps in the right direction. |
|
| Author: | Notoroge [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hikaru79 wrote: Did you pre-allocate the drive first? I have no idea why that makes any difference, but it worked. Thanks.  |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Notoroge wrote: Hikaru79 wrote: Did you pre-allocate the drive first? I have no idea why that makes any difference, but it worked. Thanks. No problem. Here's a little tip that I had to learn the hard way (after hours of frustration): After you install VMWare Tools, you will notice that you will not have any network connections, or access to the internet. What you must do is go to the Device Manager, find the Ethernet Adapter, and tell Windows to reinstall it using an automatic search. That fixed it up for me. Notice that the VMWare documentation for Windows Longhorn tells you something about editing a conf file with 'vmxnet' or something to that effect. Don't do it, it results in a syntax error. It probably only applied to the earlier Longhorn builds. Enjoy  |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I guess they are taking a few steps in the right direction, but then how many are they continuing in the wrong direction? Tell me, are Windows progress bars still completely pointless? They have those things that bounce right, left, right, left, and yet they tell you nothing about what your progress is. Why would someone make a progress bar that only tells you that the computer hasn't crashed. |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 9:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[Gandalf] wrote: I guess they are taking a few steps in the right direction, but then how many are they continuing in the wrong direction?
Tell me, are Windows progress bars still completely pointless? They have those things that bounce right, left, right, left, and yet they tell you nothing about what your progress is. Why would someone make a progress bar that only tells you that the computer hasn't crashed. The only progress bars I've ever had issues with is the "InstallShield Wizard" ones (they're the ones that zoom to 99% in the first second of execution, and then remain there for two minutes before completing), so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. Then again, I dont' use Windows all that often. I've had no problems with the progress bars the few times I actually saw them (installing VMWareTools and updating some drivers). |
|
| Author: | Neo [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 10:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How bout the progress bars that come up when you boot up XP. They just move accross repeatedly... |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 10:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
...doing nothing. Yep, those are the ones I am talking about. It's not only when you boot up XP, its in most Microsoft things. So how about some more screenshots? |
|