![]() |
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Quote:
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
No windows product has ever lived up to the hype or what it's supposed to do. Ever. Thus you can easily say it will be awful because it will.
Hell I dislike the entire idea, you shouldn't care about the OS. What extra features, discounting security which Bill f*cked up in the first place, have been added since 95, hell since 3.1? I mean genuine 'Woot I've noticed a difference.' FAT32, ICS that works and slightly easier networking. I'm sure there's loads of things behind the scenes, but I haven't noticed them and all they've done is slow it down. It was said a '95 game ran, like for like, at least 10% slower than it's DOS equivalent. How bad is it now do you think? |
Re: Microsoft VISTA
What about ntfs? Group policy? Fast user switching? And only a fool would say that netbios/win's is better than tcp/ip and dns.
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Don't forget about a shinier interface, less crashes, and more compatability. XP is compatible with almost every program, if you take the time to tweak the compatibility settings. And there's the shiney interface... shiney interface, more shiney interfaces...
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Group policy and user switching. Well as its just me on this machine why would I care?
NTFS is wonderful, apart from nothing else being able to even look at it, so I don't use it. And all the volume security and other such stuff, yes I'm sure its wonderful for admins. I'm not an admin. As I said the networkings gotten better. Not as fast as it should and it still could be better, but yes Bill did add TCP/IP. Woot. Less crashes? Maybe. I had a WinME system that was solid. I realise though that I was perhaps just lucky with my hardware choices, others hated ME and all it stood for. XP on the other hand had to be reinstalled about 3 times in the first month (OK bad stats there as I had misc. hardware problems complicating things. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif) And compatability. Well if Bill hadn't changed everything for no benefit (to me at least. I was never a security muppet, I had a firewall and anti-virus) with XP the it wouldn't need compatability. Ohh shinier. Which in fact means 'slower'. |
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Most of us are basing our opinions of Vista on PAST experience with Microsft products. Lets count them... shall we.
Windows 95 Windows 98 Windows 98 2nd addition Windows ME Windows NT Windows 2000 Windows XP Home Windows XP Professional Of these I would say that most were NOT what they were billed to be. Hense the execution of Bill Gates in the South Park movie! |
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Shiney is good. Besides, you're not REALLY going to use all that 3.0 gigahertz of raw processing power, are you? Or 4 GHZ, or 5... Eh, you can turn it off if you want.
3.1 RULES! Simple, and to the point. Great for old laptops! |
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Quote:
As you mentioned in the middle bit, if you don't pimp your PC to all the viruses worms and trojans on the internet, it will work quite nicely. And in that case, win9x is perfectly fine too. Quote:
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Thermo is completely right. If your not dumb when your using the computer you shouldn't have problems. The only Microsoft OS I have ever had problems with is Windows ME but I blame HPs slow destruction of Compaqs computer quality for that...
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
I have Office 97 and 2000. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif I paid good money for both.
I also have, albeit I cannot find it, full version of win 98 2nd Edition, Win2k, and XP Pro. I can only use the XP Pro on ONE machine so I am saving it. I use Win2k on only one machine but I can use it on more... but I do not. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:04 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.