Fun Stuff > CLIKC
Microsoft Vista?
SpacemanSpiff:
--- Quote from: est ---well, i wouldn't go as far as to say that Windows is total garbage. you can play some nice games on it, and since XP it's been solid as a rock for me unless hardware failures are counted (which they aren't). i have an issue with the way that it allocates resources, and with the file browser being integrated into the GUI in such a way as to cause the GUI to have to restart if the file browser hangs, but other than that the only really major problem i have is security.
--- End quote ---
Despite the fact that I'm a Linux geek, I have to agree. However, I have managed to have 2k and XP crap out on me and I couldn't fix it. The Windows allocates its resources is infamous anyway, and I've decided that GUIs are nothing you can discuss anyway because everyone has personal preferences there. So, Windows isn't bad, save for two things which continue to annoy me:
Security. You mentioned it and it could be fixed quite easily. Linux isn't some sort of magical-super-safe-fairy-land-OS, the reason it's safer is because you're usually not logged in as root. Why can't Windows implement a decent user management and rights system and use it for once? That would make Windows a hell of a lot safer just like that.
Also, the fact that Windows has no decent error log. If your system starts acting up, it's incredibly hard to find the source of it because you can't check any good logs.
--- Quote ---seeing as Vista is just a refinement of XP i think that it'll be a decent OS. (unless they've realy dicked around with it and made it unstable)
--- End quote ---
As Nexus mentioned, the codebase was Win2k3 Server, so I doubt it will be unstable.
However, Vista is, architecture-wise, a new OS. Have a look at their Nexus-kernel-architecture, that's a radically different from anything else they've done before.
Also, as I mentioned, integral parts of the GUI have changed and a new user/rights-management system has been implemented. Not mentioning TCPA support here, which is also new.
In short, this is not an XP-upgrade (that wouldn't take Microsoft 5 years either). It's a new OS.
And I don't call a system rock solid unless I've managed to have it run (and update the system itself without rebooting) straight for more than 100 days. Which works with Linux (Slackware, in case you want to know).
Oh, and Nexus' last point is good. There would be two reasons I could see: Microsoft ends support for XP and an improved user/rights-management.
Oerdin:
--- Quote from: Threatis ---thoughts on this, better than XP?
or just another Win ME mistake?
--- End quote ---
My understanding is Vista is a redo of XP designed to be a stop gap measure which will be replaced 1.5 years after it comes up. Blackcomb is supposedly an entirely new product and the one to wait for. Vista doesn't sound like it is worth buying.
Edit: Vista simply changes the security settings so that it is easier to lock out certain functions for non-administrator users, improves the search function to include metasearch funcctionality, changes the GUI to look more like MAC OS X (supposedly to get Apple people to defect to MS though Apple's saying MS is just copying them), and MS will be introducing their "digital rights management" software that will be dispised the world over. Essentially, digital rights management will lock all MP#, WMA, and other media files until you can prove you own them legally. Fuck that and fuck MS.
Blackcomb was originally supposed to come out in 2006 but has been pushed back to 2007 and is an entirely new product from the ground up while Vista is just a face lift on MS with a few new features which no one will miss. Blackcomb will be MS's first 64 bit operating system and it will better be able to take advantage of processor technical advances and will be set up to multithread and multitask much better then XP. I fogot to mention that a new version of IE will come with Vista though it will be free to download even if you don't buy Vista; expect the new IE to be crap just like the old one and most people in the know will continue to use the superior Firefox browser.
Oerdin:
--- Quote from: Addius ---The problem with ME was that they tried to merge two OSes that didn't really work the same even though it looked as if they did.
All in all the changes I've heard of is what you'd expect, beside the fs and cmd being late.
--- End quote ---
Win Me was just a face list of Win98 which was itself a facelift of Win95. XP was the product which merged the NT and Win9X product lines. Me was basically a stop gap product to fill the year between when MAC released an updated OS and when XP would come out. It's only interesting new feature was the introduction of "system restore" which was barely functional and put in as an after thought when beta testers could come up with a reason to buy ME instead of stiking with Win9X or waiting for XP. Win ME was virtually identical to Win2000 though MS marketers swore that ME was designed for professionals while Win2k was for home users. The differences were so slight that few people felt like paying the higher price for ME and barely more people bought Win2k since it offered nothing new.
est:
#1. you know that there is a 64-bit version of win XP?
#2. Win ME was nothing like Win2k. Win2k was NT5, WinME was the next Win9x OS. they didn't even look or act the same, really. i think you've got the ME/2k thing ass-about-face, too. 2k was marketed at the commercial desktop and WinME was the OEM OS put onto home-user machines. i once had the displeasure of trying to support a laptop that an exec brought in from home that had WinME on it. my advice to him at the time was to get Win2k onto it, stat.
Oerdin:
--- Quote from: est ---#1. you know that there is a 64-bit version of win XP?
#2. Win ME was nothing like Win2k. Win2k was NT5, WinME was the next Win9x OS. they didn't even look or act the same, really. i think you've got the ME/2k thing ass-about-face, too. 2k was marketed at the commercial desktop and WinME was the OEM OS put onto home-user machines. i once had the displeasure of trying to support a laptop that an exec brought in from home that had WinME on it. my advice to him at the time was to get Win2k onto it, stat.
--- End quote ---
My understanding is that the 64 bit version of XP isn't really 64 bits. Its kernel continues to be legacy 32 bit and all they've added is new software to emulate a 64 bit process. I haven’t seen a copy of it yet but that is what I was told. Blackcomb is supposed to be designed from the ground up to be 64 bits.
I probably have mixed up 2k and ME they were both stop gap measures and not really worth buying since XP was right around the corner and was supposed to replace them both.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version