Two editorials on Vista, from eWeek and Microsoft Watch. The former: "The looming choice for Windows users is either to stick with Windows XP (and older hardware) or take Windows Vista cold turkey. But Microsoft doesn't have to be so tough - Apple did it differently with the Mac OS X rollout." The latter: "How will Microsoft - and its business customers - cost-justify upgrading to Vista in the coming months/years? With Windows Vista, Microsoft needs to please at least two constituencies with very different sets of requirements."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-02-01
"Well, for me, that is pretty cheap. If you are tight for money, why would you even consider upgrading to Vista? But if you have enough money to upgrade to Vista, surely you have enough to justify spending a bit more to bring your hardware up to par."
You're still not getting it. I make plenty of money. The fact is I refuse to waste it on crap I don't need. Who sets this par? If my current machine absolutely flies with any Linux distro or BSD out there, why in the heck would I upgrade and waste a ton of money just to run an OS than for all intents and purposes, would be equivalent to ripping out every useful command line tool I have, yet turning on XGL?
Member since:2006-04-20
"You're still not getting it. I make plenty of money. The fact is I refuse to waste it on crap I don't need. Who sets this par? If my current machine absolutely flies with any Linux distro or BSD out there, why in the heck would I upgrade and waste a ton of money just to run an OS than for all intents and purposes, would be equivalent to ripping out every useful command line tool I have, yet turning on XGL?"
If you are using Linux or BSD, why on earth are you complaining about the hardware requirements of Vista? First, for most applications, regardless of OS, more RAM is always better - less paging/swapping, faster application response etc, and second, if your current setup OS working fine, why change it? If running CL apps is what you mainly do, I don't see how Vista remotely affects you, or why you would complain about it.
when it breaks, there is no reason you shouldn't buy a Vista ready PC, put BSD or Linux on it, and it will be even faster.
There are plenty of applications for computers that need very little RAM, but if you do anything with computer graphics, audio or games, more is always better. And if you have 64bit systems whose principle selling point is the ability to handle more than 4GB of RAM, why not take advantage of it?
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2006-04-20
Well, for me, that is pretty cheap. If you are tight for money, why would you even consider upgrading to Vista? But if you have enough money to upgrade to Vista, surely you have enough to justify spending a bit more to bring your hardware up to par.