"In the world of operating systems, Microsoft Windows Vista is just a baby. It's just now toddling along on new systems being sold throughout the U.S. And, like a small child being dropped by the stork to new parents, it's available to older desktop PCs via Microsoft's download-to-buy program. Giving early adopters such easy, unfettered access to the somewhat untested OS was a bold move by Microsoft. The company had to know that people like those who work at PC Magazine would be among the first to test-drive this new installation option."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-12
Member since:2005-11-10
As I said in another comment a while back, I've used every major beta release of Vista (Longhorn). Most of what I've said is my opinion. I feel that it is true given my experience of the five gruelling years of Vista development and the final product compared with as many years as I have managed to gain of overall computer experience on different Operating Systems and other companies and organisation's accomplishments.
Having moved off of Windows, I have come to genuinely know how superior OS X and Linux is to Windows, Vista included.
You can call that trolling, but at the end of the day, it's a) my opinion based on b) solid experience of Vista, and it's alternatives.
Member since:2005-07-28
"Having moved off of Windows, I have come to genuinely know how superior OS X and Linux is to Windows, Vista included."
I went completely McSoft `WinTrash` free in October of 2003 on my personal machines. My primary platforms are OS X and Linux and they both are rock solid and stable. My productivity rocketed into the stratosphere since I don't have jack around with anti-virus, reboots, spy-ware and associated crapware.
I know it probably peeves off the McSofties but oh well ... the global press and opinion mirrors what we've been saying all along. An honest opinion is not trolling.
Member since:2005-12-28
Boot times/system speed for Linux and Mac OS X have increased. Windows has not.
here are 2 examples (there are plenty more)
http://www.infoworld.com/infoworld/article/04/01/30/05FElinux_2.htm...
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2006/11/1048_boosts_pho.html
Vista is out to make you buy new hardware... Thats it, it offers nothing that justifies the expense or increases user productivity.
Member since:2005-07-06
"Boot times/system speed for Linux and Mac OS X have increased. Windows has not.":
Let's see, boot OS X or PCBSD once every couple of months at 2 minutes per boot. 12 months divided by 2 times 2 minutes per boot = about 12 minutes per year boot time.
OK, boot Windows three times a week at 1 minute per boot. 3 times per week x 52 weeks per year x 1 minute per boot = 156 minutes per year boot time.
Hey you are right, that is much quicker than the 312 minutes per year I used to spend booting the older versions of Windows.
I wonder why I ever switched to OS X and PCBSD...
Member since:2005-12-28
Member since:2006-06-03
Member since:
2005-06-29
In five years time Apple and [Linux] have managed to double, even triple the speed of their OS running on exactly the same hardware.
If only this were true...
Yes, you're a troll, you dislike Vista, this is fine, but most of what you said is not true. Have you tried Vista at least?