Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 24th Jul 2008 22:04 UTC
Windows As someone who uses Windows Vista practically daily, I've always wondered where all the negativity in the media comes from. Sure, Vista isn't perfect (as if any operating system is), but I just don't see where all the complaints are coming from. It runs just fine on my old (6 years) machine, all my software and hardware is compatible, and it's stable as a rock. Microsoft has been wondering the same thing, and after a little test, they may have found out why people seem to dislike Vista so much.
Thread beginning with comment 324482
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: You know
by lemur2 on Fri 25th Jul 2008 02:09 UTC in reply to "RE: You know"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

"Then, in two days, I met two guys with Vista on their laptops. Both times, I said "Hey, you're running Vista." and the answer was "Yeah, it sucks!" Ordinary people, mind you, not Linux folks.
I'm guessing that they bought computers that are underpowered. Vista really needs a minimum of 2GB to run efficiently but, since their margins are so thin and competition is so fierce, Dell and others try to cut corners by installing only 1GB. The result is fairly predictable: the machine spends an inordinate amount of time paging, and generally feels more sluggish. With 2GB going for about $40-50, you can't tell me that it's too expensive to properly equip a machine, either. "

I'm currently running Kubuntu 64-bit with both KDE 3.5.9 and KDE 4.1 RC installed. No version of Windows has ever sullied my machine.

Why should I pay for a more expensive machine, pay for extra RAM, pay for a Vista license, go through all sorts of registration hassles, and use up a lot more disk space ... all to get less functionality, make my machine susceptible to malware, make it run far slower, have it annoy me with UAC prompts, risk not being able to use some of my hardware, give up my privacy, allow a big US software vendor with monopoly interest a backdoor to my machine, risk that same vendor making an error and deciding to disable my machine, and give Big Brother US media content firms both a significant slice of my CPU time and rights over what I might want to do with my machine?

It simply makes no sense for me to do that, I would have to be insane. I would sacrifice many freedoms, rights, capabilities and capacity, and I would gain precisely nothing.

I can tell you for certain ... it is indeed way too expensive to set up a machine with Vista.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: You know
by tomcat on Fri 25th Jul 2008 19:11 in reply to "RE[2]: You know"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Why should I pay for a more expensive machine, pay for extra RAM, pay for a Vista license, go through all sorts of registration hassles, and use up a lot more disk space ... all to get less functionality...


It isn't less functionality. You're running less software (eg. no desktop search, etc), and you're declaring victory over resource usage. Try comparing apples and apples.

Reply Parent Score: 1