Linked by Adam S on Sat 28th Jan 2006 13:25 UTC
Windows Digg users just "dugg" an item from Silicon Valley Sleuth to the top of their queue. The article asks boldly, "is Windows Vista really vapourware?" Although the article discounts some legitimate strides Microsoft is making with things like IE7, Least-Privileged User Account, and Windows Defender, there's little doubt that Windows Vista is a far cry from what we were promised a few short years ago.
Thread beginning with comment 90347
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Useless
by Kroc on Sat 28th Jan 2006 16:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Useless"
Member since:

Indeed, it's the same as the jaded Windows 98 users who swore they would never upgrade to XP because they hated the Lego look. With the hindsight we have now, everybody can see that using Windows 98 is practically stoneage and insane! I believe the exact same will be of Vista. People will moan and complain becuase they like the sound of their own voice, but by the time we've all been using Vista for a year or two, we would cringe at the thought of having to use a stone-age Windows XP machine.

It's been this way ever since Win3.1 and I don't see it being any different this time with Vista, hardware requirements and all.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Useless
by dsmogor on Sat 28th Jan 2006 17:42 in reply to "RE[3]: Useless"
dsmogor Member since:

I use it. It's much nicer for my HW, leaves a lot more for my data on HD and given the fact that most viruses now target XP is safer.

Of course it sucks as developement platform but that what we have linux for ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Useless
by chemical_scum on Sat 28th Jan 2006 21:33 in reply to "RE[3]: Useless"
chemical_scum Member since:

everybody can see that using Windows 98 is practically stoneage and insane!

I still have a Win 98 partition on my Linux box at home while my work computer runs XP. On the rare occasions I boot into Win 98 I am quite surprised how efficient and modern its GUI interface seems, XP seems to offer no advantage here. 98 runs all the most recent versions of the apps I have on it both FOSS and proprietary and I have yet to find a program that does not install (OK the only proprietary apps I have tried are the free trial versions of chemical 2D drawing programs).

The only real advantage of XP is that unlike Win 98 it is stable and I'll be the first to admit that XP is a very stable platform. The lack of a proper multiuser accounts for 98 is an important security feature missing for its use as a network client but this is much less relevent for a home machine.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Useless
by AmigaRobbo on Sat 28th Jan 2006 22:04 in reply to "RE[3]: Useless"
AmigaRobbo Member since:

"everybody can see that using Windows 98 is practically stoneage and insane!"

But is that true about People using Windows 2000?

Heck I thought that about 98 after using NT4, and strangly enough even MORE so about ME.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Useless
by kolmyo on Sun 29th Jan 2006 12:05 in reply to "RE[4]: Useless"
kolmyo Member since:

I know a lot of people who use Windows 2000 (when they use Windows), including me. The reason for that is that 2k just is the best Windows atm. XP only added some bugs, ugly UI and some irrelevant features which can be added to Win2k by installing some 3rd party apps.

Reply Parent Score: 1