Submitted by “Regardless of widespread skepticism, I was confident that Vista would dazzle me, and I looked forward to saying so in print. Ironically, playing around with Vista for more than a month has done what years of experience and exhortations from Mac-loving friends could not: it has converted me into a Mac fan.”
‘Uninspiring Vista’
89 Comments
-
2007-01-19 12:54 pm
-
2007-01-19 4:55 pm
2007-01-19 4:03 am
-
2007-01-19 4:32 am
2007-01-19 8:33 am
2007-01-19 8:40 am
capricorn_tm
I do helpdesk for a living and can assure you I’m counting the hours to my death sentence, when Vista will be officially released and all the morons I try to help out each day will install the third millenium bug in their machines.
My experience with Vista ( yes I have one) is the following.
I installed it on my laptop ( celeron 2.4ghz/512 MO) and found out the following
1) It did not install ( smartly) Aero because it noticed I would never move the bastard again if I did.
2) It could NOT detect the sound card (!) even if it is a normal model ( in fact it failed where six version of Linux and two of windows succeded at the first try and without any problem)
3) It uses 280 mega of RAM to do nothing but run the taskmanager
4) It gives me an error message in wich it says that he cannot open the program because my graphic card is not big enough. The program was solitaire 
NOW.
If I did install Vista it was not for pleasure but it is because I needed to see the beast directly to believe that and the following considerations comes to my mind.
1)Linux using the Beryl interface does (graphically) EVERYTHING that Areo Does, better, in 50 mega of live memory and that running KDE that uses 30 alone.
2)Since three years, I still have to find a single piece of hardware I had problem to make work out of the box using Linux ( I speak of my personal experience here, I know some others had )
3) I went to mediamarkt the other day and found out that memory’s prices all over Europe had a rise of between 30% and 45%. Coincidence? Don’t think so mate…
Final point.
I do NOT understand why Microsoft can go away in releasing a monster that eats RAM more voraciously than a velociraptor, gives very little in term of cost/ quality and does not recognize 3 year old software from the box and I get YELLED at because I, maybe, cannot afford the price of a monster PC to get the bastard going.
… because it’s a review of Vista RC1. And I’m sure his complaints of high memory usage, bugs, and poor 64 bit support haven’t been addressed at all since then…
“And I’m sure his complaints of high memory…”
I don’t think Erika would appreciate being referred to as male.
64 bit support is something that’ll have to be fixed by the third party vendors, something that’ll probably take a while after release to get sorted.
I doubt the honesty of the article writer.
RC1 was full of bugs and pretty much unusable.
I doubt the honesty of the article writer.
RC1 was full of bugs and pretty much unusable.
How do you doubt the honesty of the article writer? She stated that she was given RC1 by Microsoft to review in the beginning of the article? She even states that she has been told that some of the problems have been fixed in the final version…
You doubt the honesty of the article writer, and yet you come to the same conclusion she did.
I doubt your honesty.
“I doubt your honesty.”
Why?
Her conclusion was to buy a MAC.
Another solution is to wait until Vista SP1 is released when everything is more stable and supported and hardware upgrades are cheaper.
Not worth the upgrade get it with your new machine.
None of those where *my* conclusion. I bought a ati R300 based card for £88 pounds from an ebay shop to run Beryl+AIGLX.
Now if your saying Vista is worth “Price of Vista”+*Possible* “Price of New Hardware”+”Learn something new”+”Things may not work”+”Replacement Software”+”Time and effort involved”+”You don’t like Microsoft”. Thats a hard sell. Linux has only half of those problems…and thats a hard sell as well. If your conclusion is different to mine *state it* do not be shy.
I think Microsoft have their work cut out, but they have Bags of Money, and big marketing engine gearing up right now. With lots of people wanting their success…from hardware companies to bodies like the Music/Movie industry, but I can’t see how they will do this.
I can see why people made the transition from DOS–>win95–>WinXP, but I’m missing the thing that will make them *want* to Vista.
Your whole comment is predicated on the assumption that I doubt the honesty of the writer of the article. That is not in fact the case – if you re-read my comment, you’ll find I doubt the honesty of the person who was doubting the honesty of the writer.
directx 10 might make people want vista. If you’re considering mac or linux, you’re not thinking of the latest games but people do want to have fun. Isn’t that right, “I’m a mac” guy?
WOW…. Ronaldst actually admitted something Microsoft produced was “full of bugs and pretty much unusable”
break out the champagne
She’s a bit late to the party reviewing RC1, RC1 was buggy, that’s why there was an RC2
it IS pretty weird to release a ‘Release Candidate’ which is so full of bugs… they should’ve called it an beta.
anyway, it’s indeed not very good to review an beta, even tough MS themselves asked to do it.
From the article …
Unfortunately, Vista RC1 contained bugs that rendered some promising features, such as the new version of Windows Media Center, unusable for me (an acquaintance who acquired a final copy of Vista ahead of release assures me that all that has been fixed).
Ok, I would think that if you’re going to review a product like this after the gold code has been released, maybe you should wait until you get your hands on the final product, especially after somebody has already told you that the problems you experienced have already been fixed.
Although my computer meets the minimum requirements of a “Vista Premium Ready PC,” with one gigabyte of RAM, I could run only a few simple programs, such as a Web browser and word processor, without running out of memory.
I personally wouldn’t recommend anybody run Vista on anything less than 2GB. While that’s probably way too much admittedly, I was able to get 2GB of RAM for about $200. Not exactly breaking the bank.
Second, users choosing to install the 64-bit version of Vista on computers they already own will have a hard time finding drivers, the software needed to control hardware subsystems and peripherals such as video cards, modems, or printers.
Of course, Vista is a pretty big update, especially going to 64-bit. Wonder if this problem existed on OSX v10.0? Anyway, if people would just wait until they get a new machine to upgrade, these kinds of problems wouldn’t exist. Otherwise, there’s really no reason why people shouldn’t stick with XP on their current machine.
It seems that none of the companies concerned had written a driver for my sound card; it took more than 10 hours of effort to find a workaround.
I wouldn’t spend over 10 hours trying to debug something I could replace for $50.
Now, however, simplicity is increasingly important to me. I just want things to work, and with my Mac, they do.
You know, when I’m researching new hardware to buy for my PC (such as the OCR pen scanner I recently purchased), I have noticed that a lot of the negative reviews are from Mac users bitching that the devices don’t work right on their Macs, so just wait until you start adding 3rd party hardware to the mix.
Oh, and here’s my favorite part …
And my deepest-seated reasons for preferring Windows PCs–more computing power for the money and greater software availability–have evaporated in the last year.
Oh really? Then she goes on to say …
Apple’s decision to use the same Intel chips found in Windows machines has changed everything. Users can now run OS X and Windows on the same computer; with third-party software such as Parallels Desktop, you don’t even need to reboot to switch back and forth.
Ok, so the greater software availability is no longer an issue because now I can buy a Mac and effortlessly switch over to Windows? LMAO!! WTF kind of logic is this??? If I absolutely LOVED the Mac and just HAD to run Windows, instead of running both operating systems at the same time, think I’d rather just get a cheap PC and use a KVM switch to go back and forth.
And now for the kicker …
I may need Windows for a long time to come; many electronic gadgets such as PDAs and MP3 players can only be synched with a computer running Windows, and some software is still not available for Macs.
Of course, he is right about this, which is the very thing that makes any advantage OSX has null and void, IMHO.
i agree with your post, the only thing i would say is that Mac OSX 10.0 was a complete rewrite from Mac OS9, where as Vista is built upon Win2k3, which is built upon Win2k (with XP elements) etc.. So i would have expected a bit more optimisation with Vista, even with the released product (end of year, biz launch) people are still saying that on idle Vista is using 400MB RAM, which i find a little high.
XP uses about 50-70MB without SP2, about 100MB with SP2, i would have thought about 200MB odd would have been more acceptable. I know people will say that RAM is cheap, but a lot of people haven’t got the extra cash to get up to a least a GB, i agree that 2GB is a good amount for vista.
Overall with Vista, which i think it has been said before 100x on blogs is that the whole experience is underwhelming. Vista is a solid release, it just have that must have feature for upgrading. Althought on a personal note the instant search within vista is the only thing which is selling it to me, after using Tiger and spotlight for a couple of years (prob less) it’s become part of my method of using a pc.
I wouldn’t spend over 10 hours trying to debug something I could replace for $50.
It’s a laptop.
If I absolutely LOVED the Mac and just HAD to run Windows, instead of running both operating systems at the same time, think I’d rather just get a cheap PC and use a KVM switch to go back and forth.
Unless you, oh I don’t know, travel with you computer. Don’t get me wrong, if it were a matter of desktops a KVM (or better yet, Synergy) is the better option.
Life is about choices. If you don’t want to run Windows, all you have to do is make the right choices about hardware and software and you won’t have any issues.
Life is about choices. If you don’t want to run Windows, all you have to do is make the right choices about hardware and software and you won’t have any issues.
If that were the case, I’d probably own a Mac. Unfrotunately, a few things (both hardware and software) that I greatly desire still only run on Windows.
Of course, I’m sure that things work the other way around for some people (esp those who are convinced that iLife is the greatest thing since sliced bread), but hey … different strokes for different folks. As I’ve always said, it’s all about the right tool for the job, and I don’t consider either platform superior over the other, and that includes Linux too. They all have their places.
see, what are you saying? get more ram, oh get another soundcard, figure out how to use a KVM switch…huh? most people don’t want to deal with that. They just want their computer to work well out of the box.
exactly
“I personally wouldn’t recommend anybody run Vista on anything less than 2GB. While that’s probably way too much admittedly, I was able to get 2GB of RAM for about $200. Not exactly breaking the bank. “
$200 is $200. I spend that much every month on diapers and wipes for my 18 month old. Then there is the mortgage, 401k, car payments, heating bills, 529s for both kids, insurance, actual date money so my wife and I can go out, etc etc.
My wife and I make a good income, combined exceeding 6 figures. But life is expensive, and unless one is irresponsible and whips out the ‘ol credit card all the time, things get tight.
In other words, there is the real world, and being forced to spend an extra 200 bucks to make something work decently which worked just fine before on the old hardware with either XP or Linux or Mac, for near zero benefit (ooooohh 3D effects, translucent windows, whoooppeee!), is utterly ridiculous.
What’s also ridiculous is all the MS apologists and fanboys who say it’s perfectly OK for just the OS to require a gig of RAM, and 2 gigs to actually run programs, and then talk down to you if you don’t want to waste extra money buying extra RAM, or a premium video card.
Thank God for Linux, where I can get all the KDE desktop goodies, beautiful look and feel, tons of features, extreme stability and security, and have it all run on old and/or budget hardware super fast. In fact, with the budget laptop I bought at Frys for $350, which has a 1.2 GHz cpu and only 256meg RAM and only a basic video card, I can run SimplyMepis, or PCLinuxOS, or a host of other distros, faster and feature for feature superior to our XP box that has a 2.4 GHz cpu and 716megs of RAM.
So, in essence, Linux gives me more for less $$$, and it looks like Vista gives you less for more $$$.
Also, thank God for Mac on Intel. Again, you get more great desktop experience running on more modest hardware specs.
Vista’s memory requirements, and the video card requirements, are reasons enough not to use them.
What’s also ridiculous is all the MS apologists and fanboys who say it’s perfectly OK for just the OS to require a gig of RAM, and 2 gigs to actually run programs, and then talk down to you if you don’t want to waste extra money buying extra RAM, or a premium video card.
Who? Seems like you’re pulling that out of your ass.
The OS itself does NOT use up 1gig of memory. 1gig should actually be sufficient to run the OS and your apps. It was for me when I used the RCs. In fact, even with 512mb it ran ok.
2gigs is just a number pulled out of someones ass.
There there. Here’s my shoulder to…
This is the real world: I run Vista on 1gig of RAM. It runs fine. And I am a gamer meaning I abuse the OS to a max. Vista probably runs fine on older rigs too. I have tried an old NVIDIA 5200 and GMA900 on Vista. They do fine. I bet ATI 7X00 class do too.
I guess I should reply that Linux and MacOS X’s higher memory requirements, costs and learning curve requirements, are reasons enough not to use those OSes. Chmod? No thanks. Finder? Fix it.
I guess I should reply that Linux and MacOS X’s higher memory requirements, costs and learning curve requirements, are reasons enough not to use those OSes. Chmod? No thanks. Finder? Fix it.
Linux has higher memory requirements than Vista? It seems like you and sappyvcv are the ones pulling figures out of their asses. Who needs chmod these days, and what exactly do you find wrong with Finder?
@Tweenex
OSNews even had an article about how XP had lower memory usage compared to GNOME.
The comparison is Linux to Vista, not Gnome to XP.
OSNews even had an article about how XP had lower memory usage compared to GNOME.
Not surprising, since GNOME is still being developed and XP is old. Nevertheless, GNOME != allOfLinux, no matter how much you try and twist this to fit your “facts”.
“Please, just use KDE” – Linus.
and then what happens you are using kde and then you need all this gnome stuff because of some gnome app like beagle. So now you have kde and gnome sucking up ram.
Also, if gnome is still being developed, wouldn’t that mean more features and just use even more memory?
Edited 2007-01-18 19:32
Beagle is not a gnome application. It is written in mono and its frontend in KDE Is kerry, written using the Qt-libraties.
But you can swap out Beagle with Strigi which is far more efficient and will be integrated into KDE4 by default.
so why is it when I was in kubuntu I had to download 75 megs for beagle?
Because it requires Gtk, Mono, Gtk-sharp and a host of other libraries that don’t ship with KDE. Not to mention Beagle itself, and probably some packaged in GUI that is Gnome dependent which required large parts of Gnome…
yes so my point is that once you start using all kinds of linux apps, you end up with more bloat because you need 2 sets of libraries to do the exact same thing.
Also, if gnome is still being developed, wouldn’t that mean more features and just use even more memory?
Not necessarily. Reducing memory usage has been a priority for quite some time now. It is very typical for free software projects to focus on optimising once they reach a certain maturity (just think of Mozilla).
In fact, I find this whole discussion highly ironic, considering that the common complaint about GNOME is that it doesn’t run well with 256 MB of RAM (and that’s being worked on). At least with Linux you always have the choice to run XFCE and get by just fine with even less.
At least with Linux you always have the choice to run XFCE and get by just fine with even less.
I am running XFCE4.4 RC2 and it has a good memory footprint but I find it tends to get up to — my system reads 286MB RAM used — when you run several desktop applications. I have Thunar, Terminal, Seamonkey, and Rythmbox running and I have 768MB RAM on my system. Realistically you still need about 512RAM to run a good collection of desktop applications on XFCE. Gnome is not that different in memory usage. We have beta 2 of Vista at work and it runs well with about 1 Gig of RAM.
Off Topic
=========
“I am running XFCE4.4 RC2 and it has a good memory footprint but I find it tends to get up to — my system reads 286MB RAM used — when you run several desktop applications. I have Thunar, Terminal, Seamonkey, and Rythmbox running and I have 768MB RAM on my system. Realistically you still need about 512RAM to run a good collection of desktop applications on XFCE. Gnome is not that different in memory usage. We have beta 2 of Vista at work and it runs well with about 1 Gig of RAM.”
I agree with your findings xfdesktop; xfce4-menu-plug do *seem* to have memory leak. I noticed it at 15days uptime. It looks like a bug, not a feature. In the latest release candidate.http://www.xfce.org/release_notes/4.4rc2_changelog.html
You can see they have focused, on optimizing memory and speed, as well as some smaller bugs.
The point made was gnome/kde+X+Linux has a higher memory usage than XP. I’d *agree* with that statement. Its worth pointing out that both KDE/Gnome can be stripped down to occupy a smaller *memory* footprint, and one of the focuses of both is to reduce this, but look for packages like KDELite and Memory usage in gnome. It has been pointed out XFCE has a lower memory footprint only a few days ago they released the latest version of XFCE4.2, with backported bugfixes. The reality is Linux provides alternatives for a more lightweight desktop environment, even when compared to XP.
In 10 days we will not be comparing a *modern* *nix desktop+X+Linux environment with a XP we will be with Vista, and Vista had a large memory usage, larger than *any* equivelent MAC or Linux desktop environment, and larger that the *vast majority of machines out there..
This is without talking about getting *full*(sic) Vista desktop experience. Which require hybrid drives and DX10 cards both thin on the ground and expensive.
The reality is the cost+effort of upgrading a computer to run Vista worth it, and the answer is *yes*. If knowing about Vista is part of your job, you like being an early adopter, You’re interesting in one of the bundled applications that come with Vista, and have the time+money and have a computer that can be upgraded…but I think these people are in the minority.
I think in 12 months Vista’s requirements will be a non-issue. Its only an issue for a 3 year delayed OS at *launch*, by then we will all be talking about HD technology on Vista and those requirements.
OSNews even had an article about how XP had lower memory usage compared to GNOME.
URL please.
I’m sorry? What figure did I pull out of my ass?
Sappyvcv:
The OS itself does NOT use up 1gig of memory. 1gig should actually be sufficient to run the OS and your apps. It was for me when I used the RCs. In fact, even with 512mb it ran ok.
Wikipedia, citing the Beast:
According to Microsoft, computers capable of running Windows Vista are classified as Vista Capable and Vista Premium Ready.[24] A Vista Capable or equivalent PC needs to have at minimum an 800 MHz processor, 512 MB RAM and a DirectX 9 class graphics card. A computer that meets these requirements will be capable of running all editions of Windows Vista although some of the special features and high end graphics options may require additional or more advanced hardware. A Vista Premium Ready PC will take advantage of Vista’s “high-end” features but will need at least a 1.0 GHz processor, 1 GB main memory, and an Aero-compatible graphics card with at least 128 MB graphics memory and supporting the new Windows Display Driver Model.
So since the only things worth buying Vista for are its theme (which you can now get on KDE, too) and Windows Mail (if it bothers you enough that it used to be called Outlook Express), Vista-worth-buying won’t run on anything less than a PC with 1GB RAM.
How does that contradict anything I said? What figures did I pull from my ass?
I guess I should reply that Linux and MacOS X’s higher memory requirements, costs and learning curve requirements, are reasons enough not to use those OSes. Chmod? No thanks. Finder? Fix it.
I use Linux, Windows (XP and 2K), most of the time, and only recently had something at work where I’ve been using Mac OS X Tiger.
Linux is on par with XP as far as memory usage goes. The OS itself takes up <4M and X on top takes 40-60M, and a heavy desktop environment like KDE 3.4 takes another 30M on top — granted, not all of that is actually loaded into memory (though it’s mapped by the VM). What’s nice about Linux is more than any other OS I’ve used to date, it properly uses the excess RAM for buffers and caches. Linux is free to download, the learning curve for general use is the same as Windows and OS/X (since you mentioned ‘chmod’, one can assume you’re unaware of the Linux desktop as a user wouldn’t need to use it any more than a Windows user needs to use ‘ATTRIB.COM’).
OS X uses noticeably more memory for the core OS, but applications tend to be fairly efficient in their memory usage. I agree that the Finder UI is quirky and could do with an overhaul. Windows Explorer seems a little more intuitive, and Linux/KDE’s Konqueror better still.
VISTA (and I’ve only used RC1 so far) has the greatest requirements by far. It seems pretty solid and the UI is basically the same, but with new paint. It doesn’t have all the whizbang glitz of Linux and is more like Mac OS/X in that regard, but still professional. The Explorer is basically like XP’s with a little more polish, but without the featureset of the Linux equivalent and not quite as intuitive.
‘Ok, so the greater software availability is no longer an issue because now I can buy a Mac and effortlessly switch over to Windows? LMAO!! WTF kind of logic is this??? If I absolutely LOVED the Mac and just HAD to run Windows, instead of running both operating systems at the same time, think I’d rather just get a cheap PC and use a KVM switch to go back and forth. ‘
– Great if you can do that! Most people couldn’t be bothered or care. They just want to use one OS. At least she tried to fix the problem with the speakers herself… most people would just call Dell or just use the computer without sound. What OS do you use? Linux I guess… I think if she tried to use that she’d have to spend a lot longer than 10 hours trying to get things to work.
– It’s the kind of Logic non-computer geeks have. The kind of Logic people have who have enough trouble finding the correct port to plug a mouse in to.
‘Of course, he is right about this, which is the very thing that makes any advantage OSX has null and void, IMHO.’
– Which part of the world do you come from? Where I’m from Erika is a girls name… maybe if you realised that you might have cut her a little slack… she doesn’t seem to be a know-it-all PowerUser type. She seems to be just writing an article about her experiences.
– I guess if she said her experiences had converted her to using Linux you’d been screaming about how great this article is and OS news should publish more like it.
🙁
Of course, he is right about this, which is the very thing that makes any advantage OSX has null and void, IMHO.
It’s a “SHE”… Erika. She, not he.
And I disagree with your post. I am a very long time Microsoft User (I am a MCSE if that matters) and when I brough my 1st Powerbook, I never looked back. I still use WIndows through Paralells (My work is .NET developer, something I do inside the VM), but using a Mac, if you are a little bit “open minded” and “ready” for something new, is a nice experience.
I haven’t touched Windows Vista Final yet (and I don’t have plans to do it, tho I will have to, because our software will eventually run under Vista’s), but just like every other MS release, the more you use it, the more annoyances you find. This has been the rule for the last 12 years of my professional experience with computers; I am not only talking about Windows Operatin System, I’m talking about Exchange, SQL Server, etc. (MS-Proxy 2.0 anyone?? LOL)
This is an awful article that just states that the author has suddenly noticed that Microsoft has ripped off OSX features – by playing with Vista RC1.
It starts by saying how she has always loved Microsoft and is now turning into a Mac fan after using Visa for a month, despite previously despising Mac operating systems. Don’t waste your time even clicking the link.
Someone should introduce her to XGL/Compiz/Beryl/etc….
heh heh heh……….
Yes, because OSNews needs yet another “It took me a week to setup Linux but Windows and the Mac work out of the box” article.
Maybe 2 years ago you would have been correct, but nowadays, Linux works more things out of the box than Windows and OSX.
With a impressive amount of bloatware, MS has somehow managed to get Vista somewhat secure. 1GB to run an OS and some apps should make one think about efficiency and design. I don’t care for what reason people switch, any reason is a good reason. Mediocrity should no longer rule.
whats with all the RC1 reviews? Vista is *gold* now.
I don’t care much for MS stuff, but this is just stupid.
“whats with all the RC1 reviews? Vista is *gold* now. ”
Gold? I would call it bronze. SP2 could be gold.
well, true enough
but my point stands!
Serious question: which articles are most helpful on whether or when to upgrade to Vista?
Links will suffice, although anything is most appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
Yeah its a review of RC1 which makes no sense I mean comparing a RC1 to OSX (which has been out for how many years now and how many revisions?)
As for the sound card that is because MS completely rewrote the sound stack which kinda buggers hardware accelerated soundcards so manufacturers have to devolp some wierd voodoo to get it to work. I also wonder if the author actually like tried to find any drivers for their computer or just used what came with RC1….
First of all, the minimum Ram that the 64 bit Version of Vista requires (i had the impression she was “testing” that one) was more than one Gigabyte. You can’t expect any software to run below it’s requirements.
Basing your judgement on RC1 when not only RC2 was already out and the release Version is going out this month is realy extremly unprofessional.
Complaining on the Driver support of an OS that not only wasn’t even released at that time but had two more revisions ahead before release is the most redicioulus thing i can think of.
Lastly, while i agree that there isn’t much of a price difference when it is your first Computer you buy between Mac and PC, it is a huge price difference if you already have an good display.
I have an 24″ TFT, so if i would buy an Dell i wouldn’t buy a new Display. So an iMac would be much more expensive, since i don’t have the option to not buy their integrated display.
That leaves me the Choice between an absolutly overkill G5, that is twice as expensive than what i would consider investing in a new computer and an MacMini, which has Virtually no Hardware accelerated 3D (the Intel GMA950 doesn’t even have Hardeware T&L, so it is even less capable then an Geforce256 which was released 1999).
Unfortunately, the MacMini was even too slow for most basic 3D apps, so i sold mine after only an month with quite some loss.
I don’t know “Technology Review” (i hope she doesn’t mean that mag by the same name from heise publishing) but if that is the level of prefessionalism you can expect from their senior editors, than i doubt it is worth reading.
Your point about screens is often missed in review articles. If you deal with people who are not very well off, the ability to keep their old screen and phase in their purchases is the difference between buying and not buying. And you are right about the mini. What you get elswhere for the price of a mini you simply cannot match from the Apple range in terms of performance.
You can’t carry it around in your coat pocket either, of course…
“You can’t carry it around in your coat pocket either, of course…”
Indeed… but they should not have switched away from the Radeon GPU that the PPC Mini had. That one was at least barely usable.
yeah the only mac a pc user would really want is the mac pro and that’s very expensive!
You can get a refurbed for ~$1300. I just got one for $1399. 2.0Ghz dual core, 1gig mem, 256mb video card, 15″ screen
Not a bad deal, for a macbook.
I don’t want a macbook with a 15 inch screen. I already have a 22 inch monitor. I want real 3d gpu graphics. If the mac mini had real 3d gpu, I could go for that. But that’s the problem with Apple. If you don’t like the few choices they offer, you are out of luck.
Yeah, to bad we are talking about Desktops, not Notebooks, and boy, could i get a used PC Notebook for 1300$.
I don’t have as high requirements for a notebook than i have for my Desktop and i’m quite satisfied with the notebook i have. I’m surely not going to replace my desktop with an Apple Notebook that is used *and* is about halve as powerfull as my actual Desktop.
Plus, that all doesn’t change the slightes bit of my argument. I could get a Monster desktop for 1300$ and just keep using my 24″ TFT. 17″ is good for Mobile use, but i’m not suffering through 17″ for my Desktop needs.
This is the funniest thing I’ve read all day.
You’ve spent $1399 on a refurbished (second hand) laptop with a 2.0GHz dual core CPU and 1GB of ram?
You’ve just been had in a big way.
Refurbished and bought from Apple. I read many many reviews online and everyone praised the refurbs from Apple. So yes, I saved $1100 by getting a refurb.
I don’t see how I’ve been had.
Nah, i could settle for an MacMini if it had a usable, 3D capable GPU. The one it has isn’t even powerfull enough for ambitious Blender work, let alone 3d Programming, which is one of my main interests.
Oh, oops. I thought you were talking about macbook pros. I misread, sorry
[i]”[…] 3d Programming, which is one of my main interests.”</i
You might want to get a SGI Tezro. 🙂
There aren’t that many 64-bit Vista apps.In addition besides the “beautiful” Aero interface there’s isn’t much under the hood that shouldn’t have been there in XP.
He summarizes exactly why the Windows and Mac experience is so different and how many former Windows fanatics finally see the writing on the wall and switch over… me included. Bottom line if you want a computer that just works every time you sit down then buy a Mac.
good articel.
If Vista RC1, RC2 or RTM – the difference is not too big. Compare XP and Vista, what’s new expect the new interface (okay, only new interface if you bought Home Preium)?
Paint, WordPad, Editor; all the same. Even WordPad can’t open Office 2007 word documents! But TextEdit in Mac OS X “Leopard” will be able to do this!
So Vista, even RTM, is a slow, bad copied (<- just stupid features!) system. Look at the hardware requierments. My Mac has 350 Mhz, and it runs so fast! I want to see vista on the same hardware…
so that’s my opinion;
I think DRM and Trused Computing are further more reasons to convert to Mac or Linux (even BSD? hu?)
think DRM and Trused Computing are further more reasons to convert to Mac or Linux (even BSD? hu?)
Actually Mac’s have had TPM chips since the Intel’s lines came out (maybe even before that) and DRM? Please iTunes anyone?
Linux may be free of that but not Mac’s most definitly not macs….
the DRM is just in iTunes, just in files from the music store. But that’s not the idea of apple; more the idea of the music industry.
And Apple does not use the TPM chip in the mac.
Oh they do….or at least they used to I guess they got rid of it with the Core 2.
http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter10/tpm/
Thats how they pretty much tried to make sure OSX 10.4 will only run on Apple machines and not just any old x86 machine. They even have a driver in OSX for it.
Either way DRM is something Hollywood and the RIAA pushes into things not the software makers. So if you want an OS that can do things like play HD Discs you will need it…
It sounds like her mind was already made up to get a Mac. I don’t think anything Vista could have done would have changed that. She just wanted someone/something for encouragement.
The article never stated what the reason to upgrade was. What features did she not have in (assumably) XP?
If she did not bother to read the feature list and find some reason to upgrade, then she must have been upgrading for the eye-candy. Since she upgraded for the eye-candy, it is very logical that that is all she found.
I’ve been using Vista since Beta 2 (RC-1, pre RC-2, RC-2, post RC-2, RTM) and I am still finding new stuff.
My advise is wait until SP 1 or even SP 2 and buy a new computer. If there is not a “must have” feature for you, why upgrade? Why throw away your money?
Oh yeah, I am running Vista on a budget Media Center that I bought refurbished 3 years ago. I added a GB of RAM (to the existing 512 MB) and it runs about the same speed as Win MCE. It multi-tasks better but that is due to the fact that it was RAM-starved before.
I run Vista because in 12 days I have to start supporting it.
Erika Jonietz is a Technology Review senior editor.
I don’t even know how to respond to that other than they must have some extremely low standards.
‘I don’t even know how to respond to that other than they must have some extremely low standards.’
Exactly, she’s an EDITOR, not a Network Administrator, or a Computer guru. She’s there to edit documents and proof-read them (as well as writing articles like this one), not to build computers, run multi-boot systems and know what a KVM Switch is!
I really love Macs but never got into buying one.
Why you may ask?
Because they are so dam expensive when compared with PCs.
Before you start saying that I should compare it with whatever Dell model. Let me say that here in Europe most of us do buy OEM PCs.
A OEM PC with a good software bundle and a game level machine is usually 500€ cheaper than the Mac. On top of that in many countries only big cities have Mac shops.
So even though I like them, for my graphics development I will keep on using PCs it seems.
That’s a pity. Because you obviously don’t factor in the cost of keeping a PC running.
A friend of mine bought a HP laptop the same time I bought a similar spec’d MacBook Pro. The Mac had a higher price but:
1) A week later, his laptop was already in repair.
2) The sofware bundle contained such “useful” things as time limited version of anti-virus software (bundled software somehow often seems to be time limited or in some way crippled – I would call that fraud)
3) He needed 3 days to figure out how to make the HP printer working as a shared network printer with his notebook
4) etc.. etc.
So while my friend paid less initially, his “total cost of ownership” was probably much high than mine (depending on how you factor in your time and nerves).
I’ve got another friend who claims to have no problems with Windows however I’v got my regular laughts when listening to his constant battle with that OS. Apparently, there are PC users who think it’s absolutely normal and most probably their fault, that software A written for Windows does not run on said OS or suddenly stops working. One of my favorite is the episode where an installation somehow went wrong and ever since some kind of nag-screen appears upon logging in which he can’t get rid off.
As for Vista: I don’t see any fundamental problems addressed: only more bloat. Certainly one of the strongest evidence for Wirth’s law..
As I said, OEM computers.
In my home country, Portugal, many shops sell their own branded PCs.
Not many people have branded computers like Dell, HP, whatever.
Again for hardware faults that can happen to anyone. Just talk with all the Mac fans with battery problems and overheating laptops.
And yes I did get some crapware, but again if you don’t buy from one of these “big” brands, usually the problem is not that big.
As for fighting with the system, install only what you need. Many people install all the stuff they can find on the net and then blame the OS.
“As for fighting with the system, install only what you need. Many people install all the stuff they can find on the net and then blame the OS.”
My home country is Germany and I may tell you this: The “fighting with the system” is one of the reasons so many people obey the (mis)belief that “Windows” is so clever by itself, does everything by itself, knows what is right and is so easy all the way. Usually, it’s the better educated computer guys (“techies”, “geeks”) who are called if problems appear – and they do appear sooner or later, let’s say, as soon as the user does something stupid. Some of them even don’t remember what they did. While everything works, it’s okay, but if there are problems, most average users are not able to even read an error message or do some basic diagnostics. They leave this work to the poor individual who has more troubleshooting knowledge than they have. And because they’re not confronted with the troubleshooting, they don’t experience how difficult it can get, starting by correct drivers, going over to network configuration up to teaching the use of a pirated copy of a program in another language (here in Germany, programs with english language are the main problem).
Most of the problems are not problems with the OS. Please understand me: I’ve never used any MICROS~1 products and surely won’t run “Vista” (because I do not own hardware it would run on), but in most cases you really can’t blame the OS when users mess up their PCs. This goes for “Vista” as for any other OS. So the advice given above is completely right: Install only what you need, know what you do, remember what you’ve done, RTFM (if you have one). 🙂
I just installed vista. Of course it is not surprising. It is an operating system for christs sake. That said, it works just fine on this three year old machine of mine (Athlon XP 2500, 1GB, GeForce whatever).
Memory usage is not a problem at all. The user access control thingy does not bother me. And even exotic third party drivers like TrueCrypt worked just fine.
Ripping CDs to mp3s also still works, so all the DRM paranoia seems to be way overdone.
Vista is not so great that it will win over any mac fans. But it won’t drive windows users to OSX or linux in droves either.
I just installed vista. Of course it is not surprising.
I presume you mean inspiring. Let’s work on that assumption.
Of course it is not (inspiring). It is an operating system for christs sake.
Well, I don’t know if you’ve ever used one but Macs, Amigas, and Linux PC’s can be pretty “inspiring”. I was inspired by Amigas, and Linux impressed me, insofar as it was an OS that could be installed on (what the time I thought of as, and perhaps at the time was) crappy PC hardware (in comparison to Macs and Amigas), and actually work, which despite Microsoft’s crowing that it was the best thing since sliced bread, Windows 98 never did on the machine that later turned into a Linux workhorse.
Indeed much of my excitement stems from the fact that because of the openness of the web, people who otherwise wouldn’t have had a chance of seeing Macs and Linux computers and getting to know their users can actually converse with them and find out just exactly how full of it MS really are, and how much their OS “efforts” let users down.
As to it being “just an operating system”, that’s true, but if Microsoft had spent the last few years struggling to get ISV’s to port software from DOS to Windows, there would be a huge market for DOS programs irrespective of how much better Windows purported to be – and there would certainly be a hullabaloo if Windows software actually started /appearing/.
Memory usage is not a problem at all. The user access control thingy does not bother me. And even exotic third party drivers like TrueCrypt worked just fine.
Well, memory usage is a problem insofar as if you don’t have enough memory, you might even have to upgrade your motherboard just to be able to upgrade to as much memory as Windows required. Plus, as you said, it’s just an operating system. An OS shouldn’t require as much memory – and indeed MacOS and Linux don’t. Plus, other people have had problems with drivers – particularly with old hardware for which a Vista drive isn’t, and probably never will be, available.
Ripping CDs to mp3s also still works, so all the DRM paranoia seems to be way overdone.
I wouldn’t be so sure; I have heard that music companies have basically given up on copy protection, but it’s not confirmed – and I wouldn’t put it past them to reintroduce them on the sly. And that says nothing about movie companies, who don’t seem to be about to give up Digital “Rights” Management anytime soon. They will if people don’t buy BlueRays and HD-DVD’s, but that seems to be more to do with the fact that people are sick of upgrading, and the prices are high, rather than any general righteous outrage about Restrictions Management.
Vista is not so great that it will win over any mac fans. But it won’t drive windows users to OSX or linux in droves either.
That, unfortunately, is probably true.
It is one of the finest articles I have *ever* read on windows.
It was not one that went on about, security, or a stack of *buzzwords* thrown into an article, without any real analysis or proof. It was wrote by a *real* person who understood *her* issues. The mistakes in the article are not clever, or misleading. They are just that mistakes. I didn’t feel like I was being fooled once.
Vista is bigger, beefier, has a stack of enhancements and features…and she didn’t care about any, and I agree with her. There is nothing to excite her or me that justifies Vista.
Now what interests me and I’m clearly the only one, is how Microsoft are going to sell this “greatest Microsoft OS ever” to the public. I know 90% of the public will probably end up using it. I’m interested if Microsoft can make them *want it*. DX10, Security, aren’t going to do it, the Wizzy interface helps.
If you would have asked me 6 months ago. I’d have said Microsoft would go for Connectivity Zune; Xbox 360; Smartphone, but without the Zune I can’t see that working.
Without a real push which isn’t coming from business, or a real push from the home user, and none of these groups really care about gamers. Vista will have slow adoption, and Microsoft have predicted the *fastest* uptake ever.
I know they will talk about productivity, ease of use etc etc, but my guess is parental controls will be their main selling point, because nobody wants to be a bad parent, and the computer can look after the kids now.
If you look back since windows 95 each new version has been uninspired. Microsoft just keeps copying what is good out there and borrows from OSX, etc. The sad part of any debate on this topic is that it currently just doesn’t matter. Once the OEM’s roll out Vista on new PC’s yet another 3 year term of Windows domination continues. Most of us don’t have the extra cash to jump to a Mac. The same thing will happen all over again with Vista. Just you watch. All your friends in the corporate world in the states will be using Vista and people will continue to complain about it like XP but the situation will change very little. Sorry if this horribly pessimistic but I see no significant reasons why the current situation would change. People stick with what they know and don’t want to be hassled about worrying if their music playing or business software will work on a Mac. It already works on the PC just not that great, but not bad enough to inspire change.
Edited 2007-01-18 23:01
A really superior article on the lines that Vista is uninspiring and at best “worthy” is this one in the Wall Street Journal.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116908385298979668-0KM342sGU…
The difference is that the WSJ article is written by a professional who knows how to be objective and fair, and who knows how to write. One surmises he may be something of a Mac fan as well.
Mossberg is probably the ultimate Apple apologist – certainly in the mainstream media. For an example of the kind of intellectual contortions this leads to have a look at
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114729881894749433-ORYg5V1P3…
People of an older generation who were exposed to the liberal left in their youth will be reminded of certain formerly fashionable East European intellectuals writing well disguised apologies for the Soviet Block.
It is not the causes that are similar. It is the style and method of argument. Dire stuff. The more dire for being disguised. Get under the surface, and what it amounts to is, choice is bad for you.
on the other hand, Apple is the choice against Microsoft domination. it needs hardware integration because it can’t afford to write drivers for everything in the pc universe. They can’t afford to support everyone with zillions of configurations. Also, no OEM will offer any alternative OS. Apple must get its OS on its own hardware because nobody else will.
So I see the integration as more of a necessity for keeping the Mac choice alive but I wouldn’t call it a plus.
Linux will need its own “mac” in addition to the freely distributed software in order to get more to switch.
Mossberg is probably the ultimate Apple apologist – certainly in the mainstream media. For an example of the kind of intellectual contortions this leads to have a look at