___MmmBoxy___

Hahaha!!

~Stephanie

aznpimp

a friend o fmine using vista and no problem .. what seems to be here ?

___MmmBoxy___

Read it. I have no problem with it, but some Apple boys have problems I guess.....

~Stephanie

WiCkEd_TrInI

uhhh..i just wanted to know some common problems/glitches with it... since i have it on my laptop

___MmmBoxy___

Ya...and now look what you started!! haha...just kidding. Did my daddy PM you? He should. If not, now he will.

~Stephanie

rjj130

My biggest complaint with Vista is that it's a memory hog.

As others have said, running on XP on the same setup vs. Vista will result in a screaming machine.

I'm running Vista Ultimate on an Inspiron 6400, 2GHz Core2Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB SATA, 256 ATI x1400 Mobility RADEON and it dogs in comparison whenever I play games on the same machine running XP.

I'm still working on tweaking it for gaming performance, i.e. shutting off Aero, Sidebar, Desktop Manager, but for the most part the system does utilize a lot of resources.

My install of Ultimate by the way is a clean one without any bloatware from Dell.

At some point I may end up going back to XP just for greater functionality purposes....

Interested thread none the less...

kanundrum

___MmmBoxy___

Mememory hog?? Did you not read what my daddy wrote??

Oh and Kanundrum....I've seen that before...it's so funny!!! haha!!

~Stephanie

WiCkEd_TrInI

ur dad didnt message me about vista he did about the system 32...thanks

theunclesam

Ubuntu FTW!!!!!

www.ubuntu.com

My Windows box is nothing more than a glorified gaming console. **** and work is done on Ubuntu.

UV7

Here's a VERY recent example that you may or may not be familiar with...
Jamie Cansdale and TestDriven.Net
I understand both sides of the coin on this one, but it just seems that the little guy, who was a Microsoft MVP, by the way, is being threatened with legal action even though there is no obvious violation of any license agreement. Cansdale saw a niche and found a way to fill it using a free-ware version of VS rather than requiring the end-user to purchase a full-blown licensed copy of the software.
Another prime example is Microsoft's evasion of ODF. As is obvious, a universal document format would eliminate the stranglehold that Microsoft currently has, and that Corel had in the past with WordPerfect, on simple word processing and spreadsheets, as well as slideshow presentations. This would create more competition in that realm, which would benefit the general public by bringing new ideas to the table, new development and functionality, all while keeping the end-user's cost of ownership down. Again, I understand Microsoft's standpoint on this issue as it could very well mean they would lose market control in this category. Currently, Microsoft Office dominates this, which isn't necessarily a horrible thing, as it is my opinion that they do offer the best solution at the present time, but that is specifically related to the fact that they hold such control over that current market. Competition is a good thing. ODF would make the market more competitive. Microsoft has taken dramatic steps to keep this from occurring, including creating their OWN version of an XML-based ODF. They submitted this robust version to the ECMA for approval in hopes that this would further push ISO toward accepting it. What is often left unmentioned is that an XML-based ODF has already been submitted and approved by ISO. Why not just conform? Of course, the claim is that there are "advanced features" in the MS-XML version that Microsoft feels are valuable and necessary, but why not offer those advanced features to be added to the existing ODF? The answer is obvious. Conforming to the existing ODF would dismantle the "it's mine" structure they currently have in place surrounding the .DOC/.XLS market.

Be careful here. I am, in no way, pointing the finger at you as being unethical. Please don't take this in that manner. You'll notice I refrained from using M$ as an acronym for Microsoft. Even though I see no harm in it, I have ceased to do so because you have expressed a concern. If you have any other concerns, please let me know and I'll do my best.

I would love to visit the campus someday, but I don't see that occurring any time soon. Duty is always calling (as are my users!).

Addressed

Comparing apples to apples.... XP is EXACTLY to what I am comparing Vista. I recommend to any and everyone that uses a wide range of hardware or software to beware of Vista due to its incompatibility issues. Even though Vista's efforts to make things more secure may be well-intended, it just seems awfully dominant of Microsoft to make such a drastic change without offering any sort of reverse compatibility. This same thing can be seen in different versions of Office, where files created by newer versions are completely incompatible with earlier versions of the same software.
As far as Linux is concerned, the distros may not be entirely PnP, but many of them are easily tweakable to function with a multitude of hardware. Suse is a prime example of a flavor of Linux that has support for a wide variety of possibilities, and a vast majority of it is completely old-hardware compatible.

Certain flavors of Linux, Suse 10 especially, resemble some of these security behaviors that are associated with Vista, as in, they require verification of the SU in order to complete more intrusive tasks.
Mozilla's Firefox did an excellent job of cutting back on browser interaction with system processes by eliminating much of the control that IE hackers use to manipulate PCs. I understand the need for security, but, from my own experiences with Vista, it was done at the cost of productivity, which is hindered due to a significant drop in performance.

Interesting. I don't think I'd be brave enough to trust all those apps on a Vista machine due to the poor performance I have experienced with a basic setup. Several of our users have recently purchased new PCs for home use, many of which were laptops. In every instance, they bumped up the RAM to a minimum of 2G per my suggestion, but every one of them seems to crawl in comparison to an equivalent machine loaded with XP Pro. One of the machines, a Dell laptop to be specific, crashed shortly after having the usual trash (AOL, Earthlink shortcuts, etc., ...the typical garbage that is canned on all systems at the Dell factory) removed from the system. Since the machine was only a few days old, we simply chalked it up as an anomaly... ...or those dreaded gremlins that inhabit every office. Unfortunately, the unit repetitively locked up after the user got it home. She brought it back to me after a few days, claiming that the machine was almost useless due to the problem. Per her request (also due to Vista's incompatibility with a certain drafting program her husband wanted to use on the system), I reloaded the system with XP Pro. The laptop has performed flawlessly ever since.
Another instance relates to a network analyst friend of mine who insisted that his company use Vista in order to more familiarize themselves with the product. The company is a dedicated Microsoft reseller (who wishes to remain nameless due to their poor experiences with Vista) and they also have expressed overall displeasure with the performance and reliability of Vista. In a few cases, my friend has reloaded Vista on a few of their laptops due to a drastic decrease in machine speed. Again, these machines are not using any super high demanding applications. They are typical, run-of-the-mill laptops that began to see a huge decrease in overall responsiveness. Now, before you write this off as hearsay or as an invalid source of information, consider that this individual, as well as his company, are all very skilled with MS products, many of them being MCT.

If I only had the availability... Since I have chosen to steer clear of Vista for the time being, I do not have a machine available that can be used as a basis for utilization testing to offer you concrete evidence beyond the poor performance and reliability I have experienced with Vista, though I doubt anything I gave you would be concrete enough, as there are ALWAYS other possible issues for everything.
On a side note, if you do set up any sort of benchmark testing that would relate to my 386 burn-in, underwater, with a case full of molasses, please let me know. I think I might just take a few days off long enough to take a trip to come by and watch that.... or even participate, if I may. I so enjoy tearing into things.
Thanks for the reply. I look forward to the next one.

UV7

UV7

Ubuntu rocks!!! Imagine a thin-net (dumb) terminal that runs something similar to Ubuntu, but allows connection to a terminal server, Windows or otherwise. This is a little of what I get to play with on a day-to-day basis!

___MmmBoxy___

TheElderBoxy wrote:

"UV7,

I have read about Jamie Canfield and I can't comment on it. He posted a letter he received so check it out. In particular read the second to the last paragraph. If you think what's written is "Squash the little guy" verbiage we would really disagree. Why don't you post that paragraph and get a vote on it?

Quick note on browser tabs. I did a tabbed variant using the IE browser control for application functionality testing in the late 90s. Not for end user browsing per se. Prior to Firefox the Internet Explorer shell NetCaptor used tabs. (I guess that means IE was tabbed several years prior to Firefox) Prior to that Internet Works had a tabbed browser in 1994. The concept of MDI or Multiple Document Interfaces where multiple documents are opened in a single host container has been used in the Windows world from as far back as I can remember. (Very early 90s anyway) I'm guessing your were insinuating Firefox was first with your comment? Again not much is net new and design patterns in general tend to converge over time.

Let's talk ODF. Again I need to be careful here. If you read this from Microsoft.com it says the Microsoft supports ODF. So I guess that closes the issue from some standpoint. Am I missing something?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...NSIVotePR.mspx

From another standpoint, and this is my very personal opinion, how would you feel if someone did a very thinly disquised copy of one of your bread and butter products? When not proven commercially successful they gave it to the Open Source community. My take on their motivation is simply to hurt you and try to limit your profit. That my friend is what you are talking about with regards to deceptive and hurtful business practice, except Microsoft is the victim. To add insult to injury I hear stuff like this after Open XML has already been ratified by ECMA. Not good enough because Microsoft already supports it.

At some point you need to question your own motivation for attacking Microsoft. Could it be because Microsoft has achieved enormous commercial success? Remember the business model Microsoft uses, unlike some of it's competitors, supports a vast partner ecosystem. Microsoft doesn't do well unless HP/Compaq, Dell and others do well.

Anyway nice talking to you. Peace..."



And as for me...my personal comment is:

If you're such a big fan of Apple and if it works so well....why don't you use that in your office? It seems you have the authority to do so, and I am curious as to why you don't?

~Stephanie

kanundrum

ubuntu is good im a big fan of solaris my self, btw they hacked the iphone in 3 days

UV7

http://www.theregister.com/2007/06/0...t_mvp_threats/
This has links to MUCH more than just the second-to-last paragraph. The buildup of communication between the two entities shows Cansdale's continuous requests for clarification on violations of EULA remained unanswered. He repetitively volunteered to remove functionality for the Express edition of VS if Microsoft would issue a formal statement that Cansdale could use to explain the situation to his customers. Rather than cooperate, Microsoft, or at least the employees that Cansdale communicated with regarding this issue, refused any worthy reply, and did nothing but threaten legal action. Cansdale even had his MVP award revoked as though he was no longer "worthy" of Microsoft's club.

So true.

Again, this shows support of Microsoft's variant of ODF, not necessarily the ODF concept itself. The entire intent is to allow EVERYONE, no matter what program they choose to use, the capability to read, write, and modify the same set of files. From my understanding of the information provided by Microsoft, it would seem that they are simply including availability of other formats, such as PDF, RTF, HTML, etc., not necessarily opening the doorway to true ODF. Time will tell. ANSI's acceptance of Microsoft's involvement may be a step in the right direction, depending on how it all proceeds from this point on. At the moment, if one were to write a document in Word, they'd better hope the intended audience has Word. Otherwise, the document is useless. This is a similar issue that took place with Corel's dominance in the market back in the 80's with WordPerfect.
Superiority of a better product at a reasonable price will reign supreme. At the moment, Microsoft Office dominates the office suite market because it is, by far, a superior product compared to its competitors. StarOffice, OpenOffice, etc., do not compare well.
We can see similar actions in the automobile market today. The U.S. manufacturers offer cars with similar aspects to their Japanese competitors, but their quality is not up to par. This is why we are witnessing the fall of the dominance of the "Big Three". There are many other factors here, but the situation would have a similar effect. The average consumer is not stupid.
I think we're missing each other here. Either that, or you have me confused with some others. I am not a HUGE Apple fan. As a matter of fact, we do NOT use Macs in my offices because I haven't the need for them. The vast majority of the machines in our offices are Windows based. We do have a domain in place, with a 2K3 Server DC acting as DHCP, another primarily for DNS, as well as multiple 2K3 terminal servers. The majority of the workstations are XP Pro, with all the thinnet terminals in our warehouses running Linux with RDP to either a 2K3 terminal server or a Suse 10 host. My mail system is Suse 10, running Postfix, and our Barracuda runs off a custom Linux base with a heavily-tweaked SpamAssassin load. Believe it or not, I actually recommended an Exchange setup for email, but was turned down due to necessity. Until my mail system breaks, we're sticking with what we have. The powers that be do not see a sense in fixing or replacing systems that aren't broken. Judging by the uptime and reliability of the mail system setup, that isn't going to happen any time soon.
My OS of choice, if I were to recommend anything to the average user, would be XP, believe it or not. Macs, although nice, are a bit overpriced for the average home user, and Linux, unless the user is advanced and/or just enjoys tweaking their system's capabilities, isn't the friendliest.
I don't view anything I've posted as an attack on Microsoft unless you consider stating common-knowledge facts and real-world evaluations of current and past business situations as an "attack." If that's the case, then I guess I "attack" everyone and everything whenever I point out issues that are not necessarily protagonistic.
A prime example of this would be my opinion of Google. They are a VERY successful company that offers their employees a great deal of benefits. I hold Google in high regard simply because of its amazing growth in such a short time. Even though I think highly of Google, I still have spoken unfavorably of their involvement in the "Great Firewall of China" issue. Does this mean I am "attacking" Google? Does this mean there are ulterior motives behind my negative statements involving Google? I certainly don't think so.

Thanks, and I hope you and your family had a great 4th.
UV7

___MmmBoxy___

Oh, ok, I guess I had you confused with someone else! Sorry!!

Continue....

~Stephanie