Microsoft Vista

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
}What, exactly, is "better" in Vista over XP Pro?

How about Vista identifying and installing drivers needed when
installing the system? I had a few hours to kill so I resized my
partitions to dual boot and reloaded XP Pro on C: and Vista RC2 on D:.
On boot up, Vista had correctly loaded all of my motherboard, sound,
video and related drivers. XP had half a dozen "!" in device manager. To
me, that is an improvement...
 
1.) False positives do happen. Pick up the phone and call Microsoft.
2.) Its my opinion, people are entitled to their own.
3.) Rocket science or not, most people NEVER open their computer for any
reason. When something goes wrong, they either drop it off at a shop or buy
a new one. Most people don't upgrade their RAM. Its that simple.
4.) I never said to upgrade to Vista and not upgrade your RAM. I did say
that there are several new features that are coming in Vista that will give
people better performance.
5.) It may not be on your list, but I can assure you, its on a lot of
people's.
6.) If they want to, and those that do are going to have many features over
XP which allow their mobile PC's to run faster, longer and more efficiently.
7.) All I've seen from your posts are complaining and trolling. If you
really want to learn more about Vista, try to pay attention and read.
8.) I'm already running Vista as my primary OS both at home and in the
office. At home I've been on it full time since Beta2, at work when RC1 was
released.


Bill F.
 
I'm so sorry you found it stupid. It's reassuring to know there are
intelligent people like you around, although it does make the rest of us feel
so humble.

David
 
Alias~- said:
That's nice. About time.


Ever hear the term "false positive"? MS doesn't have thousands of out
sourced workers all over the third world because the WPA/WGA always works.


If you say so.


They should run out and buy Vista then.


Erm, teach them how? It's not exactly rocket science.
Click to expand...

Yes adding ram is easy, but not everybody has the confidence to open their
machine.
 
Beck said:
Yes adding ram is easy, but not everybody has the confidence to open
their machine.
Click to expand...

Considering it's one step up from an erector set, I wonder why. I mean
we're talking two screws! I guess it's a good thing for techies that
repair computers ...

Alias
 
Bill said:
1.) False positives do happen. Pick up the phone and call Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Um, and then jump through a lot of hoops to "genuinize" one's OS that
was genuine to begin with. Not cool, sorry. MS admits to at least 1%
false positives which translates into hundreds of thousands of unhappy,
frustrated, PAYING customers.
2.) Its my opinion, people are entitled to their own.
Click to expand...

Being as you didn't include what this is referring to, I don't know what
you're talking about. Please learn how to do in line posting. I assume
you mean your opinion about a Firefox that hasn't even been released yet
as being better than IE7 which hasn't been released yet either. I am
correct?
3.) Rocket science or not, most people NEVER open their computer for any
reason. When something goes wrong, they either drop it off at a shop or
buy a new one. Most people don't upgrade their RAM. Its that simple.
Click to expand...

Well, people need to be educated then, now don't they? How many people
have you taught how to change RAM?
4.) I never said to upgrade to Vista and not upgrade your RAM. I did say
that there are several new features that are coming in Vista that will
give people better performance.
Click to expand...

I sure hope so after all the hype.
5.) It may not be on your list, but I can assure you, its on a lot of
people's.
Click to expand...

What's the hurry? The 53 seconds it takes my computer to boot up is not
exactly a "long time".
6.) If they want to, and those that do are going to have many features
over XP which allow their mobile PC's to run faster, longer and more
efficiently.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess people who are into mobile PC's should run out and buy Vista.
7.) All I've seen from your posts are complaining and trolling. If you
really want to learn more about Vista, try to pay attention and read.
Click to expand...

Please stick to the issues and try to avoid ad hominems. Thank you.
8.) I'm already running Vista as my primary OS both at home and in the
office. At home I've been on it full time since Beta2, at work when RC1
was released.


Bill F.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I will watch people like you who have to have the latest
and the greatest before it is even released to the public. In the
meantime, XP works wonderfully for my needs.

Alias
 
Dave said:
}What, exactly, is "better" in Vista over XP Pro?

How about Vista identifying and installing drivers needed when
installing the system? I had a few hours to kill so I resized my
partitions to dual boot and reloaded XP Pro on C: and Vista RC2 on D:.
On boot up, Vista had correctly loaded all of my motherboard, sound,
video and related drivers. XP had half a dozen "!" in device manager. To
me, that is an improvement...
Click to expand...

Yes, that most certainly is an improvement! Thanks!

Alias
 
Dave said:
}What, exactly, is "better" in Vista over XP Pro?

How about Vista identifying and installing drivers needed when
installing the system? I had a few hours to kill so I resized my
partitions to dual boot and reloaded XP Pro on C: and Vista RC2 on D:.
On boot up, Vista had correctly loaded all of my motherboard, sound,
video and related drivers. XP had half a dozen "!" in device manager. To
me, that is an improvement...
Click to expand...

Dave:

Yes, that happens for me also. But isn't this because we have late-model
machines that did not exist when XP was released? I have clean-installed
XP on a couple of older laptops and had everything work right out of the
box.

But I agree, the Vista install is nice: very smooth and very fast (I
only do clean installs).

David Wilkinson

David Wilkinson
 
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:03:41 -0400, David Wilkinson

}But isn't this because we have late-model
}machines that did not exist when XP was released?

True, but for the most part XP and prior versions relied on 3rd party
vendors to provide drivers which is OK as long as you can locate the
damn install disks. :)

}But I agree, the Vista install is nice: very smooth and very fast (I
}only do clean installs).

Well I resisted doing a clean install because I had years of "stuff"
loaded on my XP machine. The thought of reinstalling all of that
software stopped me. I bet my XP machine had been running for 4-5 years
on the same install. If I remember right, I upgraded to XP from Windows
2000 before that.

When I loaded Vista Beta 2 I did the upgrade route without a hitch. Then
I tried to upgrade to 5728 but got an error because of the latest nVidia
driver already loaded. RC2 came along and I tried to upgrade but got an
error again so I bit the bullet and wiped the system. That gave me the
chance to reload XP as a fall back in case something goes wrong. I did
have a security blanket as I had my XP machine (as of the end of July
when Beta 2 arrived) backed up to an external drive with Retrospect
along with the Vista image backup (which I have used twice).

Now with 2 clean installs (XP & Vista) I remember how fast the OS is
supposed to be!


Later,
Dave
 
I am A+,Net+,MCP,MCSE NT 2k
2k3, MCDBA and MCSD and i have worked in areas from Dept of Defense to
Consulting firms handling presidential elections so i am not basing my
opinion with no knowledge of computers. Maybe the version you loaded which
was a "BETA"(Lets remember what that word means) so maybe it didnt run great.
I have worked on Macs Linux Unix Novell and this by far is the best product i
have seen come out ever for the stage it is in. The graphics are great, the
performace is great(I am running this on a standard p4 1.7 with 1 gig of ram
on a IBM Stinkpad t41 and i have no problems whatsoever) The interfaces and
GUI's look crisp. This product is by far the most feature rich OS i have seen
come out.(This is coming from an original MAC lover) I have a feeling the
people posting negative are just some lonely Linux or Unix troll trying to
stir up a rise out of MS people. Like i said i have been pro mac awhile but i
liked XP better than OSX so i switched and now with Vista once the final copy
is released i will probably never touch a MAC or Linux box again. Oh yea
Firefox blows compared to the IE on Vista
 
It does have it good points. I think they should have spent some more time
on IE7 though. Mine runs sluggish. I usually use Opera. I have been using it
for quite some time now and I think it is one of the best browsers to date.
 
OK, then you say this negative remark typical of a troll

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be.......

BTW, if IE7 does to FF like you, then back up your remark with factual
examples. Most already agree (even many loyal IE6 users) that IE7 is not
very good.
 
Back
Top