Wait

  • Thread starter Thread starter RDN
  • Start date Start date
R

RDN

I would bet, by now, that the majority of the users of this newsgroup
are running a system with a 64 bit cpu.

Microsoft will ship "Windows Vista in November 06". First for
business than in "January 07" for Home users.

Quick survey - How long will you wait until you full upgrade or switch
to Windows Vista?

Myself, I'll hold off for 3 to 6 months after Jan 07 home user ver. ships

When Windows XP first shipped, I didn't upgrade till service pack 1 (SP1)
was introduced.
 
RDN said:
I would bet, by now, that the majority of the users of this newsgroup
are running a system with a 64 bit cpu.

Microsoft will ship "Windows Vista in November 06". First for
business than in "January 07" for Home users.

Quick survey - How long will you wait until you full upgrade or switch
to Windows Vista?
Click to expand...

Why would I want to wait for, or downgrade to Vista when I've already
been running a 64-bit OS for *months* already?

64-bit linux has been around for YEARS as it was first ported to a
64-bit Alpha chip in ~1994. So, the question you should be asking
yourself is, would you trust a newcomer to the 64-bit OS arena, or one
with a long successful pedigree?
 
Quick survey - How long will you wait until you full upgrade or switch
to Windows Vista?
Click to expand...
I think I'll wait until hell freezes over to downgrade to Windows.
 
RDN said:
I would bet, by now, that the majority of the users of this newsgroup
are running a system with a 64 bit cpu.

Microsoft will ship "Windows Vista in November 06". First for
business than in "January 07" for Home users.

Quick survey - How long will you wait until you full upgrade or switch
to Windows Vista?

Myself, I'll hold off for 3 to 6 months after Jan 07 home user ver. ships

When Windows XP first shipped, I didn't upgrade till service pack 1 (SP1)
was introduced.
Click to expand...

I've been running 64bit capable hardware since opterons became affordable...

Windows Vista? Never! Windows anything... Never! Linux does it all...
 
I'll wait until I really want to do something that requires Vista.

It will obsolete my scanner and tv card.

I'm hoping 2 years.
--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org
 
I would bet, by now, that the majority of the users of this newsgroup
are running a system with a 64 bit cpu.

Microsoft will ship "Windows Vista in November 06". First for
business than in "January 07" for Home users.

Quick survey - How long will you wait until you full upgrade or switch
to Windows Vista?

Myself, I'll hold off for 3 to 6 months after Jan 07 home user ver. ships

When Windows XP first shipped, I didn't upgrade till service pack 1 (SP1)
was introduced.
Click to expand...


heh heh he said vista.
 
I've been using Vista RC1 for about a month on a secondary computer. Frankly,
I don't like it as well as XP. The only "improvement" I've seen is the fancy
transparent GUI. I found the transparency annoying, so I've turned it off and
tried to get the desktop to look as much like XP as possible. I'm seriously
considering reformatting and reinstalling XP Pro on that computer.

I can't find any advantage to Vista, and it is annoying that they changed the
placement of common options and settings. I wouldn't spend 10 cents on an
upgrade to Vista. I'm going to build a new primary computer in December using
a Core 2 Quad CPU, and I'm putting XP Pro on it.
 
As for me, it will be at least January 2008 before I see IF I will upgrade.
I don't like the idea of only being allowed 2 installs on a given machine.
Christ knows how many times I have reinstalled windows on this current PC,
but I would like to wait a year to see if there are any big flaws to be
rectified first (cue the Linux massive :P). But, I do like my video games,
and having seen some of the screenshots, I know I will be getting it in the
end.
 
know code said:
Why would I want to wait for, or downgrade to Vista when I've already been
running a 64-bit OS for *months* already?

64-bit linux has been around for YEARS as it was first ported to a 64-bit
Alpha chip in ~1994. So, the question you should be asking yourself is,
would you trust a newcomer to the 64-bit OS arena, or one with a long
successful pedigree?
Click to expand...

*YAWN* another linux zealot squeals...

Linux is far from being ready for mass distribution. You may find it
useable, but for those of us that use our computers for more than a toy,
*nix is just not what is needed.

Honu
 
C. Sowash said:
I've been using Vista RC1 for about a month on a secondary computer.
Frankly,
I don't like it as well as XP. The only "improvement" I've seen is the
fancy
transparent GUI. I found the transparency annoying, so I've turned it off
and
tried to get the desktop to look as much like XP as possible. I'm
seriously
considering reformatting and reinstalling XP Pro on that computer.

I can't find any advantage to Vista, and it is annoying that they changed
the
placement of common options and settings. I wouldn't spend 10 cents on an
upgrade to Vista. I'm going to build a new primary computer in December
using
a Core 2 Quad CPU, and I'm putting XP Pro on it.
Click to expand...

UAC will be good for people like my parents who don't understand how to keep
a Windows system turned off, it will more than likely be turned off on my
system. Patch Guard is a nice improvment (dispiting Symatec et. al. crying
like babies), using the GPU actually as a General Purpose Device is a nice
thing, there are a whole seriese of nice improvments to vista, many of which
are under the hood.

To answer the original posters question, I have no idea.... I've actually
been waiting for Vista before I switch up to a 64 bit OS, but the main
problem is even on Vista 64bit drivers are kind of sparse. For instance it
doesn't look like there's ever going to be a driver for my promise
ultra100tx2 controller card, which is very sad :(

Assuming the few driver situations I have work them selves out, there's a
chance my main PC could be running vista Before the end of january
(depending on if it's available through MSDN which I"m sure it will be ;) ),
it all depends on the hardware support.

For all those Linux Zelots that wrote back, seriously... No OS in the world
is the end all be all of operating systems, there are things Windows does
better than Linux, get over your selves.

Carlo
 
Hertz_Donut said:
*YAWN* another linux zealot squeals...

Linux is far from being ready for mass distribution.
Click to expand...

*YAWN* another Windows zealot squeals...
You may find it
useable, but for those of us that use our computers for more than a toy,
Click to expand...

You are joking, right? Linux is much more than just usable.... I use
Windows in work and linux at home so I actually use both on a daily
basis. Do you? Windows frustrates the Hell out of me with all the
usual, well documented faults it has, but linux is a breath of fresh air
to use by comparison! Let's put it this way.... I have seen both sides
of the OS divide and if things stay as they are today, I will never,
ever install Windows on my home computer again!
*nix is just not what is needed.
Click to expand...

*nix is EXACTLY what is needed! If everyone used a *nix environment
with its vastly superior security model, then we might not be plagued
with all the viruses and worms that generate so much of the SPAM we see
these days!
 
Carlo said:
For all those Linux Zelots that wrote back, seriously... No OS in the world
is the end all be all of operating systems, there are things Windows does
better than Linux, get over your selves.
Click to expand...

You are correct, of course. Windows crashes better, gets infected by
worms and viruses better.... err, can't think of anything else it does
better!

Now what does linux do better? Better security, better stability,
better legacy hardware support (I'll bet 64-bit linux supports your
Promise card!), better memory management, better file systems (you don't
need to defrag a linux disk!), truly open standards etc.
 
I've never had to in linux, so, your point?
Click to expand...

I like Linux. I want Linux to succeed. I started with slackware 0.8x or
something in the very early 90's and have used various distros on and off
ever since. For running apache2 and vsftpd it was great and the machine I
run asterisk on is perfect for that job. For desktop use I've always
found Linux frustrating.

For general use, I think it's even gotten worse recently because flash
has made Linux a second class web client. I just passed my Athlon64
machine down to my daughters and I installed 64-bit Ubuntu on it, which I
had to replace with 32-bit ubuntu so they could use flash. Now flash
works most of the time, but often there are glitches and one my daughters
complains because certain web pages cause FireFox to spontaneously close.
(I've now installed Opera, and we'll see how that goes.). Websites often
just refuse to even let them in because they think their browser isn't
compatible (a user agent spoofer may fix that, but having to jump through
so many hoops just to make things work is not going to help Linux's
popularity).

I decided to install LimeWire on their machine and failed because it
apparently doesn't think I have a recent enough version of Java (I have
the latest). LimeWire is written in java so you'd expect it to work, but
no. gtk-gnutella works fine, but it has a pretty bad user interface.
Could I have solved this problem with some work? Probably, but why should
I have to? Because the Linux community still hasn't gotten it's shit
together, that's why.

When people complain about these sorts of problems they get blamed for
being incompetent. I'm certainly no guru, but I have configured and
compiled my own kernel on many occasions. Most of the server software I
run I custom configure and build myself rather than using a package
manager. It gets tiresome constantly having to fix things or come up with
work-arounds, however.

Yes you can rightly blame retarded website devs and macromedia and
clueless users all day long, and, yes, as far as stability and security
goes Linux is a superior OS. None of that changes the fact that I can't
install Linux on PC's of family and friends and not have them get mad at
me because stuff doesn't work.
 
I've never had to in linux, so, your point?

Is that most people don't want the hassle of having to do this. Just sit at
your pc, and it updates itself. Personally, if direct x was supported on
linux I would have Mandrake installed in a flash.
 
Back
Top