Vista?
- Thread starter dingledow
- Start date
- Status
I have Vista Ultimate 100% free and I would buy them only if I was going to purchase a new pc with the cheap DSP version. My pc is actually good with Vista Rating 3,8. Anyway, I am using Vista since the Release Canditate 2 in November 2006 and I've seen that it is an amazing OS getting better and better fixing errors, bugs, incompartibillity etc. I would strongly recommend you to purchase it or download it (Microsoft became wealthier with 40.000.000 copies of Vista sold anyway). I would suggest you though to dual boot it with XP till the sp1 is released.
superdave1984
Repeat Offender
- Messages
- 1,986
- Location
- KY
My dad bought a new PC and it came with Vista. I have a lot of trouble finding what I want when he calls me for help on the thing. LOTS of things are either in different locations or have different names so finding "My Network Places" isn't happening. I guess after a while you find everything.
It is easy. They eliminated the My from everything and jsut went with basic names. So instead of My Computer it is just Computer. The My Network Places is jsut Network.
Also advising people to dual boot isnt right. Either they are going to like Vista or not. SP1 isnt gonna be a major revamp like the XP SP1 was. they are only 2 real changes that have to be made to Vista. 1 cause of google and their attempt at getting into that lawsuit. Other than that there is only updaes that need to be added. Which you can get them all from Windows Updates anyways. So why wait?
If they dont like it they can dual boot then. If they do then dual booting might not be that great of a option for them. So they would waste space dual booting and have more trouble trying to get rid of XP then.
Also advising people to dual boot isnt right. Either they are going to like Vista or not. SP1 isnt gonna be a major revamp like the XP SP1 was. they are only 2 real changes that have to be made to Vista. 1 cause of google and their attempt at getting into that lawsuit. Other than that there is only updaes that need to be added. Which you can get them all from Windows Updates anyways. So why wait?
If they dont like it they can dual boot then. If they do then dual booting might not be that great of a option for them. So they would waste space dual booting and have more trouble trying to get rid of XP then.
you just gave more people reason to dual boot.
that is why they need to dual boot. so that they can have something to fall back on and or to compare it too. MS is forcing vista on us. most people don't like it now.
I got a new HP laptop with Vista Home Premium and like it. Yes it does have a few bugs but it still works pretty well and it was time to upgrade my old laptop. I say get vista but find a spare drive to load it or XP on and then you can just swap drives to the OS you prefer. I may make an XP back up drive for my new laptop just to see how fast it runs.
In a way to dual boot is a good idea. In case you dont like Vista. But if you do then dual booting is more of a pain than anything. So why not just use Acronis or Ghost and make a image of your XP install? Then fresh install Vista. If you like it keep it. No worries. If you hate it you can jsut use your image and be right back to where you were. Easier solution that trying to remove Either XP or espically Vista from your machine.
Of course M$ is going to try and shove Vista down our throats. Despite people's hate toward it Vista is more secure than XP. It does better with netoworks (i know some people have had issues with this as well) along with preventing applicaitons to install on the fly by with the UAC. So yeah it also helps their bottom line cause Vista costs us more to buy so more $$ in their pocket. If companies didnt try to force new products on us we would still be using a revamped version of Windwos 95 right now instead of Vista or XP.
**** even OS X does it. With each new release they charge your for it. At least from what the guys i know that use it tell me. They get charged like $80 a upgrade for the newest version of OS X. So even Apple does it. Only Linux user who use the free software dont have to pay for updates. But then again they dont have the versitility that Windows and OS X users do. They have to try and emulate platforms to be able to reproduce resutls that Windows (Gaming and Wine) or OS X can do without the emulation.
So there are arguemnts toward or against any multi boot setup. It is all personal preference. But still to be said is that if you are nto that computer savy a dual or multi boot system will bring nothing but confusion.
Of course M$ is going to try and shove Vista down our throats. Despite people's hate toward it Vista is more secure than XP. It does better with netoworks (i know some people have had issues with this as well) along with preventing applicaitons to install on the fly by with the UAC. So yeah it also helps their bottom line cause Vista costs us more to buy so more $$ in their pocket. If companies didnt try to force new products on us we would still be using a revamped version of Windwos 95 right now instead of Vista or XP.
**** even OS X does it. With each new release they charge your for it. At least from what the guys i know that use it tell me. They get charged like $80 a upgrade for the newest version of OS X. So even Apple does it. Only Linux user who use the free software dont have to pay for updates. But then again they dont have the versitility that Windows and OS X users do. They have to try and emulate platforms to be able to reproduce resutls that Windows (Gaming and Wine) or OS X can do without the emulation.
So there are arguemnts toward or against any multi boot setup. It is all personal preference. But still to be said is that if you are nto that computer savy a dual or multi boot system will bring nothing but confusion.
- Status
Similar threads
