they are not forcing it. not that's funny
just give me my money back on my store bought copy. I don't use vista. I use to dual boot it. I've been wipe it out.
I have a dell that came with vista. I wipe it and put media center on it. give me my money back on that too
you ain't going to see the kill switch through their in house spyware anytime soon. it will be awhile. the simple fact is it's there. just because you haven't seen it and you were a beta tester doesn't mean anything. it was design for you not to detect it. it is a ms exclusive. they enable it in a year or two whenever the money stops rolling in.
anybody that think that vista was design from the ground up know little about computers. longhorn was kinda designed from the ground up, but it didn't work. period. so they went back to the xp drawing board.
vista is nothing but xp with extra's. vista lovers are going to argue differently but nobody is going to produce proof stating otherwise. vista 32 bit was suppose to overcome the 3 gig limitation. guess what? it didn't.
why is everybody ignoring the winfs question? that was suppose to be the main advantage of vista (longhorn). copernic seems to have it down pat
They wont activate any spyware in 2 years because in-case you havent read, Windows 7 will be started in it Beta cycle by then. Which means that M$ isnt going to wait 5-6 years to roll out a new on like they did this time.
Eric i have very high regards for you and your opinion but in this case i can not agree. I have run Vista since it was a Beta. I am a MVP i have some connections at M$ in Redmond and not a single person can even back up your statement about spyware being included. Not even the people in the MVP program who have hacked Vista can find any trace of it.
You are right about WinFS. It was supposed to be in Vista. Just like Avalon was as well. But Avalon got renamed to something stupid and only a partial piece of that software was included. the fact is Vista was rushed. It was forced out before it was ready. I am not argueing that fact at all. There were so many promises that were broken about VIsta because they had to rush it out and WinFS to this day still isnt anywhere near ready. From what they say WinFS wont even be ready for Windows 7.
But also ista is a totally new code base. It has many simularities to XP yes but the coding is new. Which is why the XP drivers among many applications do not work on Vista without some tweaking. To think that Vista is just a recode of XP is wrong because if that was the case then ALL XP things would work on it easily.
this says it all. I know. pro vista people won't absorb one word of it.
I am realist. I'm a independent person too. I judge everything for myself, by myself. I could care less about somebody's opinion. my opinion is what matter to me
I look into stuff open minded. most people look at stuff narrow minded.
I gave vista all kind of chances, yet I kept going back to xp. a lot of people have done the same. the funny thing is 70 percent of you guys that don't agree with me are still using xp. do you care to explain that?
people that had windows xp when it first came out didn't go back to windows 98. so stop comparing xp debut with vista's. everybody loved xp. only the dos tech didn't like it. so instead of bashing me, go delete xp off of your hdd and use vista exclusively. you won't. why? because you can't.
which brings back my point
vista isn't an improvement on xp. it isn't an opinion it's a fact. but it is here to stay. the monopoly also known as MS have brainwashed millions into thinking that vista is better.
last time I checked atomic tofu, this was a tech forum designed to help people. it is not a vista promoter.
Vista as of right now is not a improvement on XP. The statements made in the PCWorld mag were close to accurate. I was not brainwashed nor do i think that Vista is the best OS since Windows 3.1 was released either.
But at the same time Vista is a improvement on what XP started. The combination of the 9x platform and the NT platform. The ability to network easily within a home and to share files and tools easily. This is what Vista has done better than XP and as time come around people will start to see how easy it really is to use Vista. When SP1 comes out (even though oughly 90% of the updates are already available) people will see a improvement in speed. But sadly no one will still be happy cause of the fact that the drivers are crap for Vista. Nobody has been able to provide drivers that perform well on the system.
This problem is due to the coding that M$ has done with it along with the lackluster support from everyone. Why should companies bother to code better software for Vista when the only thing we hear is "XP is Better". Didnt we hear that same statement back in 2001 when everyone was saying 98 was better? But did the companies push on and MAKE XP the best? Yes. So when companies start to push Vista and make it better with more applicaitons and better driver support what willbe said then?
Not only is XP faster, but it also runs more programs than Vista.
The only thing is, Microsoft refuses to make DirectX 10 for XP, even though XP is very capable of running it.
But in fact, your point does actually apply more than you'd think.
You could run a DOS machine for automated tasks in a factory, and it'd be more than capable. Even today. You don't need Vista, a heavy GUI and DirectX 10 to run some scripts.
In fact, DOS machines are used in a lot of manufacturing plants.
XP runs very few programs more than Vista. Overall i have seen and gotten well over 95% of XP applications to work on Vista with very little effort. The rest are applications that have to be tweaked at the code level to work. To boast that XP runs more is a futile arguement. As more and more software is developed for Vista only we can say the same thing that there is software that will only run on Vista and not XP. DX10 being a prime example of software that has full advantages in Vista over XP.
So you can call me what you want. Vista fanboi, M$ fanboi...whatever. Why? Cause honestly i dont care. I have not used a M$ product in over 2 weeks now and i do not see myself going back anytime in the near future as i am trying to learn Linux. Even so there are thigns that Vista can do better than XP and things that XP can do better than Vista. XP is faster than Vista but PCLinuxOS is faster than XP. So what? Ubuntu is faster than XP as well. Does that mean anything? No.
It isnt the speed of the OS. It is the ability to get the tasks done. Whatever they may be. Coding Video, internet, email, gfx, audio...the list goes on. We each have our likes and dislikes. We each will fight about each one till we are blue in the face. Doe that mean this person is right over that person? No. Why cause they are jsut opinions. Opinions are like buttholes. We all have one and they all stink. Espically mine.
So in the end we all can say what we want. We all can think what we want. But in the end it wont make no difference. I guess my opinion of Vista isnt that bad cause i didnt have to buy it. I got it for free. So why would i hate it when i didnt have to spend the $$ on it. The truth is i wouldnt have bought it if i didnt get it for free. I would have pirated it. EricB i already said i value your opinion. You and me have disagreed on many things. But i do see your point. Vista isnt that easy to get used to or like. It took me well over a month of work to get it to where i like it. Apok i also see what you are saying. But again i see the other side as well. In the end my opinion is changing cause of the fact that i have gotten away from M$ right now. Using PCLOS and Ubuntu and seeing that simple things like Internet, music and videos can be done easily in Linux and why pay for a OS when you can get one for free.
To me this arguement is futile cause right now we say we hate Vista. After SP1 gets released many opinions will change. Then Windows 7 will get released and this vicious cycle will start all over again.