Posted on 04/15/2007 10:03:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Introduction
Microsoft is understandably touting its new Windows Vista operating system with as many superlatives as they can fit in a sentence but the response from consumers seems to be rather muted so far. Half a billion in marketing dollars can certainly make a flashy entrance but for all the publicity generated in the weeks leading to its 30th January release date, there hasn't exactly been the kind of maniacal rush that we had witnessed when tech gadgets like the new Sony PlayStation 3 were initially released.
There wasn't even a decent queue of any sort when CompUSA organized a midnight launch in the US , a somewhat disappointing turnout compared to the success of previous versions of Windows. Similarly in Singapore, there was no hint of a queue when we turned up for the official launch
, in stark contrast with the Windows XP launch here in 2001, which saw shoppers queuing for up to six hours to get their hands on it. It seems that despite the massive publicity promoting Vista's new features, the public is not biting yet.
************************SNIP************************
So how would your ageing systems perform when upgraded to Windows Vista? Would you be better off continuing with an existing operating system like Windows XP? To answer these questions and more, we have configured three systems that span the performance spectrum from an Athlon XP to the latest Intel Core 2 Duo processor. But before we see how they fare running Windows Vista, let's first review the 'minimum' system requirements listed by Microsoft.
(Excerpt) Read more at hardwarezone.com ...
I’ve owned a Mac since 1993. I do have a PC, but most of what it does is go sit in a corner and gather dust.
I love my little Mac Mini, which replaced a G4 tower.
Um, so your argument is, why use a piece of technology that uses one button, when you can use another piece of technology that requires five buttons?
Think.
No
Hey I drove a Dodge Nitro the other day....kind of neat!
There are actually more buttons. Press down on the scroll ball - that's also a button. Squeeze the side pads - another button.
Duke Nukum has been told this many times. He prefers to stay willfully ignorant.
Hey, Duke... did you know there is a Freeper named Dukenukem?
I gave Vista a test drive on my newly built PC using a fully functional RC2 version of ‘Ultimate’. I found no reason whatsoever for anyone to give up XP Pro in favor of Vista.
Now, I’m gonna get out of here before that Eagle guy shows up. lol
Sorry for being so late to respond, but we had a thunderstorm right after my initial post. You’re welcome.
Any one have any good suggestions for running mov files on Vista?
Also Corel Print House(1999) won’t work and my Agfa SnapScan 1212 now appears useless.
I understand why you post as “Silly” mate. ;0)
Well, that stinks. I've used ZA for years. It works and it's user friendly compared to Windows Firewall.
Using WF, I had a program that wouldn't access the Internet (and no prompt "program x is trying to access the Internet", like ZA does), and it drove me nuts until I figured out that WF handn't recognized it, and how to get into the firewall and give the program an ok. ZA sits in the systray, one double click and you can access everything. I don't know if Vista's firewall is more user friendly or not.
An it is OS zealots like you who will keep me from owning a Mac for many, many years.
Isn’t Mac these days basically linux with an UI? Very innovative there, ripping off an already existing OS, oh wait! That’s how Macs got their start, isn’t it?
I don’t want frufru ponytail guys with huge foreheads like you and comicbook sword guy as part of my peer group.
I like real people, not OS zealots, not elitists.
No, that would be Microsoft. Apple actually licensed the GUI from Xerox. As in, paid money.
And no, OS X doesn’t have a Linux core. It has a BSD core, and it’s not FreeBSD. Apple *bought* a perpetual license to BSD way back when to make AU/X - and they used the same license when they made OS X. If that wasn’t enough, Apple bought another perpetual license when they acquired NeXT.
So, no, OS X does not have a Linux core. That’s a good thing, since it means they haven’t been dragged into the SCO v. Everyone In The World mess.
MOV files are Quicktime - just get a new copy from Apple (free) and then patch Vista with the latest round of patches.
As for Vista, we're waiting till it's absolutely necessary to upgrade. We were in Best Buy last month as I was building a system for a friend and we were putting WinXP on it. The salesguy fed us some pretty funny lines on Vista including: XP is more buggy than Vista, Vista's been beta tested for 5 years, and MS is doing away with support for XP at the end of the year.
For those who are running Vista and liking it, more power to ya. If Macs are more your thing, great. The important thing is to go with what is best for you and your computing needs and wants.
Fired up my old AthlonXP machine with XP Pro to do Taxes...sounds like a wind Tunnel at work....takes a lot to keep that slow chip cool..
.My AMD64 X2 6000+ just purrs...and gives me instant response...
I had tried that, resulted in a system crash (buffer overload?)
and funky things happening to my desktop afterwards.
Tried QuicktimeAlternative, it gives an earlier version of MediaPlayer but I wasn’t happy with that either.
Ended up doing a system restore.
Maybe I’ll wait a bit and try it again when they get more of the bugs worked out.
I wouldn’t care but unfortunately have a Kodak digital camera that only records in mov format.
The last one of those comments has an element of truth. Microsoft is terminating all OEM licenses for XP effective at the end of the year and will probably be removing XP from the market as well. They’ve already taken XP off the retail market.
NTFS has had journaling for years, and also has a lot of advanced features of its own. You're out of date.
More importantly, if you're using FAT32 for critical Windows partitions, you're missing out -- NTFS is considerably safer in most respects. Unfortunately it is still largely incompatible with other OSes.
The only time I use FAT32 is when I have to have read/write compatibility across my Win/Lin/OSX boxes, at the filesystem level (e.g. external drives). Network (e.g. SMB/Samba) sharing is unaffected.
Probably you know this, but the 32GB limitation on the size of a FAT32 volume that is imposed by Win2K, WinXP, and OSX is totally arbitrary -- Microsoft forces you to use NTFS. But Linux will happily build a FAT volume up to the actual limit of FAT32 (something around 500GB as I recall). It's just a matter of how big you can let your clusters be (if you're mainly storing small files, a large cluster size becomes very inefficient of space). But if your big volume is holding mainly big files (MP3, videos), having a large cluster size (like 32KB) is a who-cares.
I've been using NTFS exclusively since about 1996. I have never had file corruption caused by power outages or unexpected shutdowns. I've managed hundred of computers in these years.
When I buy an external USB drive I always reformat it with NTFS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.