Posted on 09/27/2007 8:40:50 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
While Vista was originally touted by Microsoft as the operating system savior we've all been waiting for, it has turned out to be one of the biggest blunders in technology. With a host of issues that are inexcusable and features that are taken from the Mac OS X and Linux playbook, Microsoft has once again lost sight of what we really want.
As we're more than aware, Vista Ultimate comes at a premium. For an additional $160 over the Premium SKU price, Ultimate gives you a complete backup and restore option, BitLocker Drive encryption, the ever so popular Windows Fax & Scan, and the "Ultimate Extras." But what started with a promise of "Extras" by summer, quickly turned into an apology from Microsoft and the eventual release of DreamScene and Windows Hold 'Em (among others) today. And while each of the "Extras" runs just fine, Microsoft's "Extras" blunder is just another reason why the company must abandon Vista before it's too late.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com ...
You don't need system commander. I have several triple-boot machines (DOS-98SE-XP) that use the win98SE boot menu to control the DOS/98SE choice, and the XP boot menu to choose between XP and DOS-98SE.
The trick is to install 98 first, and iron out all issues before loading XP. For machines that will share another machine's web connection, the FAT32 file system makes XP run like a dream, and still be able to share the same disk partitions. For machines that will have their own web connection, it is best to let XP use its own file system, and just install it on the very last partition on the bootable drive.
Yes it can, as long as the display card you have will support it. I can run two pharlap DOS-extended virtual machines running AutoCAD or GPS post processing in separate windows in XP on an old Dell laptop that was built for 98SE, and has only 128MB of RAM.
Never believe rumors; test it for yourself.
I had problem with Vista doing a very basic function. I called Dell and after hours they could not solve it. I called the router company and they said it was not their problem. MS support was rude. They claimed that Dell loaded the Vista so they don’t support it. (BS, they wrote the stinking thing and made the profit from it.)
Finally, I found a work around on the internet. You have to lie to Vista to get the function to work.
I still can’t get several software programs to work with it so I just use them on my XP machine. The Vista is used pretty much for just web browsing and email since it’s so useless.
A hypothetical board meeting back in 1983:
Suit 1: Within three years, IBM will be fighting to keep above 60% market share.
Suit 2: If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that...
Times change. I'm not saying that the poster is right, but there is no empire that does not fade and no monopoly that does not go extinct. 'Tis the way of the world.
Virtually any sys admin. Even Microsoft is beginning to realize this. Traditionally, Microsoft products have been administrable GUI-only or with second rate command line tools. Heck, .NET didn't get an MS command line build system until MSBuild with VS 2005. Exchange 2007 is slotted to have full command line administrative capabilities.
Now, if you want to write a letter to good ol' grandma, you don't want to use the command line. If, however, you have to administer any number of computers above one, you'll find that a GUI can't do better. The command line is still the quickest, easiest way.
Only when something better comes along, that is easily available to everyone who wants it. And right now there is nothing on the landscape that jointly meets those two requirements.
Of course it can, and in the same way and to the same degree as you're describing on the Mac. VMware is available for Windows, as is Virtual PC, Bochs, etc, etc, etc. I have about 8 VM's configured on the very machine from which I'm typing this, and I can any 2 or three of them simultaneously.
Well, in your other post you didn’t specifically say your objection was that one couldn’t run a Mac OS, but that’s not a limitation of Windows per se. Mac OS’s are not licensed to run in a VM, and I think the VM software vendors don’t want to anger Apple by allowing you to do it. If VMware, etc, would write it, I believe it wouldn’t be any harder than installing various flavors of Linux, OS/2, BSD, UNIX, etc., all of which can be done.
This time, I put on Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy Eft. It mostly worked, but had some problems conveniently finding my wireless LAN. I updated to 7.04 Feisty Fawn, still had some problems, and finally downloaded the ISO and burned the install disk. A fresh install of Ubuntu 7.04 fixed most all the issues, and I'm really liking it. Gravy was that a few weeks later, Dell announced that it would be offering three platforms - one a laptop - with Ubuntu 7.04 as the O/S.
Life is good.
With HP getting on the bandwagon with a SUZE platform, and Walmart's machine with another distro, the Linux world can only get better and better.
I used SuSe 10 for some time and though it was close, my experience was like yours. Almost... but...
Switched to Kubuntu 6.10 -- better, much closer, but still not quite...
Then I recently installed Kubuntu 7.04. Wow! Perfect install right out of the box. Downside/upside: the Lexmark winprinter driver that almost worked in 6.10 not available in 7.04. So I switched to an HP Deskjet 660C sitting in the "surplus" pile and bingo! This system is nice!
I've even installed some Windows apps in Wine and they work.
Sales of XP just got extended through the middle of 2008 because so many people still want XP instead of Vista. Mainstream support doesn't end until April 2009, but that'll probably be extended too. It's not like Microsoft to sell an OS and give less than a year of support for it.
OS X is easily available through the Mac stores and, as for Linux, you can either grab an ISO or, for the less technically inclined, request a free CD to be shipped to you. The alternatives are available and they are building momentum. Even vanilla BSD (i.e. Free/Net/Open BSD as opposed to Apple's souped up version) is trying to get a piece of the action. Moreover, manufacturers are beginning to offer Linux preinstalled on systems other than servers.
Face it, Microsoft needs to innovate or they will be relegated to the dustbin. They won't die, they will just become a shadow of their former selves, much the same way that IBM and Novell did (and may remain, only time will tell). I am not saying either Mac or Linux is the next big thing, because that would require knowing the future, something I don't know, but the time has come for something new and people are beginning to look for it.
Go ahead, quote Microsoft stock prices until you are blue in the face, but the truth remains that things are changing. Even Microsoft has been forced to acknowledge this implicitly, to some degree. Once, the only way to get their development tools was the professional packages or the slightly cheaper, but still hefty, academic prices. Now, they are offering express versions of their products online. Why? Because the hobbyists that Gates has so despised in the past become professionals and they like to bring their tools with them. If those tools are PHP and vim rather than Visual Studio, Microsoft is toast. Or the fact that IE's standards support has gotten at least a little better. Even though Firefox hasn't taken over, losing a few percentage points in market share has been enough to shake them into the realization that they have to pay at least lip service to standards. Or, for example, the fact that they got ECMA standardization for both C# and the .NET CLI, or their failed bid to get an Office XML format standardized. Microsoft may still talk a bold game, but at least some of them know that something needs to change or they will start losing real market share.
mac os and linux are both stable.
windows fled stability in the 1990’s,
resulting in a fix-or-repair-daily software,
which created millions of jobs for techies.
Grut,
The funny thing is in the end all Linux needed to put out a desktop on par with the commercial releases is the ability to abandon the server.
While you *can* run a server on ubuntu they made it as much in the style of OSX and windows as they could in eliminating the need for users to see the bones of the os..
Not bust but imagine in 1983 someone at IBM saying ‘we have to watch out for MS in a dozen years they will own desktop computing’
Sands sometimes shift slowly and sometimes very quickly. Heck apple looked very solid in the early to mid eighties and were all but put under by the mid to late 90’s.
Yup after more than a decade and 7 tries and imitating Apache MS *Finally* has put out a decent web server...
Aint competition grand..
IIS has been smoking Apache where it counts for years, within Fortune 1000 companies and for secure SSL traffic that’s worth encrypting. But now even the “parked domains” that aren’t even being used but tracked by Netcraft are starting to switch over too.
Larry Magid / New York Times:
Drew Cullen / The Register:
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.