Jump to content
tanknet.org

Windows Vista


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have yet to see any feature/app which Vista has but XP doesn't. Buying Vista 1.0 violates the Golden Rule of Computing; "Never buy version 1.0 of any Microsoft product".

 

Maybe 12-18 months out, I'll take a look. By then I might be ready to buy an ITX chassis PC to use as a PVR, in which case the Media Center stuff might justify going to Vista.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will switch to Vista when I can afford it :D

 

Also, the following should happen:

 

1) After a few years when all of you guys have gone thru the problems with it

2) When Microsoft releases a Service Pack X for it

3) After reading much reviews

4) When the programs I need require Vista.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Aeroglass? It's definitely easy on the eyes.

 

I should have qualified my statement with "that is of any interest to me". Hell, I'm still using the Windows Classic theme on my home PC. I first saw the transparency stuff a few years ago when the Linux crowd was messing about with transparency in xfree86, nice to look at but accomplishes nothing.

 

I looked at the Wikipedia article on Aero, aside from Media Center I didn't see anything I'd want. MS is adding some new fonts, whoopee. I did find mention of some Windows internals that sound like improvements, particularly in how settings for multiple networks will be handled. Not sure if the next-gen NTFS is going to be better or worse than current NTFS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I should have qualified my statement with "that is of any interest to me". Hell, I'm still using the Windows Classic theme on my home PC. I first saw the transparency stuff a few years ago when the Linux crowd was messing about with transparency in xfree86, nice to look at but accomplishes nothing.

 

I looked at the Wikipedia article on Aero, aside from Media Center I didn't see anything I'd want. MS is adding some new fonts, whoopee. I did find mention of some Windows internals that sound like improvements, particularly in how settings for multiple networks will be handled. Not sure if the next-gen NTFS is going to be better or worse than current NTFS.

I'm with you. I have themes disabled and run XP in performance over appearance mode. I want an OS to work well, not look pretty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I should have qualified my statement with "that is of any interest to me". Hell, I'm still using the Windows Classic theme on my home PC. I first saw the transparency stuff a few years ago when the Linux crowd was messing about with transparency in xfree86, nice to look at but accomplishes nothing.

 

I looked at the Wikipedia article on Aero, aside from Media Center I didn't see anything I'd want. MS is adding some new fonts, whoopee. I did find mention of some Windows internals that sound like improvements, particularly in how settings for multiple networks will be handled. Not sure if the next-gen NTFS is going to be better or worse than current NTFS.

 

Same. Classic theme over here. I find the Windows XP theme very cluttered.

 

OT question on NTFS: when you guys get a new 'puter, is it already in NTFS format? I seem to notice that the local tech guys here format harddrives using the FAT32 file system even if it's WinXP they are installing. I just learned that my 'puter is FAT32 and not NTFS. Since it's new and exhibiting no problems, I don't exactly want to format it and install all the stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in it support for lloyds tsb, (i actualy work for fujitsu) and so far nearly everyone who has been put on the vista pilot has requested to have xp re installed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OT question on NTFS: when you guys get a new 'puter, is it already in NTFS format? I seem to notice that the local tech guys here format harddrives using the FAT32 file system even if it's WinXP they are installing. I just learned that my 'puter is FAT32 and not NTFS. Since it's new and exhibiting no problems, I don't exactly want to format it and install all the stuff.

 

Been awhile since I read anything on it, but some folks who are pretty up to speed on Windows recommend use of FAT32 rather than NTFS. On paper, NTFS is a better filesystem, but apparently it has some failure modes which are catastrophic. FAT32 fails more often, but partial recovery of data is more probable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Been awhile since I read anything on it, but some folks who are pretty up to speed on Windows recommend use of FAT32 rather than NTFS. On paper, NTFS is a better filesystem, but apparently it has some failure modes which are catastrophic. FAT32 fails more often, but partial recovery of data is more probable.

I knew a couple of guys at Dell and they said the samething. I use FAT32 on secondary drives and externals. FAT32 is also usable by MAC OSX, which is important for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FAT32 is definitely your friend if you're going to run a dual-boot Windows/Linux system. There are NTFS drivers for Linux now that are supposed to be pretty good, but from what I've read the Linux gurus are totally comfortable with the FAT32 filesystem internals but a little wobbly on NTFS due to the lack of documentation thereof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh. I thought NTFS was superior over FAT32. Haven't exactly been up to speed on tech news....

 

Ivanhoe, could you explain more on the "better file system but more catastrophic" part of NTFS? Thanks. Am about to reformat my sister's laptop and reinstall WinXP HE with SP2 (old OS was WinXP HE SP1, found the CD and am going to slipstream SP2, did it before on another 'puter and it worked).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh. I thought NTFS was superior over FAT32. Haven't exactly been up to speed on tech news....

 

Ivanhoe, could you explain more on the "better file system but more catastrophic" part of NTFS? Thanks. Am about to reformat my sister's laptop and reinstall WinXP HE with SP2 (old OS was WinXP HE SP1, found the CD and am going to slipstream SP2, did it before on another 'puter and it worked).

About the only thing you get out of NTFS is more disk space - converting a FAT32 drive to NTFS tends to give you more usable capacity, mainly because the cluster size doesn't increase with really big drives. Worth about 5%, in perhaps 20-40GB, IIRC.

 

(Uh, do I mean clusters? I forget - the minimum amount of space that a file will take up, and the minimum increase in size as well.)

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Larger clusters means fewer clusters, which means faster r/w but more wasted space.

 

 

http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm

 

Tomas, I couldn't find the web page that presented the opinion that NTFS failures were worse than FAT32 failures, and it looks like I didn't save it to disk either. But the upshot was that FAT32 gets corrupted more often, but those few times when NTFS gets corrupted the filesystem often has to be written off. For today's large hard disks, NTFS will usually provide a noticible performance improvement. And its a journaling filesystem, which means that it handles stuff like power interruptions more gracefully than FAT32. This web page gives more info;

 

http://faq.arstechnica.com/link.php?i=1227

 

One note, I don't put much stock in claims of NTFS security for Microsoft desktop OSes. MS has just never bothered to write a true multiuser operating system, and AFAIK the average user is not going to gain any real security from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DB, Ivanhoe. I guess it'll be NTFS for my sister's 'puter then. Her laptop's battery isn't in top condition and that increases the likelihood of errors from power failures. :) I have to factor in my sister as well - she's earned the moniker "Jubilee" (X-Men character) for her abilities to wreck anything that's electronic - even by simply going near the machine. <_< :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

 

 

If MS starts sending releases that they will no longer support WinXP versions, then I might just go Linux (Mac is too expensive - around a third more expensive than a similar performing PC over here).

 

One person who made a comment on that page says he sees Vista to become an ME.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though Win2k Server was replaced by 2003 Server and Win2k Workstation was replaced by XP, it seems Microsoft will provide basic security updates thru 2010. New versions of stuff like IE will no longer be available. This raises the question of how long folks can stick with XP.

 

If Microsoft doesn't get their act together, I foresee a lot of businesses going the route of Linux client/server systems with almost all apps delivered to end users via a web interface. The hardware and software demands for just doing basic desktop computing are far outstripping what's needed to perform the required tasks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Vista as an ME clone. ME did nothing to improve computing at all. Vista has some minute improvements along with the notable downgrades.

 

People have spoken of MS's demise for years. Thing is, most computer users are stupid and lazy. Corporate America will always need functional employees. Apple and Linux are just too different for most folks for major corporations to take the plunge.

 

Remember, despite all of their marketing and "upgrade" blunders, MS still controls 95% of the market. You can't argue with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see Vista as an ME clone. ME did nothing to improve computing at all. Vista has some minute improvements along with the notable downgrades.

 

People have spoken of MS's demise for years. Thing is, most computer users are stupid and lazy. Corporate America will always need functional employees. Apple and Linux are just too different for most folks for major corporations to take the plunge.

 

Remember, despite all of their marketing and "upgrade" blunders, MS still controls 95% of the market. You can't argue with that.

 

No one is arguing against that. If it was simply that Microsoft made the poorest products in the software industry, it could be left at that - there's always the crap version of every product, regardless of what it is. For every Mercedes, there's a Pinto. The problem is that through its business methods, Microsoft has leveraged itself into an actual monopoly, and uses that monopoly in ways that harmful to the industry, the consumers - everyone but MS' shareholders. Schneier's and Gutmann's articles demonstrate (as others do) that MS fully intends to abuse this market position further, crippling your computer even more.

 

All companies are mortal, and MS will as a matter of nature pass away some day, but as much as I despise that company, I hold no illusions that it will be anytime soon. That's a pity - the consumer and the industry will pay the price for years to come. Pity that government has been so supine on this - Mr. Gates' racket should have died in a courtroom years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...