Windows Vista

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Windows Vista
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 11 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Jeffrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 03
Posts: 4793
Credit: 26,029
RAC: 0
Message 750675 - Posted: 9 May 2008, 22:28:00 UTC - in response to Message 750627.  
Last modified: 9 May 2008, 22:28:55 UTC

Win3.11

Ahhhhh yes, the most 'stable' version of windows to date... ;)

(But I'm liking Vista so far. I just wish there weren't so many darn settings to fiddle with.)
It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .
ID: 750675 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 750681 - Posted: 9 May 2008, 22:55:23 UTC - in response to Message 750609.  

there's no way I'm going to buy an upgrade just to run it on Vista.



You will eventually.

When my last dying computer can no longer reboot................


I was referring to his "GSP's Money (Accounts), Starfish's Sidekick (PIM), both of which I have used for years on W98SE & XP. Calendar Creator 9" statement. Not Vista. He already upgraded.

ID: 750681 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 750682 - Posted: 9 May 2008, 23:01:20 UTC - in response to Message 750627.  
Last modified: 9 May 2008, 23:04:05 UTC

there's no way I'm going to buy an upgrade just to run it on Vista.



You will eventually.



Nope, I still have my old AMD 850 Duron running Win3.11WFG because of the programs I still use. In fact that rig was the original Seti cruncher. Emmmmmmmm, 64mb ram 2x 40mb hd's, no bloated software, those were the days. Exiting Windows into Dos & running QuickMenu to avoid using the command line, what joy.

Now if those programmers kept up to date with their programs, then maybe.....


It kinda lends to my previous question ....what was the pressing need to go to Vista if now you can;t run applications you enjoyed with your perfectly functional XP?

It's interesting how the notion is presented in the sales pitches of Vista "you gotta have it" when in reality, you don't. XP (All editions) support will end on the second Tuesday in April 2009, and extended support (security updates) will end five years later...2014.

And I wanted to add that unless you upgrade hardware (Even though most hardware vendors will be supporting XP versions for quite a few years now to stay inline with the lifecycle of XP...)and software packages, there was and IS no need for Vista.
ID: 750682 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24886
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 750792 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 3:10:08 UTC - in response to Message 750681.  

there's no way I'm going to buy an upgrade just to run it on Vista.



You will eventually.

When my last dying computer can no longer reboot................


I was referring to his "GSP's Money (Accounts), Starfish's Sidekick (PIM), both of which I have used for years on W98SE & XP. Calendar Creator 9" statement. Not Vista. [colr=red]He already upgraded.[/color]



Not quite. I have Vista installed on BP6 (Backplane on workstation), only used for when a problem needs to be resolved with a customer's rig with Vista installed.

Main everyday usage is XP Pro (32 & 64).

Win3.11


Ahhhhh yes, the most 'stable' version of windows to date... ;)


Wrong, Win3.11WFG. which was so stable it led MS to work on & introduce NT with NT3.51

ID: 750792 · Report as offensive
Profile Jeffrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 03
Posts: 4793
Credit: 26,029
RAC: 0
Message 750815 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 4:55:28 UTC

Safari is hideous on Vista! Come on Apple, surely you can do better than that... ;)

(I'd try to speed up my scroll wheel, but I'm too scared to venture into the control panel again.)
It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .
ID: 750815 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 750919 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 11:52:51 UTC - in response to Message 750792.  
Last modified: 10 May 2008, 11:53:36 UTC


Wrong, Win3.11WFG. which was so stable it led MS to work on & introduce NT with NT3.51



Negative. Windows NT is a descendant of OS/2...which was supposed to replace DOS. OS/2 was a join venture between Microsoft and IBM that was being developed in the mid 1980's. A GUI, called the Presentation Manager (PM), was not available with OS/2 until version 1.1, released in 1988. Its API was incompatible with Windows.

By the early 1990s, conflicts developed in the Microsoft/IBM relationship. They cooperated with each other in developing their PC operating systems, and had access to each other's code. Microsoft wanted to further develop Windows, while IBM desired for future work to be based on OS/2. In an attempt to resolve this tension, IBM and Microsoft agreed that IBM would develop OS/2 2.0, to replace OS/2 1.3 and Windows 3.0, while Microsoft would develop a new operating system, OS/2 3.0, to later succeed OS/2 2.0.

This agreement soon however fell apart, and the Microsoft/IBM relationship was terminated. IBM continued to develop OS/2, while Microsoft changed the name of its (as yet unreleased) OS/2 3.0 to Windows NT.
ID: 750919 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24886
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 750999 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 15:31:10 UTC - in response to Message 750919.  


Wrong, Win3.11WFG. which was so stable it led MS to work on & introduce NT with NT3.51



Negative. Windows NT is a descendant of OS/2...which was supposed to replace DOS. OS/2 was a join venture between Microsoft and IBM that was being developed in the mid 1980's. A GUI, called the Presentation Manager (PM), was not available with OS/2 until version 1.1, released in 1988. Its API was incompatible with Windows.

By the early 1990s, conflicts developed in the Microsoft/IBM relationship. They cooperated with each other in developing their PC operating systems, and had access to each other's code. Microsoft wanted to further develop Windows, while IBM desired for future work to be based on OS/2. In an attempt to resolve this tension, IBM and Microsoft agreed that IBM would develop OS/2 2.0, to replace OS/2 1.3 and Windows 3.0, while Microsoft would develop a new operating system, OS/2 3.0, to later succeed OS/2 2.0.

This agreement soon however fell apart, and the Microsoft/IBM relationship was terminated. IBM continued to develop OS/2, while Microsoft changed the name of its (as yet unreleased) OS/2 3.0 to Windows NT.


Apologies, I stand corrected.
ID: 750999 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 751128 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 19:17:02 UTC - in response to Message 750792.  


Not quite. I have Vista installed on BP6 (Backplane on workstation), only used for when a problem needs to be resolved with a customer's rig with Vista installed.




isn't a BP6 backplane installed on machines like at a call center? PBX?

ID: 751128 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24886
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 751173 - Posted: 10 May 2008, 20:44:41 UTC - in response to Message 751128.  
Last modified: 10 May 2008, 20:47:33 UTC


Not quite. I have Vista installed on BP6 (Backplane on workstation), only used for when a problem needs to be resolved with a customer's rig with Vista installed.




isn't a BP6 backplane installed on machines like at a call center? PBX?


Don't honestly know. I have 2 backplane boxes installed in workstation,(each one takes up 2 5¼ bays & provides 3 removable HD's). I name all my drives so I know what's on where.

This is an earlier photo before upgrade.
ID: 751173 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 751745 - Posted: 11 May 2008, 22:26:56 UTC - in response to Message 751128.  


Not quite. I have Vista installed on BP6 (Backplane on workstation), only used for when a problem needs to be resolved with a customer's rig with Vista installed.




isn't a BP6 backplane installed on machines like at a call center? PBX?


A "BP6" is also a motherboard model from Abit.
ID: 751745 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 751753 - Posted: 11 May 2008, 22:29:04 UTC - in response to Message 750627.  

there's no way I'm going to buy an upgrade just to run it on Vista.



You will eventually.



Nope, I still have my old AMD 850 Duron running Win3.11WFG because of the programs I still use. In fact that rig was the original Seti cruncher. Emmmmmmmm, 64mb ram 2x 40mb hd's, no bloated software, those were the days. Exiting Windows into Dos & running QuickMenu to avoid using the command line, what joy.

Now if those programmers kept up to date with their programs, then maybe.....


Those were the days! I pulled out a copy of DOS 3.30 and put it in a virtual machine to play with. Even found some 1.44MB floppies of DOS 5 & Windows 3.1 on the same set of disks (the installation actually says "MS-DOS 5 and Windows upgrade").

I just set up two Windows 98SE workstations for those older games that won't work with Vista x64. Both the g/f and I love Vista and aren't willing to give it up - we'll just put in more machine!
ID: 751753 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 751755 - Posted: 11 May 2008, 22:34:46 UTC - in response to Message 750682.  

It kinda lends to my previous question ....what was the pressing need to go to Vista if now you can;t run applications you enjoyed with your perfectly functional XP?

It's interesting how the notion is presented in the sales pitches of Vista "you gotta have it" when in reality, you don't. XP (All editions) support will end on the second Tuesday in April 2009, and extended support (security updates) will end five years later...2014.

And I wanted to add that unless you upgrade hardware (Even though most hardware vendors will be supporting XP versions for quite a few years now to stay inline with the lifecycle of XP...)and software packages, there was and IS no need for Vista.


The question shouldn't be "what makes it a must have?". Again, bringing up the past, I remember before Windows 95 came out lots of people saying "what do I need it for?" or "there's no pressing need to upgrade at this time".

Without even trying, one can use the same logic toward just about anything. That's the freedom of choice you have as a consumer. It all depends on if you see value in what you are purchasing.

As I stated earlier in the thread, for me, I found a few features in Vista that are "must haves" such as the security features and SuperFetch. And yes, I also like the eye candy (but its not the sole reason I bought Vista).

Everyone's mileage will vary, of course. What I value you could easily find trivial and vice versa.

The bigger question is: "why does it matter"? The whole world operates differently and we all have a right to be different. If you find no value in upgrading to Vista, I respect that. If others find value in Vista, that should be respected as well, even if you disagree or cannot see the reasons.
ID: 751755 · Report as offensive
Profile Jeffrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 03
Posts: 4793
Credit: 26,029
RAC: 0
Message 751780 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 0:18:20 UTC - in response to Message 751755.  

I also like the eye candy (but its not the sole reason I bought Vista).

The eye candy was the #1 reason why I bought Vista, the new features were just a bonus... ;)
It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .
ID: 751780 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20543
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 751783 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 0:23:46 UTC - in response to Message 751755.  

... As I stated earlier in the thread, for me, I found a few features in Vista that are "must haves" such as the security features and SuperFetch. And yes, I also like the eye candy (but its not the sole reason I bought Vista).
[...]

Those were some of the features that brought me over to Linux. The 'must have' for me was for a development requirement (for true preemptive multitasking, and that a process crash was not to bring the whole machine down). Getting out of the MS-virus silliness was a very good bonus and a relief.

And then you look back and wonder why oh why you didn't change sooner!


So, what's the 'killer consideration' for Vista? Or is it just the name and assumed familarity?

Happy crunchin',
Martin

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 751783 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 751795 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 1:21:53 UTC - in response to Message 751755.  

It kinda lends to my previous question ....what was the pressing need to go to Vista if now you can;t run applications you enjoyed with your perfectly functional XP?

It's interesting how the notion is presented in the sales pitches of Vista "you gotta have it" when in reality, you don't. XP (All editions) support will end on the second Tuesday in April 2009, and extended support (security updates) will end five years later...2014.

And I wanted to add that unless you upgrade hardware (Even though most hardware vendors will be supporting XP versions for quite a few years now to stay inline with the lifecycle of XP...)and software packages, there was and IS no need for Vista.


The question shouldn't be "what makes it a must have?". Again, bringing up the past, I remember before Windows 95 came out lots of people saying "what do I need it for?" or "there's no pressing need to upgrade at this time".

Without even trying, one can use the same logic toward just about anything. That's the freedom of choice you have as a consumer. It all depends on if you see value in what you are purchasing.

As I stated earlier in the thread, for me, I found a few features in Vista that are "must haves" such as the security features and SuperFetch. And yes, I also like the eye candy (but its not the sole reason I bought Vista).

Everyone's mileage will vary, of course. What I value you could easily find trivial and vice versa.

The bigger question is: "why does it matter"? The whole world operates differently and we all have a right to be different. If you find no value in upgrading to Vista, I respect that. If others find value in Vista, that should be respected as well, even if you disagree or cannot see the reasons.



Who said I didn't have any respect for them? I am only stating my opinion, as you are.

ID: 751795 · Report as offensive
Michael Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 99
Posts: 4608
Credit: 7,427,891
RAC: 18
United States
Message 751796 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 1:23:49 UTC - in response to Message 751745.  


Not quite. I have Vista installed on BP6 (Backplane on workstation), only used for when a problem needs to be resolved with a customer's rig with Vista installed.




isn't a BP6 backplane installed on machines like at a call center? PBX?


A "BP6" is also a motherboard model from Abit.


Yup, I was referring to a BP6 'backplane".

Incidently, that ABIT BP6 motherboard was wonderful and easy to overclock.

ID: 751796 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 751824 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 3:37:00 UTC - in response to Message 751795.  

It kinda lends to my previous question ....what was the pressing need to go to Vista if now you can;t run applications you enjoyed with your perfectly functional XP?

It's interesting how the notion is presented in the sales pitches of Vista "you gotta have it" when in reality, you don't. XP (All editions) support will end on the second Tuesday in April 2009, and extended support (security updates) will end five years later...2014.

And I wanted to add that unless you upgrade hardware (Even though most hardware vendors will be supporting XP versions for quite a few years now to stay inline with the lifecycle of XP...)and software packages, there was and IS no need for Vista.


The question shouldn't be "what makes it a must have?". Again, bringing up the past, I remember before Windows 95 came out lots of people saying "what do I need it for?" or "there's no pressing need to upgrade at this time".

Without even trying, one can use the same logic toward just about anything. That's the freedom of choice you have as a consumer. It all depends on if you see value in what you are purchasing.

As I stated earlier in the thread, for me, I found a few features in Vista that are "must haves" such as the security features and SuperFetch. And yes, I also like the eye candy (but its not the sole reason I bought Vista).

Everyone's mileage will vary, of course. What I value you could easily find trivial and vice versa.

The bigger question is: "why does it matter"? The whole world operates differently and we all have a right to be different. If you find no value in upgrading to Vista, I respect that. If others find value in Vista, that should be respected as well, even if you disagree or cannot see the reasons.



Who said I didn't have any respect for them? I am only stating my opinion, as you are.


My apologies to you Michael, I didn't mean to imply you didn't have respect. The point I was trying to make was that even though you don't like Vista, calling people who chose to upgrade "sheeple" could be considered disrespectful.

But at least you conduct yourself well and I thank you for that.
ID: 751824 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 751826 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 3:43:11 UTC - in response to Message 751783.  

So, what's the 'killer consideration' for Vista? Or is it just the name and assumed familarity?


As annoying as it can be: UAC, IE7 protected mode, SuperFetch, reduced user privileges (even for "Admin" account), DirectX 10 and Aero Glass.


All arguments of *nix being virus free, for those of us that prefer Windows, features like UAC, IE7 protected mode and the reduced user privileges can be a godsend when dealing with other people's machines, or even as a great line of defense for your own system.

SuperFetch, DirectX 10 and Aero Glass are all extra goodies that pushed me over into buying Vista on top of the reasons mentioned above.
ID: 751826 · Report as offensive
Profile Jeffrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 03
Posts: 4793
Credit: 26,029
RAC: 0
Message 751859 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 6:07:43 UTC - in response to Message 751826.  
Last modified: 12 May 2008, 6:10:11 UTC

All arguments of *nix being virus free, for those of us that prefer Windows

I have always used clamxav on osx, not that I ever needed it, but ya never know...

I was gonna use clamwin on vista, but then I remembered why I use a mac, and went with avast!... ;)
It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .
ID: 751859 · Report as offensive
Profile Jeffrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 03
Posts: 4793
Credit: 26,029
RAC: 0
Message 752026 - Posted: 12 May 2008, 15:48:17 UTC - in response to Message 750815.  

Safari is hideous on Vista!

. . . then I opened iTunes and Quick Time Player and realized:

The strict 'Human Interface Guidelines' don't apply to mac apps on PCs... ;)
It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .
ID: 752026 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 11 · Next

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Windows Vista


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.