Old 25th June 2007, 09:57   #41
Twilightseer
Frenchoderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lavabo, fond du couloir, 3è porte à droite
Posts: 6,309
If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

Seriously, what does Vista have to offer that XP does not have?
Can any Vista user enlighten me?
Twilightseer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 10:41   #42
Smeggle
Just Strolling By
(Major Dude)
 
Smeggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: A Long Winding Road.....
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Wow, I guess because one of their sound guys used a cracked version of software, Microsoft should change their whole stance on people pirating their software! I had forgotten about their company-wide policy of pirating software!

Wait, they don't have one? What?

Seriously, that's an ironic tidbit, if anything. It's not any sort of sensible indictment of Microsoft, and it'd be foolish to think so.
Not the point though zoot - you can't on one hand say one thing and then do another. maybe it might be just that one set of files (Though as we all know with MS - It's not). They are the ones creating hell over this kind of stuff and then they go and do it themselves?

@ Phyltyre - You already can do that - get the error code - pop it in google and the results (generally first in the page) will be by microsoft giving you the details on what is wrong..

@ Twilightseer - I've had a beta of vista installed and also briefly looked over the first release and apart from extar graphics etc there is not that much difference between XP and vista, though I did read that the kernel is also to be changed in Vista SP1 to a completely new one (6.01?).

That said it is not as secure as they make out. All they've done is make it near on impossible to use anything. That security advisor is about the most stupidest thing I have seen them do yet. It's like when you try deleting something they ask you a million times if your sure you want to do that (Ok exaggeration I know) but everytime you go to use a program near enough?

Also one thing I have a major beef about is Windows Live Center (Which is garbage) and there security center. I know when it is installed that it removes AVG Anti Virus or other proprietary AV solutions. That is just wrong - If I chose to want AVG and use it then they should configure there software to allow that.. again a case of MS trying to monopolise every thing and I have more trust in AVG protection than I would ever have in any security software issued by MS.

Seriously though Vista is nothing special - a few extra graphics which could have easily been added to XP via a service pack and a few very annoying features which most switch off. Every new computer I have sold this year with Vista on, within days I have been requested by the new owner to come and either put XP home or Pro on there machine or remove that stupid annoying security advisor. 2 people I nearly had to refund them due it!

nope I don't rate Vista at all and MS saying they are going to stop selling Xp beginning of next year is using 'Force' to get people to switch... I think the choice of what you want to use should be yours and not at the behest of some conglomerate..

Don't think though much will come of it though for MS it's an issue that will not go away...

Music is Life, Love and Happiness :|: Life is Music. Serren - 1985 - 2005
Religion? Religion is a Blasphemy against humanity - From the film What the Bleep do we know

siggy link So stumbling? whats it all about
Smeggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 13:40   #43
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
Not the point though zoot - you can't on one hand say one thing and then do another. maybe it might be just that one set of files (Though as we all know with MS - It's not). They are the ones creating hell over this kind of stuff and then they go and do it themselves?
That's the point though. "Microsoft" didn't break any law, one of their employees, almost definitely without the knowledge of a significant number of their coworkers, did.

Your argument is analogous to saying that the police have no right to enforce the law, since there's been at least one corrupt officer in the past. It's ridiculous.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 14:32   #44
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
@ Phyltyre - You already can do that - get the error code - pop it in google and the results (generally first in the page) will be by microsoft giving you the details on what is wrong..
No, it also gives possible solutions for third-party programs that don't give error codes, as well as those that do. And you don't need to google some arcane hex blarg to do it.

Vista has: better error handling, better sound control (each application has its own entry in the volume fields), an improved Start menu, improved search (that some people think outdoes Google Search, but I don't search that often), FAR better home networking wizards, troubleshooters, and monitors that actually troubleshoot connections (and, unlike XP, might actually FIX something), a library worth of file sorting values and new views, improved memory handling, window/image previews from toolbars, and other stuff I've managed to forget, like UAC (which I can't understand complaints about since you can just disable it.)
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 15:03   #45
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
I don't think you understand what a 5th graders attempt to be witty looks like.
Huh. Apparently not. He was flying below the sarcasm radar, as it were.

Quote:
Originally posted by Sawg
If Vista wasn't ME 2.0, then maybe.
It's really not. In fact, Vista is... well, nothing like ME, in any way that I can think of.

Every complaint I've ever heard about Vista has been either patently false or the result of a misunderstanding on the part of the complainer, with the one exception of UAC.

Vista is not a "memory hog" (unless you're using the 3D interface, of course, and even then it's not that bad). It is not unstable. It is not slow. It is easily the most secure version of Windows ever. Its interface is demonstrably better (and if you just don't like it, you can turn just about all of it off).

UAC is fairly annoying, granted, but you can (as Phyltre points out) just turn it off.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 18:50   #46
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by xzxzzx


Every complaint I've ever heard about Vista has been either patently false or the result of a misunderstanding on the part of the complainer, with the one exception of UAC.

And the exception of the price, the DRM stuff, the fact that its not much different than XP.

A lot of people are not buying Vista right away for a ton of reasons. For gamers, its the lack of compatible games and the minor impact on game performance. For many its because its expensive. For business, its because their software isn't compatible yet. For security concerned, its because SP1 isn't here yet. For the rest its either wait and see or because their hardware would need an upgrade.

My system got a 4.7 on the Vista scale in Beta 2(its probably on a different scale now) and I can buy Vista and put it on this machine. But I see no reason to upgrade to Vista yet. It could be for games later on, but I still need a DX10 card. Not to mention that it could cost me a bit to get unless I go OEM version. So its either buy Vista which I have a minor interest in or use that money for something better. Factor that in to a ton of other people and its easily one of the many big reasons why Vista sales are suffering.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 19:04   #47
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
And the exception of the price, the DRM stuff, the fact that its not much different than XP.
The price argument is fair, although it's hardly an atypical price (it's pretty much what XP was selling for before). The DRM issue can be pretty stupid and been blown out of all proportion. Technically it's very different to XP, and it's considerably more usable and so on, but it's mostly the sort of thing that people won't notice until they go back and realise how much they lose regressing to XP.

Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
A lot of people are not buying Vista right away for a ton of reasons. For gamers, its the lack of compatible games and the minor impact on game performance. For many its because its expensive. For business, its because their software isn't compatible yet. For security concerned, its because SP1 isn't here yet. For the rest its either wait and see or because their hardware would need an upgrade.
For business, it's because SP1 isn't here yet and they traditionally wait that long. The security-concerned should know that Vista's already more secure than XP, but sure. The other points are good ones; incompatible software is a good reason not to move, but that's not really Vista's fault.

Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
My system got a 4.7 on the Vista scale in Beta 2(its probably on a different scale now) and I can buy Vista and put it on this machine. But I see no reason to upgrade to Vista yet. It could be for games later on, but I still need a DX10 card. Not to mention that it could cost me a bit to get unless I go OEM version. So its either buy Vista which I have a minor interest in or use that money for something better. Factor that in to a ton of other people and its easily one of the many big reasons why Vista sales are suffering.
That's kinda the main issue. Although it's a major update, can people justify the cost when what they already have works right now?

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2007, 21:22   #48
mikm
Major Dude
 
mikm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 1,255
Everytime somebody bitches about Vista being "loaded with DRM", god kills a kitten.

powered by C₂H₅OH
mikm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2007, 03:42   #49
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by mikm
Everytime somebody bitches about Vista being "loaded with DRM", god kills a kitten.
They should be extinct by now.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2007, 20:53   #50
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by mikm
Everytime somebody bitches about Vista being "loaded with DRM", god kills a kitten.
I killed enough kittens, but I like Vista. You also don't need the OEM versions. The "upgrade" versions will install with no qualifying OS. Google it.

Make sure you have good enough hardware. I think that's gonna be dual core.... a gig of ram... and that the video card you want to use has a solid Vista driver. You should be happy. You'll cuss for a week while you get used to it, but you won't want to go back to XP.

I promise.

Remember me. Like I've said... I killed enough kittens bitching about the DRM. I recant. This is the best OS we've ever seen for a PC. It doesn't stutter, shimmy, fart and crash near as much as XP. Hell, I thought I was using a Mac
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 16:48   #51
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
And the exception of the price, the DRM stuff, the fact that its not much different than XP.
Well, see, no. The price isn't unusual, the "DRM stuff" is simply not bad (you can do everything, DRM-wise, on Vista you can do on XP), and yes, the interface isn't that different from XP, but that is a feature.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 17:46   #52
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
It's just another case of Sequel Syndrome--everybody enters the theater wanting something different. You can't follow the original, because then it's just a bid for more ticket sales. You can't make it revolutionary, because then you're no longer "true to the roots" of the first film. You can't ignore what was introduced in the first film, but you're expected to make bigger revelations than the first did, and so on.

There is no possible iteration of a Windows OS that wouldn't get panned by some groups for whatever reason. Its userbase is so large that the expectations generated are extremely disparate. Doesn't anyone see that there are roughly equal numbers of articles panning Vista for including eyecandy like Aero (HOMG IT EATS RAM!) and panning Vista for not doing more to revolutionize the UI (HOMG THIS IS XP!)?
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 19:36   #53
KOOLguy
Senior Member
 
KOOLguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 100
Quote:
I think that Vista is actually a substantial upgrade, specifically for crash reasons. Why? Because (in nearly every instance) it tells you what crashed, then looks online for what caused the error. It tells you if the problem comes from an outdated program, or Windows itself. And then it directs you either to an online article detailing possible solutions, or to the online support/forums of the offending program.
Nonsense, Windows XP SP2 does the exact same thing, and besides that, Everything that vista does MAC OS X DOES BETTER. Bill Gates will just hide under his desk when conflicts about the two operating systems rises to the top of the apple vs. windows battle.

Quote:
It doesn't stutter, shimmy, fart and crash near as much as XP. Hell, I thought I was using a Mac
It's true, i have seen a lot more system hangs on new installs XP then i have vista, but vista takes like fifteen minutes to boot up on average as opposed to my P3 733mhz XP's ten seconds to boot (including HDD checks and memory counting)
KOOLguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 19:44   #54
KOOLguy
Senior Member
 
KOOLguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally posted by Twilightseer
If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

Seriously, what does Vista have to offer that XP does not have?
Can any Vista user enlighten me?
Bill Gates sez: "Vista offers much better user account settings, and a fancy interface and prettier start menus, and larger cup holders."

KOOLguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 20:29   #55
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Quote:
Originally posted by KOOLguy
but vista takes like fifteen minutes to boot up on average as opposed to my P3 733mhz XP's ten seconds to boot (including HDD checks and memory counting)
...Fifteen minutes? Even on the ancient computer specs you've listed, somehow, I doubt fifteen minutes is an actual load time. I'm not even touching the rest of that baseless vitriol.

I realize it may come as a shock to some that a new operating system might need more powerful hardware than its >five-year-old predecessor, but I suspect these same people are also shocked when the sun rises in the morning. I can't believe that I, of all people, actually need to defend a Windows OS.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 23:13   #56
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by Phyltre
I can't believe that I, of all people, actually need to defend a Windows OS.
You don't actually "need" to. You chose to.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 23:19   #57
mikm
Major Dude
 
mikm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 1,255
I prefer calling it "correcting misinformation/fud"

powered by C₂H₅OH
mikm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2007, 23:56   #58
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
This isn't XP. Despite usually feeling blackmailed by MS to buy the latest and greatest, this is actually a pretty good OS. It is really significantly better than XP.

Expecting it to run on antiques is sorta silly though.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...uirements.mspx

Last edited by rockouthippie; 28th June 2007 at 00:14.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th June 2007, 11:26   #59
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by KOOLguy
Nonsense, Windows XP SP2 does the exact same thing
No, it doesn't.
Quote:
Originally posted by KOOLguy
Everything that vista does MAC OS X DOES BETTER.
No, it doesn't.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th June 2007, 15:14   #60
watadoo
JEDI MASTER
 
watadoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canyon, CA with a bunch of hippies
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
I killed enough kittens, but I like Vista. You also don't need the OEM versions. The "upgrade" versions will install with no qualifying OS. Google it.

Make sure you have good enough hardware. I think that's gonna be dual core.... a gig of ram... and that the video card you want to use has a solid Vista driver. You should be happy. You'll cuss for a week while you get used to it, but you won't want to go back to XP.

I promise.

Remember me. Like I've said... I killed enough kittens bitching about the DRM. I recant. This is the best OS we've ever seen for a PC. It doesn't stutter, shimmy, fart and crash near as much as XP. Hell, I thought I was using a Mac
An entire kitten farm must have spontaneously combusted because I agree with ROH, word for word. The only slight difference is that XP hardly ever crashed, stuttered, shimmied or farted for me.

"Which is worse, ignorance or indifference?"

"I don't know, and I don't care."
watadoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th June 2007, 15:25   #61
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by KOOLguy
It's true, i have seen a lot more system hangs on new installs XP then i have vista, but vista takes like fifteen minutes to boot up on average as opposed to my P3 733mhz XP's ten seconds to boot (including HDD checks and memory counting)
Ten seconds. To boot XP from a cold start. On a PIII 733. To post-login.

Sure buddy.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th June 2007, 20:36   #62
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
You also don't need the OEM versions. The "upgrade" versions will install with no qualifying OS. Google it.
You know, you are exactly right.

I saw the article about a clean install forced on XP Professional because there was no upgrade path.(Which explains why the Home Premium edition goes for $150 normally.)

But I did a Pricegrabber search and found the genuine HP Vista upgrade for about $100 with free shipping. No Joke.

I can work with that price. I wasn't going to pay $150+ and certainly not $225 for the full version.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th June 2007, 09:32   #63
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Twilightseer
If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

Seriously, what does Vista have to offer that XP does not have?
Can any Vista user enlighten me?
I'm not sure if this was ever answered, so here's the relevant Wikipedia pages:
Features new to Windows Vista
Technical features new to Windows Vista
Security and safety features new to Windows Vista
Management features new to Windows Vista (less relevant for home users)

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th June 2007, 22:10   #64
ShyShy
Amazon Bush Woman
Forum Queen
 
ShyShy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Sticks, Queensland
Posts: 8,067
Quote:
Originally posted by watadoo
An entire kitten farm must have spontaneously combusted because I agree with ROH, word for word. The only slight difference is that XP hardly ever crashed, stuttered, shimmied or farted for me.
Two of the most hard headed people I know online just agreed on a product, I'll just have to take a looky at the links zoot posted.

Thanks for hashing this all out for me, guys
ShyShy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th June 2007, 22:52   #65
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
But I did a Pricegrabber search and found the genuine HP Vista upgrade for about $100 with free shipping. No Joke.
I bought the Home Basic upgrade for $100 at Costco. It doesn't have the 3d desktop, but I didn't figure that was worth $50. I'm using it on a 4800 X2 with a gig of ram.

Quote:
XP hardly ever crashed, stuttered, shimmied or farted for me.
Me either, except for a few things. With really intensive apps (like encoding video), XP will stutter and pause while you're typing. Vista doesn't. Another time XP likes to stagger is when you are reading/burning a DVD/CD.

Also, I can now burn 2 DVD's at once. XP won't. Worse, if you try, it makes coasters.

I think if they'res one real selling point on this OS, it's the improvement in multitasking. Much smoother... and the new protected memory scheme makes it less likely to crash as well.

My PVR box is running XP,. It crashes and reboots at least daily. I don't think Vista would.

Last edited by rockouthippie; 29th June 2007 at 23:29.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 07:08   #66
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Yeah, I use some "legacy" programs (okay, abandonware and apps with really lazy developers) and probably the most noticeable thing with Vista has been that it will contain a programs's nonresponsiveness. It grays the window, but the minimize button NEVER stops working. So you're right back to your desktop, and can either wait it out or terminate it.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 08:22   #67
ertmann|CPH
Forum Viking
(Forum King)
 
ertmann|CPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The North
Posts: 3,541
A few totaly irrelevant or totaly subjective arguments for using Linux

Linux made me a better student!!!

Since i don't have alot of games sitting around on my computer, waiting to be played, I've used my time much more constructively

I know it's probably essentially down to user numbers, but non-the-less, i've not seen a single piece of virus or malware on my computer, for the 4 years i've been using Linux.

My system is much more stable than when i ran XP, without doing any real regular maintenance work, or taking any care when i browse the web.

That and Compiz Fusion is just mighty mighty cool stuff to play with.
ertmann|CPH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 12:38   #68
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
4 years i've been using Linux.....much more stable
I'm still a linux fan, I'm using Ubuntu to type this. This machine also has Vista. But the thing is.... Vista addresses those stability issues.

Part of the reason I use linux is that it WAS better than windows for stability. Vista solves that problem or pretty close.

Now I'll just use linux for it's rich working environment and fantastic free software

I am not giving up linux. It's sure is nice to have a stable windows OS though.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 15:09   #69
Wolfgang
Forum King
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,069
Regarding PC vendors putting loads of useless crap on pre-installed versions of windows, this is something I really loathe. My sister bought a Toshiba laptop a couple of years ago and upon starting up, there were already 45 running processes. Most of them were replacements for things windows already does but not as well, such as the battery meter, audio handling, screen tinkering and so on. Granted, they allow a user to tweak their system much better, but there is just no need for all these processes to be running simultaneously and constantly. They ate a huge chunk of the laptop's resources. I managed to trim it down to 27 running processes at startup (because she wanted to keep some, like the colourful battery meter) and the general responsiveness must have increased two-fold.

The thing is, I had to do this for her because she had no idea how to get rid of them. How many average windows users know of the existence of services.msc or msconfig.exe? Not many.
Wolfgang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 15:56   #70
P$ycHo™
Flakmonkey!
 
P$ycHo™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DM-Campgrounds
Posts: 1,870
many users don't even know that they have 45 running processes
P$ycHo™ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 17:01   #71
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by P$ycHoâ„¢
many users don't even know that they have 45 running processes
This made me curious, so:
code:
calum@thoth:~$ ps aux | wc -l
127


127 processes baby! Now we're cookin'!

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 18:08   #72
P$ycHo™
Flakmonkey!
 
P$ycHo™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DM-Campgrounds
Posts: 1,870
38 processes on my xp atm
P$ycHo™ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 18:55   #73
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 19:49   #74
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
I have always wondered why you disable all of those services. I mean, antivirus I understand (there's a significant performance decrease for that sort of inline checking) but most of these things improve the system's functionality with truly negligible cost.

That said, if your desktop works the way you want it without them, that's fair enough.

Out of curiosity: With BITS disabled, do you need to check for Windows updates automatically or does it just turn off their downloading in the background?

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 00:44   #75
Smeggle
Just Strolling By
(Major Dude)
 
Smeggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: A Long Winding Road.....
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
This isn't XP. Despite usually feeling blackmailed by MS to buy the latest and greatest, this is actually a pretty good OS. It is really significantly better than XP.

Expecting it to run on antiques is sorta silly though.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...uirements.mspx
Huh? Where did you get that from? It is XP or the core kernel still is - even MS themselves say the kernel won't be fully changed until service pck1 not due until end of this year but more probably next year..

This is more or less standard practice with MS and has been since windows 95 - Release/get the public to test/then fix the problems in the next issue - windows 98 was to address the problems and upgrade certain parts of 95. 98se then (upgraded or (supposedly repaired) the problems with 98.

Millennium 2000 was the test bed for XP - what do you think there error reporting service is about? They use that to repair or address the problems that they know the end user will generate. And no, I am not knocking them for that but putting it in it's correct context.

They still though have not addressed the main problems windows has and will always have. Until they stop bundling everything into the main core it will continue to have it's litany of problems. the only way to remove those problems is to make it's many proprietary programs just that, proprietary 'Stand Alone' programs, separate from the main operating system.

I use windows. I switch of every thing and use only the most basic elements of the operating system. I don't even update! In fact I never have used there update service on my system apart from the updated installer issued after service pck1. As my copy of XP Pro is with SP1 it was the only requirement.

Other than that I use 'Stand Alone Proprietary' software. I never have problems. I never have spyware, virus attacks or malware attacks of any kind.

I have tested both types of set up with different forms of Security software and different configurations. irrespective of what security package used, if I use any of the built in Microsoft programs such as messenger, outlook, I.E. etc then the computer invariably or not becomes infected and in a very short time. And that includes using the likes of Avast, Black Ice, Zone Alarm, AVG, Kaspersky and other third party security software. It go's without saying really that Symantec Norton and McAfee are the worst of the bunch. This is also with 'error reporting, remote assistance, automatic updates switched on. In fact the testing is usually with a simple default install of windows xp.

Using the 'Stand Alone' software technique and switching of all the garbage that is just not needed and that no ordinary home user will ever in there life use and including switching of updates, remote assistance and error reporting to name just a couple, stopping windows explorer from accessing the internet, (I mean why for ffs? It has no reason to access the internet! It's for navigating the folders and files on my frikkin computer not for babbling away to all and sundry online).. as I was saying, set up in this manner I never ever have problems!

So please do not tell me that Vista is any better - it is not. It is not simply because it is based on XP as it's main core with a load of fancy garbage thrown on top that most will never use or want to use. It also is an attempt at stopping not only the illegal sharing of copyright music/film files but also copyright software.

will it take over? Yes but only when it is fully implemented next year when server 2008 is released and then it gets it's main new kernel core. From some of the tech reports I have read when that happens you can literally say goodbye to your cracks etc (If you use them) as the system itself will verify that the software is ligit, even calling home to verify whether you like it or not!

Already Microsoft issue updates with it's windows defender, (and windows live center does this as well), 'that will remove software that they deam inappropriate to the running of windows! This includes AVG Anti Virus btw to name but one known case where I have already personally come across this happening.

What will this mean? It will mean the end of creative software online eventually and the end of small companies being able to innovate. Once they have done that, then I fully believe they will go back to there final battle to monopolise every part of the internet, which they tried and failed to do with Frontpage and there attempt at forcing MSHTML on to people.

Not going to happen??? Talking out my ass?

Lets see - they've already attacked Adobe with there version for creating PDF's etc.. They've done something that Norton was previously doing and they've done it for free! (Supposedly) - They have already made it harder to create windows software for vista and they are already removing third party choice software irrespective if that is your choice of software. Chose there's and lose your choice (Read the E.U.L.A. correctly - it's all in there).. By agreeing to install and you have to, you also agree to the E.U.L.A . Agreeing to that, you also give them the right to arbitrarily remove your software of choice. You arbitrarily give them the right to check you are using legitimate software. A lot of this is built into the Vista E.U.L.A and it is also in Live Center and windows Defender.

When the (Real) final Vista ships - i.e. service pack 1 then part of that is to agree to Windows Live Center and windows defender....

I've recently joined stumbleupon and some of the stuff in relation to this that I have found in relation to the E.U.L.A. and what it gives Microsoft the right to do is hair raising and kinda scary!

I'll come back to this in a year or two (If I remember and it's still here) with a 'Told you so! Until then feel free to ridicule all you want but then I was ridiculed for what I said in relation to XHTML/CSS a year or so back and how search criteria would change with all the major search engines, low and behold what happens? oops seems I was right....

The writings on the wall as they say - check over the E.U.L.A. correctly if you don't believe me....

mind I said this would happen with Longhorn (As Vista was supposedly going to be called a few years ago) actually I said it when XP first came out that it was the next stage and I was called all the idiots under the sun moon and whatever else they could find.... turns out I was right after all.....

Who's behind most of the implementation of this? Steve Ballmer CEO of Microsoft! And the real people behind it?

The 'Money Men' - they don't like it when there pockets get hurt and we've all been doing that for a while now...

Fuck em I'm gonna go watch Star Trek while I still can - Streamed online so fuck all they can do about it....For now that is.

Music is Life, Love and Happiness :|: Life is Music. Serren - 1985 - 2005
Religion? Religion is a Blasphemy against humanity - From the film What the Bleep do we know

siggy link So stumbling? whats it all about
Smeggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 00:59   #76
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Out of curiosity: With BITS disabled, do you need to check for Windows updates automatically or does it just turn off their downloading in the background?
AutoPatcher.


[edit]
BITS and the "Automatic Update" process have to be set to automatic to even use http://update.microsoft.com

Manual isn't good enough apparently.

Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
I have always wondered why you disable all of those services. I mean, antivirus I understand (there's a significant performance decrease for that sort of inline checking) but most of these things improve the system's functionality with truly negligible cost.
There are so many things, though, that nobody needs for a home PC that tiny their negligible costs add up to being somewhat significant.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One thing about Vista that actually interests me is whether or not they have finally packaged the different features correctly for the different versions.

I mean, with XP, everyone with a laptop is recommended to use Pro; why even fucking bother with the different version then?

Blows me and my mind.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme

Last edited by shakey_snake; 1st July 2007 at 03:39.
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 06:40   #77
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
They still though have not addressed the main problems windows has and will always have. Until they stop bundling everything into the main core it will continue to have it's litany of problems. the only way to remove those problems is to make it's many proprietary programs just that, proprietary 'Stand Alone' programs, separate from the main operating system.


So please do not tell me that Vista is any better - it is not. It is not simply because it is based on XP as it's main core with a load of fancy garbage thrown on top that most will never use or want to use.
These two paragraphs would appear to be the core of your argument, and both have been addressed in this thread multiple times. First off, what are the "main problems" Windows has, in your opinion?

As for the second paragraph, it's coming off as quite pugilistic. Are you calling the people who have noticed a substantial improvement in Vista from XP liars or idiots? It's one or the other. It's one thing to say you think it sucks (we all have opinions) but it's another to be insulting.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 11:37   #78
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
There are so many things, though, that nobody needs for a home PC that tiny their negligible costs add up to being somewhat significant.
I really disagree with this; I'm sure there's one or two services which take a disproportionate amount of resource, but with the exception of those the smaller ones really aren't going to have a noticeable cumulative effect.

Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
One thing about Vista that actually interests me is whether or not they have finally packaged the different features correctly for the different versions.

I mean, with XP, everyone with a laptop is recommended to use Pro; why even fucking bother with the different version then?
The new versions are sorted more by "marketing" feature set than previously, and since they put a lot of work into working out the cross-dependencies of things, things like the "laptop" situation at least shouldn't be a problem. Everything other than "Ultimate" has a limited feature set compared to its alternatives (it's not like XP where Home is strictly worse than Pro; Vista Home Premium has features that Vista Business/Enterprise does not, and vice versa).

That said, in terms of the services, I'm not sure they have a good reason to disable all that many of them. They add OS features that may be required or desired by both OS apps and third-party apps, and don't cause any problems.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 22:29   #79
Smeggle
Just Strolling By
(Major Dude)
 
Smeggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: A Long Winding Road.....
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
Originally posted by Phyltre
These two paragraphs would appear to be the core of your argument, and both have been addressed in this thread multiple times. First off, what are the "main problems" Windows has, in your opinion?

As for the second paragraph, it's coming off as quite pugilistic. Are you calling the people who have noticed a substantial improvement in Vista from XP liars or idiots? It's one or the other. It's one thing to say you think it sucks (we all have opinions) but it's another to be insulting.
The main problem with windows I have surmised adequately in what I said.

As for the second part no I'm not calling anyone an idiot or liar. What I am saying though is that they are misunderstanding a fundamental part of Vista and that it as yet does not have a new kernel. As I said that won't be addressed until server 2008 is released. At the moment it still uses the basic core of XP and then other new software/features have been built onto/added to that.

Least from the tech write ups that I have read over the last year is what I understood was happening.

What is more concerning though is the power that the E.U.L.A. now gives to Microsoft. I first suspected this during checking out over recent months there automatic updates. Windows defender was being offered as an Update and really it should not be as it is not technically an update.

So I select to ignore that update and not remind me or show me again. So the next month what happens? So it appears again and again I refuse it - this happened two or three months in a row and so I decide I'm gonna have a look. After download I looked over the E.U.L.A and by installing I would give Microsoft arbitrary rights to remove any thing they deam to be a risk to my system, including third party security software.

Windows Live Center is even more draconian and that is the only word to describe it.

Music is Life, Love and Happiness :|: Life is Music. Serren - 1985 - 2005
Religion? Religion is a Blasphemy against humanity - From the film What the Bleep do we know

siggy link So stumbling? whats it all about
Smeggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 22:51   #80
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
As for the second part no I'm not calling anyone an idiot or liar. What I am saying though is that they are misunderstanding a fundamental part of Vista and that it as yet does not have a new kernel. As I said that won't be addressed until server 2008 is released. At the moment it still uses the basic core of XP and then other new software/features have been built onto/added to that.
This paragraph is pretty wrong. It's using an updated version of the same kernel as XP, and Server 2008 will too. Also, there is very little wrong with that kernel, which is why there isn't anything to be "addressed" here.

Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
What is more concerning though is the power that the E.U.L.A. now gives to Microsoft. I first suspected this during checking out over recent months there automatic updates. Windows defender was being offered as an Update and really it should not be as it is not technically an update.
Windows Defender is a constituent part of Vista, and as such its updates should be available through Windows Update.

Quote:
Originally posted by Smeggle
So I select to ignore that update and not remind me or show me again. So the next month what happens? So it appears again and again I refuse it - this happened two or three months in a row and so I decide I'm gonna have a look. After download I looked over the E.U.L.A and by installing I would give Microsoft arbitrary rights to remove any thing they deam to be a risk to my system, including third party security software.
You're going to feel silly when you read the EULA for the "third party security software" and find it has the exact same clause. This is a risk that comes with security software and companies need to protect themselves against litigation.

If they removed something that you didn't want them to, they'd still need to be able to explain why it was seen as a threat, so I really wouldn't worry. This is paranoia.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > Breaking News

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump