what do you think about the upcoming windows vista?

woo

do you really believe those specs?
that spec i would say would run xp nicely but not vista

Rex_Mundi

sco0ter wrote:

A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:

1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
1 GB of system memory.
A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero2.
128 MB of graphics memory.
40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
DVD-ROM Drive3.
Audio output capability.
Internet access capability.

This is part of the reason that it's not worth buying a 'Vista ready' machine now. I think this has got to be one of the biggest empty sales gimmicks ever.

You could spend a fortune on a top spec computer now, and have a machine that will deal with Vista when it comes out. This is fine, but why spend top bucks now running (a finally) perfectly good XP (certainly XP Pro seems to have got there), only to intend on upgrading in a year to Vista and owning a machine that in hardware terms at that time (in a year) is at the lowest end of the hardware spectrum.

Moores law has been going for years now. It's still going to an extent. Next year, when Vista has finally come out, and has had the first service pack issued (making it worth looking at safely). The hardware specs we regard as top end now will be normal computer specs (maybe even low end for new computers). This is why I think the 'Vista ready' tag is such an empty sales tactic.

For anyone upgrading now. A good machine with XP will do for years. If anyone is serious about upgrading to Vista, they should wait till upgrading their hardware. The prices then will be so much cheaper than they are now.

sco0ter

Why is everyone going on about waiting for service packs...... XP is still getting service packs and if everyone waited until it was 100% you would never upgrade.... Vista will be more secure and stable than XP when released and will go through the usuall deluge of people trying to hack and virus attack it the same as XP did. I have been running Vista on my old laptop for over 7 weeks now with no problems. Its only a 800 Mhz Pentium III WITH 512 mb ram and 128Mb graphics but everything works fine (except Aero)

woo

with a completely new network stack in vista i think that is a lot to be worried about! a lot more than when xp came out.

Rex_Mundi

woo wrote:

with a completely new network stack in vista i think that is a lot to be worried about! a lot more than when xp came out.

I think this has got to be one of the biggest worries with Vista when it comes out. It can take years to get a brand new network stack up to a decent secure state. I see this causing big security problems for Vista for quite a while.

I remember XP was billed as the most secure OS ever when it was released. I also remember MS panicking about getting all new users to download SP1 a few months after they released it (it was literally a few months). !!!!!!.........XP is only just a good system in the recent past. There is no way in the world that Vista is going to achieve this from the start.

mikewebs

What does everyone need this OS for?

Surely, things were easier when we could install printers, scanners, mice etc easily under Win98? Surely things were easier when we could turn on the computer and get to work straight away? My new comp (only 2 weeks old with a 3.0ghz/512mb ram) takes nearly a minute to be usable because of AV and firewall software staring up.

I think using a computer should enhance your life.... look at all the Q&As on this forum that prove MS Windows and associated bloatware are getting more and more complicated and annoying to use. As one poster said, Vista will not be perfect for months after it is released - if this were a physical product like a kettle, you would ask for your money back if it didn't work wouldn't you?

I was lucky and won a computer from Microsoft when XP was released, but have spent until recenly religiously updating because of security issues, enhancement features and other such bloats.

Come on guys, Vista may be 'more secure' and 64 bit and it may use transparent windows but for goodness sake, what has any of that got to do with making computer use more pleasurable and enhancing your life? I sometimes wonder what would have happened if Microsoft consolidated one technology completely before running away to another 'better' technology.
I don't think that MS-DOS days were easy, and I believe in the use of the internet and security etc, but think that when an operating system becomes less basic-user focussed - i.e more and more technical knowledge is required - someone needs to take a step back and evaluate exactly what is needed.

As for trying out the beta test, according to Microsoft Vista, my computer has unrecognisable features (funny that, XP recognises them), I can't try it in case everythings goes SNAFU.

I don't mean to criticise MS, but I have listened to and read many advertisments and articles that promise the best, most secure user experience, but after Win95,Win98, Win ME and XP (that has been 5 years post release in the making), I for one will not be upgrading until all the 'glitches' are sorted out - but, by then it'll probably Windows Zulu or some other naff name. Sorry for the rant but I think we should remember what we have been given in the past and not place too much trust in MS.

wolfman

mikewebs wrote:

Surely, things were easier when we could install printers, scanners, mice etc easily under Win98? Surely things were easier when we could turn on the computer and get to work straight away? My new comp (only 2 weeks old with a 3.0ghz/512mb ram) takes nearly a minute to be usable because of AV and firewall software staring up.

Windows XP is to date, at least in my opinion, is the easiest version of Windows to use, and most stable. Regarding boot time that's just a matter of configuration, with that spec, you should be able to have it load up nice and quick.

mikewebs wrote:

I think using a computer should enhance your life.... look at all the Q&As on this forum that prove MS Windows and associated bloatware are getting more and more complicated and annoying to use. As one poster said, Vista will not be perfect for months after it is released - if this were a physical product like a kettle, you would ask for your money back if it didn't work wouldn't you?

Firstly, the majority of users on this forum use Windows, so it's going to accumulate more questions relating to it.

Unfortunately in technology, gone are the days of safely using a computer with little knowledge about it. Windows XP came along at a time when the world was going online, hence all the security problems they weren't ready for, and additional security precautions you need to learn about.

Remember, to get the most out of a computer (or anything in life) you have to learn about it.

mikewebs wrote:

Come on guys, Vista may be 'more secure' and 64 bit and it may use transparent windows but for goodness sake, what has any of that got to do with making computer use more pleasurable and enhancing your life?

A better interface, faster, more responsive, more stable, easier navigation. Supposedly more secure, so less for you to worry about. I certainly have found it more "pleasurable" to use than XP. It's just the next step, just like Windows 98 was to Windows 95. Evolution of technology.

For some people the upgrade won't be worth the cost, to others it will.

MercilessKiller

mikewebs wrote:

What does everyone need this OS for?

You think it was created for people not to need it?

*SIGHS LOUDLY*

1) 64 bit compatibility
2) User-friendliness with literate and illetarate users
3) security (maybe not from the start but it will be more secure than XP.. this is OBVIOUS !!!!!!.. they wont create a worse secure system than XP... that's like a nwe piece of software coming out which doesnt work.. pointless)


As for "needing"... well really, why does everyone "Need" the processor they've got? they could all go a few ghz lower prob, or why does everyone "need" the hard drive they have?

Come on mike - don't be so closed minded dude

NastyMatt

I am looking forward to the new OS.. but then again I look forward to all new OS/Software/games etc as I work in IT and "game" a lot at home. I have had a computer (of some flavour) for the past 26 years at home... I love new stuff!!

I mention gaming as my machine at home is normally fairly rapid so Aero will run no problem on my machine (and I have seen it - it looks superb). As for when I will be moving over?? It will have nothing to do with Service packs but when I next rebuild my machine.

I use XP Pro at home and it is the best OS I have used so tearing apart a solid machine to put a new OS on it is not my idea of fun When I upgrade will be an ideal time to build from scratch.

movieman

WILL PEOPLE STOP USING ME AS A COMPARISON!

Why? Vista is ME for the 21st century: an upgrade few people really want or need.

Windows 3.1 to 95 was huge, 95/98/ME to XP was major, XP to Vista gives some fancy graphics that I don't want, DRM crap that I don't want, and... uh.... um.... yeah.

Even Windows 3.0 to 3.1 was a more compelling upgrade than XP to Vista. I see no reason to switch at all, until I buy a new PC in a couple of years and can't get XP anymore.