Jump to content


Photo

Windows Vista


  • Please log in to reply
111 replies to this topic

#1 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,726 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 January 2007 - 0929 AM

Soooooo, who is going to do the upgrade? Who is going to be a beta tester for Microsoft? I am uneasy about the DRM issues with Vista:

Vista DRM

Toms hardware

Paul Smith's blog
He seems to be a bit of an apologist for Microsoft on the DRM issue, I am unsure of it, and will wait for at least six months before doing the upgrade.
  • 0

#2 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,871 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 1353 PM

I think I will wait till I get a new computer, apparently it's a real hog, even by MS standards

Edited by Colin, 28 January 2007 - 1354 PM.

  • 0

#3 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 28 January 2007 - 1702 PM

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.
  • 0

#4 Gregory

Gregory

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,475 posts

Posted 30 January 2007 - 1605 PM

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".


Aeroglass? It's definitely easy on the eyes.
  • 0

#5 Stevely

Stevely

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Interests:varied

Posted 30 January 2007 - 2133 PM

Aeroglass? It's definitely easy on the eyes.


Aeromac more like.:lol:

Edited by Stevely, 30 January 2007 - 2137 PM.

  • 0

#6 DwightPruitt

DwightPruitt

    Cretinous idiot.

  • Guests
  • PipPip
  • 2,190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indianapolis

Posted 31 January 2007 - 0104 AM

I bought a new machine today, and it happened to be loaded on it. It wasn't the reason I bought a new machine, but it seems OK.
  • 0

#7 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 31 January 2007 - 0351 AM

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
  • 0

#8 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 31 January 2007 - 0521 AM

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.
  • 0

#9 m1a1mg

m1a1mg

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,803 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charleston, SC

Posted 31 January 2007 - 0858 AM

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.
  • 0

#10 DwightPruitt

DwightPruitt

    Cretinous idiot.

  • Guests
  • PipPip
  • 2,190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indianapolis

Posted 31 January 2007 - 1201 PM

My first impression is that Vista is heavy on security (which is good) and graphically it looks like it's set up for old people. Right up my alley. :) It was very easy to set up a network here at home
  • 0

#11 Stevely

Stevely

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Interests:varied

Posted 31 January 2007 - 1321 PM

My first impression is that Vista is heavy on security (which is good) and graphically it looks like it's set up for old people. Right up my alley. :) It was very easy to set up a network here at home


It is in fact heavy on security, but not your security.
  • 0

#12 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 31 January 2007 - 1742 PM

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.
  • 0

#13 superfractal

superfractal

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,238 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK, some where near a 6x brewey but a bit further west i think. But i may be drunk.
  • Interests:hmm tanks, pizza women, tv etc im human male ok! shoot me... wait no i was kinding put the gun down.. no noooooooooooo!!!1111111111111111111111111

Posted 31 January 2007 - 1926 PM

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.
  • 0

#14 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 31 January 2007 - 2108 PM

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.
  • 0

#15 EvanDP

EvanDP

    Deus Ex Nukina

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,391 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, California, USA
  • Interests:SciFi, firearms, Military history, computers, redheads

Posted 01 February 2007 - 0153 AM

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.
  • 0

#16 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 01 February 2007 - 0801 AM

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.
  • 0

#17 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 01 February 2007 - 0955 AM

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).
  • 0

#18 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,267 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 01 February 2007 - 2042 PM

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
  • 0

#19 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 01 February 2007 - 2347 PM

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.arstechni...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.
  • 0

#20 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 02 February 2007 - 0305 AM

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:
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users