--Even if your not really happy with what works?Your nuts, I can run Linux on my old 386sx33 and it screams (no gui
of course) you couldn't even think of doing that with Vista. Keep
your hardware and stick with what works.
--
Microsoft is the devil, and Apple is getting too big to respond to
it's customers. Open source or die.
Doug
--Have no idea what the heck you are talking about on your other post with the Linex I am totally computer ignorant LOL
Did it, use it, works fine..
--Vista is a dog compared to XP Pro and XPx64.
Which OS upgrade got faster on older machines? Stupid issue.. Vista ads features that use the the horse power new machines.. if speed is your issue.. load Windows 97... I bet it screamss....
Debian screams on old hardware - if all it's doing is routing E-mail, being a firewall, or text based word processor. Try running a modern application or watching a movie on that old hardware.
--Silly you, Vista simply wastes resources. XP is just as secure, and beats Vista in almost every area except network file transfer. No big improvement, in fact no improvement at all. Vista is a sad waste of time.
That is just wrong.. XP can't be as secure.. because when you move the users from admin level to user level tons of software can't deal with it, can't even install so you have to run in in admin mode or have problems that make UAC alerts look like a song.
--Yeah it can't be right. Vista has to be more secure... why?
14 old month predictions from a company that needs people to stay worried so they buy product.
First comment says it all just FUD... I have never pushed anyone to upgrade a working XP system XP is a good enough in most cases.. just not to fear it and by a PC with an old OS.. Bussiness are smart not to do an upgrade until they need to refresh all thier PCs.. pretty standard operating procedure.
News alet!! New OS needs a bit more ram and CPU than previous.. when wasn't this true... Maybe we should all dig up a copy of Windows 386 and be amazed at the speed..... LAME
The key statement is "XP is good enough" which I agree with... people like you seem to need to try to spin this to Vista is bad.. which it isn't...
Problem is he is right on Counts 1&2 and if there is a compelling reason to upgrade.. that is personal preference.. if your business has already spent tens of thousadsn creating security features that come in Vista.. there may be no reason.. but if you most of us on this board we don't staff IT and developers and a million$$ to pay them I am glad more security is built into vista..
--
Yes, I do expect Windows 7 to be a significant improvement over Vista, if not in functionality, hopefully at least in the sense that it will be less buggy and have better driver support. Windows 7 is just going to be an evolutionary improvement over Vista, not a revolutionary one, as Vista was over XP. Also, I am sure that by then 64 bit application and driver support will be much better than it is today.
That will be irrelevant by then. At least by then, I will feel satisfied that we have had an opportunity to juice out the life of our current and legacy hardware. At the moment, our policy is to replace hardware, as it dies, with top of the line, Vista 64 capable hardware, but loaded with XP 32 bit. When Windows 7 comes out, we expect to move to it fairly soon (unless our application vendors wise up and offer Linux versions of their wares
. And we will be moving to a 64 bit OS and applications. 64 bits is the way of the future due to the bloated applications and data sets that require gobs of RAM. Moving to a 64 bit OS today is too premature since some of our software is not supported in a 64 bits OS. Moving to Vista 32 bit today doesn't but us anything.Personally, I think that would be a mistake. Unless there is a good justification, I prefer to keep our fleet as homogeneous as possible. There are a lot of advantages in that for both, support and the users. When the time comes we will all move together to Windows 7 and 64 bit computing.
Thanks for the translation Kenny, but I think you may have popped your cork a little too soon (not the first time I'm sure). Firstly, I never said Gateway's support wasn't garbage, but thats not the reason Vista sucks. Secondly, XP can work with my hardware just Like Vista can, but BOTH, yes BOTH OS's need modified slipstreamed versions to accomodate my HD. Lastly, Vista blew long before I "messed" with it. And not just on my laptop, but also on the two other Vista machines I use on a regular basis. They are slower, hog memory, use more power, have less efficient HD write patterns, and CRASH more frequently than their XP counterparts. Not to mention the fact that locations and titles of features and folders are changed from XP, seemingly without any good reason (at least to my mind).
----
Eugene
The only time a smaller sensor with the same pixel count is superior
to a larger sensor (aka higher pixel density) is when you are
focal-length limited.
Lee Jay
