Look at all of the Vista Versions!
http://techgage.com/article/windows_vista_version_comparison/
VISTA HOME PREMIUM - You can't take advantage of dual-cores!?


I met this whore one day, her name was Vista.
She was super pricey (about.. 299 for a night.)
She didn't do much, just sat there, ate cake, and got fat.
Then, when we finally got around to doing something, I found out she had AIDs. When I tried to kick her out, she refused to leave.

THAT, my friends, is Vista.

Or we, Linux users, feel that Windows fanboys hold Linux to a different standard. They require Linux to be perfect before even giving it a second glance, but when Windows Vista comes out with just as many problems, some of which are for the same reason's Linux has problems(Low driver support), it is OK, and to be expected.

I don't have a problem admitting that I spend most of my time in Windows. I know XP better than anyone I have ever met in person. I know the operating system up, down and all around. And I can safely say that Linux's only problem that sets it below XP in any way is driver support. I am a Windows user, I am also a Linux user.

The reason SOME Linux users push Linux so much is because it needs users to increase driver support from hardware companies. Problem is, without hardware support, it is hard to draw users. As you can see, this puts Linux in a real pickle. So people are working hard to not only support hardware they didn't create, but also draw in new users, to help increase hardware support. Linux is better than Windows in almost every conceivable way. There is no doubt about it. But it must gain users before it get the hardware support it deserves. Fortunately Dell is bring Linux to at least one of their line of desktop and laptop computers, which will help and unmeasurable amount. Hell, even Michael Dell uses Ubuntu on his personal laptop.

Danial.Beta wrote:

Linux is better than Windows in almost every conceivable way. There is no doubt about it.

I immediately thought of the popularity factor.

Crispy wrote:

Nick231 wrote:

Thats just plain bloated, Windows XP can run with as little as 7MHz and 20MB of ram.

Er, what? Not usably, it won't.

If XP can run on that system (which I doubt) then 2000 certainly could. 2000 is less bloated than XP.

I've ran XP on a 350 MHZ computer with 128 MB of ram...so yeah. i've also seen my friend mess with some really old crappy computer and have gotten XP to work on it.

Dont get Vista, stick with XP, k?

Vista isn't really that bad, so stop saying it sucks until you have used it for a week or two. It is an improvement over XP but unless you want to play DX 10 games, don't bother with it. The embedded DRM doesent even do anything. I can rip music pirate any software or media and it doesn't give me a problem. It does use more memory than XP but the aero is pretty nice. So until you have tries it more than 15 minutes, please shut it.

No, I have hate towards people who are ignorant. Vista does have its flaws, however its pretty stable. When programs crash, its handled alot more gracefully. If it crashed twice in 15 minutes the person probably had something wrong with their computer. Its not that bad of an OS.

Xx Dark Wizard xX wrote:

If it crashed twice in 15 minutes the person probably had something wrong with their computer.

AND. THIS. SHOULDN'T. MAKE. IT. CRASH.

Seriously, how many times have I said this in this thread?

If Linux can handle dying hardware, Windows should be able to as well. It can't.

Not to mention that the reports of random crashes are wide enough that I'd say you've got lucky if it didn't crash, rather then the other way around.

1) O RLLY
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/28/dell_linux_computers/
and not to mention the vendors that sell computers with linux on them that you obviously excluded ie http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/desktop.html
full list right there
(for the record I have only used Ubuntu on vmware(which I then uninstalled later for space) and am currently running winxp so im not a linux user)

Revenant Jesus wrote:

I have never had a machine crash twice in less then 15 mins. I blame it on the user.

[link] <--- This was most definitely not due to user error.

Jp wrote:

Only if it was a nimrod with root access.

I once caused a kernel panic using only apt-get with the option that forces installation of incompatible dependencies. The dependencies had dependencies, you see, and those dependencies had dependencies... so I manually tracked down every single one and forced their installation. I ended up overwriting libc with a newer verson, which made the OS unbootable; it would throw a kernel panic every time Linux started up.

Now that is user error. I learnt my lesson! =)