Now that it's out, what are the pros? I've googled it and pretty much kept track, but I want to know how it operates!
Is it really any more "secure" than any other version of Windows? What packages do they offer, and can the "Vista Ready" computers operate the eye-candy (such as gloss, and all of the cool extras)
Does Vista run any faster than XP?
Any major pluses?
ID:277340
 Jan 29 2007, 7:57 am
|
|
Wow..
I also heard they are limiting network traffic, and what's the point of coming out with 4 different versions!? What version has all of the eye-candy on it? | |
I don't get Microsoft. Why are they putting restrictions on Windows Vista? It's an operating system. It shouldn't have restrictions!
That's it. I'm switching to Linux the first chance I get! Which would actually be now since I have the CD laying around, but I'd rather wait for BYOND Linux so I don't have to mess around with WINE. | |
Limited hardware installations, "HD Compliant" hardware requirements for media, outright can't use any sort of recording hardware (My ATI TV wonder card will outright not work, nor will my friends HDTV wonder).
Possibly the single reason to upgrade to vista would have been DX10, but WINEHQ is working on porting it to XP, so pending the success of that theres really just a few other features which you can be sure someone will release software for XP to do the same things (Virtual folders = Folder with shortcuts in it, for example). Theres the lovely 10Gigs of space required, and no "clean-upgrades". An upgrade version of Vista can't be clean installed. You MUST have a running Genuine version of windows in order to upgrade. For many people, that means an additional 5-10Gigs of Wasted hard drive space to keep their Backup partitions (HP/Dell/etc. Computers rather than shipping a disk have a seperate partition on the hard drive that contains a clean install image to be used when problems arise) in case they needed to upgrade again at a later time. In all honesty too, It won't be long before there are hacks released for each and every restriction in vista, so it may not turn out quite as bad in the long run, but personally I'll wait and see how long it takes before I take the plunge for some eye candy and having the OS trying to tell me what I can and can't do, when I've got a perfectly fine OS already. | |
http://ubuntu.com
FTW! I'm switching soon, I've had it with Windows. (If anything, I'll use VMWARE) | |
Also itunes doesent work, crappy driver and onboard sound support. I would just use XP till they fix most of the stuff. And it has embedded DRM. And it is really expensive.
| |
I've seen all the versions like vista home and vista ultimate i dont get the difference between them im probably gonna go with vista because i hate changing things once i get used to them.
| |
Jon88 wrote:
Flame Sage wrote: Many report that it is in fact faster. Any major pluses? You know it funny that people blame Microsoft for including DRM when Apple does it already. Sadly HD-DVD/BluRay need the DRM to play, without it, the video/music will be of lower quality or not play at all. Much like the new DRM HD-DVD/BluRay players need HDCP support so the video is not degraded. This is a problem the linux world will need to address, or they will be left out on new content. (will be a deal breaker for many thinking of switching) The good/not so good news is that Torvalds is ok with DRM "I want to make it clear that DRM is perfectly ok with Linux!" - Torvalds. So linux may very well have DRM in the kernel one day, for better or worse. | |
Jon88 wrote:
or some other program is trying to capture the video, and stuff like that. Gotta love new technologies. =) ...or not, considering that such new techno-majiggers like to break what could amount to some really high-quality stuff. Hiead | |
Jon88 wrote:
Does Vista run any faster than XP? Maybe for you but it runs faster than xp for me :S Eyecandy sucks on vista its hardly worth having they don't have many widgets to download and they all look like a 10 year old drew them. | |
Xzar wrote:
You know it funny that people blame Microsoft for including DRM when Apple does it already. Sadly HD-DVD/BluRay need the DRM to play, without it, the video/music will be of lower quality or not play at all. Much like the new DRM HD-DVD/BluRay players need HDCP support so the video is not degraded. It doesn't "need" HDCP support or DRM. They're both arbitrary (and failed) restrictions. This is a problem the linux world will need to address, or they will be left out on new content. (will be a deal breaker for many thinking of switching) It can't be addressed. The very nature of Linux (being that the users are free to use THEIR computers how they want) means that there's no way the movie industry is giving a decryption key for any linux program. (Not that the windows ones have done a good job so far of keeping theirs secret...) So linux may very well have DRM in the kernel one day, for better or worse. There are sort of two kinds of DRM. There's the first one, put in place by the owner of the computer system. The computer is theirs, and the DRM helps to keep their stuff secure. One example is a business having DRM on their office machines to secure their documents. Another is a home user with DRM that prevents non-permitted programs from running. The other kind is more evil. It's the one where the control of YOUR computer is taken away. It's given to Microsoft, the movie industry, or some other organization, who then try to dictate what YOU can do with the stuff YOU own. | |
Jon88 wrote:
The other kind is more evil. It's the one where the control of YOUR computer is taken away. It's given to Microsoft, the movie industry, or some other organization, who then try to dictate what YOU can do with the stuff YOU own [or don't own]. Which actually makes the entire thing kind of funny, as the people they are trying to stop, are just going to find a way around it anyway. | |
I went a whole day with Linux on my desktop(It has been running on my laptop for about a year now) with no problems, short of missing my games. It really pisses me off that game developers ignore Linux. I want to play games, in fact, they are an important part of my life. Aside from those, I got everything I wanted working, including support for w32codec for .wmv and .mpeg support thanks to the Automatix for Ubuntu. http://www.getautomatix.com/
I got pretty much all of my hardware working(My mouse has a lot of buttons that I didn't feel like programming, but I could have). Compiz is every bit as good as Microsoft's Aero, with some features that Aero can't top. On top of that, it doesn't require much power, my laptop that struggles horribly with WoW runs it with no problems. All around, I can't figure out why Microsoft thinks that Vista is worth the CD it is printed on. It offers nothing new and nothing exciting. It is over priced and under featured. Vista is one downgrade that I will not be buying. DX10 is pointless, because no real game developer(That isn't under Microsoft's payroll) is going to program a game that doesn't look just as well in DX9 because it would cut their market into a very small fraction of what it could be. Perhaps developers will smarten up and start using OpenGL instead. Meaning that Linux will be a trivial feat. | |
Nick231 wrote:
Jon88 wrote: Or don't own? My sentence was referring more to the hardware. If you don't own that (or somebody isn't letting you use theirs), shame on you for stealing. :( | |
Jon88 wrote:
Nick231 wrote: I was referring more to playing media, which your mention of the movie industry, and other organizations refers to aswell. Regardless, it doesn't make the afterstatement any less true. There has been no real successful prevention of piracy of any form, which is what makes it rather funny. | |
Danial.Beta wrote:
It really pisses me off that game developers ignore Linux. I want to play games, in fact, they are an important part of my life. Install Windows. ~Kujila | |
Kujila wrote:
Install Windows... ...and waste lots and LOTS of space on features you will never ever use such as themes and other silly crap. Sorry, but I don't want to get the latest of the latest PCs just to be able to run Windows Vista, a poor operating system which - despite it's 'better security' I keep hearing about - still fails to do the most basic thing: give the user control over what they get. Instead, we're supposed to cough up more money if we have over 256MB of RAM? Hell no! | |
Android Data wrote:
Instead, we're supposed to cough up more money if we have over 256MB of RAM? Hell no! I don't know where people keep getting this from it never happened to me. I think you might be getting it mixed up with you have to HAVE 256ram to install vista :S? | |
Yes. Users are no longer administrator by default.
Slower.
You get DirectX 10, but that really won't count as "major" for awhile. There's a bunch of negatives like Microsoft being Hollywood's lackey, so HD-DVD/BluRay automatically go to a lower resolution if your entire computer isn't HDCP-compliant, or some other program is trying to capture the video, and stuff like that.