Posted on 01/12/2008 4:06:08 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
(For those who don't remember, Windows XP becomes usable once you reach 512 MB of RAM, and its "sweet spot" is about 1 GB of RAM.)
for later - nice piece.
I was told XP is not set up to use more than 3 GB of RAM.
Besides, their OS is built on layers of older OS codes which were patched and repatched again. It all make OS grow fast in size.
Vista is the greatest gift Microsoft has ever given Apple.
In the interest of full disclosure, I’m a steadfast Mac user. I am also proficient in Windows. Every time I have provide tech support for a Windows-using friend or family member who isn’t as tech-savvy as I am, i thank my lucky stars that I don’t have ti del with that crap every day.
Mac OS just works. I’m just saying.
I just bought a Dell off their site with Vista as well. E521 - Anthlon 3800+ dual core with 1 GB ram and 250GB sata drive and other goodies. $300 but with no OS option other than Vista. I'm going to get an OEM version and reinstall XP. I plan to get all the drivers off the net for XP before I do anything with the new PC, though. Hopefully no issues, but for the price, I'll deal with the temporary inconvenience.
OK, I’ll be the lone voice in the wilderness on this one.
I’m running Vista, with no problems, and I like it a lot.
I’m a systems analyst, and my home setup is a Windows 2008 RC 1 server, a Vista Ultimate desktop both hard wired to my wireless router, and a Laptop, also running Vista Ultimate connected wirelessly. The 2008 box is an Active Directory domain controller and the other two boxen are domain members. I also have both an XBox 360 and a Wii connected wirelessly.
I haven’t had any issues with the networking part - it’s just worked, and worked well. My daughter sometimes brings her laptop over (running XP) and connects to my network easily.
I do recall hearing much the same stuff being said about XP for the first year it was out. But, in my opinion, The initial relase of Vista was a much better OS than the initial release of XP. It seems that MS can’t catch a break - everyone’s complained for years about their security issues, but when they start to fix it, everone complains that it doesn’t work exactly the way it used to.
Sure, it’s different from XP, and that takes a little getting used to. You can’t tell after a few hours or days if it’s an improvement - you need to give it a little time to get past the learning curve. I’ve been using Vista since the first beta, and while there are things about it I’m not thrilled with, it’s a perfectly fine OS and will only get better with time, just as XP did and OS X is.
One of three. Ron Paul is a raving loon, and hemp clothing is scratchy. I prefer cotton.
Hemp for paper and fuel, that's a whole 'nother question.
That's easy to answer. There are a ton of specialized software packages that simply do not run on Apple machines. It's impossible to justify the cost of developing specialized software to operate on Apple computers when Apple's market share is less than ten per cent.
Apple is certainly idiot-proof but a lot of people expect more than that and look at their computers as an important tool to get a complex job done.
I have developed a working hypothesis on software development. When the lines of code exceed 100,000 and the number of arbitrary constants approaches 50,000, no man (or woman, or group of programmers) have any idea about what the program is doing.
They did. It's called Vista Home Basic, Vista Home Pro, Ultimate. Buy whichever one you want. You can also turn off Aero, turn off UAC, turn off the sidebar, and you've pretty much gone back to XP.
Worst tech product of the century.
Do you remember Deskview? Or Geoworks? I also have a copy of the last version of Borland's Quattro Pro 4.0 for DOS. Its GUI looks just like Windows, but it runs in 640K (yes, that's K!) of RAM... /grin
I have downloaded some of those run-from-CD/DVD versions of Linux and did the VMware virtual window for a few others.
The problem with Linux is that there are too many versions (around a dozen), which is confusing.
I also tried out the VMware virtual window. It worked, sort of, but several of the VM-specific programs said they needed upgrading, but would not connect to the Internet link to upgrade. The VMware virtual window was about like run-from-CD — pretty to look at, but it wouldn’t ‘read’ data on the hard drive outside of the virtual window, and anything saved inside the virtual windows was erased when the window as closed.
I have a standard Kworld pctv card that none of the versions of Linux have recognized. They sort of see it, but they won’t/can’t run the drivers to make it actually work.
Finally MS is not going to get away with stealing other companys software and embeding them in to their operating system, to put that competitor out of business. A little too greedy there Bill. Pay back is sweet!!!!
Linux, of course, is free and will.
Well, I guess I have extra ram, then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.