Microsoft Vista: What's Up?

For all you guys in the know…

What’s the “word on the street”?

The new OS from Microsoft named “VISTA” is supposed to be available to non-business customers in January (along with “Office 2007”). It’s supposed to “replace” XP.

(When Microsoft “sneezes”, everyone seems to get a cold, right)?

1)Will it be a major upgrade (eg. “Win-98” to "Win2000)… or more of an “ME” type upgrade?

  1. I’m in the market for a Laptop PC; I guess that it makes sense to wait?

“XP Pro” has been a great OS (with not nearly the problems I had with previous OS’s).

So…what’s the scoop?

Mufasa

Here’s the Homepage:

Mufasa

I admit to being ignorant to what Vista really is, but so far all I know is that it’s going to make people get higher-end components to run it.

It seems like Microsoft likes to design a new OS just to make people continue to upgrade their computers every couple of years.

I’m not getting it right away, if at all. I think I’d still have been happy with Windows 98 if I never went to XP.

They seem to try everything they can to keep your computers running slow and sub-optimal. Pretty soon the best processor, and what’s considered a great amount of RAM will be obsolete only because they made a more complicated, larger OS.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
1)Will it be a major upgrade (eg. “Win-98” to "Win2000)… or more of an “ME” type upgrade?[/quote]

No. Its just like the leap from 200 to XP.

Or from 98 to ME.

There is already a new system in the works to Replace Vista.

Wait for a laptop thats Vista Premium Ready or something by that name.

Vista takes up around 600mb of Ram when NOT DOING ANYTHING! And about 10+ Gigs of hard drive Space.

I would recommend a Laptop with at least 2gigs of ram as absolute minimum. 1 gig runs a browser and maybe notepad…

It also needs a beefy Videocard (512 minimum. Nvidia or Ati chipsets. Latest series. nVidia is in the GeForce 8s now.) to run all those effects and transparency and all the crud on top of it.

[quote]
“XP Pro” has been a great OS (with not nearly the problems I had with previous OS’s).[/quote]

Ditto. Very nice… most of the time.

Also. You could just get a Mac. Alot of Vista’s “groundbreaking” features were blatantly ripped off the Mac. They didn’t even bother changing alot of it to make it look different.

Its that obvious.

Plus. There are no viruses for Mac. Or intrusive Spyware or any of that crap. Its not compatible!

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
I admit to being ignorant to what Vista really is, but so far all I know is that it’s going to make people get higher-end components to run it.

It seems like Microsoft likes to design a new OS just to make people continue to upgrade their computers every couple of years.

I’m not getting it right away, if at all. I think I’d still have been happy with Windows 98 if I never went to XP.

They seem to try everything they can to keep your computers running slow and sub-optimal. Pretty soon the best processor, and what’s considered a great amount of RAM will be obsolete only because they made a more complicated, larger OS.[/quote]

If they didn’t make a slower OS that was heavier on Resources… would people even BUY new PCs?

No.

Its not in their best interests. Or in the interest of the Computer Matufacturers. They have to keep making shitty products with minor updates once in awhile to string consumers along.

Worked so far.

If you want innovation and better performance. You might want to look into Mac.

Or Ubuntu Linux. Last I used Ubuntu it was REALLY nice. And they keep making the thing perform a little better every time they come out with Updates. Its not magical but the system gets a little better with each update instead of slower.

And there is no spyware or viruses for Linux either. So there is one problem gone.

You have to remember as hard drives get bigger and cheaper (right now 250 gig is pretty standard) Microsoft can continue to produce “bloat” code. Every new version they have ever released has gone up exponentially in size.

That said, Vista takes advantage of the new dual-core chips (these make a single CPU act like two) and they have made great strides in 3-D graphics and graphics in general.

I have installed Vista/Beta 3, RC-1 and RC-2 and its pretty cool. The biggest benefits aren’t visible though. It is far more secure. Vista no longer give programs (applications) direct access to the kernal making hacking harder but still not impossible.

If you are buying a new PC get at least 2 Gig. of RAM and get a decent (250 meg.) video card. Also, go th eextra few dollars for a Pentium D (dual core), I have one and they really make a difference.

Cheers,

RW

Vista is more than the leap from 2000 to XP. It is the first OS from MS that isn’t based around the Windows NT core.

Now if this is a good thing, I’m not sure. All I know is that after playing around with it, it is like a smarter version of XP, takes advantage of newer graphics cards, and most of the “improvements” are below the surface.

edit…

I’m one of the sneaky buggers that won’t pay for Windows for personal use, so I’ve already got the Vista Ultimate RTM (Release to Manufacture) or final version installed.

I like it, but as mentioned before the system will need a decent pc to run so keep that in mind. You don’t have to wait for it to be released before buying a new pc, provided it’s quite high-end. The features are nice, and with the new Office 2007 I think they’ll work well together.

I’ve been looking at a new laptop with 2gb ram and a 256mb graphics card, but now I’m considering a more powerfull machine…

You guys are GREAT! (As usual!)

This helps a lot. Keep the ideas and thoughts coming!

Mufasa

Did anyone else (like me) take advantage of the MS offer to watch some of their webcasts and get a free copy of Vista sent to them?

http://www.powertogether.com

They are all sold out of getting a free copy/license of Vista Business, but they still are running the Office Professional 2007 promotion. You basically sign up, watch 3 of their webcasts (some of which are fairly interesting) and then 6-8 weeks later, you get the software mailed to you. Voila!

Notice how the “Vista” thread and the “The Suck” thread seem to clump together on the front page.

Coincidence? I think not.

[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
Plus. There are no viruses for Mac. Or intrusive Spyware or any of that crap. Its not compatible![/quote]

No? What do you call Oompa-Loompa, Opener and Renopo then?

What about ichatHack, mailHack, safariHack, and InqTana?

What about the demonstration that was done at this year’s BlackHat convention: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/08/hijacking_a_macbook_in_60_seco_1.html

How about the guy who challenged the world to “rm my Mac?” http://rm-my-mac.wideopenbsd.org/ How long do you think his machine lasted? Click a few links and read. See also “Lessons learned.”

[quote]pookie wrote:
No? What do you call Oompa-Loompa, Opener and Renopo then?

What about ichatHack, mailHack, safariHack, and InqTana?

What about the demonstration that was done at this year’s BlackHat convention: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/08/hijacking_a_macbook_in_60_seco_1.html

How about the guy who challenged the world to “rm my Mac?” http://rm-my-mac.wideopenbsd.org/ How long do you think his machine lasted? Click a few links and read. See also “Lessons learned.”[/quote]

Still. Its alot safer than Windows. Even with those minor flaws.

And if you ever have security issues… just get a good firewall. No?

[quote]RoadWarrior wrote:
That said, Vista takes advantage of the new dual-core chips (these make a single CPU act like two) and they have made great strides in 3-D graphics and graphics in general.[/quote]

XP can also use dual core… and Quad Core. It depends on the application and if it can take advantage of it.

Most games come with dual and quad support. The new ones that is.

[quote]
I have installed Vista/Beta 3, RC-1 and RC-2 and its pretty cool. The biggest benefits aren’t visible though. It is far more secure. Vista no longer give programs (applications) direct access to the kernal making hacking harder but still not impossible.[/quote]

Yeah. It also doesn’t allow antivirus software access either. Can’t clean it when it does mess up.

As said, Vista uses loads of memory. The RC1 ast at over 600mb idle. Great if you have 2gb of ram, but not that many people do.

Direct X 10 is about the only good bit. They says its more secure, but …you know.

[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
Still. Its alot safer than Windows. Even with those minor flaws.[/quote]

Some of those flaws are pretty major. The problem is that Apple is refusing to acknowledge and repair some of those flaws. In some cases, they “spin” those flaws as “features”: http://rixstep.com/1/1/20061130,01.shtml

Apple seems to be making all the same mistakes Microsoft made 5 years ago. OS X has been getting less safe with each new revision.

A firewall won’t help you if you receive an email with an attachment and you click on it. Or is you download and open a picture of the new Mac OS X that turns out to be an executable… The wireless driver bug is also not affected by a firewall’s presence.

Getting Mac users to cooperate in their own downfall is incredibly easy, because most of them still believe the myth that OS X is invulnerable.

Some of the holes require no user interaction at all. Many vulnerable Macs are protected the same way many vulnerable Windows PC are: By being behind a router.

They’re also protected by their lack of market share, something that Windows has in abundance. :slight_smile:

[quote]Dr Stig wrote:
As said, Vista uses loads of memory. The RC1 ast at over 600mb idle. Great if you have 2gb of ram, but not that many people do.[/quote]

Vista is designed to use that much memory. Unused memory is wasted, so Vista uses as much of it as it can; preloading often used application before you’ve even clicked on them, among various other optimisations.

Search for “SuperFetch” and “ReadyBoost” for more detailed explanation of Vista’s aggressive memory usage.

The only reason I would get vista is DX10, pretty graphics are awesome. Unfortunately I would have to upgrade my RAM and GFX card quite a bit, which means a new motherboard. I’ll hang on to XP for another year or so I think.

I’ve had Office 2007 Enterprise Edition for a few weeks now and it’s leaps and bounds above Office 2003. The whole system is built around tabs and graphically more user-friendly.

I haven’t played with any of the beta Vista’s yet to know how different they are. I would assume, given the timeframe they used to create it, it would be a bigger leap than just 98 to ME. Hell in my opinion that was a step backwards.