Originally posted by: NFS4
Well, just got it installed on my laptop. Don't see any transparency stuff with my integrated Intel graphics. From what I've read, it only supports NVIDIA and ATI hardware
That being said, this OS is pretty damn fast and is easily as fast or faster than XP on the same hardware.
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: NFS4
Well, just got it installed on my laptop. Don't see any transparency stuff with my integrated Intel graphics. From what I've read, it only supports NVIDIA and ATI hardware
That being said, this OS is pretty damn fast and is easily as fast or faster than XP on the same hardware.
Wha??
How can it be faster? unless its caching everything?
Do you mean general browsing? I need more details!!
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_beta1_01.asp
That's really good to hear on a first run beta of the OS. HOPEFULLY, it will stay as fast with improvements to code down the road, or get even faster (which I'm not holding my breath for).
Basically, I understand the need for Virtual Folders. They help people who CAN'T organize. No matter where on the HDD they drop their crap, they can find all of it in a Virtual Folder. Okay, that's fine and dandy, but for people like myself, who already store all their documents in a smart location anyway, I better damn well be able to ignore Virtual Folders and not use them for anything. THUS, it makes me very mad that the Documents link, for example, in the Start Menu, opens up the VIRTUAL All Documents folder and not the TRUE Documents folder. Anyone else share this concern with me?
I agree with almost all of that. To reply to your first paragraph specifically, it does concern me of the main link in the start menu taking you to the virtual folder, and the confusion ensues about which folder you're actually in. The great thing about it? This is a beta, so hopefully enough people will give feedback to fix this in the final release, or atleast present a better solution. Chances are, you will be able to customize the start menu fully like you can in XP, so I'm not too worried about this facet yet. It should be possible to remove that link entirely, and/or change it or replace it.Originally posted by: archcommus
Okay...let's start addressing the real issues here...not the GUI or RAM usage, but the organization, content, and usage of this OS. I'm reading NFS4's link, and this naming confusion and Virtual Folders confusion worries me. I'm big on organization and anything that tries to mess with that will be personally terminated by me.
And finally, the author of that article says that this will have to do until MS finally drops drive-letter based organization. Can anyone clarify what this means? If he means we need a way of doing things where the physical location of a file doesn't matter, that worries me even more. All that's saying is "We need a system where people can put files wherever the hell they please and can still find them and not worry about organizing it."
This is like the same thing with Gmail. Google encourages you to not worry about organizing your emails because their search feature is so awesome. Well I'm not real keen on doing that. By doing that, you NEVER really have a good idea of how many emails or what kind of emails you're storing. You have no idea what you have. But, when you want to find it, you can. Pushing that way of thinking in an OS doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
Originally posted by: blurredvision
I agree with almost all of that. To reply to your first paragraph specifically, it does concern me of the main link in the start menu taking you to the virtual folder, and the confusion ensues about which folder you're actually in. The great thing about it? This is a beta, so hopefully enough people will give feedback to fix this in the final release, or atleast present a better solution. Chances are, you will be able to customize the start menu fully like you can in XP, so I'm not too worried about this facet yet. It should be possible to remove that link entirely, and/or change it or replace it.Originally posted by: archcommus
Okay...let's start addressing the real issues here...not the GUI or RAM usage, but the organization, content, and usage of this OS. I'm reading NFS4's link, and this naming confusion and Virtual Folders confusion worries me. I'm big on organization and anything that tries to mess with that will be personally terminated by me.
And finally, the author of that article says that this will have to do until MS finally drops drive-letter based organization. Can anyone clarify what this means? If he means we need a way of doing things where the physical location of a file doesn't matter, that worries me even more. All that's saying is "We need a system where people can put files wherever the hell they please and can still find them and not worry about organizing it."
This is like the same thing with Gmail. Google encourages you to not worry about organizing your emails because their search feature is so awesome. Well I'm not real keen on doing that. By doing that, you NEVER really have a good idea of how many emails or what kind of emails you're storing. You have no idea what you have. But, when you want to find it, you can. Pushing that way of thinking in an OS doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
Originally posted by: eLiu
Originally posted by: blurredvision
I agree with almost all of that. To reply to your first paragraph specifically, it does concern me of the main link in the start menu taking you to the virtual folder, and the confusion ensues about which folder you're actually in. The great thing about it? This is a beta, so hopefully enough people will give feedback to fix this in the final release, or atleast present a better solution. Chances are, you will be able to customize the start menu fully like you can in XP, so I'm not too worried about this facet yet. It should be possible to remove that link entirely, and/or change it or replace it.Originally posted by: archcommus
Okay...let's start addressing the real issues here...not the GUI or RAM usage, but the organization, content, and usage of this OS. I'm reading NFS4's link, and this naming confusion and Virtual Folders confusion worries me. I'm big on organization and anything that tries to mess with that will be personally terminated by me.
And finally, the author of that article says that this will have to do until MS finally drops drive-letter based organization. Can anyone clarify what this means? If he means we need a way of doing things where the physical location of a file doesn't matter, that worries me even more. All that's saying is "We need a system where people can put files wherever the hell they please and can still find them and not worry about organizing it."
This is like the same thing with Gmail. Google encourages you to not worry about organizing your emails because their search feature is so awesome. Well I'm not real keen on doing that. By doing that, you NEVER really have a good idea of how many emails or what kind of emails you're storing. You have no idea what you have. But, when you want to find it, you can. Pushing that way of thinking in an OS doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I don't like the idea of searching. I know where my sh!t is, and I can most certainly get there faster than windows can search 300GB of files.
Don't want or need fancy file interfaces, pretty GUIs, etc...just something that is stable, compatible with crap, and won't eat my system resources...
Facebook
Twitter