Vista why is it so bad..

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem

I can do that on a Windows PC too, it's totally pointless. You are not doing anything other then changing the look of the UI. Do you have replicas of all the software that Apple includes with OSX?

There's a lot more to an OS then how it looks or feels..

I'd be using BSD as the base which is the base of OSX. The only thing left would be the GUI. Yes, I cloned Firefox to look like Safari.

Lol, please just stop. Cloning firefox to look like safari doesn't make it safari... it's still firefox!

I meant I could clone Linux or BSD to look and behave exactly like a mac.

I'd be using BSD as the base which is the base of OSX.

Which one is it?

I will say it again, there's a lot more to an OS then how it looks or feels.

Oh, and BSD isn't an OS. There are tons of BSD based operating systems like freebsd, openbsd, Darwin(see what I did there?), Dragonfly, and even monowall(the security appliance).

Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD, sometimes called Berkeley Unix) is theUnix operating system derivative developed and distributed by the Computer Systems Research Group of the University of California, Berkeley, from 1977 to 1995.

replica-A replica is a copy that is relatively indistinguishable from the original.

Good for you, you can use Google. Now tell me what that means?

You show me your "replica" and I will show you more things that are different then things that are the same between them. Once again, I will say there's a lot more to an OS then how it looks or feels..

 

[Net]

i hear they improved vista. they refer to it as "windows 7"

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: net

i hear they improved vista. they refer to it as "windows 7"

Vista is being improved with SP2 ,good bet that W7 will be improved with SP1 ,Windows 8 will improve on previous OS ,get the idea .

Improvements are always coming,however users are not always happy with them since Microsoft can't please everybody as members here know from past experience .

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem

so you have earned my respect

It's about time someone acutally looks to what I said instead of instantly flaming me.

Maybe the point here is not to open your mouth when you don't actually know what you are talking about? You have made some very ignorant statements in this thread. Some about Vista and some about OSX. Get informed, then speak.

You sir are very rude and your statement would make sense if I was actually talking. Why don't you control your temper and handle this thread like an adult? Please tell me why I am so unimformed. Other than DRM which I've already admitted to being wrong, what else have I said wrong about Vista? As for OSX, I REFUSE to use an OS that tells me which brand of computer to use. I have a strong hate for macs and I always will. It is my opinion and if anyone doesn't like it they can get over it. I could make a mac clone and no one could tell the difference. Best of all, it'd be free in price, and free to install on whatever pc you want. I like competition. It brings innovation and price cuts as shown by Nvidia and ATI.

I believe we can use the term speak when having a conversation using text. Speach can be in many forms, you can speak up via letter, internet post, or using words.

I will admit to being rude, but quite frankly I am also right. I will comment on this below, I have a lot of free time to point out every stupid thing you have said in this thread (or at least as many as I care to find).

Let's start with the post I have quoted.

"I could make a mac clone and no one could tell the difference. Best of all, it'd be free in price, and free to install on whatever pc you want." - Sure you can buddy. Making a OS is easy. What you are really saying is you can take a free os and skin it to look like OSX. Well I have done that with windows, gnome, and kde (both on linux) and I can tell you that is nothing like OSX. It just looks like OSX. Can your 'OS' run textmate (the greatest editor I've ever used)? If you really could write a OSX clone then I suspect you would of already done it and be a millionaire by now.

"What a useless, proprietary, stolen BSD that is designed for computer illiterate people." - Let's look at this here. How can an operating system be designed for illiterate people, yet also be a stolen high end unix operating system. It is either high powered unix or it is not. Further more, how do you steal something released under a license that allows you to do exactly what apple did. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. But let us keep going.

"When you upgrade your RAM you have to use this "special" RAM. I couldn't imagine Apple allowing its customers to use regular RAM." - Yet they do let you use regular ram. Just like any other computer built on commodity parts. You buy the right type of ram (DDR2) and stick it in just like any other computer. Again, you show how your bias overrides your ability to get informed.

"If I really wanted to experience a mac then I could just clone a BSD to look exactly like it since that is all it is: a fancy looking BSD." - Again with the BSD clone crap (also you point out again that it was stolen, forgetting you can't steal BSD licensed software or the fact that apple does release their source and give back to the BSD licensed code they use). Can BSD use quicktime? What about iTunes? No, well maybe iWork? No, what about microsoft office? No? Hmmm......well can I program using the cocoa librarys? No??? Damn it, my cloned apple really isn't a cloned apple after all. BTW how do I get time machine running on bsd? Maybe you can show me a BSD distribution that comes on high end laptop hardware with everything working, full support, and a easy update system with a OSX gui?

I'm going to combine the next two quotes

"What do you guys see in Vista? It has nothing new in it." and "DX 10 also offers nothing new since editing a config file in Crysis produced the same results." - First I point you to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...s_new_to_Windows_Vista Please note the DirectX section. For the record Crysis is a dx9 game with dx10 extensions. So it doesn't surprise me that they would write the engine to have dx9 methods for the same new features to dx10. Game developers have been writing their own shaders and such for ever. It seems they just got busted with microsoft trying a marketing ploy.

"Vista came out almost two years ago and it required 1gb of RAM. It was rediculous then and it is now." - http://www.microsoft.com/windo...stem-requirements.aspx that says enough. I'm not even going to point out the whole Peter Gutmann things that you finally got around to researching and realizing the truth.

Let me do one last one:
"It's interesting that you prefer Windows to *nix for a server, many people would disagree with you." - Really now? That may be true in some circles, but not true in a vast amount of corporate networks. Active Directory ring a bell? Most vendors who come to my business on a day to day basis expect that we have exchange and active directory and are very shocked when we do not. We have a hell of a time trying to find vendors who's products will work without active directory. And there is nothing (yet) that linux offers that even comes close to replicating active directory (of the 2003 server variety). This is why we use netware (I do admit however that novell is moving their netware platform to linux).

The problem here is that you have expressed hatred of an operating system. If that is true then you need some reevaluation of your priorities. Simply put there is no reason not to use vista, and for sure there is no reason to take vista off of a new computer and put xp on it (technical reasons). If you need a unix desktop, you are going to find none better then OSX. If you need a rock solid unix notebook you are not going to find anything even close to osx.

I am an open source advocate. That does not mean I'm not going to pay for quality. I've used unix for well over a decade now and if it was possible to easily do what the mac does for me with linux, bsd, solaris, whatever, then I would have already done it. That is the reason why I do not run osx server, because I can easily replicate it's functionality (for the parts we use). I'm sorry the world doesn't fit in nice boxes of perfect and horribly flawed like you seem to want them to.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: net

i hear they improved vista. they refer to it as "windows 7"

You Fail

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: clarkey01

Originally posted by: net

i hear they improved vista. they refer to it as "windows 7"

You Fail

Well, it is sort of true Clarkey. Microsoft people themselves are saying that Windows 7 is going to be everything that Vista is and more. Almost more like the true Vista.

Ballmer himself said that some people might want to wait for Windows 7, and he thinks it might not be a bad idea.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: TheStu
Well, it is sort of true Clarkey. Microsoft people themselves are saying that Windows 7 is going to be everything that Vista is and more. Almost more like the true Vista.

Ballmer himself said that some people might want to wait for Windows 7, and he thinks it might not be a bad idea.

No one with any ounce of honesty is going to debate that Windows 7 is shaping up to be what Vista could have or should have been. Microsoft failed to listen to customers with Vista and the publics reception of it proves that to be the case. Win 7 is more akin to a R2 release, much like 98 was to 95 or XP was to 2000.

R2 releases concentrate more on adding new features and polishing up the GUI and other tools. Service packs are merely a roll up of bug fixes and help improve the performance. XP sp2 was of course the exception to this rule in that it is actually a R2 release that was given away for free instead of being charged for the upgrade due to the horrible security record XP RTM and SP1 suffered from. There was a huge debate amongst the suits at Microsoft to actually package and sell XP SP 2 as a new operating system. Jim Allichin stepped in and basically over rode everyone and said the SP must be free because of the sorry state of security.

The point of this post is to show that there is a pattern to Microsoft releases and how they are labeled. Win 7 is no different from any other R2 release in this regard except for one. The GUI changes to Win 7 are so massive that the last time Microsoft made these types of GUI changes was the release of Windows 95. This is why Microsoft is calling it a major release, instead of a R2. Yes the core is still Vista, but the fit and finish will be anything but Vista or any other operating system Microsoft has ever released.