Jump to content

Thoughts On Vista


Swad
 Share

72 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on Vista, but in a different way from the other thread. What do you think? Impressed, or no?

 

Also, what previous Windows version do you think this release will be like? Windows XP? 95? ME, God forbid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They talked briefly about Vista on the "This Week in Tech" podcast (highly recommend it by the way, #1 in iTunes). Sounds like the things Microsoft got right in Vista are things OS X had for the past four years. Other'n that, it's XP SP3.

 

I've heard about the same. What they originally planned many many moons ago has been stripped down and sliced off so that its just a shell of it's original estimations.

 

XP SP3 is a good description I would think. Time will tell I guess. The only thing I really care about is them working on security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a copy of the most recent Vista Beta and I have to say I really don't like it. I don't like the look or layout. I think its a very ugly looking OS. and after useing it I found for the first time EVER I missed Windows XP.

 

I rather MS just ditch Vista and just release XP SP3 with Vista's features.

 

I don't see alot of people upgradeing to this version, And Given the choice to Buy Vista or OSX I see more people leaning twords OSX then Vista. Its just not a worth wild upgrade.

 

I left it on my PC for about a week before I formated the HD and installed OSX on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like the interface of Vista, and people are comparing it with Tiger while vista is still BETA!!! Just wait for the final version and by that time OSX 10.5 will also be released and then we can finally say which OS is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Vista is still in beta 1. Its still got more to bring.

 

I don't know. M$ just about gutted what whas suppose to be the the final layout on the prior beta version. I think M$ just about done what it wants with Vista. Now they just started to do some ironing out. We will see in RTM I reckon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey yall need to be nicer, Vista is still a tech release for Driver writers mostly, the interface is just an extension of XP, its like runing linux without KDE or Xwindows , or gnome, they just have the XP interface painted onto it. Beta 2 is supposed to reveal more about the upcoming user interface which I do believe will be chaulk full o eye candy and user features a'la OSX which Microsoft happens to own a 150 million $ chunk of. (hmmm nice interface apple-microsoft).

Im sure my future powerbook will dual boot into vista.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Vista Beta 1 doesnt have the whole WinFX working including avalon, it stands to reason that people wont see much of a difference. Even once those parts have been fully implamented the average user will not see a difference, i mean, you ask someone the what is the difference between vector and raster graphics and how using one of them changes the apperence for the better, many people wont have a clue! how many of you would really give a damn if the desktop was rendered using software rendering or OpenGL in a 2D world, or Direct X in a 3D world?

 

Give it time and 3D displays will make such a desktop look fantastic, but at the moment it wont make a difference. I'll probably use it for a while and say "wow looks pretty cool" then turn it all off and go back to my gray start bar ive used since 95 and zero special effects. Why? because i dont sit there looking at my desktop! i work, or i play and doing either isnt helped with fancy 3D buttons or scaleable icons.

 

I do however think that everyone has missed the point of Vista, yes it will look pretty but since when is that all there is to a OS?

 

Turn all the eye candy off and what your left with (once its finished) is a totally re writien OS, which will be more stable, faster, more future proof, easier to program for and easier to use, then anything else on the plant. i'll upgrade to longhorn, i'll be free of old code slowing down my pc becuase XP is designed to be compatable with 10 year old systems.

 

Dual boot apple OS X, with vista or i can use VMware for it all and have the best of both worlds, what more can anyone ask for!

 

Theres more to an OS then its looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like the interface of Vista, and people are comparing it with Tiger while vista is still BETA!!! Just wait for the final version and by that time OSX 10.5 will also be released and then we can finally say which OS is better.

 

Yeah, but Tiger (which is a hastily ported dev release, comparable to an alpha) crashes less than Vista, a native OS that has been in the making for over 12 years. It might not be feature complete yet, but we already know they cut out most of the features, including the Sidebar (wasn't that almost the trademark feature of LH at first?). Now all they have is this search subsystem which resembles Spotlight, new graphics, and a few new security features (read: This program requires administrator acces to run. Enter your password:). IE does look nice; it's comparable to Safari PPC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, currently I am using Beta 1, and it's impressive in some respects, but in most it is not. Visually, it's extremely intresting, and for the most part does a better job that Aqua, but that's just my preferance.

 

As far as being a "stable" OS, it is certainly far from it. My Mactel has never, and I mean never, crashed while Vista crashes at a frequency of 2 to 3 times a week for various driver issue and whatnot. It uses a system kind of like Rosetta to get XP programs to run, but that still has issues. For example, playing Half Life 2 is kind of risky; because of the driver, it is prone to hanging at save points or crashing alltogether.

 

I still would have to suggest OSX86 over it as long as you have a fully working clone; otherwise, Vista is worth the download to try on a seperate partition. It's kind of a fun little project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista it's in the same stage as Whistler... we can't make any conclusions about final product. The core changed to Windows Server 2003, instead of WinXP, so they'll be certain changes under the hood. IT WILL NOT BE XP WITH A NEW SHELL.

I just hope more changes in usability, instead of many changes under the hood.

 

Thinking of it... XP with a Hardware Accelerated UI could be a great program, since one of it's main weaknesses as an OS are bad UI rendering, consuming CPU instead of GPU, like OSX.

 

EDIT: I never had security issues!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but Tiger (which is a hastily ported dev release, comparable to an alpha) crashes less than Vista, a native OS that has been in the making for over 12 years. It might not be feature complete yet, but we already know they cut out most of the features, including the Sidebar (wasn't that almost the trademark feature of LH at first?). Now all they have is this search subsystem which resembles Spotlight, new graphics, and a few new security features (read: This program requires administrator acces to run. Enter your password:). IE does look nice; it's comparable to Safari PPC.

 

 

Tiger has been developed (as any other OS X, like Panther, etc.) for both PPC and x86 platforms since the beginning. Marklar was it's codename and before Puma, there was a version of 10.0.0 that ran on x86. Steve Jobs said in his keynote about the Switch to Intel, that Mac OS had been living a double-life. If you pay attention you'd see that Transitive Technologies' Rossetta is a processor translation layer, not a porting software. The core binaries contained in MacOSX86 are compiled for the platform NATIVELY, EXCEPT applications like iTunes and Safari RSS. That includes APIs, Drivers, etc. The fact that they don't work is related with other issues.

 

Vista's Beta 1 is a system made from scratch. It's been made grabbing portions of earlier technologies, yes, but you could say it's being written from scratch.

 

All the features that Vista Beta 1 sports were announced on PDC2002-03. The success of Apple in implementing them before Vista ships is a sign of good engineering, but not ORIGINALITY. Eventually, every OS would include such features, but you can't say (not even insinuate) that Vista has copied Mac OS X!!!

 

This is not about who copies who, but who delivers the best product. Stop the bashing and talk with facts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tiger has been developed (as any other OS X, like Panther, etc.) for both PPC and x86 platforms since the beginning. Marklar was it's codename and before Puma, there was a version of 10.0.0 that ran on x86. Steve Jobs said in his keynote about the Switch to Intel, that Mac OS had been living a double-life. If you pay attention you'd see that Transitive Technologies' Rossetta is a processor translation layer, not a porting software. The core binaries contained in MacOSX86 are compiled for the platform NATIVELY, EXCEPT applications like iTunes and Safari RSS. That includes APIs, Drivers, etc. The fact that they don't work is related with other issues.

 

Vista's Beta 1 is a system made from scratch. It's been made grabbing portions of earlier technologies, yes, but you could say it's being written from scratch.

 

All the features that Vista Beta 1 sports were announced on PDC2002-03. The success of Apple in implementing them before Vista ships is a sign of good engineering, but not ORIGINALITY. Eventually, every OS would include such features, but you can't say (not even insinuate) that Vista has copied Mac OS X!!!

 

This is not about who copies who, but who delivers the best product. Stop the bashing and talk with facts!

 

I never said MS was copying Apple. I'm saying OSX can match most of the features in Vista. I also know about the "double-life" thing. That doesn't change the fact that OSx86 was never completely tested for public use and it is still crash-prone ("other issues").

 

If we wanted to ask "who was copying who," then we could say UNIX has had sudo for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said MS was copying Apple. I'm saying OSX can match most of the features in Vista. I also know about the "double-life" thing. That doesn't change the fact that OSx86 was never completely tested for public use and it is still crash-prone ("other issues").

 

If we wanted to ask "who was copying who," then we could say UNIX has had sudo for decades.

 

I was not only answering you, but the earlier posts also!!!

 

Forgive me if you thought it was personal... but the subject is a bash-and-get-bashed issue.

 

TOTALLY AGREED:

Unix is the only true language for computing, the others are using dialects! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a few thoughs

OSx86 has been in use by apple employees for a couple of years now, so it's not really a 'hastily' produced port.

both Vista and OSx86 were released for driver/software developers and not for users.

the face that the osx is more stable on some systems might be true, but I still can't do too much with it since there are no graphics drivers released for it.

by the time Apple will release it's first public Mac86 we will have Vista out as well (or at least close to it)

It will be nice if we could finally come to the point where the choice of OS is as simple as any other app, my arguments against Mac all these years was 'too expensive' and 'old hardware', now that the hardware will be pretty much the same if Apple will decide to stop selling hardware and move to software it can give OSx a bigger market share and give windows some real competition (it worked for SEGA).

 

if Apple tries to sell me a PC with an Intel CPU that has similar hardware to any other PC and has some small hardware restriction which allows me to run OSX on it, and they price it at a much higher price than dell, hp or some no-brand PC, that will be just wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have any of you checked on the hardware requirements of Vista/Longhorn? Not the ones for the preview release, but the final release's needs?

 

Besides, what are we supposed to extrapolate from the current preview to the final shipping version -- considering that most likely half of what is still promised will be dropped, and, really, Vista will change nothing about being as virus friendly as any Windows release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...