siddharth Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Here they are: 1. UI built for the era of video and digital photography It's not actually Microsoft's key selling point, but the thing that everyone will probably find the most useful about Vista is that photos, videos and music are not treated the same as Word documents any more. When you open a folder of photos, they come up as they'd appear in Google Picasa or Apple iPhoto. There's inbuilt basic photo editing. Music folders come up in columns of ID3 tags, a bit like iTunes. Finally, you don't have to rely so much on third party apps to work with your files. 2. Image-based install PC enthusiasts spend a lot of time installing and reinstalling Windows for their own and other people's PCs. The Vista DVD is actually a pre-installed version of the OS in a compressed form, making it substantially quicker to install. It's also much easier to customise for unprompted installation with the correct defaults, and you can even install your own software automatically at the time Vista is installed - like slipstreaming service packs but on steroids. Read more... 3. Up-to-date driver base and better driver handling on installation Enjoy the just-baked driverbase while it lasts (19,500 drivers large). If you do need to use a special disk driver during installation in the future it won't have to be on floppy disk. Now you can use a USB memory key or CD. Also, Microsoft is now making much greater use of Windows Update for provision of drivers that aren't present in the Windows RTM driver base. Windows Chief Jim Allchin talks about it here. 4. Desktop search and search folders built in Yes, you could already get umpteen desktop search apps including Windows Desktop Search from Microsoft for XP, but you can't underestimate the importance of it being installed on every single Vista PC. Now when your mum rings saying she's lost a document she's been working on all day you can just direct her to the start menu. Also, desktop search folders are handy for finding stuff you haven't necessarily got stored in one folder but that is useful to gather together from time to time (e.g. documents with "tax, invoice or receipt" in them). 5. Sleep mode that actually works. It's a small thing, but makes a big difference: Vista has finally caught up to operating systems that can sleep near instantly and wake up reliably, in a couple of seconds. Read more... 6. Rock-solid laptop encryption The data on your laptop is worth a hell of a lot to an identity thief. Vista's "Bitlocker" encryption (only in Enterprise and Ultimate versions) does heavy-duty, full-drive encryption, so you can be certain that unless a thief has your password there's simply no way they're going to get in. Read more... 7. Better file navigation Vista now has some time-saving features like favourite folders displayed in the left column of every Explorer window, as well as "breadcrumbed" folder lists allowing you to quickly jump backward and forward through a path. Sure, these should have been put into Windows years ago, but at least they're here now. 8. Inbuilt undelete Or, depending on how you look at it, inbuilt rolling backup. Every time you make a change to a file or delete it, Windows keeps the previous version. As a result, the "oh !@#$ I just overwrote my entire PhD with Document1" feeling can be quickly assuaged. Read more... 9. DirectX10 OK, this isn't so much a benefit as your hand being forced: DirectX 10 will never be made for XP, and a raft of games have already been announced ‘exclusively' for 10. Admittedly it does take gaming graphics to the next level, but it's very much tied to Vista. 10. Face it, you have no choice When Microsoft brings out a major renovation to Windows, you can choose to ignore it for a year or two, but then the device drivers start drying up for older versions of Windows, your friends start asking questions about their new PC that you can't answer, and even if you use Linux, you'll inevitably need familiarity with Microsoft's latest interoperability blockers. Face it: your arse belongs to Redmond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rez. Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Let the squabbling begin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filip100 Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBK.Xscape Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 yea, #10 is soooo true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassJAw Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Sleep doesn't work on the two laptops I tried it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soündless Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 or you could get a mac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TvvqKMZ72bsklauw5 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Sleep sucks with Vista. The "Apple Sleep" works much nicer and doesn't turn on randomly for no reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFNITE Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Sleep sucks with Vista. The "Apple Sleep" works much nicer and doesn't turn on randomly for no reason. agreed. Even if you take out the battery, Mac laptops have built in safe sleep feature that allows you to boot back into where you were before power went out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Better file navigation? I can't believe I am reading this. If you want better file navigation move to KDE or stay with XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sev7en Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I agree just for the DirectX10 support because without the unofficial DX9.x Wrapper, Windows users can't use the latest DX version (DX10 is Vista only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbz Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 If these are reasons for XP users, they're about half-true. If these are reasons for OS X users, they're all false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Ingus Posted June 24, 2007 Share Posted June 24, 2007 If these are reasons for XP users, they're about half-true. If these are reasons for OS X users, they're all false. Well said Best thing about vista is that it sells more Macs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl8080 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 The majority of people that are quick to slate Vista have not tried it. People should try using it on a high-end machine. My only gripe is that half of my apps wouldn't work in Vista (I don't actually have it installed) for example, VLC Media Player refuses to show any video. DX10 is the {censored}, just look at Crysis. In a couple of years it will pull down its pants and wee all over XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_muad_dib Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 i'd move this thread to laughs... now.. i've read those points when xp come out.. a sort of deja-vu....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Ingus Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 The majority of people that are quick to slate Vista have not tried it. That's an assumption The truth of the matter is that most people who have slated vista are those that HAVE tried it, and consider it a modern day windows ME revisited. Would you like me to post some links of windows fanboys who have tried it and call vista a joke? I'm talking about people who professionally review things for a living, and not just 'regular' people who have used it. If I also included regular people who tried vista and didn't like it this site would need another server to contain all of the links of unhappy vista customers. I'm sure Microsoft couldn't be happier that you're delusional about vista, but most people live in the real world. People should try using it on a high-end machine. People shouldn't have to go out and buy a new high-end machine, just to update their operating system In a couple of years it will pull down its pants and wee all over XP. In a couple of months Leopard is going to pull down its pants and wee all over vista, so your point is mute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timdsmith Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 The majority of people that are quick to slate Vista have not tried it. **snip**(I don't actually have it installed) **snip** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I wouldnt really call those reasons "to get vista" I would call them "great things about vista". If these are reasons for XP users, they're about half-true. If these are reasons for OS X users, they're all false. Sort of, not necessarily false, just not better than OS X I really dont understand why so many of you hate Vista! I like it a lot, and its way better than XP. I can see someone preferring OS X to Vista. In some ways I do. I can see someone preferring Linux to Vista, people I know do. I cannot see someone hating Vista to its core and starting a Holy War against it. People shouldn't have to go out and buy a new high-end machine, just to update their operating system I have a Mac mini with a 1.42 GHz PPC Processor. I upgraded it to 1GB Ram (Samsung, Apple charges to much) It is a second revision Mac mini sold during July-October 2005. It has a ATI Radeon 9200 graphics card with DVI and VGA output (DVI to VGA adapter supplied) and 32 MB of (non-upgradable) video RAM (It also has integrated wifi and bluetooth) Tiger (PPC) was released on April 19th 2005. This Mac Mini, shipped after Tiger's released does not support Core Image. Do I get a nice little ripple effect when I add a new widget?? No. Will it support Core Animation? No. Do I care? No. This Mac Mini was a cheap purchase and did what it needed to do. And since I bought it cheap, guess what, its video card is obsolete! I am not angry, I knew this is how it would be when I bought it. My point in all of this is that When you buy cheap computers they need to be upgraded for next gen OS's. Not only Microsoft does this, every computer company in the world does this. Standards increase, and software takes advantage of the new, higher standards. In 2001 my parents purchased a middle of the run computer. A ~2.0 Ghz P4, 512 MB RAM, a 32 MB vid card etc etc. In 2006 they bought a new laptop and desktop, both can run Vista perfectly fine. I know this seems like a long and pointless rant lol but my point is that your going to have to upgrade. It is inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Ingus Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I know this seems like a long and pointless rant lol but my point is that your going to have to upgrade. It is inevitable. Yes "at some point" you would have to upgrade, but that's not what we were saying. Macs seems to be much more resistent to this. I know people with 15 year old Macs that are still using them and running Tiger. Try to run vista on a 15 year old PC On the other hand we've also read about people who bought a new PC just a year or a year and a half ago, and then couldn't run vista. They had to buy another PC (actually many of them just got fed up with windows in general and bought a 'mini' W/OS X instead). I also know of people who bought a new PC with vista and they still have probelms. A simple google search will introduce you to many of them. Hopefully for the windows fanboys one day microsoft will fix vista and it will be usable, but it will still be a joke when compared to Leopard, or even Tiger in many respects I just pray that Apple doesn't break Leopard. Those of us who regularly use Tiger have gotten so spoiled because it works so incredible, and I just hope they don't mess it up when Leopard comes out. If Apple can get Leopard to be as dependable and great as Tiger is, then it will be leaps and bounds ahead of vista Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFI Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I know people with 15 year old Macs that are still using them and running Tiger. 15 year old Macs? Common mate, I think thats pushing the "OS X has better scalability" factor a bit too far. I highly doubt that OS X Tiger would even run on the original Macintosh (black and white screens)...which was released 15 years ago. While OS X definately has a better scalability than Windows (XP and Vista), I wouldn't go farther back than the G3, which was released 9 years ago in 1998. I've seen Tiger run pretty well on the iMac G3 (the colorful ones)...but never heard of running on machines prior to that. That being said one can only imagine how mindboggengly slow Vista will run (if it even does) on a PC from 1998. Imagine Vista running on a Dell Dimention with a Pentium processor at 166Mhz, with 64MB ram, 2Gb HD space, and if lucky, an ATI Rage 128 graphics card with 4Mb video memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Ingus Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Common mate, I think thats pushing the "OS X has better scalability" factor a bit too far. Not at all. I was surprised when I learned about it too. I don't know the exact process that they use, but I do remember that they had to install a second program on the Mac before Tiger would load. I do not know if there were hardware modifications. Also keep in mind that they weren't using these Macs to run Photoshop or do gaming, etc. They were just for general computing needs, Which is all they needed, but they still run and run well from what I have read about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac-mini Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 that program is xpostfacto and it is mainly used for beige G3s but it will work on more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Yes "at some point" you would have to upgrade, but that's not what we were saying. Macs seems to be much more resistent to this. I Yes I am well aware that OS X 10.4 will work decently for the most part on G3 iMacs: A decent computer for internet browsing, e-mail, and document writing. However try to run Tiger, at more modern resolution and with dashboard+all the goodies you know and love. If you bought a launch mini in January '05 with a 1.25 Ghz PPC G4 proc, 256 MB RAM, a 40 GB HD and an ATI Radeon 9200 you will crawl if you try to Multitask. Run Photoshop and iWeb at the same time? No thanks. If you try to run Dashboard and another program you will... crawl. So sure, your two year old Mac Mini could "run" Tiger, but it sure as hell couldnt keep up with modern computing needs. If I bought a $500 box in 2005 with lets say, a ~2.5 GHz P4, 512MB RAM, a 64 MB vid card sure I could "run" Vista basic. But it would be slow. If I upgraded it to a 128 MB (which are cheap as dirt now a days) Sure I could "run" Home Premium. But it would be painfully slow. In fact, on the example box listed, I would find XP to slow for my taste. PowerPC G3, G4, or G5 processor Built-in FireWire At least 256MB of physical RAM A built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card supported by your computer At least 3.0 GB of available space on your hard drive; 4GB of disk space if you install XCode 2 developer tools DVD drive for installation (get CD media for $9.95) There is no way that Tiger could even run on a 15 year old mac. No way. Im not going to dwell on that because people overexagerate all the time and I'd seem like a jerk. PowerPCs werent even in Macintosh computers untill 1994 with the introduction of the Power Macintosh 6100. edit: I don't know the exact process that they use, but I do remember that they had to install a second program on the Mac before Tiger would load that program is xpostfacto and it is mainly used for beige G3s but it will work on more So maybe, just maybe it would work on a pre-G3 PPC proc. I doubt it'd be able to do much though With Leopard coming im expecting the requirments to be G4 proc and *maybe* 512 MB Ram. 256 Minimum, 512 recommended most likely. Maybe were looking at things differently here, If you want Tiger to "run" then fine, a G3 iMac: perfect! But if your like me, and want Tiger to run, multitask and include all the latest goodies, and upgrade to Leopard in October of this year then even my current Mac Mini is too slow. [it could probably run Leopard, but coverflow and all that would be slow and Im sure a lot of new stuff wouldnt work (like the dock etc) and It wouldnt be 64 bit.] Anyway not trying to flame, but I sure wouldnt want to run leopard on a PPC Mac Mini would you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoggyca Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 try running vista on a 15 year old pc... DONE and with only 256mb ram and it only use half on boot up.. last I checked osx need 256-512.? ok not quite 15 years ago but looking at the hardware besid ethe ram I think its a lowest its going to go before it won;t load...? and the fact its only useing 67% ram and only 2% or soo of cpu tiem thats not bad? the only thing I need to do waz put a new HD in becuz the old one didn;t have enough spae to install TOO MY SUPIRES IT RAN QUITE FAST...... lack of games though!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 try running vista on a 15 year old pc... DONE and with only 256mb ram and it only use half on boot up.. last I checked osx need 256-512.? OS X needs 256 MB. Can you please list the full specifications to the rig you installed this on? Im really interested, this is truly amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoggyca Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 OS X needs 256 MB. Can you please list the full specifications to the rig you installed this on? Im really interested, this is truly amazing! well first off you need a program called Vlite http://www.vlite.net/ and a iso of your choise I used ultmited edtion for this rig. You use vite to unlock the 512MB requirment and cripple it to 256mb limit. you can if u choses to scap anything eles out of the OS as well then recompile your edtion u wanted. My rig is a full blowen Ultmite with 256Limit installed... the system a old althon at at 800MHZ. vista will not install anything lower. ram just that a stick of 256. and the onboard video.... I did have to install a new drive for testing as vista is 8 gig or more install. and a old 1.99 gig drive wouldn;t cut it other then that its the basic ever thing built into the mother board rig.... just noticed I think the cpu is a old amd athlon duron 1.4 witch infact is clocked at 900mhz now that I come to think about it... ----------------------- My main PC with is in my sig with sitll getting another 2 gig of ram is my main PC and part of the ClubSLI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts