Adios Vista! Windows 7 On The Horizon

[RStar]

When they jump version whole numbers (I.E.) 4.2 to 5.0 are they saying there are enough changes to warrent the new version and the 4.0 to 4.1 is simply a "fixed" version? Because it would seem to me that all versions were no more than fixes or patches with a few new features tossed in for marketing purposes (since I know nothing about the underlying code that makes it run).

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by RStar

When they jump version whole numbers (I.E.) 4.2 to 5.0 are they saying there are enough changes to warrent the new version and the 4.0 to 4.1 is simply a "fixed" version? Because it would seem to me that all versions were no more than fixes or patches with a few new features tossed in for marketing purposes (since I know nothing about the underlying code that makes it run).

Windows X = Y.Z

Z and X change when there are significant feature adds to the OS without changes to the underlying architecture. Y changes when they change the basic underpinnings of the operating system. Meanwhile, there are actually finer grain version numbers (Y.Z.xxxxx) for bug fixes.

And, like Alex, I have never had the issues with Vista that make it supposedly so awful. And I'm somewhat of a power user.

[Moonliner]

Vista = Runs significantly slower than XP (on existing hardware)
Requires training for users coming from XP
Offers nothing new of any value.

For home users who surf, email and write documents it is a bloated behemoth of an operating system that just gets in the way.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Vista = Runs significantly slower than XP (on existing hardware)
Requires training for users coming from XP
Offers nothing new of any value.

For home users who surf, email and write documents it is a bloated behemoth of an operating system that just gets in the way.

Which is why I'm sticking with XP.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Vista = Runs significantly slower than XP (on existing hardware)

I haven't noticed this at all, then again I made sure I had enough RAM to run the program.

Requires training for users coming from XP

I didn't notice this either. Sure, things were laid out slightly differently but they didn't create any confusion that I recall.

For home users who surf, email and write documents it is a bloated behemoth of an operating system that just gets in the way.

Personally, I have had no issues with Vista at all. Never had a crash, never had any problem whatsoever, other than trying to get some older programs to work with it - but that is to be expected.

I hear all of the horror stories and find them puzzling. I'm perfectly happy with my purchase.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

I haven't noticed this at all, then again I made sure I had enough RAM to run the program.

I didn't notice this either. Sure, things were laid out slightly differently but they didn't create any confusion that I recall.

Personally, I have had no issues with Vista at all. Never had a crash, never had any problem whatsoever, other than trying to get some older programs to work with it - but that is to be expected.

I hear all of the horror stories and find them puzzling. I'm perfectly happy with my purchase.

So you spent exrta $$$ to make sure you could run Vista, and for that what exactly did you get in return? What is vista doing for you that XP would not do faster, better, cheaper?

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

What is vista doing for you that XP would not do faster, better, cheaper?

Supports more than five simultaneous users logged into Shared Docs.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Supports more than five simultaneous users logged into Shared Docs.

You run Windows XP HOME at your business?

I cry for you.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

So you spent exrta $$$ to make sure you could run Vista, and for that what exactly did you get in return? What is vista doing for you that XP would not do faster, better, cheaper?

Nope, didn't really spend any extra money. I bought a laptop, it came with Vista and had enough RAM to run it. So far, it has done everything I've wanted it to do. Would XP work just as well? Perhaps. But it was the same price to load the system with XP as it was Vista, and regardless, I wanted to have more RAM. So I don't feel like I sacrificed anything. And I don't think I am suffering in any way for my decision.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

Nope, didn't really spend any extra money. I bought a laptop, it came with Vista and had enough RAM to run it. So far, it has done everything I've wanted it to do. Would XP work just as well? Perhaps. But it was the same price to load the system with XP as it was Vista, and regardless, I wanted to have more RAM. So I don't feel like I sacrificed anything. And I don't think I am suffering in any way for my decision.

All that extra RAM goes into running the OS. Bleh. I'd rather see the focus on the applications.

Still, XP does have it's limits like the 4GB cap on RAM. Fortunitly the new memory hogging vista raises that limit to..... Oh, wait. Never mind Vista ram is capped at 4GB too.