|
|
|
Ask Your Vista Questions Here.
|
|
Senior Member
|
3. April 2007 @ 20:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
I meant M$ finally copied off the superior os, OS X. So it's "new" features include spotlight, gadgets, and other stuff. It's OS X for pc, legally.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
janrocks
Suspended permanently
|
3. April 2007 @ 20:21 |
Link to this message
|
Cool.. M$ pinching something of apple... well there's something new !not!
They can't even come up with an original place to steal something from....
http://rblevin.blogspot.com/2005/09/new-...tects-when.html
Funny.. I was trying to find the transcript of the legal case over the theft by Gates of the dos code when he left apple to found micro-soft
Funny that it can't be found... maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place, we all know microcrap own the internet...
Random quote of the day....
Eric: Don't forget, when you stir the Christmas pudding, make a wish.
Denise: I wish I didn't have to stir this pudding.
|
|
Howdoody
Newbie
|
4. April 2007 @ 06:42 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Most stability problems with Win 98 happened, because it was a poor OS. Pretty much a no brainer there.
That's true, and overloading it with preinstalled crapware did not help it.
I wonder if those who actually know anything about computers will ever consider Vista an "upgrade" to XP. Just like going from 98SE to ME, or going from 2000 to XP never was a real upgrade.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. April 2007 @ 07:57 |
Link to this message
|
Cursor flaw gives Vista security a black eye
Microsoft's release of a "critical" patch on Tuesday poked holes in Vista's security promises, but security experts advise against discounting the new operating system.
The software giant broke with its monthly patch cycle Tuesday to fix a bug that cybercrooks had been using since last week to attack Windows PCs, including those running Vista.
"As far as software vulnerabilities go, Vista's cover is blown," said Nand Mulchandani, a vice president at Determina, the company that discovered the latest security bug. "It is not Superman; it is just a human being. It is just software. Vista is going to be very similar to the other operating systems Microsoft has delivered in terms of bugs."
Microsoft officially launched Vista for consumers in January, promoting the operating system as the most secure version of Windows yet. It is the first client version of Windows built with security in mind, meaning that it should have fewer coding errors that might be exploited in attacks, Microsoft has said.
Yet the "critical" hole that affected much older Windows versions also hit Vista. The vulnerability lies in the way Windows handles animated cursors and could let an attacker commandeer a PC when the user views a malicious Web site or e-mail message.
It is a flaw that should have been caught by Microsoft's code-vetting processes for Vista, called the Security Development Lifecycle, some experts said. The flaw is also evidence that faulty code from previous Windows versions has been copied into Vista, they said.
"It is a little premature to attack the whole effort altogether, but this is something that the Security Development Lifecycle should have caught," said Amol Sarwate, a research manager at vulnerability management company Qualys.
The buffer overflow vulnerability in the cursor function in particular should have already been fixed because a bug in the same Windows component was patched two years ago, said Rohit Dhamankar, manager of security research at TippingPoint, a seller of intrusion prevention products. That should have prompted re-examination of the code, Dhamankar said.
Microsoft disputes that it should have caught the cursor bug before. People who say so don't understand security vulnerabilities because not all bugs are created equal, said Stephen Toulouse, senior product manager in Microsoft's Security Technology Unit.
"In the case of the cursor vulnerability, even though something may look similar to the outside, that doesn't mean the code is anything alike to the previous vulnerability," Toulouse said. "The SDL was never meant to catch every single vulnerability, period."
But Dhamankar argues that Microsoft forgot to recheck all the possibilities that could lead to a buffer overflow after the original bug was found and patched in 2005.
Mulchandani agreed. "The dirty little secret is that Microsoft clearly did not write Vista from scratch. They did not completely build a whole new code base for this operating system. Every version of Windows since Windows NT has had this flaw in it," he said.
Microsoft does acknowledge that Vista will have vulnerabilities. "There are going to be other vulnerabilities. The SDL is not a process by which no vulnerabilities will ever occur. There is no process on this planet that can do that," Toulouse said.
The cursor flaw is like a sign post for the bug hunters. Hackers will now be looking for bugs in similar Windows components to find ways to attack Vista.
"This has been a very significant break and it definitely gives a big pointer," Dhamankar said. "If more such errors are found later, Vista is not going to be able to offer the great protection that's claimed."
Still, Microsoft's Vista security promise doesn't fall apart because of this single vulnerability. Vista is more secure than XP or any other Microsoft client operating system, Sarwate said. "If you consider Windows 2000, XP, 2003, I would still say that Vista is more secure than all the other operating systems," he said.
Mulchandani also said that, while Microsoft has taken way too big a bite at the security message, Vista is more secure than its predecessors because of features such as User Account Control and others that limit privileges on the operating system.
And that's just the goal Microsoft was aiming for, Toulouse said.
"You have to look at Vista versus XP. A lot of people are holding Vista up and saying in a vacuum it will reach some nirvana of security," Toulouse said. "Our whole goal with Windows Vista was to create a fundamentally more secure operating system than we have ever created previously."
http://news.com.com/Cursor+flaw+gives+Vi...l?tag=nefd.lede
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. April 2007 @ 08:30 |
Link to this message
|
Microsoft Vista 'bait-and-switch''
p2pnet.net news:- A marketing campaign by Bill and the Boyz allowed PC makers to say their systems were Windows Vista Capable, "even when the computers could only run the most basic form of the operating system," says a lawsuit filed against Microsoft.
"In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and switch - assuring consumers they were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines when, in fact, the could obtain only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as 'Vista'," the suit reads, states the IDG News Service, going on:
"The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, seeks class action status and asks for damages. The suit notes that the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million and that the size of the class likely exceeds 10,000 people.
"Many of the machines with the Vista label cannot run or poorly run Home Premium, the least expensive version of Vista that includes most of the heavily advertised features, the suit says."
However, Microsoft argues it "conducted a broad effort to educate computer manufacturers, retailers and consumers about the hardware requirements to run different versions of Windows Vista," IDG has Microsoft's Jack Evans saying.
http://p2pnet.net/story/11872
|
Senior Member
|
4. April 2007 @ 14:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lots of thoughts here, as someone who has had to 'fix' computers recently changed to Vista...
To sum it up.... 'Bad.'
"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim |
Senior Member
|
5. April 2007 @ 02:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
I admit the mouse glitch is annoying
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. April 2007 @ 13:30 |
Link to this message
|
Consumer Nightmare: Vista Express Upgrade
You bought an Windows XP-based PC--before the Vista launch--and heard rosy promises of an OS upgrade. But scoring Vista has been a painful process for many.
Erin Biba, PC World
Thursday, April 05, 2007 05:00 PM PDT
Nearly two months after the release of Microsoft's newest PC operating system, many customers who signed up for the Windows Vista Express Upgrade program when they bought a Windows XP-based machine are still waiting for their software.
Due to large order volume, misdirected security measures, poorly communicated expected shipping dates, and simple breakdowns in customer service, the upgrade process for some people who purchased a PC in late 2006 and early 2007 has been slow and painful.
The problems with the program--which PC World had concerns about from the day it was announced--appear to be widespread. PC World readers who purchased new HP and Toshiba PCs have expressed dissatisfaction with the process; both those companies opted to have their upgrades handled by a third-party provider, ModusLink, which Microsoft had suggested to them. However, consumers also have been unhappy with companies like Dell, which opted to handle the upgrade process itself. Amber Bouman, who writes PC World's "On Your Side" column, addressed the Vista upgrade issue in March.
How the Program Worked
Microsoft's Vista Express Upgrade program--intended as consolation for the delayed launch of Vista--offered a discounted version of the new OS to anyone buying an XP-based PC between October 26, 2006 and March 15, 2007. March 31 was the deadline for customers to apply for their upgrade to Vista.
Upon purchasing the new PC, customers received a Microsoft Certificate of Authenticity (COA), a numbered sticker typically placed on the new PC's chassis. Later, when Vista launched, most customers could access an upgrade Web site. Once there, they had to enter their COA number, which would confirm their eligibility to receive a Vista upgrade disc in the mail--after they mailed or faxed in their proof of purchase. Of course, users would have to install the new OS themselves.
For customers who purchased a Windows XP Dell during that time frame, the process was slightly different. Dell allowed its customers to register for an upgrade when they bought the PC. This process eliminated the need to mail in a proof of purchase, although customers still needed to access Dell's Web site and enter their COA to receive a specialized Dell upgrade kit.
The Dell kit includes the Vista OS upgrade disc as well as a Dell Upgrade Assistant, which effectively prepares the XP system for Vista with the most recent drivers and an upgrade walkthrough.
What Went Wrong
Since the upgrades started shipping in February, PC World readers have expressed concerns over a variety of issues surrounding their upgrades. The most common complaint has been that the buyer's COA number was not recognized when the owner attempted to register it.
According to reader Scott Copperman, who purchased a new HP PC with the upgrade program at the beginning of March, "I went to [the HP Web site] to claim the offer. As I went through the site, I was denied because my COA was no good. Or so they said." After five days of back and forth e-mail messages and phone calls with ModusLink--the company that handled HP's upgrade process--Copperman was finally able to get a confirmation that he would receive the upgrade. But Copperman says he is still waiting for the software to arrive. "I'm exasperated with them," he says. "I feel taken advantage of."
And Copperman is not alone. Paul Hughes, who purchased his new PC in late December, also had difficulty with his COA: "I thought the whole [upgrade] process stunk." After sending his proof of purchase and COA to ModusLink, Hughes received an e-mail telling him that his COA was not recognized. The e-mail asked him to be patient while ModusLink made adjustments to its system.
Hughes eventually managed to get his upgrade disc sometime later--in a broken jewel case. "I think Microsoft has really lost some of their more ardent supporters on this," Hughes says. " I have always been a die-hard Microsoft groupie, but this whole mess has left a very bad taste in my mouth, and I would be more than hesitant to get involved in an upgrade scheme like this again."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130451-page,1/article.html
|
|
janrocks
Suspended permanently
|
6. April 2007 @ 16:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think despite being sold something with false promises of time and performance they have all gotten off lucky.. I, given a choice, would rather put up with XP than have an untested, buggy top heavy OS forced on me.
So M$ have left a bad taste in the mouth of a fanboy.. I'm laughing so hard it's hard to type.
|
|
silver112
Member
|
6. April 2007 @ 21:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
whats a mouse glitch?
does it happen when you start the computer.
|
Senior Member
|
6. April 2007 @ 23:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Federal agencies ban Windows Vista
As Microsoft is out touting the "wow" of Windows Vista, two federal agencies are among those saying "whoa."
The Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cite fear of compatibility problems as one of the reasons not to allow their tens of thousands of employees to upgrade to Microsoft's latest operating system.
"We are temporarily not permitting computers with the Vista operating system to be connected to our networks," Michael Baum, a NIST spokesman, said Tuesday. The organization's technology staff is testing NIST applications and evaluating the security in Windows Vista. The same holds true for Internet Explorer 7 and Office 2007, he said.
It is not unusual that agencies aren't rushing to install major software updates. Large organizations in particular tend to do a lot of testing before upgrading. The same happened when Microsoft released Service Pack 2 for Windows XP. The actions by DOT, which employs about 54,000 people, and NIST, with 2,900 employees, were first reported by Information Week.
The DOT also bans Vista, Office 2007 and IE 7. In addition to compatibility concerns, the department lists cost, available funding and a pending headquarters move as reasons not to upgrade, according to a DOT memo dated January 19 (click for PDF of the memo). The memo is still current, a DOT representative said Tuesday.
"There appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products," according to the memo. The department plans to issue an update next month to clarify its strategy for 2008 and beyond, the representative said.
In a statement, Microsoft said it is working with many government agencies to help them adopt its latest products. "We respect the customer's decision," the company said.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the largest organization under the DOT, is taking the opportunity to consider alternatives to Microsoft's operating system and productivity software, said Tammy Jones, an FAA spokeswoman. This includes including running Linux on desktops and using Google's online applications, she said.
"We're trying to see what the cost impact would be to the FAA to convert to the new Microsoft products," Jones said. "We want to explore what some of the alternatives are. Google is one that we're looking at, so is Linux." The FAA has about 45,000 employees.
Vista has been available to businesses since late November and was released to the general public at the end of January. About 90 million copies of the operating system will be installed this year, predicts IDC. The analyst firm also foresees that consumers will be first to adopt the system. Businesses should be cautious, IDC advises.
"Business customers should take a cautious approach to adopting new Windows technologies and need to go through a normal evaluation cycle," IDC analyst Al Gillen wrote in a recent report. "Most organizations should incorporate a move to Windows Vista in their longer-term road map--unless they are planning to move toward competitive solutions."
Many organizations will need up to 18 months after the Vista ship date to verify their applications, get other software makers to support the operating system and run tests, analyst firm Gartner said in a December report. "Sooner or later, most organizations will deploy Windows Vista," Gartner's analysts said.
|
|
Altometrn
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. April 2007 @ 01:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ozzy214:
Hmm...I been trying out vista and it seems nice with the eye candy, but yet I cant get it to run on virtual pc. I had to find a junk hard drive to install it on. Setup takes a long fricking time.
Also now I recently found out there are two versions of vista. 32 and 64 bit. I have no idea which version I have other than dec release, but it sucks. It acts just like 64 bit pro. Im running this on the first pc in my sig and I have problems like slow loading of proggies and when playing music it stutters like a cd skipping. SO I really dont see what the hype is about..:>
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. April 2007 @ 19:31 |
Link to this message
|
April 5, 2007 1:46 PM
Consumer Inertia Holds Back Vista
Joe Wilcox
Harris Interactive has released a study of U.S. consumers' intentions about whether to buy Windows Vista. The number saying they'll wait to upgrade jumped from 31 percent in December to 67 percent in March.
The Harris poll asked consumers about their intention to upgrade or switch their primary home PC to Windows Vista in the coming 12 months.
Related: 60 percent of the 2,223 adults surveyed said Vista will have no impact on when they make their next PC purchase.
Microsoft's marketing has been effective in raising Vista awareness, just not sales, according to the Harris poll. The number of people aware of Vista was 87 percent post-launch, compared with 47 percent before the software's release.
"In order to generate that 'Wow' factor, Microsoft will have to put forth a value proposition that will move the majority to the upgrade category in the years ahead," Milton Ellis, vice president of Harris Interactive Technology Group, said in a statement. "Vista promised better performance, reliability, security and a revolutionary user interface?but it appears consumers looking to upgrade are not ready to buy into the promise, whereas new computer buyers will want the latest and greatest."
Vista Upgrade Intentions
So far, the value proposition isn't there enough, which was a theme from yesterday's post on Windows Vista Capable stickers.
There are many contributing factors that the Harris poll doesn't address, such as the number of households with no PCs or more than one. People with PCs that meet their needs should turn out to be less likely to jump to the next operating system upgrade. I know from my days working as an analyst that the majority of U.S. households have at least one PC. There's no rush to buy like there is with some other categories, such as big-screen or high-definition TVs.
Microsoft has a marketing problem with Vista, because 1) People buy differently in an established market than a growth one; and 2) Microsoft has finally met a worthy competitor: itself. Both problems are entwined.
For many people, Windows XP is going to be good enough. It's a great product, supported by lots of applications and lots of hardware. The Web platform (aka Web 2.0) provides ways for consumers to extend the value of XP without jumping to a new operating system and without the hassles associated with switching.
For both reasons?the maturity of the PC market and Windows XP being a good enough product?Vista needed to be a whole lot better. While Vista is more pleasant to use, the operating system isn't exceptionally better.
US Household Operating Systems
Last month, I laid out my six tenets of good product design. No. 6: When displacing something else, a new product must offer a significantly better experience.
The DVD rapidly replaced VHS tape because the experience was so much better, whether you measure picture quality, durability, navigability or usability. HDTV and big-screen TV sales are hot for similar reasons. By contrast, high-definition DVDs are better than standard DVDs but not that much better. The transition is slow going, and the format wars simply aren't enough explanation. In some ways, Vista is to Blu-ray Disc or HD DVD as Windows XP is to the DVD. Somewhat better isn't good enough.
It's a bad sign when, with increasing Vista product awareness, the number of people "not sure" about upgrading diminishes and the number planning to stick with what they've got dramatically increases. The goal of marketing is to raise awareness so that people will buy, not choose to stay with the product they have.
The seeming contradiction?increased awareness and decreased intention to upgrade?is an indictment against Microsoft's Vista marketing efforts. That more consumers are choosing to stick with Windows XP means that the more people learn about Vista the less interested they are in it. Either it's a marketing problem or something more fundamental.
Unfortunately for Microsoft and its partners, the latter reason may emerge as the main reason. Given that Microsoft is competing against its own very good product and most people already have PCs, Vista needs to be more appealing than Windows XP and the user benefits have to be made crystal clear.
Instead, Microsoft has increased complexity by introducing confusing new versions, adding features like UAC (User Account Control), and requiring heftier hardware or software application updates. The confusion over Windows Vista Capable versus Windows Vista Ready also illustrates the depth of the problem. Increased complexity risks making the new product less appealing than the older one.
The number of versions?by my count 15?sold by Amazon illustrates purchasing complexity. Buyers choose from four versions: Business, Home, Premium and Ultimate. Adding in the upgrades and additional license SKUs pushes the number above two dozen. I didn't count Spanish or system-builder versions. At Best Buy the number is only eight, because the additional licenses aren't included.
While consumers may not be rushing out to buy Vista, the operating system will succeed simply because there is so much economic infrastructure built around it. The power of monopoly is behind Microsoft. But it's in the best interests of Microsoft and all its partners that Vista succeed sooner. To get there, Microsoft has to give consumers better reasons to switch to Vista.
Can marketing fix the problem? That's the first question I pose to Microsoft Watch readers. The second: What would you recommend that Microsoft do to turn Vista buzz into consumer sales?
Related Posts:
* The Trouble with Windows Vista Capable, Microsoft Watch, April 4, 2007
* Stacking Vista Licenses Too High, Microsoft Watch, March 26, 2007
* Tellme About Dial 2.0, Microsoft Watch, March 15, 2007
* Vista Launch Sales Falter at Retail, Microsoft Watch, Feb. 15, 2007
* Vista Sales Lift: Here Today, Gone Tomorrow, Microsoft Watch, Feb. 12, 2007
* Vista Security: A Petulant Child, Microsoft Watch, Jan. 16, 2007
* Vista? Yes, Bother, Microsoft Watch, Dec. 16, 2006
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/v...2129TX1K0000535
|
|
silver112
Member
|
9. April 2007 @ 06:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
windows vista isnt that bad
everybody here acts like it will destroy the earth or something
|
|
Howdoody
Newbie
|
9. April 2007 @ 07:07 |
Link to this message
|
Vista slower than XP at start-up, shutdown, gripe users
Au contraire, says Microsoft; Vista should be faster for most
April 09, 2007 (Computerworld) Windows Vista users are complaining on Microsoft Corp.'s support forums about long start-up, shutdown and application load times compared with Windows XP.
The users, who sound pro-Vista for the most part, have vented about a variety of speed issues on Microsoft's Performance & Maintenance forum. "I have XP and Vista running side-by-side [but] I twiddle my thumbs waiting for certain apps to load up on the Vista machine while the load is instantaneous on the older XP machine," wrote a user identified as William. "I've tweaked it as best as I could with the info available and I am still very disappointed."
Wrote another user, Kris: "Recently I upgraded from XP to Vista [Home] Premium. When I start the laptop and I see the last BIOS info and Vista starts loading, then I have to wait a full 6 (six!) minutes before I can open my first application (for example Outlook or IE or whatever)."
Some accepted the slower speeds as the price of admission for getting the latest and greatest from Microsoft. Said Jon: "XP is undoubtedly quicker than Vista. I don't think there will be a way around that. You'll never get extra functionality, without some performance cost, assuming the same hardware."
Suggestions from other users, including some tagged as Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals, ranged from adding more RAM to running Vista's Performance Information and Tools control panel to diagnosing possible problems. Replies to such messages, however, typically claimed 2GB or more of memory, and said no problems were reported by the operating system.
Start-up and shutdown times were particularly grating to some users. "Takes about 10 minutes to boot, then 5 minutes after login before you can use it," said user Bengt. "If no improvement I have promised my family to return to XP. But I want Vista!"
One user had a worse tale to tell. Martin Racette wanted to know if it was normal that Vista took more than an hour to shut down and to restart.
Others, at least, kept a sense of humor. "I've compared it to a Commodore 64 loading programs from tape, but I think the Commodore was faster," said Steve Franks. "I'm currently writing this on my other PC, because nothing has happened on my Vista machine for about 15 minutes." [....]
http://www.computerworld.com/action/arti...ticleId=9015905
|
|
Howdoody
Newbie
|
9. April 2007 @ 07:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by silver112:
windows vista isnt that bad
everybody here acts like it will destroy the earth or something
1. Vista is very expensive as a standalone product, which is of significance for do-it-yourselfers - like the 99.99% members of this forum.
2. Vista is falsely advertised as the best thing since sliced bread while it can't be even considered as "upgrade" compared to XP. So far no one provided a single compelling reason to switch from XP to Vista.
3. Micro-soft thinks everybody is pretty dumb.
4. Some micro-soft product users are pretty dumb.
|
Moderator
|
9. April 2007 @ 07:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
5. Why should we throw out perfectly good machines just to run the resource-hungry Vista. I love Linux anyway but Vista's the excuse i needed to move more fully into Linux and start phasing out most of my XP machines
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules *** |
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. April 2007 @ 07:57 |
Link to this message
|
i have Linux but like 2000 better
as for vista and xp-poop,
some know i like windows 2000..its my main system its not for gamers..
i have another 2000 box that does not have a windows update on it.
except sp-4.since 2003..never had to reformat..it has a good firewall and virus program..
it will rip and burn a movie in AVG 19 min..
no virus or spyware in the box.i am posting from that system,now..
I LOVE MICROSOFT-VISTA,NOT!!!
So i madE a pix of me PAL eating all the vistas systems returned back to mircosuck.....wait until next month he will be over 600 lbs........
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. April 2007 @ 08:02
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
9. April 2007 @ 10:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
silver112
Vister aint so bad all you need is 3 of the 4 below
1.Need a adequate PC.
2.Need money
3.need to know what you are doing.
4.dont care what you are doing.
Unlike XP vister is much more of a nightmare its like if XP was released a year or 2 before it was launched it would have been more unstable and ran on less things,Vister needs a year or 2 to mature into a decent OS untill then most are better off with XP,2K or even 98 :X
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. April 2007 @ 14:28 |
Link to this message
|
VISTA - What I Like And What I Don?t Like - That Is The Question?
http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/blade/2...s-the-question/
Or is that two questions? I have been one of the fortunate ones in that I was able to get a hold of Vista Ultimate right after it was released to the business community back in November, 2006. So I have had the pleasure, or sometimes not so pleasurable, to experience Vista in its finest hours longer than some who like to posts reviews on the net. And I try to keep myself thinking that Vista is going to be a great operating system once some of the kinks get worked out. But I also find that even after 4 + months of use, I?m still struggling with the new OS. Here?s why:
1. Moving stuff around does not make it NEW and WOWING! Now after 4 months you would think that I would get the hang of where stuff is. Nope. But it might just be this old dog and new tricks. You see, 98, 2000, and XP were all basically the same and stuff was where stuff was supposed to be. IMHO. But I have adopted and moved MY STUFF where I can find it.
2. Icon size. Yes, Microsoft thought we needed bigger icons so they increased the size. Some smart ass made mention that the new icons were made for the AARP crowd. I resemble that remark! Since I don?t keep icons on my desktop and only in the tray, it doesn?t apply for me.
3. DRM - well thats something your going to have to live with in Vista. Microsoft was forced into DRM by the recording folks who were not going to support Vista if it wasn?t included. I can?t help here.
4. Cost - Vista is pricey. I got my version as a freebie for being a beta tester. Yet I haven?t bought Vista and most likely won?t until I get it on a new PC.
5. Software - some of the games I like will not play nicely on Vista, so I dual boot to XP to play by favorites.
6. No sound from Windows - the driver for my sound card have not ben updated. Yet I can play music disk just fine. Go figure. Its Windows sounds that I miss, but is no biggie.
7. Lock ups - I?ve had several for no apparent reason. These have occurred when the system was just sitting there in idle position.
8. Networking - I have trouble on occasion printing to my network printer. Vista seems to lose it for no reason. Then ?bang? it works. Its been a crap shoot whether I get to print or not. Printer is a HP Laser and I have no problem ever printing from a XP system on the same network.
9. Other software - some of my other software won?t play with Vista. My copy of Quickbooks Pro 2003 is a no go. And I can see buying new software as well as buying Vista may be to high of a expense for some to bear.
10. And I?ve chosen to turn off UAC and run in Administrative mode. This is a experiment to see what kind of havoc I?ll run into. LOL I feel that I am grown up enough that I can do without the mothering Vista wants to use.
What I do like:
1. I really do like the new GUI. I?m a eye candy person and it beats looking at XP.
2. Once I kicked in more RAM, 2G, my system is purring like a kitten. I know. 2G seems like a lot, but it does seem to be the sweet spot for my system.
3. As I continue to find my way around the system, I am now finding things a lot easier to use. What I mean is that Vista is easy to use. It just takes some practice. Maybe old dogs can do new tricks after all.
4. WiFi - no brainer here. It just works and for some odd reason Vista reports a better signal strength than on the XP side. I have noticed two updates for my wi-fi card since I started using Vista. Performance is better. Or is it just a my perception? It does sound strange even to me after thinking about it.
5. Performance is on par with XP.
Overall my experience with Vista has been OK thus far. But I personally believe that unless you already have a computer that fully supports Vista and with plenty of cpu cycles and RAM, your best bet is to wait until you buy a new PC. I still use Windows XP on my other systems and will not be upgrading.
But as always, you are the one who must make the final decision.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. April 2007 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
Windows Movie Maker 2.6
Apr 09, 2007 - 6:21 AM - by Digital Dave
Movie Maker 2.6 is for Windows Vista users whose computer cannot run the Vista version of Movie Maker.
microsoft.com
File Name: MM26_ENU.msi
Version: 2.6
Date Published: 4/6/2007
Language: English
Download Size: 7.0 MB
Overview
Movie Maker 2.6 is for Windows Vista users whose computer cannot run the Vista version of Movie Maker.
To test if your computer can run the Vista version of Movie Maker:
1. From the Start menu, click All Programs.
2. Click Windows Movie Maker.
If Movie Maker launches, you should not download version 2.6.
If you get an error message that says, "Windows Movie Maker cannot start because your video card does not support the required level of hardware acceleration or hardware acceleration is not available", download and install Movie Maker 2.6.
Top of page
System Requirements
* Supported Operating Systems: Windows Vista; Windows Vista Business; Windows Vista Enterprise; Windows Vista Home Basic; Windows Vista Home Premium; Windows Vista Starter; Windows Vista Ultimate
Movie Maker 2.6 requires a version of Microsoft Windows Vista that has the Vista version of Movie Maker already installed.
Top of page
Instructions
The Movie Maker 2.6 installer must be run with administrator privileges.
1. Select language
2. Click the Download button.
3. Click "Run" to run the installer.
DOWNLOAD HERE
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/detai...&DisplayLang=en
|
|
janrocks
Suspended permanently
|
10. April 2007 @ 08:26 |
Link to this message
|
Theres an interesting contradiction in the above release.. Or it loks like one..
Quote:
Movie Maker 2.6 is for Windows Vista users whose computer cannot run the Vista version of Movie Maker.
Quote:
Movie Maker 2.6 requires a version of Microsoft Windows Vista that has the Vista version of Movie Maker already installed.
But they are giving no clues as to which version has it already. And having read quite a lot.. It won't install if the hardware isn't capable of running it. A possible catch 22 situation, and yet more proof of what a bollo*ks up this OS is.
|
Moderator
|
10. April 2007 @ 09:36 |
Link to this message
|
...and to complete my previous post...
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. April 2007 @ 09:39
|
Senior Member
|
10. April 2007 @ 11:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by janrocks:
Theres an interesting contradiction in the above release.. Or it loks like one..
"Movie Maker 2.6 is for Windows Vista users whose computer cannot run the Vista version of Movie Maker."
"Movie Maker 2.6 requires a version of Microsoft Windows Vista that has the Vista version of Movie Maker already installed."
But they are giving no clues as to which version has it already. And having read quite a lot..
It won't install if the hardware isn't capable of running it. A possible catch 22 situation, and yet more proof of what a bollo*ks up this OS is.
Well reading those I think it means that the computer cant run the program so you get 2.6. However, 2.6 needs the first installed because it needs files or something from it. Just my thought.
EDIT- format problem
EDIT- cant fix it for some reason
Doesnt expecting the unexpected make the unexpected expected and therefore mean youre expecting the expected which was the unexpected until you expected it?
"Opinions are immunities to being told were wrong." - Relient K
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. April 2007 @ 11:30
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. April 2007 @ 11:42 |
Link to this message
|
CREAKY ON HIS LAST SHOPPING TRIP
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. April 2007 @ 07:11
|
|
