Is Vista the New OS/2?
An anonymous reader asks: "Well after the long torturous wait, Vista is finally out. Is it just me or do others see similarities between Vista and the OS/2 launch back in the '80's? I mean you need new hardware to run the new OS (Just like OS/2). Even on the best '386 system OS/2 still ran like a dog. Older apps sometimes didn't work (DOS penalty box). And most important, what was the compelling reason to upgrade? Add to this an interview I saw with Ballmer, some time ago, where he was talking about how he knew OS/2 was doomed when IBM kept talking about OS/2's KLOC's (thousands of lines of code), and how bloated OS/2 was. Now I see an interview with him where he talks about how great Vista is due to the, yes you guessed it, the KLOC's of code in it. So is Vista going to see the same fate as OS/2?" This is kind of a hard sell seeing that Vista has Microsoft's might behind it, rather than against it. Still, how long do you think it would take a good percentage of computer users (say 80+%) to migrate to Microsoft's latest and greatest OS?
Unless you stand to make money of Vista, as opposed to no Vista. I really don't see why you care. If you're still using Windows, chances are Windows XP does all you need. If Windows XP doesn't have all you need, now may be a good time to dual boot with Linux, or switch to a Mac.
I've seen Vista in use, and all I can says is "looks like KDE". Of course the reason for this is that many KDE themes have long since copied many aspects of the Aero theme.
All these Vista articles are getting to be annoying, and there seems to be no way to turn them off.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Vista will be a "success" simply because it comes pre-loaded with all new PCs and releases like this will keep the corps buying the steady income support licenses from MS.
It is MS's game to screw up and that ain't happening soon. (Though I prefer Ubuntu and that Windows has truly become a little bitch to run at home, the OS itself bringing up more pop-ups of various types than some of the worst websites - asking every 3 minutes for input over some bullshit.)
Question is how long will M$ let hardware vendors (Dell, HP, IBM) etc ship XP rather than one of the mirriad of Vista versions???
I bet in 6 months you'll have severe difficulty finding a new PC with XP on it...
another 6 months and you'll have problems finding XP on the shelves.
Actually, it runs suprisingly fast. I work in technical support, so I have been forced to learn vista for a while already.
At the moment I'm running it on a core duo laptop with 512MB memory and a intel 945 graphics adapter. And yes, aero works nicely.
Wasn't it so that vista required a lot of ram and a good video card? Quite low on those stats, this laptop, right?
Running a webbrowser and other light stuff, I can't really tell a speed difference between vista and xp. Running something like photoshop... well, 512 megs of ram, so both vista and xp dies. Even gnome trashes itself to death.
If you have any decent computer it doesn't matter which OS you use. All work just as fast. Only thing what matters is how you want to maintain it.
Want it to work out of the box, and then later fix it? Get windows
Want to spend a day configuring it and then forget about it? Use linux
Want it to simply work, but have no application support? Get beos
The taxpayers should demand that Windows be kicked out of schools just as they would demand drug dealers be kicked off school grounds.
I can tell you this isn't going to happen. Know why? Those same tax payers are using Windows at home.
How expensive can it be for the school? I mean, XP came with their PC for FREE. Don't the schools pay the same price?
(Yes, I know Windows is added into the cost of the PC, and the OEM's get it for reduced costs but the tax payers, for the most part, don't, so their perceptions will be different from ours)
bork bork bork!
I bet people who don't know enough to get a real video card won't care anyway.
Amazing. Because someone doesn't wish to spend $300+ for a card makes them 'unknowing'?
Some of us don't care about running video games...we don't have time.
Memory: 2GB (four 512MB DDR-PC2700 DIMMs, upgraded from original 512MB configuration)
Display adapter: ATI Radeon 9600, 256MB, AGP8X (upgraded from original Nvidia 128MB card)
I may be stupid or deceptive, but 2GB and a 9600 is *NOT* mainstream. Therefore you do not get a really good "experience", just as you say yourself.
[...] if you go back to the 2k-like version of the shell UI, you won't even know you're running Vista, even from a perf perspective.
Now there is a compelling argument to upgrade...
!ERR: Signature not found.