wont feel like a victory if MS decides to pull the carpet off everyone's feet someday. to my mind, the phrase "walking on eggs" illustrates perfectly the situation of those developing or relying on Mono.
if MS has trully managed to make Win7 be faster than WinXP, we must have crossed over to the "Bizarro World" where all men are clones of Steve Balmmer, all women clones of Clippy and programs code programmers! madness!
The general feeling around here is that no-one WANTS to believe it is even possible that Windows 7 doesn't suck.
of course. it goes against commom sense that an OS can be faster than a predecessor released 9 years before. that would be like saying that Win XP was tested against Win 3.1 and found to be faster. madness.
WTH! if i had run those tests and come to the conclusion that Win7 installs faster than XP, i would have rushed to the basement, grabbed my Win3 floppies and performed a "3 vs 7 Install Death-Match"!
Linux might get an extra 1% market share in the business environment in 2009. but not at home. at least not until Auntie Mary can figure out how to use the OS.
if the zealots spent as much time simplifying the GUI and unifying the distros as they spend touting the OS, 2004 would have been the year of the Linux Desktop!
Announcer: We have gathered a few volunteers to try the new version of Windows Vista....I mean, Windows Mojave.... I mean Windows 7. Here is what they had to say:
Joe SixPack: Sick! Soccer Mom: Oh, my God! Joe Average: Wow! It's like, you know.... Stuff! Barbie Doll: Totally!
Announcer: The new Windows 7 will revolutionize how people use PCs. The system has been designed from scratch to run smoothly on a mere 4 Gigabyte of RAM!
Joe SixPack: What's that? Barbie Doll: 4 Gigabyte is like, 2 gallons or something. Joe Average: Feels faster than my AOL.
Announcer: Dont take our word for it. Visit Win7.MojaveProject.Microsoft.com and test drive the new Windows. Experience what so many other people have already experienced!
I finally told him that the first thing he needed to do before I could help him was to get a laptop that met or exceeded Vista's minimum system requirements.
you could have gone the extra mile and made yourself substantially more helpful to your friend by suggesting a machine with XP. not only would he end up spending less money on hardware, but he would also benefit from a snappier system.
maybe your friend is doing well enough that he can afford an E8550 and 8GB of RAM.... or maybe not -- given that he DID buy a "budget laptop" as you yourself put it. try attacking the root of the problem next time (ie, the OS), instead of inflating people's budget unnecessarily. i'm sure XP would be more than bearable on a "budget laptop".
memory comparisons arent fair as lots of the resources IE needs are already loaded to the RAM since the boot. regarding crashing, you might have a buggy addon or maybe you need a install of Firefox. i dont get crashes on mine.
If every Firefox user were to convince one IE user to convert, this could be achieved.
that would result in too many people using Firefox, which would definitely shift the malware creators attention away from IE. thanks, but no thanks. I dont want to be forced to drop Firefox (and its great addons) and adopt Opera, Safari or Chrome!
[...] spectacles that made even the simplest product feature -- such as the handle on the clamshell iBook -- seem innovative and utterly desirable.
Spectacle?! You're kidding me. this is the easiest job in Silicon Valley? to arouse Mac fans and convince them to buy more Apple stuff. c'mom, that's as labourous as convincing an alcoholic to have another drink!
given the degree of complexity of CS and the population's established disdain for knowledge (because celebrities + realityTV = cool), very little would be achieved. i'd rather see the masses educated on:
So basically Ultimate (or Vista in general) is worth the extra cash because it allows people to indiscriminately overwrite important files without regard to their accuracy, importance or completeness.... And another of your Vista's highlight is the fact that it also allows people to spread their files and folders around the filesystem without any sensible concern about where a particular document should be saved.
That's both lazy and sloppy.
Call me Old School, but if one needs this much babysitting when using a PC, one should go back to the ease of pencil and paper and save some serious cash.
supporting 64bit Guests on a 32 Hosts is neat and everything, but dropping support for Win2000 Hosts is somewhat counter-intuitive. especially if they (Sun) want VirtualBox to be seen as a serious competitor to VMWare. i mean, it's ok if the users they are targeting are those toying with virtualization in their bedrooms.
Slashdot Mirror
wont feel like a victory if MS decides to pull the carpet off everyone's feet someday. to my mind, the phrase "walking on eggs" illustrates perfectly the situation of those developing or relying on Mono.
if MS has trully managed to make Win7 be faster than WinXP, we must have crossed over to the "Bizarro World" where all men are clones of Steve Balmmer, all women clones of Clippy and programs code programmers! madness!
The general feeling around here is that no-one WANTS to believe it is even possible that Windows 7 doesn't suck.
of course. it goes against commom sense that an OS can be faster than a predecessor released 9 years before. that would be like saying that Win XP was tested against Win 3.1 and found to be faster. madness.
WTH! if i had run those tests and come to the conclusion that Win7 installs faster than XP, i would have rushed to the basement, grabbed my Win3 floppies and performed a "3 vs 7 Install Death-Match"!
that just sounds like a fisherman tale....
Linux might get an extra 1% market share in the business environment in 2009. but not at home. at least not until Auntie Mary can figure out how to use the OS.
if the zealots spent as much time simplifying the GUI and unifying the distros as they spend touting the OS, 2004 would have been the year of the Linux Desktop!
Announcer: We have gathered a few volunteers to try the new version of Windows Vista....I mean, Windows Mojave.... I mean Windows 7. Here is what they had to say:
Joe SixPack: Sick!
Soccer Mom: Oh, my God!
Joe Average: Wow! It's like, you know.... Stuff!
Barbie Doll: Totally!
Announcer: The new Windows 7 will revolutionize how people use PCs. The system has been designed from scratch to run smoothly on a mere 4 Gigabyte of RAM!
Joe SixPack: What's that?
Barbie Doll: 4 Gigabyte is like, 2 gallons or something.
Joe Average: Feels faster than my AOL.
Announcer: Dont take our word for it. Visit Win7.MojaveProject.Microsoft.com and test drive the new Windows. Experience what so many other people have already experienced!
I finally told him that the first thing he needed to do before I could help him was to get a laptop that met or exceeded Vista's minimum system requirements.
you could have gone the extra mile and made yourself substantially more helpful to your friend by suggesting a machine with XP. not only would he end up spending less money on hardware, but he would also benefit from a snappier system.
maybe your friend is doing well enough that he can afford an E8550 and 8GB of RAM.... or maybe not -- given that he DID buy a "budget laptop" as you yourself put it. try attacking the root of the problem next time (ie, the OS), instead of inflating people's budget unnecessarily. i'm sure XP would be more than bearable on a "budget laptop".
just my 2 cents.
memory comparisons arent fair as lots of the resources IE needs are already loaded to the RAM since the boot. regarding crashing, you might have a buggy addon or maybe you need a install of Firefox. i dont get crashes on mine.
If every Firefox user were to convince one IE user to convert, this could be achieved.
that would result in too many people using Firefox, which would definitely shift the malware creators attention away from IE. thanks, but no thanks. I dont want to be forced to drop Firefox (and its great addons) and adopt Opera, Safari or Chrome!
[...] spectacles that made even the simplest product feature -- such as the handle on the clamshell iBook -- seem innovative and utterly desirable.
Spectacle?! You're kidding me. this is the easiest job in Silicon Valley? to arouse Mac fans and convince them to buy more Apple stuff. c'mom, that's as labourous as convincing an alcoholic to have another drink!
given the degree of complexity of CS and the population's established disdain for knowledge (because celebrities + realityTV = cool), very little would be achieved. i'd rather see the masses educated on:
1) computer security
2) SPAM avoidance
3) independent thinking
4) reading (yes, some cant)
and possibly (if pupils aren't too tired):
5) World History/Geography
6) difference between model and role model
7) getting off the couch to vote
So basically Ultimate (or Vista in general) is worth the extra cash because it allows people to indiscriminately overwrite important files without regard to their accuracy, importance or completeness.... And another of your Vista's highlight is the fact that it also allows people to spread their files and folders around the filesystem without any sensible concern about where a particular document should be saved.
That's both lazy and sloppy.
Call me Old School, but if one needs this much babysitting when using a PC, one should go back to the ease of pencil and paper and save some serious cash.
WinXP (and even Win2K) is fine!
supporting 64bit Guests on a 32 Hosts is neat and everything, but dropping support for Win2000 Hosts is somewhat counter-intuitive. especially if they (Sun) want VirtualBox to be seen as a serious competitor to VMWare. i mean, it's ok if the users they are targeting are those toying with virtualization in their bedrooms.
it's too early to drop such a solid OS.