I'm not a "Windows person" - I'm just able to recognize a nice feature in Vista that wasn't in XP. I also never said Windows had an amazingly capable GUI.
I've always been a keyboard guy - it's much faster to hammer out a few keystrokes than put your hand on the mouse and make precise movements.
Only on Slashdot do I get 10+ mostly hostile replies to a comment where I was just answering someone's question - what's better about Vista than XP?
Besides, the only command line that gives me a hardon is a Linux bash shell.
Well you don't have to condescendingly congratulate me, someone asked what was nice in Vista and I answered - I love OS X, it's intuitive and innovative, but it doesn't run my games.
I'd dual-boot but a) that's a pain in the ass, and b) I'm not spending that kind of money to get Apple hardware that's as powerful as what I have right here. If Hackintoshes were as seamless an experience as an actual Mac, I'd be down for that - I haven't checked up on how well they work nowadays.
I especially appreciate the features being in Vista because I do computer repair. I can spend tons of time pimping out my own installations to be just right, but having to use other people's computers a lot, it's nice to have those basic efficiency features there.
That's why there's the ability to type any part of it - start typing e, x, c or w, o, r.. - there's also arrow keys for picking something down the list.
Acknowledged. I think it's a good thing to be able to play my games and use Apple features at the same time - it's the closest I can come to using OS X for my everyday use.
I disagree - I think the only thing that compared to this kind of efficiency before (at least in a stock Windows installation) was XP and pinned start menu programs - you could hit Windows key and then 'I' to start the Internet link, for example. However, having every program in your Start Menu and every hidden program and control panel icon also pinned would not work.
I tried it - it's pretty nice, but by default it doesn't search outside the Start Menu for non-.lnk programs. Vista will search system directories and find stuff like regedit and msconfig, and will also search the control panel, so you can type "mou" and see the Mouse control panel as the first option. My biggest beef with it though: it's not also a command line. It's nice to just hit the Windows key and quickly fire off a command in Vista. That having been said, I'm still using XP.
I'm not implying that Vista had this feature before anything else, but do note that the KDE 4 alphas and betas didn't even start coming out until 6 months after Vista was released.
Well no, they don't make you run anything from the keyboard - but at least for me, using the keyboard is a lot faster than the mouse. I also never said it was worth it to "upgrade" just for these features, I was just answering someone's question about what good new features there were. You are right about some options, like for example, Network Connections - you have to start Network and Sharing Center, then click Show Network Connections on the left.
So what exactly is it that makes XP OK (in comparison with previous versions, like 2000) and Vista too bloated (in comparison with previous versions, like XP)?
The fact that modern hardware eats XP for breakfast, and shits out Windows 3.1.
Aero is indeed nice: it's noticeably smoother moving around windows than in XP. I'm with you 100% - why do these people hate the fact that their otherwise idling video card is being used for something to make it better?
The best new feature of Vista, and it really, really is a nice one, is the instant Start Menu search. You can be SO fast at starting programs or finding files by just hitting the Windows key and typing the first few letters. Also, breadcrumb navigation in Windows Explorer is nice. However, these are things that can be added to XP - I just wish the authors of such addons would refrain from making them look exactly like Vista, because that doesn't look good with my XP classic theme.
What? You mean all those Mojave commercials showing random clueless people thinking a demo of Vista is cool thing is somehow wrong?
I think those commercials are a good thing. Those random clueless people are the same people that refuse to buy a computer with Vista because they "heard it sucks" - not that they'd know the difference. SP1 fixed some of the most horrendous problems with Vista, and I think even SP0 was fine for average users if tweaked right.
These clueless people need to realize that they'll probably LIKE Vista, and they should probably upgrade anyway because their XP SP0 or SP1 computer sitting at home has 256MB of RAM, and 100+ startup processes, a good chunk of which is spyware.
Yup the host sets up a structure in memory which lists all the USB endpoints. When a driver wants to do some IO it asks the host controller driver which adds a request into the structure with a pointer to a buffer. The host controller hardware reads the structure with busmaster DMA and generates the USB packets. When the device answers the host controller DMAs the data into the the driver's buffer interrupts the CPU. Then the host controller can pass the buffer back to the driver. Polling is done by leaving the request in the structure, it doesn't require any CPU activity. Intel like USB because they invented it, not as some sort of conspiracy to load your CPU.
I know it's off-topic, but I thought I'd point out why I love Slashdot by comparing it to Digg. If this story were on Digg, the comments would be something like "I BET THIS BE ON NEXT MACBOOK PRO LOL". Here, we get something like your comment in the first thread. <3/.
He doesn't think people are special for owning Apple products. He's referring to Apple users who act like they're special because they're "enlightened" enough to use Apple products, and love the fact that they're part of a relative minority (not saying that's you).
True, but it was very rare that it was anything good since 99% of the stuff was randomly generated. The only rare, good thing I know of is Umbra's sword and armor, but she's almost impossible to kill at level 1. For starting stealth people, there was an outdoor ruin just west of the Imperial City that had a Fine Steel Bow sitting outside, which is nice while you're level 1 but rendered useless in a few levels when you get a Silver one..
You can also get speech options for all the other SPECIAL attributes, if they're high enough.. although you're right, I never saw anything for having an attribute too low.. my 3rd character, a highly specialized killing machine, has 1 charisma and 1 perception and makes it by just fine.
If you're just a total bastard throughout the game the ending is pretty funny, and it does mention some specific things, but you're right that it doesn't really mention side quests. I do think the main quest got a little silly and felt rushed at a certain point, which sucks because before that it was sweet.
As far as Oblivion: at least Bethesda improved on that by hand-placing stuff in the world this time around. Oblivion just wasn't worth playing once you realized it was all leveled and you could just tool around the same starting areas as you leveled up to get the best items, and even worse, that you COULDN'T get those items at an earlier level. Fallout 3 vastly improves on the fun and replay factor of Oblivion with VATS and hand-placed items and locations.
And Morrowind: sure the NPCs were lifeless, the combat sucked, et cetera.. but at the time, had you ever played such a vast and hand-detailed game, with so much freedom? At least Morrowind's main quest was actually interesting (it had a ton of back story at every turn if you were willing to read) and took you through all sorts of places and trials, unlike most of Oblivion's and half of Fallout 3's. Although, you're right: in Morrowind even, Bethesda managed to make the ending feel half-assed, among other things.
Regardless, Morrowind still ranks as my favorite game of all time, just for the initial 250 hours or so of amazement as I explored every little nook and cranny of that world. And Fallout 3 is still a game I keep installed now, because it's so much more FUN (if you don't do the main quest after a certain point) to just explore and kill things. And Oblivion, well, I loved it at one point, but Fallout 3 has totally eclipsed it, since it is essentially a better version of Oblivion.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Natural Elite (the PS/2 white one, not the USB black one with the stupid "extra functions").
I'm not a "Windows person" - I'm just able to recognize a nice feature in Vista that wasn't in XP. I also never said Windows had an amazingly capable GUI.
I've always been a keyboard guy - it's much faster to hammer out a few keystrokes than put your hand on the mouse and make precise movements.
Only on Slashdot do I get 10+ mostly hostile replies to a comment where I was just answering someone's question - what's better about Vista than XP?
Besides, the only command line that gives me a hardon is a Linux bash shell.
Thanks, I hadn't looked really closely but that all works like a charm!
Well you don't have to condescendingly congratulate me, someone asked what was nice in Vista and I answered - I love OS X, it's intuitive and innovative, but it doesn't run my games.
I'd dual-boot but a) that's a pain in the ass, and b) I'm not spending that kind of money to get Apple hardware that's as powerful as what I have right here. If Hackintoshes were as seamless an experience as an actual Mac, I'd be down for that - I haven't checked up on how well they work nowadays.
I especially appreciate the features being in Vista because I do computer repair. I can spend tons of time pimping out my own installations to be just right, but having to use other people's computers a lot, it's nice to have those basic efficiency features there.
That's why there's the ability to type any part of it - start typing e, x, c or w, o, r.. - there's also arrow keys for picking something down the list.
Acknowledged. I think it's a good thing to be able to play my games and use Apple features at the same time - it's the closest I can come to using OS X for my everyday use.
I disagree - I think the only thing that compared to this kind of efficiency before (at least in a stock Windows installation) was XP and pinned start menu programs - you could hit Windows key and then 'I' to start the Internet link, for example. However, having every program in your Start Menu and every hidden program and control panel icon also pinned would not work.
1) You don't need a powerful video card, and 2) if you don't have even the equivalent of integrated Intel graphics, you can turn Aero off..
I tried it - it's pretty nice, but by default it doesn't search outside the Start Menu for non-.lnk programs. Vista will search system directories and find stuff like regedit and msconfig, and will also search the control panel, so you can type "mou" and see the Mouse control panel as the first option. My biggest beef with it though: it's not also a command line. It's nice to just hit the Windows key and quickly fire off a command in Vista. That having been said, I'm still using XP.
I'm not implying that Vista had this feature before anything else, but do note that the KDE 4 alphas and betas didn't even start coming out until 6 months after Vista was released.
Well no, they don't make you run anything from the keyboard - but at least for me, using the keyboard is a lot faster than the mouse. I also never said it was worth it to "upgrade" just for these features, I was just answering someone's question about what good new features there were. You are right about some options, like for example, Network Connections - you have to start Network and Sharing Center, then click Show Network Connections on the left.
Nice to know - I haven't used KDE since v3-something.
The fact that modern hardware eats XP for breakfast, and shits out Windows 3.1.
Aero is indeed nice: it's noticeably smoother moving around windows than in XP. I'm with you 100% - why do these people hate the fact that their otherwise idling video card is being used for something to make it better?
The best new feature of Vista, and it really, really is a nice one, is the instant Start Menu search. You can be SO fast at starting programs or finding files by just hitting the Windows key and typing the first few letters. Also, breadcrumb navigation in Windows Explorer is nice. However, these are things that can be added to XP - I just wish the authors of such addons would refrain from making them look exactly like Vista, because that doesn't look good with my XP classic theme.
I think those commercials are a good thing. Those random clueless people are the same people that refuse to buy a computer with Vista because they "heard it sucks" - not that they'd know the difference. SP1 fixed some of the most horrendous problems with Vista, and I think even SP0 was fine for average users if tweaked right. These clueless people need to realize that they'll probably LIKE Vista, and they should probably upgrade anyway because their XP SP0 or SP1 computer sitting at home has 256MB of RAM, and 100+ startup processes, a good chunk of which is spyware.
Have you ever tried a one-blade razor?
Like this?
I'm still using a Mach 3, after all these years. I refuse to upgrade to these newfangled quad- and penta-blade razors.
Definitely. Runs pretty shitty here, with a 3.0ghz Core 2 Duo, GTX 260, 4GB DDR2-800. I hear the quad-core people have it good.
I know it's off-topic, but I thought I'd point out why I love Slashdot by comparing it to Digg. If this story were on Digg, the comments would be something like "I BET THIS BE ON NEXT MACBOOK PRO LOL". Here, we get something like your comment in the first thread. <3 /.
He doesn't think people are special for owning Apple products. He's referring to Apple users who act like they're special because they're "enlightened" enough to use Apple products, and love the fact that they're part of a relative minority (not saying that's you).
Unless you don't have the paper DUE to a lack of effort! Not that I would know...
True, but it was very rare that it was anything good since 99% of the stuff was randomly generated. The only rare, good thing I know of is Umbra's sword and armor, but she's almost impossible to kill at level 1. For starting stealth people, there was an outdoor ruin just west of the Imperial City that had a Fine Steel Bow sitting outside, which is nice while you're level 1 but rendered useless in a few levels when you get a Silver one..
You can also get speech options for all the other SPECIAL attributes, if they're high enough.. although you're right, I never saw anything for having an attribute too low.. my 3rd character, a highly specialized killing machine, has 1 charisma and 1 perception and makes it by just fine.
If you're just a total bastard throughout the game the ending is pretty funny, and it does mention some specific things, but you're right that it doesn't really mention side quests. I do think the main quest got a little silly and felt rushed at a certain point, which sucks because before that it was sweet.
As far as Oblivion: at least Bethesda improved on that by hand-placing stuff in the world this time around. Oblivion just wasn't worth playing once you realized it was all leveled and you could just tool around the same starting areas as you leveled up to get the best items, and even worse, that you COULDN'T get those items at an earlier level. Fallout 3 vastly improves on the fun and replay factor of Oblivion with VATS and hand-placed items and locations.
And Morrowind: sure the NPCs were lifeless, the combat sucked, et cetera.. but at the time, had you ever played such a vast and hand-detailed game, with so much freedom? At least Morrowind's main quest was actually interesting (it had a ton of back story at every turn if you were willing to read) and took you through all sorts of places and trials, unlike most of Oblivion's and half of Fallout 3's. Although, you're right: in Morrowind even, Bethesda managed to make the ending feel half-assed, among other things.
Regardless, Morrowind still ranks as my favorite game of all time, just for the initial 250 hours or so of amazement as I explored every little nook and cranny of that world. And Fallout 3 is still a game I keep installed now, because it's so much more FUN (if you don't do the main quest after a certain point) to just explore and kill things. And Oblivion, well, I loved it at one point, but Fallout 3 has totally eclipsed it, since it is essentially a better version of Oblivion.