Windows XP Service Pack 2 wins because of the built-in firewall and improved Internet Explorer 6 which was more immune to spyware. Today, it wins even more because it has Internet Explorer 7. While those are nice features to have integrated into the XP, free 3rd party software can be added to Windows 2000 that can either duplicate those features, exceed them, or come close enough. Remember, novice Windows users didn't use Windows 2000 unless they had an advanced user administrating his/her PC.
For example, my primary desktop runs Windows 2000 with Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall (replaced ZoneAlarm), Opera 9.10 (FireFox is more popular), Spybot Search & Destroy (I'm pretty careful), and AVG antvirus.
Also, running as a restricted user (not an administrator) helps a lot and anybody who's knowledgable enough to install Windows 2000 can learn to run as a restricted user by reading the Help files ("Run as" is your friend).
Between work and home I have two Win2000 boxes and two XP boxes (and a Redhat as well). I remember still running NT when XP was introduced.
Unless you have an application that can't be run on an older system, and by then you usually need a newer computer anyway, is upgrading really worth the hassle?
Upgrading to Vista is probably not worth the hassle, since almost all Windows users (novices to advanced users) currently run XP or Windows 2000, which are just fine for the vast majority. XP and Win2000 will continue to get security updates until 2012 (XP) and 2010 (Win2000). They will continue to run most of the applications users want and have drivers for most hardware.
However, I think upgrading to XP was definitely worth the hassle when "home" users were using Windows 98/ME. The NT kernel alone was worth it. Also, extended support for 98/ME ended last July (after many extensions), so 98/ME users no longer get security updates.
For "pro" or "advanced" users (you're apparently one of them), upgrading from Win2000 to XP was not necessary for many users. Most XP apps and drivers also work for Win2000. Win2000 already had the good NT 5 kernel. Win2000 will continue to get security updates until July 2010.
However, I do predict applications will soon stop supporting Win2000 (before extended support ends) as the number of Win2000 users dwindles to an unprofitable niche in the eyes of developers and hardware makers. Win2000 will still be a fine OS, but its successor (XP) was released five years ago and I'm sure most people get the new OS when they get a new computer.
My main desktop runs Win2000, but I plan to build a new PC in the second half of this year. I predict that apps and hardware will be phasing out Win2000 support by then. It will probably be worth it to add Vista OEM to my Newegg cart.
I'm not cynical as much as I detest a company that puts a software company's interest above the end purchaser; that's just poor customer service. But hooray for capitalism, he got a better deal and what he wanted from a competitor. Since no computer company offers something close to what I want in a computer, I prefer to build my own reliable desktops and compromise on my desired features when I shop for a notebook (I lean toward ThinkPads). I don't "detest" companies that don't offer what I want when I think their reasons are reasonable. (Is that a correct sentence?)
In this case, I assume that buyers of Dimension and Inspiron models are much more likely to run in Administrator mode, install malware, not know what they're doing, and need hand-holding from Dell's support. These low-cost models get low-cost, probably outsourced support with lots of employee turnover. To keep costs low, they can probably save a lot of money by focusing their support and training on Vista only. I admit I'm making a lot of assumptions here.
That said, I would "like" it if Dell offered XP with their home models, even if XP was more expensive than Vista (to offset the theoretical addional support costs). I'd also like it if Apple offered a "real" desktop computer without an integrated monitor (no notebook parts, not a workstation), but this option would probably take away too many Mac Pro sales. I don't hate either company like so many Slashdot commenters do.
Just got done looking at the computers in DELL's business section -- they can only be configured with Vista. What section are you on their site are you going to? I was referring to Dell's "real" business PCs (NOT Dimension desktops or Inspiron notebooks) in their business section. For example (from their "Small Business" section):
Were you only looking at the Dimensions and Inspirons (Vista-only models) in Dell's business sections? I personally don't think Dell should be offering these "home" models (featured in their home section) in their business section. These models cut costs and features that most business should get. They are not in the same class as the "real" business models. Some of the differences:
Dimensions and Inspirons have lower-cost outsourced support (last time I checked) while the "real" business models get North American-based support (3 years by default for desktops).
Dims and Insps have more bundled "shovelware" which some novices appreciate but business buyers abhor. It's also rumored that Dell gets paid by shovelware companies, which lowers prices and makes novice buyers happier.
Business models are supposed to be more stable and reliable.
I'm not a big fan of Dell, but I think their business/pro models are alright.
Had a friend who tried to buy a Dell box today. They wouldn't sell it to him with XP on it; only Vista. Does the friend know that "business" Dell PCs (e.g. Optiplex desktops, Latitude notebooks, Precision workstations) can be configured with XP? Only the "home" PCs (e.g. Dimension desktops, Inspiron notebooks) are restricted to Vista only. (Dimensions and Inspirons are also sold in the "business" section, but they are really meant for home users.)
I can only imagine what kind of deals Dell and MSFT have cut... I think it's reasonable to believe that phasing out XP support might be worth the relatively few sales they lose by not offering XP to home users. Maybe my imagination should be more cynical.
Ninety-seven percent of the music on iPods is DRM-free. Customers are not locked in. I'm not arguing about the spirit of your comment, but do you still actually believe Jobs's "97 percent" estimate? This misleading statistic has been picked apart on Slashdot and other articles. Jobs got that number by making some questionable assumptions and leaving out some very important variables. From's Steve's DRM letter:
Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that's 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold. Note he says 22 songs for each iPod ever sold. How many of every iPod ever sold are currently in use? How many of every FairPlay song ever sold are currently loaded onto an iPod?
Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. That seems high to me, but I'll just assume that's a reasonable estimate.
This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. WTF? "The average iPod" is misleading because (1) not every iPod ever sold is currently in use and (2) some individuals are using their FairPlay songs on multiple iPods. An individual who has owned 3 iPods doesn't split all his/her FairPlay songs among all three iPods, including the dead iPods.
Don't you think "total iTunes store customers" and "average songs sold per customer" (which Apple refuses to disclose) would be much more relevant? How about "number of customers who have spent more than $100 at the iTunes store?"
It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music. It's hard to believe people fall for this misleading statistic.
I've run into a similar situation when ordering a new laptop for one of my clients. According to our Dell sale rep, we can only get XP installed on a Precision. Unfortunately, all Latitudes and Inspirons come with Vista only. I found that so hard to believe (no XP for Latitudes?) that I checked Dell's Small Business notebooks page. Latitudes (Dell's "real" non-workstation business notebooks) can definately get Windows XP preinstalled instead of Vista. It seems your Dell sales rep was either incorrect or misunderstood. It would be nonsensical NOT to include an XP option for their Latitude line for the good reasons you stated in the rest of your comment.
I'm not surprised Inspiron notebooks (even in the Small Business section) do not offer XP as an option because I never considered Inspirons to be "real" business notebooks. Their features and prices are more oriented toward home users.
I'm relieved to hear from a customer that Lenovo is still doing a good job supporting their ThinkPads since they acquired IBM's PC division. I still favor ThinkPads and ThinkCentre desktops over uber-cheap HP and Dell PCs because of their good reputation for service and support. Besides, the ThinkPad R series and ThinkCentre A series offer reasonably priced options, even if they aren't "pretty" or made for the home.
I'm very curious about the quality of Lenovo's service/support for their cheaper 3000 series notebooks and desktops, which are not ThinkPad/ThinkCentre models and were released by Lenovo after they acquired IBM's PC division. Their desktop computers page says the 3000 series is "Backed by IBM service and support" (just like ThinkCentre), but I have doubts about Lenovo providing the same level of support for such a low price.
Anyhoo, thanks for your current ThinkPad anecdotes.
vista likes dual core (or 64 bit capable) cpus. It can run on single core but you will not like how it runs. I think vista was supposed to be only 64 bit. During the testing on beta all the 64 bit capable machine ran it a lot better.
I'm happily running Vista on a single core cpu right now, without any performance problems... Care to give any sources on that claim? The inside of his ass?
Seriously, I don't understand why the GP got modded up. Many Vista performance previews have shown that Vista runs just fine with a single-core 32-bit P4-era CPU. The recommended CPU requirements will not be a problem for the vast majority of PCs bought with Windows XP preinstalled.
What many XP users will want to upgrade to is 1GB+ of memory (many have 512MB) and a DirectX 9 GPU. Compared to Vista's memory and GPU requirements, Vista's CPU requirements are relatively light.
The fact of the matter, however, is that Core 2 Duo processors at 65nm now have about the same power consumption as their Athlon 64 X2 counterparts at 90nm--about 65W.
I highly recommend taking a look at processor electrical specifications. And keep in mind that Intel's power figures are more optimistic ("typical") than AMD's ("max").
I don't think we should trust the power "specs" from Intel, AMD, or any source that only focuses on the CPU. If you want to compare power consumption between Core 2 Duo and Athlon 64 X2, I think you should look at total system power consumption with whatever chipsets you plan to use.
For example, on the "mainstream" P965 and nForce 590 chipsets, the Core 2 Duo systems consume significantly less power than the Athlon 64 x2 counterparts. Note that the nForce 590 chipset is power-hungry, but NVIDIA chipsets are more popular than ATI chipsets. I cannot find Core 2 Duo vs Athlon 64 x2 benchmarks that use a more power-friendly ATI chipset (I'm sure I've seen one before), but I guess that shows how unpopular ATI chipsets are. I'm sure AMD acquisition will change things.
WTF is with ram prices? CPU's, hard disks, displays are all going down as per usual but ram, which normally follows the rest of the industry is sticking darn tight to that 200$ US per 2gb of decent quality ram level.
It's been there for a while, it's becoming quite annoying - I had a 2gb machine 2 years ago and it cost maybe 300$ US, 100$ US in 2 years does not make for a good price drop!
I hear ya. RAM prices are so frickin' unpredictable. I've been hoping for a DDR2 price war similar to the fantastic PC133 price war of November 2001, when the shipping cost of PC133 was higher than the price of the RAM itself (128MB - $5, 256MB - $10).
Subject: And he's right It's way too early to declare a winner.
The primary thing that decides the success or failure of a format is content available on it. There's only one HD-DVD exclusive studio (Universal). There are quite a few that are Blu-Ray only, including all of the Sony studios and Disney. At this early adopter phase, I don't understand why Blu Ray proponents make a big deal about HD DVD having only one exlusive"Big 6" studio (Universal) while Blu Ray has three exlusive (Sony, Disney, Fox). HD DVD also has support from Paramount and Time Warner, just not exclusively. None of these studios will stay exlusive forever. All of the studios will support whichever format wins, and the battle has just started.
For those that believe "exclusive" studio support and porn is important, HD DVD is exlusively backed by Digital Playground, Wicked Pictures, Pink Visual, Bang Bros, and ClubJenna Inc. (which on 22 June 2006 was acquired by Playboy Enterprises), and HD DVD is also non-exclusively backed by Vivid Entertainment.
Besides, Blu Ray is a better format. 50 GB per disk allows for lower compression ratios and uncompressed multichannel sound. Which has made no difference in video quality so far. Toshiba demonstrated a triple-layer 51GB HD DVD disc at CES this year, so Blu Ray might not be able to exploit this capacity advantage in time.
Blu Ray also enjoys much broader industry support, including Apple (which gives you a hint as to what Final Cut / DVD Studio types will be using) and Dell. Apple and Dell will support whichever format wins. Apple exclusively supported DVD-R and not DVD+R. Dell exlusively supported Intel. Also, it's not like there aren't alternatives to Apple and Dell that support HD DVD.
It's obvious they will never give "permission" to do this. Their whole business model is based on using OS X as a driving force to sell their hardware with high profit margins.
Note that Apple also "disallows" virualizing OS X on Apple hardware (in OS X). This shouldn't hurt their business model, unless (perhaps) Apple fears that this will lead to ports/hacks for non-Apple hardware.
I shouldn't have to explain on Slashdot why anyone would want to virtualize OS X on a Mac running OS X.
They've probably been fleshing out the feature list for Vista's successor since the first day a developer copy of OS X 10.5 reached the grubby mitts of a Microsoft employee. Don't expect the real work to start until spring, though, when it's released with its 'top secret' features.
Go ahead and mod me down, bitches, but after this tasty tidbit you know I'm probably right.
Are you (and the moderators) suggesting that those internal Microsoft e-mails prove that MS "copied" those features from Apple's early demo of OS X Tiger in 2004? Re-read that article without your anti-MS goggles.
Desktop search, video conferencing, sidebar, and Aero were Longhorn/Vista features that were announced by MS long before that impressive Tiger preview at WWDC. Those e-mails show that MS was very impressed by Apple's implementation of already-planned Vista features, not that they were copying them. Since Apple would release Tiger (with these features) before MS could release their long-delayed Vista, Vista's implementations would be directly compared (by reviewer/consumers) to Tiger's implementations.
Except for perhaps Aqua/Aero, none of these features were "copied" from Apple the way Apple fanboys like to claim. At most, they can argue that MS changed their existing implementations of those features to resemble Apple's implementations, but they didn't copy the features themselves.
So WinFS is finally being released? That was the one I was referring to that's been in development (and delayed) for years now. I've heard mixed thoughts about whether or not it will be better or worse, but we won't know until it's out... It will probably be an add-on to Vista, not part of Vista's successor (Vienna). Recent articles (past 2 months) about Vista's successors have hinted that WinFS is likely to be part of an add-on/service pack/roll-up to Vista codenamed "Fiji" (also called "Vista RC2" by some people). Fiji is due some time in 2008 and supposedly includes the vaporous WinFS, updated Aero, updated.NET Framework, updated bundled apps, HD-DVD playback (with decoder), and other "minor" updates/add-ons.
Even Zune supports AAC. Just do some research. Nearly *Everything* nowadays supports nondrm-aac, from players to phones.
Funny, cause WMP11 doesn't seem to. Windows Media Player 11, in its default installation, doesn't play AAC. However, AAC decoding is easy to find and add using Microsoft's WMPlugins.com site. A link to the CoreAAC codec is right there on the front page.
Not that I'm a proponent of the much-improved WMP 11 on the Windows platform (I prefer foobar2000). But I do like AAC now that Nero has made freely available (for Windows) a very high-quality VBR AAC encoder that's supposedly better than iTunes/Quicktime (which makes very good CBR AAC files). Sure, it's not as "free" as LAME, but Windows users no longer need to install iTunes to encode AAC files.
I wish they'd start offering music in FLAC format. If you have a good stereo you can tell the difference. I wish set top DVD players would start playing music in FLAC format (or any lossless format with easily obtainable encoders). For many people with good stereos, it would be very convenient to burn all of Led Zeppelin's studio albums onto one DVD and play it on their home theater's DVD player.
Well, maybe I'm the only one who wants this. I'm not getting my hopes up. I don't want to depend on my PC to decode FLAC files when a DVD player should be able to do it.
Windows Media Format - PlaysForSure is still the most common DRM scheme in use since so many people accidentally rip their CDs to that format with WMP's default settings. Adding DRM to files ripped from CDs hasn't been the default setting in Windows Media Player since version 9 was released four years ago (January 2003). Yes, this was dispicable behavior in versions 7 and 8, but it has been four years. People are still erroneously saying this is WMP's current default setting. Some are honestly ignorant. Others are just spreading FUD.
similar to where Windows 2000 was when it was fresh out the door. Should be better, considering that Win2K came from a completely different code tree than 98. I think the GP was referring to Windows NT 4, not Windows 98. The names of MS's "home" and "professional" operating systems were unnecessarily confusing at the time. The GP could have made it more clear.
"Did they really need to be that efficient, or is it just part of their DRM scheme, the same as the design to make it impossible to 'drag-n-drop-n-play' files?"
Since my iPod has never, ever in its life seen any files with DRM, it can't be part of any "DRM scheme".
I think you're being pedantic. The GP was talking about DRM in iTunes, not in any files on the iPod. "DRM scheme" is not the best choice of words, but an accepted definition of DRM is "a system of managing digital rights." This system can include how iTunes restricts users from easily transferring MP3 files from iPod to computer.
Even if your narrow definition of DRM is accepted, I think everyone on Slashdot knows what he/she was talking about. Apple is limiting functionality to allay the fears of copyright owners. Your files without DRM can still be restricted by a "DRM scheme" if you use iTunes.
With ReadyBoost you should be able to haul the performance up significantly with a large memory stick.
Read the technical description of it on the MS site to cut through the hype - it is a horrible idea and won't help. Read the results of Anandtech's tests of ReadyBoost performance - it makes a very significant impact on performance (in memory-intensive benchmarks, of course). The tests were done on a system with only 512MB of RAM, like the system described in the original comment. Upgrading to 1GB of RAM is better, but ReadyBoost definitely helps. Where did you and the moderators get this idea that ReadyBoost doesn't help?
The first priority of Michael Dell should be to improve Dell's lousy customer service and in-source it to US again. Dell may have already started this for some models. The first banner at the top of Dell's OptiPlex Desktops page now says: "BUILT HERE. SUPPORTED HERE. OptiPlex desktops include North American-based technical support." I don't know if any other lines have North American-based support for non-corporate customers.
Corporates love Dell because of its uniform ugly black boxen. If you missed it, in November 2003 Dell moved their corporate support for OptiPlex and Latitude back to the USA from India after complaints.
Apple's phenomenal customer support is the main reason iPod and iMac's still rock. I don't know if I'd call it "phenomenal," but I like knowing who provides North American-based support. Some other PC makers that have North American-based support: Gateway, Lenovo, MPC (formerly Micron PC), Velocity Micro, Falcon Northwest.
Subject: WildTangent talking about ruining gaming?
As in the spyware company WildTangent that gets packaged with a number of apps including AIM? Wish a CREDIBLE developer would have said that, and not them, being from the bottom of the barrel.
Slashdot covered WildTangent's bitching about Vista two weeks ago (this story linked to a less relevant/. story). That story's discussion seemed to agree that WildTangent is malware. It's difficult to uninstall completely. WildTangent apparently wants their software to be installable without entering an admin password and wants children to be able to install it without parental consent.
I hate linking to stores too, but here's the Retail version from newegg. And if it turns out I can't get the upgrade, I'll be miffed:P I'll find out in a day or two if it's valid. Wish me luck;) Holy crap! (sorry for cussing) You're correct. I was wrong about "free Vista upgrades" not being available for boxed retail versions of XP. How could I have missed that? Or why wasn't this widely reported on tech news sites? I read tech news daily and I never read about this Technology Guarantee Program (free Vista upgrade) for retail boxed versions of Microsoft Windows XP. The pre-loaded/OEM version of this program was mentioned on every tech news site, but my archive search of Ars Technica and DailyTech returned no results for the retail version.
This is a decent option for some buyers to consider. I don't see any "system" purchase requirements for the free Vista upgrade from retail versions of XP. For about $190/$280, we can purchase retail versions of XP Home/Pro and get free upgrades to Vista Home Basic/Business. This is about $100/$140 more expensive than the OEM versions, but these retail versions can be transfered to your next computer. If you're planning on changing motherboards before the next version of Windows, then the retail price premium might be worth it.
Unfortunately, XP Media Center Edition is not sold in retail versions and XP Home retail cannot get a free or discounted upgrade to Vista Home Premium.
I followed your MS link but found no mention of requiring an OEM version or not allowing a retail version ("qualifying PC running Windows XP" no mention of pre-installation, etc). Can you link me to the section that mentions that? I'm assuming you meant the link to Microsoft's Vista Express Upgrade promotion. That page doesn't mention OEM versions of Windows XP (no manual, reduced support) because they are not intended to be installed by inexperienced users. OEM versions are meant to be installed by "system builders," which includes big builders (like Dell) and individual "builders" (like you and me) that know what they're doing.
So when that page says "Receive an Express Upgrade to Windows Vista when you buy a qualifying PC running Windows XP," they are actually referring to an OEM versions of Windows that was preinstalled by the system builder that built that "qualifying PC." They don't mention OEM versions of Windows because that page was meant for normal retail buyers, not system builders, and retail PCs have OEM versions of Windows preinstalled. They don't mention standalone retail boxed versions of Windows XP because they don't qualify (you're supposed to buy a "system").
Actually, there's a retail version of XP + free Vista upgrade. Or at least, a number of vendors are selling it that way. I'm pretty sure (but not absolutley sure) you're mistaken. Every XP + Vista upgrade bundle I've seen has the OEM version of XP (no fancy box, no manual), not the retail version (fancy box). Some online vendors do not make it crystal clear that they're selling an OEM version, but the product description will reveal it's OEM. Hint: if non-upgrade versions of XP Home/Pro are selling for less than $100/$150, then they're OEM versions.
I like Newegg, but that page for XP MCE OEM does not say anything about the difference between OEM versions and retail versions. It just has the letters 'OEM' tacked on to the name of the product.
I haven't actually tried to use my coupon yet, so I can't say for certain if it will work, but if it doesn't, I'll have words for the vendor. That seems to be a concern to many buyers on that product's Customer Reviews section (one thing I like about Newegg). Retailers are allowed to sell OEM versions of Windows to "system builders" (which includes home builders), but the description on the Vista upgrade coupon seems to indicate that users might have to prove (send receipts) that, along with the OS, they bought a system (motherboard, CPU, hard drive, memory) to qualify for the free Vista upgrade. I know Newegg did not make this clear a few weeks ago, so I expect them to offer refunds or exchanges to early buyers (they have a good reputation for service).
Slashdot Mirror
For example, my primary desktop runs Windows 2000 with Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall (replaced ZoneAlarm), Opera 9.10 (FireFox is more popular), Spybot Search & Destroy (I'm pretty careful), and AVG antvirus.
Also, running as a restricted user (not an administrator) helps a lot and anybody who's knowledgable enough to install Windows 2000 can learn to run as a restricted user by reading the Help files ("Run as" is your friend).
Unless you have an application that can't be run on an older system, and by then you usually need a newer computer anyway, is upgrading really worth the hassle?
Upgrading to Vista is probably not worth the hassle, since almost all Windows users (novices to advanced users) currently run XP or Windows 2000, which are just fine for the vast majority. XP and Win2000 will continue to get security updates until 2012 (XP) and 2010 (Win2000). They will continue to run most of the applications users want and have drivers for most hardware.However, I think upgrading to XP was definitely worth the hassle when "home" users were using Windows 98/ME. The NT kernel alone was worth it. Also, extended support for 98/ME ended last July (after many extensions), so 98/ME users no longer get security updates.
For "pro" or "advanced" users (you're apparently one of them), upgrading from Win2000 to XP was not necessary for many users. Most XP apps and drivers also work for Win2000. Win2000 already had the good NT 5 kernel. Win2000 will continue to get security updates until July 2010.
However, I do predict applications will soon stop supporting Win2000 (before extended support ends) as the number of Win2000 users dwindles to an unprofitable niche in the eyes of developers and hardware makers. Win2000 will still be a fine OS, but its successor (XP) was released five years ago and I'm sure most people get the new OS when they get a new computer.
My main desktop runs Win2000, but I plan to build a new PC in the second half of this year. I predict that apps and hardware will be phasing out Win2000 support by then. It will probably be worth it to add Vista OEM to my Newegg cart.
In this case, I assume that buyers of Dimension and Inspiron models are much more likely to run in Administrator mode, install malware, not know what they're doing, and need hand-holding from Dell's support. These low-cost models get low-cost, probably outsourced support with lots of employee turnover. To keep costs low, they can probably save a lot of money by focusing their support and training on Vista only. I admit I'm making a lot of assumptions here.
That said, I would "like" it if Dell offered XP with their home models, even if XP was more expensive than Vista (to offset the theoretical addional support costs). I'd also like it if Apple offered a "real" desktop computer without an integrated monitor (no notebook parts, not a workstation), but this option would probably take away too many Mac Pro sales. I don't hate either company like so many Slashdot commenters do.
- Optiplex desktops
- Latitude notebooks
- Precision workstations
- Precision mobile workstations
Were you only looking at the Dimensions and Inspirons (Vista-only models) in Dell's business sections? I personally don't think Dell should be offering these "home" models (featured in their home section) in their business section. These models cut costs and features that most business should get. They are not in the same class as the "real" business models. Some of the differences:- Dimensions and Inspirons have lower-cost outsourced support (last time I checked) while the "real" business models get North American-based support (3 years by default for desktops).
- Dims and Insps have more bundled "shovelware" which some novices appreciate but business buyers abhor. It's also rumored that Dell gets paid by shovelware companies, which lowers prices and makes novice buyers happier.
- Business models are supposed to be more stable and reliable.
I'm not a big fan of Dell, but I think their business/pro models are alright.Don't you think "total iTunes store customers" and "average songs sold per customer" (which Apple refuses to disclose) would be much more relevant? How about "number of customers who have spent more than $100 at the iTunes store?"
It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music. It's hard to believe people fall for this misleading statistic.I'm not surprised Inspiron notebooks (even in the Small Business section) do not offer XP as an option because I never considered Inspirons to be "real" business notebooks. Their features and prices are more oriented toward home users.
I'm very curious about the quality of Lenovo's service/support for their cheaper 3000 series notebooks and desktops, which are not ThinkPad/ThinkCentre models and were released by Lenovo after they acquired IBM's PC division. Their desktop computers page says the 3000 series is "Backed by IBM service and support" (just like ThinkCentre), but I have doubts about Lenovo providing the same level of support for such a low price.
Anyhoo, thanks for your current ThinkPad anecdotes.
Seriously, I don't understand why the GP got modded up. Many Vista performance previews have shown that Vista runs just fine with a single-core 32-bit P4-era CPU. The recommended CPU requirements will not be a problem for the vast majority of PCs bought with Windows XP preinstalled.
What many XP users will want to upgrade to is 1GB+ of memory (many have 512MB) and a DirectX 9 GPU. Compared to Vista's memory and GPU requirements, Vista's CPU requirements are relatively light.
I highly recommend taking a look at processor electrical specifications. And keep in mind that Intel's power figures are more optimistic ("typical") than AMD's ("max").
I don't think we should trust the power "specs" from Intel, AMD, or any source that only focuses on the CPU. If you want to compare power consumption between Core 2 Duo and Athlon 64 X2, I think you should look at total system power consumption with whatever chipsets you plan to use.For example, on the "mainstream" P965 and nForce 590 chipsets, the Core 2 Duo systems consume significantly less power than the Athlon 64 x2 counterparts. Note that the nForce 590 chipset is power-hungry, but NVIDIA chipsets are more popular than ATI chipsets. I cannot find Core 2 Duo vs Athlon 64 x2 benchmarks that use a more power-friendly ATI chipset (I'm sure I've seen one before), but I guess that shows how unpopular ATI chipsets are. I'm sure AMD acquisition will change things.
It's been there for a while, it's becoming quite annoying - I had a 2gb machine 2 years ago and it cost maybe 300$ US, 100$ US in 2 years does not make for a good price drop!
I hear ya. RAM prices are so frickin' unpredictable. I've been hoping for a DDR2 price war similar to the fantastic PC133 price war of November 2001, when the shipping cost of PC133 was higher than the price of the RAM itself (128MB - $5, 256MB - $10).For those that believe "exclusive" studio support and porn is important, HD DVD is exlusively backed by Digital Playground, Wicked Pictures, Pink Visual, Bang Bros, and ClubJenna Inc. (which on 22 June 2006 was acquired by Playboy Enterprises), and HD DVD is also non-exclusively backed by Vivid Entertainment.
Besides, Blu Ray is a better format. 50 GB per disk allows for lower compression ratios and uncompressed multichannel sound. Which has made no difference in video quality so far. Toshiba demonstrated a triple-layer 51GB HD DVD disc at CES this year, so Blu Ray might not be able to exploit this capacity advantage in time. Blu Ray also enjoys much broader industry support, including Apple (which gives you a hint as to what Final Cut / DVD Studio types will be using) and Dell. Apple and Dell will support whichever format wins. Apple exclusively supported DVD-R and not DVD+R. Dell exlusively supported Intel. Also, it's not like there aren't alternatives to Apple and Dell that support HD DVD.It's obvious they will never give "permission" to do this. Their whole business model is based on using OS X as a driving force to sell their hardware with high profit margins.
Note that Apple also "disallows" virualizing OS X on Apple hardware (in OS X). This shouldn't hurt their business model, unless (perhaps) Apple fears that this will lead to ports/hacks for non-Apple hardware.I shouldn't have to explain on Slashdot why anyone would want to virtualize OS X on a Mac running OS X.
Go ahead and mod me down, bitches, but after this tasty tidbit you know I'm probably right.
Are you (and the moderators) suggesting that those internal Microsoft e-mails prove that MS "copied" those features from Apple's early demo of OS X Tiger in 2004? Re-read that article without your anti-MS goggles.Desktop search, video conferencing, sidebar, and Aero were Longhorn/Vista features that were announced by MS long before that impressive Tiger preview at WWDC. Those e-mails show that MS was very impressed by Apple's implementation of already-planned Vista features, not that they were copying them. Since Apple would release Tiger (with these features) before MS could release their long-delayed Vista, Vista's implementations would be directly compared (by reviewer/consumers) to Tiger's implementations.
"Longhorn" Alpha Preview (November 2002)
Except for perhaps Aqua/Aero, none of these features were "copied" from Apple the way Apple fanboys like to claim. At most, they can argue that MS changed their existing implementations of those features to resemble Apple's implementations, but they didn't copy the features themselves.
Not that I'm a proponent of the much-improved WMP 11 on the Windows platform (I prefer foobar2000). But I do like AAC now that Nero has made freely available (for Windows) a very high-quality VBR AAC encoder that's supposedly better than iTunes/Quicktime (which makes very good CBR AAC files). Sure, it's not as "free" as LAME, but Windows users no longer need to install iTunes to encode AAC files.
Well, maybe I'm the only one who wants this. I'm not getting my hopes up. I don't want to depend on my PC to decode FLAC files when a DVD player should be able to do it.
Since my iPod has never, ever in its life seen any files with DRM, it can't be part of any "DRM scheme".
I think you're being pedantic. The GP was talking about DRM in iTunes, not in any files on the iPod. "DRM scheme" is not the best choice of words, but an accepted definition of DRM is "a system of managing digital rights." This system can include how iTunes restricts users from easily transferring MP3 files from iPod to computer.Even if your narrow definition of DRM is accepted, I think everyone on Slashdot knows what he/she was talking about. Apple is limiting functionality to allay the fears of copyright owners. Your files without DRM can still be restricted by a "DRM scheme" if you use iTunes.
Not that anybody's reading this thread anymore.
As in the spyware company WildTangent that gets packaged with a number of apps including AIM? Wish a CREDIBLE developer would have said that, and not them, being from the bottom of the barrel.
Slashdot covered WildTangent's bitching about Vista two weeks ago (this story linked to a less relevantThey can go frick themselves.
This is a decent option for some buyers to consider. I don't see any "system" purchase requirements for the free Vista upgrade from retail versions of XP. For about $190/$280, we can purchase retail versions of XP Home/Pro and get free upgrades to Vista Home Basic/Business. This is about $100/$140 more expensive than the OEM versions, but these retail versions can be transfered to your next computer. If you're planning on changing motherboards before the next version of Windows, then the retail price premium might be worth it.
Unfortunately, XP Media Center Edition is not sold in retail versions and XP Home retail cannot get a free or discounted upgrade to Vista Home Premium.
So when that page says "Receive an Express Upgrade to Windows Vista when you buy a qualifying PC running Windows XP," they are actually referring to an OEM versions of Windows that was preinstalled by the system builder that built that "qualifying PC." They don't mention OEM versions of Windows because that page was meant for normal retail buyers, not system builders, and retail PCs have OEM versions of Windows preinstalled. They don't mention standalone retail boxed versions of Windows XP because they don't qualify (you're supposed to buy a "system").
My description is pretty confusing. A better description of OEM can be found from this Ars Techinca article: Buying OEM versions of Windows Vista: the facts
Actually, there's a retail version of XP + free Vista upgrade. Or at least, a number of vendors are selling it that way. I'm pretty sure (but not absolutley sure) you're mistaken. Every XP + Vista upgrade bundle I've seen has the OEM version of XP (no fancy box, no manual), not the retail version (fancy box). Some online vendors do not make it crystal clear that they're selling an OEM version, but the product description will reveal it's OEM. Hint: if non-upgrade versions of XP Home/Pro are selling for less than $100/$150, then they're OEM versions.I hate linking to an example at an online store, but here's one: Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 SP2b w/Upgrade Coupon for Vista - OEM
I like Newegg, but that page for XP MCE OEM does not say anything about the difference between OEM versions and retail versions. It just has the letters 'OEM' tacked on to the name of the product.
I haven't actually tried to use my coupon yet, so I can't say for certain if it will work, but if it doesn't, I'll have words for the vendor. That seems to be a concern to many buyers on that product's Customer Reviews section (one thing I like about Newegg). Retailers are allowed to sell OEM versions of Windows to "system builders" (which includes home builders), but the description on the Vista upgrade coupon seems to indicate that users might have to prove (send receipts) that, along with the OS, they bought a system (motherboard, CPU, hard drive, memory) to qualify for the free Vista upgrade. I know Newegg did not make this clear a few weeks ago, so I expect them to offer refunds or exchanges to early buyers (they have a good reputation for service).