different versions of Vista?

|CoR|Braveheart said:
I am not going to get my new PC parts for another 6 months so Vista will probably be a little better by then. i just needed to know what the difference's were with both of the packages.
Click to expand...

Microsoft doesn't improve with time, I hate when they update, something somewhere is going to break. One day a server auto updated and it screwed up a bunch of DCOM settings and I had to go through and try to debug the dang thing, ended up having a critical downtime where neither marketing nor the workers were able to access information without asking one of the engineers to pull up a map.

They also like to just copy code over without looking if it will break current functionality. They basically copied over the add/remove programs from xp into 2k and never even bothered to look that that traditionally had the only way to make boot disks, and they didn't provide any other ways to do it from what I could tell.

They also like to copy over *BSD code and shove it into their programs, since it is royalty free. The entire networking stack is based on old *BSD code, and has been hacked together since then..
 
Ahh...the whole BSD thing...wow...I remember that...that is what STOPPED the "ping-of-death", but now that they tried from scratch with Vista, and didn't steal code, they screwed it up again...no surprise...even though they still stole code...lol...anyone see them get sued by Apple for a few million? MS paid to keep it under raps...
 
XionTawa said:
Ahh...the whole BSD thing...wow...I remember that...that is what STOPPED the "ping-of-death", but now that they tried from scratch with Vista, and didn't steal code, they screwed it up again...no surprise...even though they still stole code...lol...anyone see them get sued by Apple for a few million? MS paid to keep it under raps...
Click to expand...

Yep, MS has enough money to do so.
 
If you want to screw up a windows network, all you need is:

- Crossover cable
- Ethernet hub with no collision detection (very easy to make if you don't have one lying around but it has limited range)
- 2 Ethernet cables
- Dumb windows PC

It is funny to see how bad windows slows down, you can't do anything at all until you unplug it.
 
|CoR|Braveheart said:
I am not going to get my new PC parts for another 6 months so Vista will probably be a little better by then. i just needed to know what the difference's were with both of the packages.
Click to expand...

I HIGHLY suggest looking at Ubuntu. They are making great strides in the Linux world, and it runs great. Since the last time I used it, they've made tremendous progress. It's now quicker and slicker than ever.
 
I use fedora, mostly because I am used to the administration on red hat based systems.

Compiz rocks, windows users don't know what they are missing :p
 
vibrokatana said:
I use fedora, mostly because I am used to the administration on red hat based systems.

Compiz rocks, windows users don't know what they are missing :p
Click to expand...

Maybe with my second build i will use Linux. but this will be my first build and only the second computer i have had, so what i am getting at is i do not want to experiment with anything. i want to stay pretty cheap and stay with what i atleast kinda know.
 
I never got into Linux much, played with Ubuntu and Fedora Core, but I like point and click EVERYTHING...because I could not figure out how to install anything...
 
snappy of gui installer that comes with fedora

or you can use the yum command, which is very nice:

list packages matching string
# yum search string
install and remove junk
# yum install packagename
# yum remove packagename

in ubuntu the apt-get command is pretty easy to use, basically the same but you can replace search with list.

They have pretty much stupified everything so that anybody could use it, look in the wikis as they contain step by step instructions that can help you do what you want. Most people only run into problems when they refuse to ask for help or look for it.
 
I've just recently installed (as in less than a week ago) openSUSE 10.3. I really like YaST. I really like... well, there isn't much I don't like. Its not as easy to get proprietary codecs as Ubuntu was, but I don't hold that against them at all.

And I'm now in KDE land. :rolleyes:
 
vibrokatana said:
OEM has to be purchased with computer hardware IIRC, you pay more for the pretty packaging.
Click to expand...

Since I'm blatantly not going to read all 4 pages... :)

You also pay more for the abillity to move the license from machine to machine. With an OEM license, the OS is tied to the machine it's initially installed on, and *legally* you're not allowed to move it, e.g. if you sell the machine, it HAS to have the installation media and the license sticker on the box and you can't use it again or if you build a new one...you can't just re-install there.

You're also paying for support calls (no support with OEM versions) and getting both 32 bit and 64 bit versions rather than just one with the OEM.
 
Last edited:
vibrokatana said:
They also like to copy over *BSD code and shove it into their programs, since it is royalty free. The entire networking stack is based on old *BSD code, and has been hacked together since then..
Click to expand...

err...the networking stack in Vista was completely re-written and moved off of that code base, for better or worse

the only thing i've noticed that I don't like is it slows down when copying 2GB+ files, presumably because it's using buffered I/O which there is a workaround for...you know, if you happen to have a copy of Exchange laying around (I do!!!). aside from that, I get typical expected bandwidths on a 1GB connection when copying files.
 
vibrokatana said:
Why exactly would anyone want vista? It drives me nuts whenever I have to work on a vista burdened machine.

The upgrade thing is pretty funny though, quality software...
Click to expand...



/cough more secure than OS/X? (see CERT filings for reference...)

Better UI / Aero

new start menu is vastly improved

greater management capabilities in a domain

built-in machine imaging

improved restore point management

"previous versions" of files without being on a domain

CableCard (OCUR)

DirectX 10

Desktop search

Media Center is built in...and oh...can be on a domain finally!

An excuse to buy new hardware, even though it wasn't really needed...but, I mean...DX 10 games amirite?


RE the upgrade hole...that capability is provided to enable trial / operation without a key for a certain period of time...exploiting it for the purposes of saving a few bucks is a bit...well...sketchy, to put it nicely, and isn't something that should be promoted. i would suggest buying OEM and getting some new hardware out of it at least (which may be cheaper in some cases anyway as long as you don't need support or 32 AND 64 bit versions)

I don't think it would be too unreasonable to expect them to patch that and you suddenly finding yourself with a limited OS at some point...or be unable to receive new patches / SPs.
 
nattyg said:
Since I'm blatantly not going to read all 4 pages... :)

You also pay more for the abillity to move the license from machine to machine. With an OEM license, the OS is tied to the machine it's initially installed on, and *legally* you're not allowed to move it, e.g. if you sell the machine, it HAS to have the installation media and the license sticker on the box and you can't use it again or if you build a new one...you can't just re-install there.

You're also paying for support calls (no support with OEM versions) and getting both 32 bit and 64 bit versions rather than just one with the OEM.
Click to expand...
hence why you don't attach the sticker. When you move the installation jsut call ms and tell them you had to replace the mobo..they'll reactivate for you.
 
nattyg said:
err...the networking stack in Vista was completely re-written and moved off of that code base, for better or worse
Click to expand...

XionTawa said:
Ahh...the whole BSD thing...wow...I remember that...that is what STOPPED the "ping-of-death", but now that they tried from scratch with Vista, and didn't steal code, they screwed it up again...no surprise...even though they still stole code...lol...anyone see them get sued by Apple for a few million? MS paid to keep it under raps...
Click to expand...

Apple sued them for stealing code from OSX...However, Apple let them use the code after MS paid Apple millions so that nothing would be said, and so that Vista wouldn't go to crap...

I understand that OS choice is personal preference, but if you look at facts surrounding Vista, it is a slew of problems, and the fact that most the UI was stolen, and how completely UNSTABLE it is...like all other MS OSs...

...and I am NOT a Mac user...
 
nattyg said:
/cough more secure than OS/X? (see CERT filings for reference...)

Better UI / Aero

new start menu is vastly improved

greater management capabilities in a domain

built-in machine imaging

improved restore point management

"previous versions" of files without being on a domain

CableCard (OCUR)

DirectX 10

Desktop search

Media Center is built in...and oh...can be on a domain finally!
Click to expand...

It is NO WHERE near more secure than OSX (PING-OF-DEATH)

The UI code was stolen

Start menu too simple, nothing advanced about it...

greater management capabilities in a domain - ehh...nothing to disagree with...

I have built in machine imaging on my Media Center Edition XP...

System Restore is a joke by any means...first then to go when I get a new PC...

"previous versions" of files without being on a domain - Not sure what you mean...

Cable Card?

You know, I use DX9, and I have seen DX10, and I see NO difference...but I also push 60 FPS on everything anyway...

I also have a desktop search...

I have Media Center Edition, and to be blunt, Media Center SUCKS...it is the worst multimedia setup I have ever seen...



I am not trying to be mean, or say "YOU'RE WRONG!", I am just pointing out what I think and know against what you have said...

...This is my opinion...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top