Farmers Markets And Farm Shops
Shopping & Style0 min ago
windows vista
Nobody seems to like windows vista---Why????
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by leylander. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's too processor and memory intensive, uses too much hard drive space, their is not enough hardware compatibility, Microsoft have done their normal trick of moving things about just a little bit so you have to hunt down settings (to be fair the last one people will get used to) and a lot of the drivers that are available for vista have been rushed out and have problems (that ones not really MS's fault)
That said it is by far the most secure version of windows yet and they have finally stopped letting everything run as an administrator and now most stuff runs in user mode
And so says the Linux user ;)
That said it is by far the most secure version of windows yet and they have finally stopped letting everything run as an administrator and now most stuff runs in user mode
And so says the Linux user ;)
I think it is too strong to say "nobody" likes it. I have seen many people say the like it a lot.
I think my main gripe with it is that an operating system should just sit quietly in the background and help you do your work (rather like an engine in a car). You should hardly notice it is there.
But Vista seems to shout at you all the time "look at me, aren't I amazing", and "are you sure you want to do that"
I think they got it just right with Windows XP; fairly secure, fairly easy to use, and just sits quietly in the background helping you to get your work done.
I think my main gripe with it is that an operating system should just sit quietly in the background and help you do your work (rather like an engine in a car). You should hardly notice it is there.
But Vista seems to shout at you all the time "look at me, aren't I amazing", and "are you sure you want to do that"
I think they got it just right with Windows XP; fairly secure, fairly easy to use, and just sits quietly in the background helping you to get your work done.
I think they rushed it out a bit too quick - a lot of software is not compatible with it and there don't seem to be any *solutions* yet.... still lots of bugs too...
I think MS are hoping that we will be the testers here and report back problems to them, so that they only *fix* the essential stuff.
lol at Chuck - this woman here was brought up on Unix !
I think MS are hoping that we will be the testers here and report back problems to them, so that they only *fix* the essential stuff.
lol at Chuck - this woman here was brought up on Unix !
But Vista seems to shout at you all the time "look at me, aren't I amazing", and "are you sure you want to do that"
No that's the good thing about vista... it wont let you or the system run things without asking you first... it's called security.. it's what linux has been doing since day one XP was not even close to secure until at least service pack2 (and even then it was doubtful!)
To there credit MS are making huge strides towards making a secure OS with vista and bongoboy if you've turned off UAC then you have instantly undone most of this progress.
Vista was rushed (haha rushed.. how many years did they have!!) out and it had many flaws but these are getting sorted.
I stand by what I said that it is far too resource intensive, mainly due to the fancy visual effects they think people want... personally I would rather my OS sat quietly in the background and done it's job and not try to impress me by looking really fancy, but if anything tries to change a system setting then tell me!!.
Give it a little time and vista will be the best OS that MS have released by far.... but at the moment it can cause more problems then it solves!
No that's the good thing about vista... it wont let you or the system run things without asking you first... it's called security.. it's what linux has been doing since day one XP was not even close to secure until at least service pack2 (and even then it was doubtful!)
To there credit MS are making huge strides towards making a secure OS with vista and bongoboy if you've turned off UAC then you have instantly undone most of this progress.
Vista was rushed (haha rushed.. how many years did they have!!) out and it had many flaws but these are getting sorted.
I stand by what I said that it is far too resource intensive, mainly due to the fancy visual effects they think people want... personally I would rather my OS sat quietly in the background and done it's job and not try to impress me by looking really fancy, but if anything tries to change a system setting then tell me!!.
Give it a little time and vista will be the best OS that MS have released by far.... but at the moment it can cause more problems then it solves!
Don't hold your breath on that one Mark, there are rumours abound that Microsoft have already given up on Vista, Large companies like Boeing and GM have refused to accept it on there systems.
That has prompted (according to rumour) them to leave a skeleton crew keeping vista running, till they release their OS 7.
Who knows for sure, but Vista isn't what they hoped it would be, they haven't learnt a thing from XP's initial release. What's the chances of making their new system Open Source? To let decent programmers help.
That last sentence was a joke BTW...lol
That has prompted (according to rumour) them to leave a skeleton crew keeping vista running, till they release their OS 7.
Who knows for sure, but Vista isn't what they hoped it would be, they haven't learnt a thing from XP's initial release. What's the chances of making their new system Open Source? To let decent programmers help.
That last sentence was a joke BTW...lol
Very true, but with the likes of the Asus Eee PC being released with Linux, and it's competitive price. The flood gates may open soon.
It's human nature to stick with what feels comfortable, and since MS has pumped the market full of their OS for years, it will take time for the masses to accept change.
But with the current financial situation, people will start looking for a bargain, and Linux is certainly that. I see open source as the future, as long as people are informed and educated that they have a choice.
When Linux becomes idiot proof (I.E. does away with the need to understand Terminal) then it will be the death knoll of MS.
It's human nature to stick with what feels comfortable, and since MS has pumped the market full of their OS for years, it will take time for the masses to accept change.
But with the current financial situation, people will start looking for a bargain, and Linux is certainly that. I see open source as the future, as long as people are informed and educated that they have a choice.
When Linux becomes idiot proof (I.E. does away with the need to understand Terminal) then it will be the death knoll of MS.
I'll try my best Icey, but i'm quite new to linux myself.
Firstly, apologies to those who know better than i, this is just my version.
Microsoft is a big business ran for profit, and all the code they put into there programs is secret. They have used their money and influence to get their operating system place on all new PC's.
Most usual users of a PC think that it can only operate with a MS operating system, that is wrong. The PC runs via it's BIOS, the OS you place on it (Windows, Linux etc) is up to the user. But most users only ever get the option of a Microsoft OS.
In the 90's a Finnish man called Linus Torvalds gathered together information already written on the UNIX based system to start LINUX. Linux is like a Microsoft OS but all the information about how it works is free for anyone to manipulate and improve.
TBC
Firstly, apologies to those who know better than i, this is just my version.
Microsoft is a big business ran for profit, and all the code they put into there programs is secret. They have used their money and influence to get their operating system place on all new PC's.
Most usual users of a PC think that it can only operate with a MS operating system, that is wrong. The PC runs via it's BIOS, the OS you place on it (Windows, Linux etc) is up to the user. But most users only ever get the option of a Microsoft OS.
In the 90's a Finnish man called Linus Torvalds gathered together information already written on the UNIX based system to start LINUX. Linux is like a Microsoft OS but all the information about how it works is free for anyone to manipulate and improve.
TBC
MS has say 10,000 people programming for them (just a random number) but Linux can have everybody that has access to a computer programming for them. Having millions programming can be a benefit when it comes to understanding, but it's negative comes to having a final decision on how things should be.
It's a great system, but it's not always easy for the novice to understand. Or for a tipsy bloke at 3am to explain.
That is my explanation, the best i can do at 3am. sorry.
It's a great system, but it's not always easy for the novice to understand. Or for a tipsy bloke at 3am to explain.
That is my explanation, the best i can do at 3am. sorry.
When you switch on your PC, the odds are you are running a MS system, unless you use a Mac. IE means Internet Explorer, Microsofts Internet Browser (The part of their program you use to access the internet) Google isn't a browser (yet, but i'm sure they will have their own one soon) Do you use Firefox then?
"When Linux becomes idiot proof (I.E. does away with the need to understand Terminal) then it will be the death knoll of MS."
You should try Ubuntu Linux. I have it on my second machine. Except for software development, there is nothing I can do on my Windows machine that I can't do as easily (or more easily) on the Ubuntu machine. What's more every item of software on that machine is 100% legal, 100% free, and (in most cases) better supported than the paid-for products on my Windows machine.
"Then just turn the UAC off like i have."
Ubuntu also has the equivalent of UAC, but it manages to implement it without the singing-dancing-whistling-wow!-I'm so-wonderful! style of Vista.
Insiders in the Vista development team have admitted that there was a "war" between the bells-and-whistles brigade and the enhanced functionality bots, and that the BandWs won.
Microsoft have already announced a tentative release date for what they are calling "Windows 7", and if that ain't an admission that something went horribly wrong, I don't know what is...
You should try Ubuntu Linux. I have it on my second machine. Except for software development, there is nothing I can do on my Windows machine that I can't do as easily (or more easily) on the Ubuntu machine. What's more every item of software on that machine is 100% legal, 100% free, and (in most cases) better supported than the paid-for products on my Windows machine.
"Then just turn the UAC off like i have."
Ubuntu also has the equivalent of UAC, but it manages to implement it without the singing-dancing-whistling-wow!-I'm so-wonderful! style of Vista.
Insiders in the Vista development team have admitted that there was a "war" between the bells-and-whistles brigade and the enhanced functionality bots, and that the BandWs won.
Microsoft have already announced a tentative release date for what they are calling "Windows 7", and if that ain't an admission that something went horribly wrong, I don't know what is...
The guy in charge of the Vista project resigned the day it was released. It was a hard slog rewriting an OS from the ground up. Most of Microsoft's employees are over it because of all the problems and delays getting it to release. Many of the engineers have either left to work somewhere else or are more interested in working on new projects like Server 2008.
Microsoft is already dropping hnts about bringing forward the next OS schedule to as soon as late 2009. Given MS previous performance this should see it relaease by the end of 2010.
XP was based on a pedigreed line of OSs going back to Windows NT. It had its roots in the days when there wasn't vast processing power available so it was written to be efficient. Hence it doesn't need a computer 2GB of memory to work well.
Microsoft is already dropping hnts about bringing forward the next OS schedule to as soon as late 2009. Given MS previous performance this should see it relaease by the end of 2010.
XP was based on a pedigreed line of OSs going back to Windows NT. It had its roots in the days when there wasn't vast processing power available so it was written to be efficient. Hence it doesn't need a computer 2GB of memory to work well.
"XP was based on a pedigreed line of OSs going back to Windows NT"
Actually, it goes back further than that. NT was what MS decided to call OS/2 after they split with IBM. IBM and MS developed OS/2 jointly. After the split, IBM rewrote the front end (an interface that was later extensively copied by MS when they introduced W95). IBM went on to call their version OS/2 Warp, and MS called theirs, Windows NT.
Actually, it goes back further than that. NT was what MS decided to call OS/2 after they split with IBM. IBM and MS developed OS/2 jointly. After the split, IBM rewrote the front end (an interface that was later extensively copied by MS when they introduced W95). IBM went on to call their version OS/2 Warp, and MS called theirs, Windows NT.
One of the reasons there are "problems" with Windows Vista is that its development process was complex, flawed and disrupted.
In fact just read this small section here on Vista development to see why there were so many poblems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#Dev elopment
It seems the confusion betwen the Longhorn project and the Blackcomb project started the problems.
Then the fact that as late as 2004 everything they had been working on they threw away then started again did not help.
I think Vista is the result of that complex and flawed development process.
In fact just read this small section here on Vista development to see why there were so many poblems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#Dev elopment
It seems the confusion betwen the Longhorn project and the Blackcomb project started the problems.
Then the fact that as late as 2004 everything they had been working on they threw away then started again did not help.
I think Vista is the result of that complex and flawed development process.
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
Crosswords6 mins ago
News6 mins ago
News7 mins ago
Why Are Labour Trying To Shield The...
News7 mins ago
