|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TACH
Retired Number
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 28461
Location: Chillin on the Delaware.. from the Jersey Side
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: Microsoft Vista Ships November 30... |
|
|
| Quote: | Microsoft officially announced it will launch its long-awaited and overdue Vista operating system on November 30, but for corporate customers only. The rest of us heathen consumers will have to wait until the rumored January 30, 2007 date before we can get our paws on the final code. A Microsoft spokesperson also confirmed that Microsoft Office would also be released on November 30.
The big launch event will be held on November 30 at the NASDAQ Stock Market in midtown Manhattan and the Marriott Marquis in Times Square. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer will reportedly be there, and it was unconfirmed whether he would be jumping up and down wildly, screaming and yelling.
STORY |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Exick
Site Staff
Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 15880
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I always find it slightly amusing that corporate customers seem to get new versions of Windows first. It's been my experience that corporations (at least the somewhat biggers ones) tend to not be on the leading edge of upgrades. Where I work, they are just now moving people off of NT 4 and Windows 2000 and onto XP. Vista seems like a long way off.
_________________
Game recognize game, Granddad. - Riley Freeman, The Boondocks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Socks
Franchise Player
Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 10761
Location: Bay Area, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Exick wrote: | | I always find it slightly amusing that corporate customers seem to get new versions of Windows first. It's been my experience that corporations (at least the somewhat biggers ones) tend to not be on the leading edge of upgrades. Where I work, they are just now moving people off of NT 4 and Windows 2000 and onto XP. Vista seems like a long way off. |
True. It's more of a marketing thing to make big corporate buyers feel special regardless of whether they are actually deploying immediately or not. Plus, Microsoft works with a lot of big companies in beta-ing the pre-release versions, so it's their way of thanking them for going through that (often-times) painful process with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakez34
Star Player
Joined: 24 Apr 2001
Posts: 6119
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Also certain corporations specfically require features unavailable in current product releases. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeDunk
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 26849
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whats Vista gonna have ? updates? upgrades? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
20,000
Retired Number
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 29999
Location: Likely nowhere near you
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeDunk wrote: | | Whats Vista gonna have ? updates? upgrades? |
More bugs, viruses, crashes, *blue screens of death*
I kid, my laptop has not had a blue screen since I have XP now
_________________
Courage doesn't always roar.
Sometimes courage is the quiet voice at the end of the day saying...'I will try again tomorrow.' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersfreak
Franchise Player
Joined: 11 Apr 2001
Posts: 12389
Location: Riverside Rescue
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeDunk wrote: | | Whats Vista gonna have ? updates? upgrades? |
Security is supposed to be a big thing, also the screens are sort of transparent so you can see screens behind the screen you are on.
WIKI has it covered
_________________
Forget carbon, reduce your government footprint |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Drifts
Retired Number
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 28401
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know what else to put on Vista that's not on XP...the transparent screens, I have that already
_________________
"Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PWiddy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Nov 2004
Posts: 287
Location: NC!!!
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| i just wish my system would run it. I have a feeling it will be a memory HOG. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakez34
Star Player
Joined: 24 Apr 2001
Posts: 6119
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vista's RC Beta's have had some memory use issues and I have a feeling it may remain the same. I personally haven't liked it on the computer I ran it on (but I also wasn't getting the AERO interface because my graphics card couldn't support it, and that's a big part of the user experience).
I ran it on an Athlon 1.67 Ghz machine with 1 GB of RAM and a 64MB Nvidia graphics card (which isn't sufficient to run the Aero user interface).
Prior to installing, it made me install my OLD version of Norton. No biggie.
Upon running it, the user interface was much nicer looking. The biggest improvements, in terms of usability, may be its user interface - easier to navigate through Windows Explorer, search - you can search for anything on your computer in a matter of seconds and the new Windows Gallery - think Google's Picasa, but much more integrated into the system.
In terms of memory use, IE7 is a major memory hog in comparison to Firefox 2. The Alt+Tab with the Flip 3d option, which allows for you to flip through programs while seeing a screenshot of each program that's running, also utilizes a large amount of memory. You can, however, turn that off and run the regular Alt+Tab option.
The bad:
1. May be a memory hog. Don't even consider attempting to run it with less than 1GB of RAM (I think that's its minimum system requirements).
2. No noticeable value gain for the consumer. The features noted above are great, but for myself, not worth the hassles of upgrading.
3. A bit obnoxious in terms of forcing me to remove programs, and even after installing, noting that my computer does not meet all of Vista's performance requirements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhengi
Star Player
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakez34 wrote: | Vista's RC Beta's have had some memory use issues and I have a feeling it may remain the same. I personally haven't liked it on the computer I ran it on (but I also wasn't getting the AERO interface because my graphics card couldn't support it, and that's a big part of the user experience).
I ran it on an Athlon 1.67 Ghz machine with 1 GB of RAM and a 64MB Nvidia graphics card (which isn't sufficient to run the Aero user interface).
Prior to installing, it made me install my OLD version of Norton. No biggie.
Upon running it, the user interface was much nicer looking. The biggest improvements, in terms of usability, may be its user interface - easier to navigate through Windows Explorer, search - you can search for anything on your computer in a matter of seconds and the new Windows Gallery - think Google's Picasa, but much more integrated into the system.
In terms of memory use, IE7 is a major memory hog in comparison to Firefox 2. The Alt+Tab with the Flip 3d option, which allows for you to flip through programs while seeing a screenshot of each program that's running, also utilizes a large amount of memory. You can, however, turn that off and run the regular Alt+Tab option.
The bad:
1. May be a memory hog. Don't even consider attempting to run it with less than 1GB of RAM (I think that's its minimum system requirements).
2. No noticeable value gain for the consumer. The features noted above are great, but for myself, not worth the hassles of upgrading.
3. A bit obnoxious in terms of forcing me to remove programs, and even after installing, noting that my computer does not meet all of Vista's performance requirements. |
I think you pretty much covered everything here. The biggest upgrade is security and if there is a major push to go to Vista, then many programs will be coded specifically for that OS.
Another advantage is for those who are gamers. DirectX 10 is said to be only for Vista and that should increase gaming experience.
Other than these, I just don't feel the need to upgrade to a more expensive computer just for the graphics and interface that Vista offers. Maybe in 2-4 years when computer hardware becomes less expensive will Vista become worth it.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Town
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 25604
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
man...I never received my beta CD.  and I took the damn test too  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postandpivot
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | lakez34 wrote: | Vista's RC Beta's have had some memory use issues and I have a feeling it may remain the same. I personally haven't liked it on the computer I ran it on (but I also wasn't getting the AERO interface because my graphics card couldn't support it, and that's a big part of the user experience).
I ran it on an Athlon 1.67 Ghz machine with 1 GB of RAM and a 64MB Nvidia graphics card (which isn't sufficient to run the Aero user interface).
Prior to installing, it made me install my OLD version of Norton. No biggie.
Upon running it, the user interface was much nicer looking. The biggest improvements, in terms of usability, may be its user interface - easier to navigate through Windows Explorer, search - you can search for anything on your computer in a matter of seconds and the new Windows Gallery - think Google's Picasa, but much more integrated into the system.
In terms of memory use, IE7 is a major memory hog in comparison to Firefox 2. The Alt+Tab with the Flip 3d option, which allows for you to flip through programs while seeing a screenshot of each program that's running, also utilizes a large amount of memory. You can, however, turn that off and run the regular Alt+Tab option.
The bad:
1. May be a memory hog. Don't even consider attempting to run it with less than 1GB of RAM (I think that's its minimum system requirements).
2. No noticeable value gain for the consumer. The features noted above are great, but for myself, not worth the hassles of upgrading.
3. A bit obnoxious in terms of forcing me to remove programs, and even after installing, noting that my computer does not meet all of Vista's performance requirements. |
I think you pretty much covered everything here. The biggest upgrade is security and if there is a major push to go to Vista, then many programs will be coded specifically for that OS.
Another advantage is for those who are gamers. DirectX 10 is said to be only for Vista and that should increase gaming experience.
Other than these, I just don't feel the need to upgrade to a more expensive computer just for the graphics and interface that Vista offers. Maybe in 2-4 years when computer hardware becomes less expensive will Vista become worth it. |
hardware is already less expensive for newer computers with newer cpu's.
my system running a 3.2ht p4 has nothing on the new core2duo processors. and thats what you will need to run Vista properly. and like the other guy said. 2 gigs of ram. not one. one is a minimum, if you run something else memory heavy you will already be taking from virt.memory. get 2 gigs minimum. memory is cheap anyway.
but a computer with all the new hardware out is about the same price i paid to build mine a year and change ago. so its time to upgrade. seems to soon. but since that core2duo hit the stands. its so far ahead of what you're currently working with it aint even funny. its not a slight difference. its a huge difference, as long as you have the correct motherboard and enough ram. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakez34
Star Player
Joined: 24 Apr 2001
Posts: 6119
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Of course the right hardware will make Vista a much more worthwhile upgrade.
But in terms of a common user, who's been using a computer that's run very smoothly with XP to perform common tasks using the Office suite, limited photo-editing and some music organizing, the upgrade doesn't seem worth the extra expenses.
I used to be all for installing the latest and greatest product on my machine and upgrading it accordingly with the appropriate hardware, but I can honestly say I'm very happy with XP on my older machine and I'm pretty sure there are a number of others who are in a similar situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
