Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> [I've been reading so many Vista reviews, but this one is different:]
>
> Oh, Good Lord! It's Windows Vista!
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | In conclusion, the experience I just had with Windows Vista has lowered
> | my opinion of Microsoft by 50%. My laptop runs XP and has 512 MB, and
> | it's really fast! Vista's minimum is supposed to be 1 GB, but it should
> | still run at least decently at half of that! But no, it doesn't.
> | Microsoft, you have disappointed me.
> `----
>
>
http://blogs.pcworld.com/communityvoices/archives/2007/09/oh_good_lord_it.html
>
> No wonder Microsoft faces risk of lawsuits over Vista in some countries
> (see below).
>
> Hello, Microsoft? It's Vista: The sky is falling!
>
>
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/09/hello_microsoft.html
"Answer: Microsoft is a forward thinking company. They rarely target
hardware that is current when they design an OS. Rather, they design for
what they believe will be current when the OS ships. In this context, Vista
hits the mark."
Umm....but it *still* needs device drivers for 64bit PCs? Some "forward
thinking" there.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Device-drivers-wanted-for-64-bit-PCs/0,130061733,339280942,00.htm
"In 2003, Advanced Micro Devices released 64-bit chips for PCs in the form
of the Athlon 64,..."
Yes, & *Linux* took advantage of it *four* years ago!
"However, the software needed to take advantage of those chips is hard to
find as there is little incentive to develop applications when there are
few users currently of 64-bit operating systems."
Funny, he must still be talking about M$ SW. I didn't have any trouble
building a machine & then running 64bit SuSE OS & applications.
"Microsoft is requiring those device manufacturers to develop 64-bit drivers
if they want their devices to work with the 64-bit edition of Windows
Vista, in an effort to ensure that device drivers are written to proper
standards."
Ah yes, he *is* talking about M$.
"But hardware vendors and application developers haven't wanted to take the
time and effort to develop new software for an operating system that very
few people use"
Well, l000kee here! Isn't that what the wintrolls keep saying about Linux?
Seems they were mistaken & meant Fista!
"As a result, 64-bit Windows software is hard to find, although Microsoft
says the situation is improving."
Uh, yeah....suure, that's why a lot are going back to eX-Pee.
" As I recall, there were a lot of legacy PCs that couldn't run Windows XP
very well when it first shipped."
Funny, I didn't have any problems running my distro on a "legacy pc"...oh,
but that was *Linux*!!
"However, the "Wintel treadmill" keeps on rolling, Moore's law keeps on
being relevant, and we all keep on upgrading every 18-24 months."
Not all of "us", only the poor "must have" windoze saps who keep buying M$
products in the vain hope that it will be better than the last. Then they
find they have to lash out more money, to upgrade perfectly good equipment
to run it. Still, there should be some good hardware going off cheap for us
Linux users!
The truth about Windows Vista hardware:
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/06/15/windows_vista_hardware/
A comparison: M$ Fista & Linux hardware:
http://www.msversus.org/microsoft-windows-linux-hardware-requirements.html
<snip>
--
Operating systems:
FreeBSD 6.2, Debian 4.0
PCLinuxOS 2007, (K)Ubuntu 7.04
Ubuntu 7.10 "Gutsy" alpha - Tribe 5
|
|
