Lenovo says "no thanks" to Vista for 2008 Olympics
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted August 15th 2007 2:55PM
posted August 15th 2007 2:55PM
[Via Slashdot]
posted August 15th 2007 2:55PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
look i dont wanna sound like a vista hugger or something
but between ubuntu and vista i choose vista.
problem ussually is
a. the drivers.
b. it takes some knowhow to streamline it and take the crap out
Considering that Mac OSX (10.0) was a completely different OS than Mac OS 9, with absolutely nothing in common to it's sibling, what exactly were you trying to prove?
OSX is UNIX/NEXT based, OS 9 was the Apple homegrown OS.
On the other hand, Microsoft has created yet another copy of Windows, trying to rewrite the core, but retain as much backwards compatibility as possible. In doing so has meant a Home Basic edition was required to give older PC's an upgrade path...
So yeah Puma was the first good version of OSX. However it did actually work on hardware that was over 6 years old at the time (see my earlier post), which Vista CANNOT DO!
My only problems with Vista regard trying to interface with older windows OS, like XP and Mobile 2003. . . .with a little bit of work and a few minutes spent downloading both problems were resolved, all in all I think Vista is fine, I don't use all the pretty bells and whistles, I turn off a lot of the 'eye-candy' and just use it as intended as an OS not a computer environment. I open and close progs, I surf the web, I download, I process words and insert functions into my cells. I netwrok and fileshare. . . .
All in all I am just happy that the taskmanager has more info for the running processes so it is much easier to get rid of crap. .. . . HPSYDV.exe - on XP = HPSYDV.exe ,system, 9443K, on Vista HPSYDV.exe = HPSYDV.exe, system, 9443K, 'Hewlitt Packard updater'
(the example used is not 100% accurate butyou hopefully get the point.)
All in all I am pleased with Vista as many more things are simplified and placed in the background from a novice to medium user's standpoint.
I have to say that with computers I don't want to have to know a lot about them in order to efficiently use one. . . having to use regedit is teh suxors. . .
Keep on trucking MS, Apple and everyone else. . . make a computer that requires little time and effort to perform the tasks I do today, and make the OS so intuitive that no one has to go to a community college for two semesters at the age of 45 in order to send an email (not me but I am related to her).
This article is flame bait. Couldn't it just as easily be titled Lenovo says "no thanks" to OSX for 2008 Olympics or Lenovo says "no thanks" to Linux for 2008 Olympics.
It won't work if it's Mac paper (white with an apple in the top right hand corner, embossed on 180 GSM uber deluxe matte paper), and you are using a Microsoft pencil. You need a special pencil sharpener to get the right angle of the pencil. And remember that the paper may not fit in a standard size envelope, you need the special Mac envelopes as well. And don't forget to open an ipost account, USPS won't deliver it unless you have one.
There's a reason why so many people love XP so much: it's simply better. Better than previous Windows versions, better than Vista, and better than Mac OS X (btw, I'm on an OS X Tiger MacBook right now--the only reason I bought it was for 64-bit processing in Leopard). After the bugs were fixed past SP2, XP became, in my opinion, one of the best OSes ever released. It was secure (as secure as a Microsoft product can be, at least), functional, impressively designed, and friendly to use (to an extent).
Vista simply fell short and became a victim of Microsoft's pride and ambitions.
Switch to Macs...eliminate XP and Vista problems. Why shouldn't the Olympics use the best OS?
Tiger will "run" but VERY VERY slowly. You won't get any of the pretty animations either.
Leopard will not run on a G3.
"... a legion of Vista users feel ..." plural verb with singular subject.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that.
I eagerly awaited the arrival of vista and installed it as soon as i received a copy. I wanted to love it, but just last week i have had to reluctantly go back to xp. And boy did i make the right decision. I have a p4 3.0ghz dell dimension 9150 with a gig of ram. Barely a year old. Vista was slow - even right clicking took ages. Opening and moving files took a lifetime. File permissions were screwed - kept saying i did not have permission to delete file even tho its the admin account. Copying files between drives was a complete joke, took ages. Pretty much a waste of time for me until they sort the issues. I really wanted to like it as well and persevered for many months.
What can i say, I re-installed xp and its lightning quick, no messing around. Very much happier with the experience. Vista will be great one day, but its a long way off yet. And dont give me all this about outdated hardware- my pc should be more than capable.
I know you didn't want to hear it, but a 3 ghz P4 is a few years old now, so... Well, I guess it depends on what's important to you. I play lots of games so a processor upgrade was needed for me anyway, and Vista runs great with the hardware I have. But again, this was built for games. I can understand being frustrated with slower performance on a machine that really should be adequate for most tasks.
Vista is a hell of alot quicker than XP if you have the right hardware for it. I have a 5800+ with 2GB's of ram and it is lightning quick. Most people who say there is nothing improved with Vista never actually used it. Superfetch decreases load times dramatically, and while it does interfere with some games, all you have to do is turn it off. Its indexing is really nice too, all i have to do is hit start and type in what i want and it is there by the time I am done typing it.
I used to use Linux, and support it non-stop and bashed microsoft a couple of times. but this past year I realized that Linux fanboys are a bunch of "hippies" that dont listen to reason. I got banned from a Linux forum for simply saying that I prefer windows because of its better hardware support. and I got a whole slew of comments like below:
***actual comments on a simple statement
Its not the OS's fault you buy crappy hardware
GTFO quit blaming the dev's for your problems
quit trolling linux forums (doesnt even make sense since i was in a windows section)
Dev's work for free, and Microsoft has a monopoly so that is why there is no support, just leave and use your windows
I was like wtf, when i read these comments. These are the same people that everyday bash microsoft based on rumors and FUD, and they cant even take one comment, that wasnt even negative?! BSD is better because they exist to create a quality OS, not to compete with microsoft. Now i can see why people use windows, its because people at Microsoft and their users can take critisism. every time microsoft has a good number to report the comments are filled with "thats a lie those bastards", but if apple says they sold a million iphones on the first day you hear "wooo go apple, take that microsucks". its kind of crazy.
erm... I use XP and pretty much weekly have glitches and problems that seem to just arise from nowhere. By NO means a stable environment IMO. Short of spending an extra $2000 for a similar Mac setup, that wont run 1/2 of the software I use -unless running XP on the Mac, in which case it comes down to hardware...
XP is crap and yet still the best out there, for music production anyway.
Mac also has its glitches, is highly overpriced and wont run 75% of software.
Vista will not run any of the production software I have.
XP is the only choice.
Do you remember a few years back when we were having the same lame arguments of 2k over XP?
Exactly. What great new features did XP add? Visual styles and cleartype? Yet the initial release of XP was relatively buggy and sluggish compared to Windows 2000, and had tons of security problems.
But here we are 5 years later and everyone says XP is the best Windows ever, and Vista will always suck.
Yes, Vista does have its share of issues - the recent "fix packs" are proof of that, but the main
problem with Vista is that Microsoft changed so much under the hood to progress the Windows platform that it broke compatibility with a large portion of hardware and software (a sad, but necessary evil to move forward), without giving users enough visible features to justify dealing with the reduced compatibility.
Eventually the remaining Vista issues will be fixed, hardware and software compatibility will rise, and then the cost of upgrading to Vista (reduced compatibility) will no longer outweigh the (admittedly few) surface benefits, and people will slowly migrate over, just as they did with XP...
So just for? Cheaper and running in a mature and stable system!