
Maybe you're running a six-year old pirated copy of XP because you still don't trust Vista -- "I'm waiting on one more Service Pack, just to be extra sure," you say. If that's the case, you might have to come up with a new excuse soon: Mary Jo Foley over at ZDNet is reporting that a beta build of Vista Service Pack 2 is already in the hands of some software and hardware partners, and that Microsoft intends to deliver both Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2 before it launches Windows 7 --
err, 6.1, no wait, yeah let's go with 7 -- which it supposedly
hopes to release June 3rd of next year. At present we know very little about SP2's features, but we're sure you have
a few ideas.
I love how Engaget are so blatantly Apple fanboys. They don't even try to hide it. They wear their rainbow colored Apple shirts with pride while trying to find a way to provide NON-BIASED news... err editorials.. err no news. Which is it Steve-Jobknobbers?
Been using Vista since it came out, runs fine. Never once crashed on me.
I had my computer for for 2 weeks coming in and out of sleep mode and it was fine.
Im glad no one so far has mentioned "The Fruit Company" for once so far...
Spoke to soon :(
Hey ... FreeBSD is not a fruit ... oh wait .. you mean the FreeBSD rip-off... ah yes... "the fruit company" ...
Fruit of The Loom makes great underwear and their white briefs are a top choice amongst Engadget readers. Don't throw comments just like that or you might offend a few of our most frequent visitors.
You know I used come to engadget for their brilliant gadget news but I find that I'm switching to gizmodo more and more with far less apple posts and far less jobknobbers. Bye engadget. I'll come back when Steve jobs dies and apple becomes just another company.
And did anyone notice the engadget podcast was more or less about apple in its entirety.
See you later alligator! remember to get a few ipods for the kids during the holidays! very nice peppy colors!!
I have Vista on a newer maching and XP SP2 on an older machine. Difference with Vista? None that I have noticed. Not better, but did not support my printer or some of my older software titles. Not faster or anything that makes a difference. If the vendor had a choice for XP when I bought I would not have Vista today. If anything all the DRM just makes it less friendly!
WHAT DRM??????
I keep hearing this thrown around when insulting Vista.
WHAT D R M???
@Ruben -
What do you mean what DRM? Vista has so much!
haha no I joke I joke I kid I kid...
time for some MadLibs!!
"If anything all the ***** just makes it less friendly!"
In this case the ***** is a computer acronym... I'm assuming it was a choice between DRM and HDD for this one....I wouldve personally filled in the blank with LOL or some sort of emoticon like :-]... but thats what makes MadLibs so fun you never know what someone will say....
speaking of DRM I hate when my HTML decides to HDMI to the point where the WTF makes me replace the SSD!!...
give it a while see what crazy MadLibs you can come up with...
I know I'm a bit of a doucher but way too often acronyms are being dropped on Engadget where they have no place belonging... (I'm good for a chuckle usually though....)
Bring it on Microsoft.
"Windows 7" makes it sound like another update. Boring . . .
oh well, as long as the OS itself is good, I'll gladly pirate it!
Ive had Vista home premium for a year now and ive had no problems. It does exactly what Windows XP does, though I must admit start up times and hibernation times are a lot longer.
Maybe you had it running on a Pentium 2 machine :D
Now more linux distrubutions will be downloaded as a result of, lol.
I have a Netgear NAS Duo at home and downgarded to XP from Vista because there was a world of difference in file access/copy/move speeds to and from my NAS device. Even with SP1 on Vista basic functionality with files is still SLOWWW...
So you are saying that Netgear was the problem. I agree! Netgear's products are a freakin joke. You should have upgarded the NAS instead of downgarding your OS.
@Jizzag I noticed that file transfer wasnt so good with Vista, but the problem went for me when I upgraded to SP1.
Hey, do you guys think that maybe Vista seems to run slower as more people use laptops these days than desktops. Ive never used vista on a desktop before. I wonder how it will run on a top of the range alienware or XPS desktop with 1600Mhz Bus etc?
I mean laptops are and have been a little bit behind desktops in terms of speed. They are catching up fast though, just a thought :)
vista sp2 = windows 7 ;-)
Love the fact that they wrote pirated copy of XP! OMG, thats so me, for 6 years... how the hell did they know.. Hell no to Vista.. I tried it once, i had to restart from scratch!
Love the fact that they wrote pirated copy of XP! OMG, thats so me, for 6 years... how the hell did they know.. Hell no to Vista.. I tried it once, i had to restart from scratch!
You know if you had Vista, there would be no doublepost. ;)
well i dont know what yall are talking about stable, ive tried to install vista on 3 different machines. got a blue screen every 15min running it on one, and the other wouldnt even install. ill stick to XP component for component XP wins performance wise hands down. like someone else stated the gaming test isnt valid, considering vista was designed with games in mind XP on the other hand wasnt. just from the look of vista you can clearly see business individuals werent in mind when it was designed. it looks as though they based the design on what looks pretty and not what functions. not to mention ive seen linux distros run cooler looking stuff, and eat up 1/4 of the resources as vista does. they tried to dumb the operating system down when they made the switch for the average user but doing so caused the typical enthusiast to get lost in the rearrange. at least the switch from 98 to XP you could still find everything you needed. now in the control panel there is probably about twice as many icons to sort through.
When I first started with Vista, my computer wasn't good enough for it and it sucked a·s. Then I upgraded my hardware and it's perfect: I have gotten about 5 BSODs in the more than a year I've been using it, and those are usually because of shitty drivers from manufacturers . When I switched from 98 to XP, before I put it in classic mode the control panel was all f-ed up. I don't see why everyone thinks that the keystone of innovation is keeping everything the same. New features require learning, and if they find a way to simplify something for a FIRST TIME USER, then more power too them. Plus your brain needs stimulation, learn a language and upgrade to Vista!
its not my hardware trust me. my entire system was built after vista was released, its all up to date stuff.
4gb ram
5 sata HDD
DVD burner
8800gtx
sound blaster xfi
e8650
so defiantly not something old enough to not be compatible with vista.
i cant justify upgrading to vista at this time from my system, granted it will run it just fine.
Do you have a Samsung DVD burner?
Vista is so expenisve if Microsoft knows it will just last for 2 years........................
I am deeply regret to buy an Ultimate...............
Vista is nice if you have a nice machine, but yeah, they rip you off buying ultimate.
It's actually slower that Business...
I've not had a single problem implementing Vista into our existing network. Outside of upping the RAM on user's machines (From 1GB to 2GB which is inexpensive) it has performed very well, and the response has been positive. I am currently testing Windows 7 as a side project for possible implementation in the future, and I will be one to admit that I like what I have seen so far of Windows 7. True, it's not completed yet but I have a feeling that the final product will be good for the masses.
As a network administrator of a multi-platform environment, (XP, Vista, OSX, Linux and AIX) I have found it imperative to stay current with all emerging technologies or else you might find yourself in the unemployment line. (The old adage: "If you can't adapt you won't survive" holds true in the computing environment)
Bring Vista's SP2 on baby!!