At least Seven is off to a good start. Though, Vista was off to a good start as well then somehow one person said it sucked, then another person said it sucked because that first guy said it sucked, even though this second guy doesn't even know what Vista looks like. See Microsoft's Mojave Experiment, most people who think Vista is bad don't even know what Vista looks like and can't even mention anything bad about it other then the generic "Incompatible drivers", "resource hog". And even then they can't mention what drivers are incompatible or how it's a resource hog, other then the fact that it uses more RAM then the previous version of Windows, every version of Windows always has (With the exception of Seven, which uses less RAM then Vista.).
And so you have the sheep effect. Where everyone thinks that something is bad, weather or not it's true. (Though it really can't be, since it's more of an opinion.) A perfect example of this would be eye eye's post.
Agreed. Although I actually had more problems with Vista after it was out of Beta. So while I agree Vista worked great... it worked even great..er-er while in Beta. So cross your fingers that
My understanding with Vista was that they continued to add features after the beta. So while it was "Mostly feature complete" in beta they weren't testing all the interactions between every component. With windows 7 everything is included in every build. So I think this'll be a more reflective beta of the end product.
Some problems snuck through the Vista Beta due to poor project management and I don't think we'll see a repeat.
I built a PC strictly in anticipation of Vista that ran XP MCE for months without a hitch before installing Ultimate, after 2 months of it taking over a minute to boot up or sometimes hanging during boot I got rid of it and bought 2 Macs and haven't looked back since.
I had the Vista beta and it worked pretty damn well, for some reason the final was just a cluster fuck.
Last I heard many of Vista's problems were fixed but it wasn't soon enough for many people such as myself.
I have tried Windows 7 on my Macbook Pro and I like it alot, but I do remember how well the Vista preview builds were too so I will reserve judgement until after the final build.
Vista was not the sheep following the sheep, and the Mojave "Experiment" is solely a marketing tool created by Microsoft after they FINALLY got most of the kinks worked out from Vista over a year and a half later.
I am not going to say OS X is perfect by any means but I do applaud Apple on getting right to work releasing updates rather than having press releases saying "Everything is fine, nothing to see here move along."
I bet people participating in the Mojave experiment didn't try copying files, because you know, that little feature, so useless in a 2007 Operating System, didn't work in Vista. And they didn't have any experience with XP, because they would have found Vista's interface is a nightmare only a moron could have designed. And they were not IT managers, having to do with users who couldn't get a damn thing to work in Vista because a standardised interface that's had the same base for 12 years is one of most most valuable assets in software for a medium to large firm. And they didn't realise that there is no reason for Vista to take up more RAM, because they don't know that among the "features" they are sacrificing resources for there is not one that is major and that actually requires more resources, other than some "pretty" visual effects. And they didn't know the meaning of the word "optimisation", the impossible procedure that takes a bloated OS and makes it more efficient by using less resources, which was obviously impossible to implement in the 6 years it took Microsoft to make Vista, but now become strangely possible in less than 2 years with Windows 7. And they didn't spend money for new machines and realised that those, while being many times faster than old ones, ran actually slower, or maybe didn't care because the those shiny objects they saw on the screen blinded them. And they were no developers, so they didn't realise that simple operations like writing data to disk were many times slower than XP, for the reason that, in Microsoft's words, they had been "optimised".
I could go on but I know it's useless, for I know that this post will get low-ranked by people who have no counter-argument and are just victims of the sheep effect, which makes you think actual facts are just an "opinion".
I just built a PC in December and installed Vista Ultimate 64 for the first time...I was very skeptical given all the bad stuff I'd heard about it....and....it runs just great! I have VS 2008 and Adobe CS4 installed on it for work purposes, and Fallout 3 and Civ4 for fun, and haven't experienced a single error so far.
I don't know what issues it may have once had, but they have clearly been resolved.
The phone has 256MB of RAM and a 1GHz processor, which do the job reasonably well, though the Anna interface will likely leave something to be desired for many smartphone users.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
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.
At least Seven is off to a good start. Though, Vista was off to a good start as well then somehow one person said it sucked, then another person said it sucked because that first guy said it sucked, even though this second guy doesn't even know what Vista looks like. See Microsoft's Mojave Experiment, most people who think Vista is bad don't even know what Vista looks like and can't even mention anything bad about it other then the generic "Incompatible drivers", "resource hog". And even then they can't mention what drivers are incompatible or how it's a resource hog, other then the fact that it uses more RAM then the previous version of Windows, every version of Windows always has (With the exception of Seven, which uses less RAM then Vista.).
And so you have the sheep effect. Where everyone thinks that something is bad, weather or not it's true. (Though it really can't be, since it's more of an opinion.) A perfect example of this would be eye eye's post.
Agreed. Although I actually had more problems with Vista after it was out of Beta. So while I agree Vista worked great... it worked even great..er-er while in Beta. So cross your fingers that
My understanding with Vista was that they continued to add features after the beta. So while it was "Mostly feature complete" in beta they weren't testing all the interactions between every component. With windows 7 everything is included in every build. So I think this'll be a more reflective beta of the end product.
Some problems snuck through the Vista Beta due to poor project management and I don't think we'll see a repeat.
I built a PC strictly in anticipation of Vista that ran XP MCE for months without a hitch before installing Ultimate, after 2 months of it taking over a minute to boot up or sometimes hanging during boot I got rid of it and bought 2 Macs and haven't looked back since.
I had the Vista beta and it worked pretty damn well, for some reason the final was just a cluster fuck.
Last I heard many of Vista's problems were fixed but it wasn't soon enough for many people such as myself.
I have tried Windows 7 on my Macbook Pro and I like it alot, but I do remember how well the Vista preview builds were too so I will reserve judgement until after the final build.
Vista was not the sheep following the sheep, and the Mojave "Experiment" is solely a marketing tool created by Microsoft after they FINALLY got most of the kinks worked out from Vista over a year and a half later.
I am not going to say OS X is perfect by any means but I do applaud Apple on getting right to work releasing updates rather than having press releases saying "Everything is fine, nothing to see here move along."
I bet people participating in the Mojave experiment didn't try copying files, because you know, that little feature, so useless in a 2007 Operating System, didn't work in Vista.
And they didn't have any experience with XP, because they would have found Vista's interface is a nightmare only a moron could have designed.
And they were not IT managers, having to do with users who couldn't get a damn thing to work in Vista because a standardised interface that's had the same base for 12 years is one of most most valuable assets in software for a medium to large firm.
And they didn't realise that there is no reason for Vista to take up more RAM, because they don't know that among the "features" they are sacrificing resources for there is not one that is major and that actually requires more resources, other than some "pretty" visual effects.
And they didn't know the meaning of the word "optimisation", the impossible procedure that takes a bloated OS and makes it more efficient by using less resources, which was obviously impossible to implement in the 6 years it took Microsoft to make Vista, but now become strangely possible in less than 2 years with Windows 7.
And they didn't spend money for new machines and realised that those, while being many times faster than old ones, ran actually slower, or maybe didn't care because the those shiny objects they saw on the screen blinded them.
And they were no developers, so they didn't realise that simple operations like writing data to disk were many times slower than XP, for the reason that, in Microsoft's words, they had been "optimised".
I could go on but I know it's useless, for I know that this post will get low-ranked by people who have no counter-argument and are just victims of the sheep effect, which makes you think actual facts are just an "opinion".
I just built a PC in December and installed Vista Ultimate 64 for the first time...I was very skeptical given all the bad stuff I'd heard about it....and....it runs just great! I have VS 2008 and Adobe CS4 installed on it for work purposes, and Fallout 3 and Civ4 for fun, and haven't experienced a single error so far.
I don't know what issues it may have once had, but they have clearly been resolved.