Windows Vista, so... whats it like? Options

[Warlord]

I sure hope XP doesn't get outdated fast!
I don't want to have to buy vista just because the computer is outdated.

[Clazzy]

XP will be outdated before you know it.

It's been outdated for years in the features department (Linux and OSX overtook it long ago) but it can mostly be augmented with whatever you need. Vista just added way too much and made it too bloated. If XP is fine now then there's no need to worry for another 3-4 years. People still happily use 98 and ME at the moment despite their age. Considering the amount of people jumping ship to alternative operating systems (i.e. Ubuntu Linux is now estimated at 30 million users and now Dell are taking it seriously by selling it alongside Windows). Microsoft is really fading away, just very slowly. Internet Explorer has decreased in popularity, OpenOffice has matured and other projects, both open and closed source are competing. Linux has MASSIVELY evolved over the past two years and OSX (despite my massive dislike for Apple) has made headway into the computing world again because of the iPod. Given a couple more years, it's perfectly possibly for the Windows share in the desktop market to drop to a good 75-80%. By then, major companies will really invest in Linux or OSX (depending on which has the larger market share) and there will be little point using Windows any more because the competition is far superior and will have the same support.
Microsoft have their fingers in too many pies and, while they can make a good office suite and a few other decent things (Media Player isn't too bad) they're being beaten back on most fronts and will slowly fade away. Remember that Apple was on top in the desktop OS market once, they were only beaten when IBM came along in leaps and bounds in the desktop market.

[Sir Modsalot]

Remember that Apple was on top in the desktop OS market once, they were only beaten when IBM came along in leaps and bounds in the desktop market.

Right, and something tells me that Dell will bring Ubuntu to the same level of mass success that IBM did with Microsoft.

[Clazzy]

It will happen, just not instantly. There's a lot of buzz going around the internet with regards to Ubuntu, Google is now seeing Linux as a viable target (hence Picasa and Google Earth being available for Linux), Adobe are seeing it too (Flash 9 is now available, we never got Flash 8) and so on.
Microsoft took over with the favourable conditions available (computers dropping in price, wider availability, people not wanting to spend an arm and a leg on a Mac). Basically, there was little point in Microsoft innovating in the OS market because they already had a monopoly share. The same happened once Netscape was taken out of the running, there were no major feature updates to IE for years, then Firefox came on the scene and took a 15% market share. OSX and Linux are both far more innovative than Vista, the big reason as to why Vista is actually going to be relatively successful is because it comes preinstalled on virtually all computers made after about last January. At least with Dell accepting Ubuntu as a genuine competitor means that we might finally get a fair market for operating systems now, rather than one all-dominating one.

[Wess]

OOPS did not meen to post.

i,ll install Vista soon, as second OS tho.
Mac an linux say notting to me, seems to much of a hassle to get "stuff" working.

This post has been edited by Wes.com: May 3 2007, 03:17 PM

[DeathRay2K]

I have to say, I disagree with your assertion that Linux is more advanced than XP...
While I know that a lot of the problems with mainstream usage of Linux is due to licensing restrictions and unsupported drivers, at the same time there's just a lot of stuff that they do wrong, just so that they seem different from Windows.
The filesystem, for instance, is an unbelievable mess in every way shape and form. New users will have no idea what filesystem to use, and once they figure that out they still have to figure out where to put stuff, and how to manage all the crap that they don't care about.
With Windows XP and Vista, its dead simple, you put your stuff in 'My Documents', you install programs to 'Program Files', etc.

Next we've got the whole linux system in general. It should really be invisible to the user. The average user doesn't give a crap about what renders the desktop, what manages the network, and so on. They just care that it works. And with Linux, there's a good chance that it doesn't. While I don't like to say it, large parts of Linux just don't work the way they should. I can't connect to any other computer on my network from Linux. I don't know why, and I don't really care, but that's reason enough for me to stay with Windows.

[Clazzy]

The filesystem, for instance, is an unbelievable mess in every way shape and form. New users will have no idea what filesystem to use, and once they figure that out they still have to figure out where to put stuff, and how to manage all the crap that they don't care about.

In Linux, you want a place for your documents? It's called your Home folder. It's easily accessible and nicely labelled. You need to know absolutely nothing more about the filesystem hierarchy to use Linux. Since all programs are installed either through Synaptic or via .deb (or .rpm if you're so inclined) files on the internet, configuration files, binaries, images and so on are all intelligently installed in the right place. For a typical user, they don't need to pick what filesystem they want since the installer picks it for you. This is just nitpicking now. If somebody installs XP then they have to decide whether they want FAT or NTFS. It'll automatically choose NTFS for you (an Ubuntu installer will automatically pick ext3). Case closed.

Next we've got the whole linux system in general. It should really be invisible to the user. The average user doesn't give a crap about what renders the desktop, what manages the network, and so on. They just care that it works. And with Linux, there's a good chance that it doesn't. While I don't like to say it, large parts of Linux just don't work the way they should. I can't connect to any other computer on my network from Linux. I don't know why, and I don't really care, but that's reason enough for me to stay with Windows.

And how does Linux try and tell everyone about the programs it uses? People will find out if they're interested but everyone else will just pick "Firefox Web Browser" or "GIMP Image Editor" for web browsing and image editing. It tells you what they are in the name. People who are actively interested may try and learn more but there's no forcing people to learn to find out about stuff. As for issues like not connecting to a network, that is a problem with licensing (i.e. Samba). Any driver issues are the fault of the companies who make the products because they never made any drivers for Linux. My laptop works absolutely (and I mean absolutely, wireless, bluetooth, graphics, sound, card reader, touchpad) with no flaws. My friend's desktop (custom built) runs with no issues either. Don't be so quick to blame the operating system because it isn't widespread enough just yet.

just so that they seem different from Windows.

So you're saying every other operating system should copy Windows? NEWS FLASH: Windows isn't the baseline by which every single operating system should conform. Windows might do some things well but not everything is perfect. Different operating systems have different ideals for a perfect desktop (i.e. look at Symphony) and it's not right to say that every OS should just copy Windows. Besides, if they did then what would the point be in originality?

[ChielScape]

i do hope your predictions become reality, clazzy.
if linux becomes more popular, more software will support it. Linux has the potential to become more useful than windows, but as long as sotware supports only windows, including games/directX, many people would still need windows.
if its marketshare increases, it will gain the support of more and more companies. when that happens, windows wouldnt be necessary for poeple, and they would switch to this free alternative.
however, linux as it is now, wont do much good.
if dell can make it more popular, and more important: better known, it will not only become supported by more companies, but also more people will work on it, since its open-source, which will speed up development.
if it works, i think it wont take much more than 5 years for linux to be used on a least 50% of the PCs in the world, unless microsoft comes with an increadible service pack for vista.

[confactor]

Hmmm I'm sure windows is going to be around for a long time to come even if linux becomes more popular.
<>
so is linux like dos with its heirarcy? or is it different then that?

[Aztek985]

First off, where the hell can you buy a Dell with Linux? On their website ... nope!

Microsoft has been on top in the OS market for as long as I can remember ... they'd have to f*ck up pretty badly to fall into second place! Linux, to what I can see, is in last place! Mac is more popular than Linux! :sleep:

[ChielScape]

Mac is more popular than Linux! :sleep:

its a f*cked up world isnt it?

[Clazzy]

First off, where the hell can you buy a Dell with Linux? On their website ... nope!

http://news.com.com/Dell+picks+Ubuntu+for+..._3-6180419.html
Be up-to-date, they start selling them AT THE END OF MAY. The PCs will be cheaper than Windows ones because you don't have to pay the Windows tax.

Microsoft has been on top in the OS market for as long as I can remember ... they'd have to f*ck up pretty badly to fall into second place! Linux, to what I can see, is in last place! Mac is more popular than Linux!

You don't realise, they've been very slowly losing market share without the help of major companies selling Linux preinstalled on computers. Windows has the market share at the moment purely because of the fact they're sold as OEM operating systems on the desktop market. Macs actually have almost the same amount of market share as Linux, by the way.

[confactor]

Some things I liked about vista:

quick search function-instantly finds files and folders. I think this makes up for some of its sloppy
organization.

visual window selection- allows for a more human friendly selection.

<>
The only thing so far that I didn't like was that I could not put a gif in the backround. To me
most personal computers perform very simular functions. I believe most users can't see
all of the functional advantages of linux and are sold more by user friendly computers.
That is why I think Vista is something that users will like. (Servers/corporate suite) may be more ideal for
linux...

This post has been edited by confactor: May 7 2007, 12:50 AM

[Lightstorm]

just get the vista transformation i have it and if you don't want to pay $150 for vista its great it makes it look just as pretty even added wigets.

[Clazzy]

quick search function-instantly finds files and folders. I think this makes up for some of its sloppy
organization.

visual window selection- allows for a more human friendly selection.

Let me be brutally honest in saying that other operating systems have been able to do this for the last 3-4 years, this isn't a new feature and merely something Microsoft have picked up late. Look up Spotlight, Beagle, Tracker, Compiz, Beryl and Quartz, that's effectively what Vista copied.

[confactor]

Let me be brutally honest in saying that other operating systems have been able to do this for the last 3-4 years, this isn't a new feature and merely something Microsoft have picked up late. Look up Spotlight, Beagle, Tracker, Compiz, Beryl and Quartz, that's effectively what Vista copied.

oh, well, at least it doesn't look like a lemon like the other windows operating systems right?

[Clazzy]

Not really. It certainly looks better than most default Linux looks (but they in turn look better than the XP skin designed by a five-year old) but you'd need a very modern PC to run the Vista effects while the OSX and Linux ones will run on much lower-spec computers. Beryl runs on my 2.5 year old laptop with complete impunity, my laptop would struggle to run the Aero effects comfortably and I think it would even have problems running Vista comfortably in general. Quartz runs on old (according to the official specs, on 16MB graphics cards) systems fine too.

[The DvD]

Something that i hope to see happening soon is that MS is forced to lower Windows retail prices to reasonable levels, because of the increased competition of Linux or Mac OS's.

Still, there are some things holding back Linux's market penetration.. For example, corporate environment IT moves forward at a *very* slow pace. Also, games (the killer app for many desktop users) basically require Windows at the moment. Either game developers will need to start offering OpenGL codepaths, or running multiple OS's simultaneously has to become common. I can see that last thing happening with upcoming quad-core processors (like AMD's 'Barcelona', which offers extensive hardware virtualisation posibilities).

[Clazzy]

I can see virtualisation becoming a big thing over the next couple of years but probably not in the desktop market, it's more likely to be used in the business sector. As you said, they are very slow to progress so it could be possible with more advanced virtualisation to move to something like Linux yet keep their older programs that are Windows-only working fine. With virtualisation, the program can have data copied out and into the parent OS and computers are now powerful enough to effectively have virtual environments. Time will tell, I suppose.