Last message on previous page:

Well I thank you for your comments. I find the AMD vs Intel and ATI vs Nvidia to be just plain silly. More often that not I read these and other boards for laughs at how narrow minded people can be. Buy what you like, if you do not like another brand make the best statement you can make and do not buy it. But thanks again. I am looking forward to a nice time. These forums are and will continue to be great!

AMEN !

And "Ressource Heavy, Zero Inovation, User Friendly OS" work.
And we follow

Wow, Windows Vista isn’t even out on the shelves yet and already its raping, pillaging, killing first born children, demonically possessing young kids, mugging old women, sacrificing animals, committing necrophilia and ending life as we know it. At least that is the impression I have of what some people want you to believe.

You know, I have a neighbor that still uses an old Pentium 90 MHz with 64 MB of RAM and (I believe) an old Linux OS. All he does is check his e-mail twice a week and log into TV Guide’s website to check the TV listings. Occasionally he types something up in a spreadsheet and shoots it out on an ancient printer. For him, Windows 95 came and went. So did Windows 98, 98SE, ME, 2000 and now Windows XP. Not once did he complain about “required upgrades”, a new monitor, expensive RAM or more HD space. He simply used what he wanted to and what suited him just fine. You know what else? He didn’t die because Windows REQUIRED an upgrade nor did Microsoft fly a black helicopter into his backyard, kidnap him and give him an anal probe that forced him to comply with their new OS.

I just simply can not believe how some people over react to a corporation marketing a new product. It is as simple as “buy it or don’t buy it”. I promise, whichever choice you make, it won’t cause the death of millions…..really.

As for me personally:

Will I buy Windows Vista? Yes. Not because I am a “MS Fanboy”, but because one of my hobbies is keeping my PC as up to date as I can within certain reasonable limits. Those limits will allow me to install Vista on my PC and I expect better dual-core support for my Athlon X2 processor. I enjoy tinkering around with new hardware, software and upgrading my PC. This gives me an opportunity to do all three. I will buy new ECC RAM for my system and probably some other stuff just for kicks and giggles. Not because MS “tells me to”, but because I probably would eventually do it anyway.

I read about half this thread and finally got bored of the tards that are bashing microsoft for making a better product. They are not taking xp away from you and forcing you to buy vista. And i'm not sure who it was, ak47 or dastral or something who said the minimum requirment was a gig of ecc ram. Whoever said that, your retarded 8O This is as stupid as those conroe and am2 threads cause its based on nothing more than speculation. In my opinion, windows should not limit the high end computers, nor not accomadate the low end. It should go from 624x340 to 2500x1900 so that everyone can use it, maybe even mayep_necro's 66mhz lol, and make all features available for use if the system is up to it. ANd by the way there are many differences betwwen windows generations, all the new features and such. Furthermore i don't even know why people have such big problems with microsft, the big bad corporate monopoly. Windows is easy to use, unlike dos, which i think is similar to linux but not sure. I think people only have a problem because they want to have a problem. Its like stupid kidswho say they aren't submitting to authority and shit like that. You just want to be different, for no GOOD reason. NOW, the one guy who uses linux with the penquin avatar, is a competant computer user, therefore its easy for him to use linux, but for most people, it would be a bitch to use, and they wouldn't be able to use their computer. It also makes some sense for hardaware makers to comply with some of micrsofts request since windows is the most widespread os ever, so microsoft and the hardware makers should work together to make the best possible computers.

p.s It's uncanny how mpjesse always seems to be right 8)

In a perfect world, you would be right. However, M$ has proven again and again (See Core Duo Power Drain bug), that they are not interested in making the best product they can, or in working with the hardware manufacturers. They have shown that they are interested in licensing, and in only patching holes and problems when they are called out by others.

If you notice, most of the Windows fixes you see are due to errors pointed out by others, and it often takes some leverage to get them fixed.

I have no problem with M$ releasing Windows Vista (though I think the hardware requirments have more to do with lazy programming than with actually taxing the machine). I just will not be adopting it as my main OS at release, and I will not be choosing which hardware I buy based on whether it will work with Vista. XP is the first M$ OS that I can actually say I feel is a decent OS (And I've worked with them all), and I am fine staying with it.

You're absolutely right! I am sure that the bugs in windows are intentionally left there by MS and not just flaws due to the natural imperfections of the people who develop the product. I mean really, the nerve of them. I have NEVER heard of GM having a recall of cars and trucks, and I have NEVER had a TV break down on me in my life. If every other company in the world can produce perfect products that never have flaws or break down, then why does MS keep doing this, as if we wouldn't notice???? I mean, why would they care right? I know what it is, they have a secret stash of the REAL version of Windows that they use and then send everyone else the versions they intentionally left flaws in.

As far as the hardware requirements, I mean PLEASE! I know that I like having 4 gigs of RAM and a near 4 GHz processor just to use MS Word. I mean, why develop an OS that actually uses all the power these new systems have? Who does MS think they are, actually utilizing my processor power and memory? Those bastards!

I think I am going to buy a Ferrari just to drive 35 MPH to the grocery store now. It seems just a reasonable…doesn’t it?

Actually, your sarsasm completely unfounded.

I was trying to make the point that is it Naive to think that M$ desires to build an OS that is usable by everyone with few hardware or knowledge requirements, and that is why they are releasing a new version. They are releasing a new version to make money, esepcially since they haven't had an upgrade boom brought on by a new OS since 2001.

It has been PROVEN time and again that M$ has sat on known serious issues until outside watch dogs or consumers noted them. I know most companies do this, that was my point. They aren't going to work with vendors to get you the absolute best possible product, when they won't even work with their largest hardware partner (Intel) on known issues.

Unlike you, I happen to like using my high end PC for MORE than just running a somewhat bloated OS than could get buy with lower Hardware requirements if better programming optimization is used. It is possible to acheive much of what they are trying to accomplish with lower requirments if they had better programming. How do you think Linux can do so much with such lower system reqs?

I guess if you are buying your PC for the internet and Email, then it makes perfect sense to have the OS take up as much as possible of your PC. If you actually want to DO SOMETHING on it, then you want as much porcessing power and memory as possible to be available for running other programs, not just for having your PC turned on and idle.

****Unlike you, I happen to like using my high end PC for MORE than just running a somewhat bloated OS****


Oh? You KNOW what I use my PC for? Outside of what you admittedly know that I wrote as sarcasm, exactly what do I use my PC for?

When you can answer that, then we can talk.

****Unlike you, I happen to like using my high end PC for MORE than just running a somewhat bloated OS****


Oh? You KNOW what I use my PC for? Outside of what you admittedly know what I wrote as sarcasm, exactly what do I use my PC for?


When you can answer that, then we can talk.

I might also point out that this seems to be awful close to taking a shot at me personally and I am just not going to stoop to that level. Perhaps we shouild keep phrases such as "unlike you" out of the conversation.

Very enlightened response. You must have missed the sarcastic undertones in implying you don't do anything on your PC. My whole point is, don't you want as much of your power available for actually running programs, and not being used for basic Operating tasks?

I am all for taking advantage of the capabilities available to newer PCs. What I am not in favor of is getting lax in your programming efficiency because newer systems have enough overhead to handle it. You should want your OS to use as little of the system's power as possible for its given features. M$ has a habit recently of not worrying about that, and just upping the hardware requirements instead.

You are completely misundertanding me. It has nothing to do with you personally. I was being sarcastic based on your statements that you want and OS that uses all of a systems available power in order to make my point. Saying it that way way just the most convenient way.

Sorry if I have offended you, that was not the intention.

I know exactly what you implied. Perhaps you missed the question asking how you would know what I use my PC for.

At any rate, you can't really go around telling others what they should and whould not want out of their OS. Each individual person is going to want different things from their OS.

My whole implication was sarcastic, I don't care what you use your PC for, you can cook eggs on it for all I care.

I didn't do anything of the sort, if anything, you did that. I stated that a poster was being Naive in his views that M$ should make an OS that will run on any machine, or that they were even interested in doing so. I then stated that I would not be an early adopter, and would not buy hardware based on what they tell me I need.

At that point you launched a completely unwarranted sarcastic tirade in my direction (from misunderstanding my previous statements) that was basically an attempt to tell ME what I should want out of an OS by implying that I should want one that uses all the available power.

So please don't try to lecture me on behavior that you exhibit. Thanks.

Well...let's see, it is your post that says...and I quote:

" You should want your OS to use as little of the system's power as possible for its given features."

I never said, or implied that you or anyone else should want anything. What I said was "how dare they make an OS that actually uses my system resourses". That doesn't mean that anyone should use it, it just means that I can understand why they have such high requirements