Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Microsoft faces a class action lawsuit over the unfit state of Vista
-
28-02-2008 9:11pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
It never ceases to amaze me the people who get angry at computer innovation. I mean, seriously, if I could pay and upgrade the gas mileage on my car, I'd do so happily.
I mean, cars have gotten the same gas mileage and have had the same top speed for decades - there is no innovation there. Is that what people want from the computer world as well? A stagnant market where nothing changes and everyone lives with 64 megs of RAM on their P2 machine?
The fact I can buy a new system now, or upgrade my current, so that it will allow me to do stuff in half the time that I used to do it in, well, thats a good thing.
The average user can work with a P266/64megs of RAM with no problems. I live in Clare - they gave the 'Information Age' machines away here for under a hundred euro a few years back - and you find them in every home. Everyone here has one. They can use Office2000 on a W95 box and to be honest, they will never have to do any upgrades. They can log on the internet via their 33.6 modem and print files on their dot-matrix printers without issue.
That being said they also won't be able to watch video in HD, compile 3D images in 3DSMax or Lightwave, use GoogleEarth (or other high-end websites), setup their new MP3 player to sync with their PC, convert video from NTSC to PAL or use software like AutoCAD or Adobe Premiere CS3, and of course you can rule out the latest and greatest games. The average user doesn't do anything other than check email and type up the occasional document so this doesn't effect them. Thats why so many of these things are still around here and people still pay to have them serviced (the shops in town fix them - usually at a cost that is more than they are worth - about half of what it would cost to buy a new top-of-the-line Dell).
People like myself though, notice these things and look forward to advancements in technology.
I' m quite happy upgrading every couple of years - because with the apps I use, I can ALWAYS use more RAM and speed.
Also, it's funny to see so many people complaining about upgrading on a technology forum. I mean, are we all on dial-up posting to a BBS? No. Why? Technology upgrades.
It's ironic to see so many people taking advantage of technology and using that advantage to complain about the technology they have upgraded to - seeings how if those advancements didn't happen there wouldn't be a site here to complain on.
Of course it's also quite ironic that the same people complaining about upgrading their systems now were the same people complaining last time they rolled out a new OS (XP). These people of course aren't using Windows 3.1 either.
But hey - some people are happy with using 1980's technology. I just have to laugh a little knowing my mobile phone can do more than my neighbors PC.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
From a technical standpoint, XP (and 2000) is a house of cards, where changing code often lead to the system failing, requiring many more hours of testing and development to ship small changes. With Vista they changed this (was the main reason behind the delay, as the XP codebase become too unstable), they went back to the beginning, starting with the win2k3 sp1 code, and made the system as modular as possible. This allows, for example, WinFS to be retro fitted if they wanted to, or an upgrade to the network stack to be done seperately. It's why dx10 wasn't just ported to XP (and then used as marketing to force gamers to Vista), and it's why XP has a large amount of patches, and has had lots of patches to fix patches
From another point of view, MS could have sat on XP as a cash cow and just done support, and been happy for another 10 years, far cheaper then to develop a new OS, however, given the rate of technology change, the risk is that MS would have nothing to do in 10 years once someone else starting getting a foothold, due to supporting the new technologies coming through.
In the next few years we'll have 8GB RAM as the standard, with 1GB Graphics cards, 8 to 16 core machines for desktop users, eSata, Wireless USB, Torrenza, Quickpath, working bluetooth, WiMax, Wireless-N, SSD, tri/quad channel ram, we'll also see websites using new tech such as silverlight, and the next version of flash, which will put much larger strains on current desktop hardware.
All this requires development to be done to the OS to support it, and the question is whether it's worth modifying XP to do all this, or start with a new OS and build from there (and again in a few years time).
You have to remember that neither XP or Vista are by no means perfect at what they do, meaning they can have improved UI, improved RAM management, improved security and so on and have numerous bugs, which will need to be fixed.
Then you have the enabling platforms, by shipping with .net in box, allowing companies to develop more cheaply and reach a wider audience.
Or you could think of Vista, as XP with all these changes made 0
Advertisement