Ulysses Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Lol nice to see microsoft dropping there rip off price for this crap operating system, seems that stand alone sales aint as good as MS would like!! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7270757.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USWhoFan Posted March 2, 2008 Share Posted March 2, 2008 I don't think they've dropped the price enough to garner the sales they'd like to get. Personally it'll need to drop at least another $100 before I consider purchasing/using it. And until that time comes I'll stick with XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dBLOOD Posted March 2, 2008 Share Posted March 2, 2008 Since the retail versions price is tripple of the OEM version, it is nothing more than a joke... And the one machine/OS thing is unashamedly unfair, and clearly only made for bloodsucking, so still no Vista for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbb Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 Microsoft has a lot of work to do if they expect us to buy this thing in a year's time or so. I won't be buying I'm afraid, I'll wait for it to get better or at least get as good as Win98. I don't like XP so I don't think I'd buy Vista either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x5315 Posted April 6, 2008 Share Posted April 6, 2008 they'd have to....no-one's gonna buy it :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted April 6, 2008 Share Posted April 6, 2008 they'd have to....no-one's gonna buy it :p Just like Macs. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 MAC's would have to be about $1000 less for me to even consider buying one. I won't spend $2000 on a baseline MAC, not when I can build a top-of-the-line PC for around $500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x5315 Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 baseline mac. That'd be the mac mini. Which isn't $2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dBLOOD Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 Yes, only $600 + display, keyboard, and mouse to use it... Mac Mini on Apple Store Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x5315 Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 but you can use any monitor, keyboard or mouse. so you could use your old one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 ok, so they're cheaper than I thought. It's like the soda or pop debate. Neither side is right, they just like to argue :D Both Vista and Leopard have major flaws. No one makes a perfect OS, not even Ubuntu. Vista----- can it sync with my Zune? yes can it run my vpn software? yes does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? oh god yes can it run design software efficiently? yes does it boot/shutdown quickly? oh god no MacOS--- can it sync with my Zune? no can it run my vpn software? probably does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? oh god yes can it run design software efficiently? yes does it boot/shutdown quickly? yes, very much so Ubuntu--- can it sync with my Zune? no can it run my vpn software? only if i were some linux genius who could install it properly does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? it doesn't crash, but it also can't run my games can it run design software efficiently? not OEM versions. only the half-retarded cousin of OEM versions does it boot/shutdown quickly? i could boot/shutdown twice before MacOS boots once It's all about what you consider the lesser evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 does it crash <SNIP> oh god yes Well, that's really a case specific to certain users. All operating systems will crash for someone. I haven't had any crashes in Vista, in fact, I've probably had fewer than in XP. does it boot/shutdown quickly? oh god no Again, I haven't seen Vista performing any slower than XP was. Granted, the system requirements for Vista are higher, but if you can exceed those, performance is not really affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 On all 'current' windows platforms, most crashes are caused by bad drivers or unstable hardware. We all know Vista has had its share of 'bad luck' *cough* with bad drivers. As the 3rd parties get more experience on Vista, the number of crashes should reduce to below the number of crashes on XP. Vista is slower than XP and always will be, in virtually every aspect (every bench I've read confirms it, without a single exception and SP1 does very little to mitigate that), whether or not it is perceptibly slower, depends on the user in question and which tasks he performs. The 'slowness' is a trade-off you make for other 'benefits'. My personal opinion on Vista: if we're talking about the 32-bit version, the 'benefits' are not worth the step from XP to Vista, as such imo, XP beats Vista. Unless of course, you want to game on dx10, in which case you have no other choice. If we're talking about the 64-bit version, I'd have to say Vista beats XP. So, to conclude, it's pointless to buy a 32-bit Vista version, but if you're going 64-bit, Vista is probably worth it. Of course, when the OS forcibly ships with the computer you buy, then there usually is also no point to specifically buy XP, the transition to either side (Vista-XP) is not worth the extra money if you've already got one of both. FYI, OEM versions of Vista Ship either 32-bit or 64-bit, never both. Retail versions have both 32- and 64-bit installation possibilities. That's of course just a small personal analysis between Vista and XP, Mac OS really isn't an option, unless you buy a Mac or like to mess around a lot. Linux... well, if you forget about gaming and are willing to put some effort into learning how to operate Linux and are willing to search around on the internet a lot to solve all those 'problems' you're bound to run into, mostly by yourself and are not dumb (you don't have to be smart, but you can't be dumb either) and are willing to forgo some of those popular proprietary applications that are not available on Linux and are content to work with open source variants instead then, if all of those apply, Linux is the OS for you. It'll be more stable; once you get the hang of it, you'll get less easily frustrated by your OS and it's free and new versions are released on a much more regular basis then either windows or mac os. Of course, deciding which distro to install is a daunting task, most people recommend starting with an 'easy' Ubuntu and if you feel you'd like to experiment a bit after you've gotten the hang of it, try some others. If you're still not happy with Linux, you can always try BSD, more specifically PC-BSD, that's about as idiot proof as BSD gets. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 I personally have had a positive experience with Vista. The SP1 upgrade did not kill my drivers, install was very streamlined, my system is now more stable than it was under XP. Still, that's not saying much. Yes, it boots and shuts down faster than XP, but that's still slow compared to MacOS and Ubuntu. Yes, it crashes less than XP did, but it can still have an epic crash from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted April 10, 2008 Author Share Posted April 10, 2008 XP unstable?? I cant actually remember XP actually crashing like Win 98/ME with the dreaded blue screen. I think the only time I will upgrade to Vista is when software does not support XP and at the moment that is not the case. One thing I have noticed as I sell PC games on ebay are vista users complaining on odd ocasions that XP games wont run under vista, not sure if this is due to there drivers not being updated or not though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 it's a directx 10 thing. dx10 does not support directplay. this rules out some microsoft games, specifically freelancer (one of my favs, of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted April 11, 2008 Author Share Posted April 11, 2008 I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other. That's probably the best way to go. I'm dual booting Vista and Ubuntu 7.04 at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbb Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 XP crashes more times than 98 ever did. Win98 was much more stable than XP and more compatible than XP. As for Vista, I'm not buying that until the bugs are ironed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other. That's probably the best way to go. I'm dual booting Vista and Ubuntu 7.04 at the moment. dual booting winxp and ubuntu 6.06 for over a year now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now