Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
hardcore_gamer

Windows Vista is already obsolete !

Recommended Posts

herooftime1000 said:

Yeah, now Windows will redeem themselves with 7. Haha! NOT!


You know, I've kind of felt for a while now that XP will go down in history as The Last Good OS Microsoft Ever Made.

Share this post


Link to post

I've already experienced the nightmare that is KDE4. Thank you Kubuntu for forcing that upon me without question with no way to turn back to KDE3 without breaking everything.


Yes I know this is a Windows 7 thread, but there is an evil parallel between evils of KDE4 and Windows 7...

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately that's only to be expected when an OS is built around a key feature - reminds me of the Windows 98/Internet Explorer debacle.

Share this post


Link to post

Vista has been good to me - though its taken awhile to break me down.

Windows 7 looks good.

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, so..I looked at the article, and.....where are the amazing changes and new features that will make Vista users want to pick this up? Unless I missed something major, very little of this looks particularly major or interesting. I'm still using XP on my Windows partition, and I don't even see any reason to upgrade from that.

Share this post


Link to post

Why don't they start on a new operating system from the ground up, and not call it Windows. Surely there has got to be some other user interface that would work for an operating system.

Share this post


Link to post
esselfortium said:

Okay, so..I looked at the article, and.....where are the amazing changes and new features that will make Vista users want to pick this up? Unless I missed something major, very little of this looks particularly major or interesting. I'm still using XP on my Windows partition, and I don't even see any reason to upgrade from that.

Agreed. I'd still use XP if it wasn't for a new computer with preinstalled Vista. After switching off all the crap that were the selling points of Vista (namely UAC (heh) and Aero) it's almost the same. It wouldn't surprise me if all the 'enhancements' in Windows 7 were of the same kind.

Share this post


Link to post

How could anyone conceivably say no to an OS that lets you adjust the transparency levels of taskbar and preview windows? Listen to your heart, obey the subliminal advertising, abuse your credit card - you won't regret it!

Share this post


Link to post

How can something be obsolete if it was never successful enough to be even called "the previous standard"? And I don't mean the "M$-forcing-OEMs -to-include-it-with-every-new-laptop" kind of successful. I mean the "people-buying-new-laptops-with-Vista-and-reverting-to-XP" kind of failure. Meh.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm in the minority apparently and have absolutely no complaints with Vista. Of course, I'm using Vista Ultimate, using it on a completely new custom-built system with almost all the hardware being certified for Vista, and quite frankly would think I would just be throwing away the 200 bucks I spent on an OEM version of it if I reverted back to XP. Sure, there are a few program incompatibilities here and there, the most serious of which is I can't use a program like WinTex since I'm running an 64-bit OS, but even that's only minor. Everything else seems to work just fine for me, at least now that I'm using a full version instead of the release candidate that Microsoft put out a while back.

EDIT: And besides, the article stated that the estimated release date for this isn't until sometime mid next year at the earliest, so that IMHO means there's still enough time for Vista to become the "standard", however possible that may be.

Share this post


Link to post

Vista's only feature that had the slightest chances of getting people use it over XP is DirectX 10. Of course, as we all know by now, it was far from enough. I don't think there really is anything you could add to XP that would make an OS more desirable, unless it's some feature that somehow can not be ported to XP by enthusiast and you could force content providers to use that feature (like DX 11 that couldn't be ported to XP and MS would buy ever game studio to make only DX 11-compliant games). But at least for the time being plans like that are going to fail when it comes to buying all third party content providers.

So, if MS wants to do the "New XP", what they should do is recreate XP but halve the memory and CPU usage. That's something I guess people would actually buy.


edit: And actually I don't have any problems with Vista either. It's just that it's, well, obsolete, having no desirable new features yet taking more resources. There's no point in having Vista unless you're a software developer who wants to make sure that his programs work for both XP and Vista users.

Share this post


Link to post
EarthQuake said:

Why don't they start on a new operating system from the ground up, and not call it Windows. Surely there has got to be some other user interface that would work for an operating system.

Midori, and maybe Azure if you're feeling generous.

Windows 7 will probably come out around early 2010 so it's not like they're dumping Vista right away. Remember that the development cycle for Vista was abnormally long, so releasing another OS this soon is actually closer to how they used to do it.

W7 looks good from what I've seen. For instance, they're finally taking a good hard look at the UI instead of just slapping more paint on top of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Creaphis said:

You know, I've kind of felt for a while now that XP will go down in history as The Last Good OS Microsoft Ever Made.

That will be true as long as Microsoft doesn't realise that an OS is supposed to be a stable base for running programs and not a software package full of bloat and "features" that destroy backwards compatibility and cause third party programs to crash.

Seriously, I don't need something to cook my breakfast and clean my house, I just want some fucking stability and an OS that doesn't eat up 75% of my RAM.

Share this post


Link to post
Danarchy said:

That will be true as long as Microsoft doesn't realise that an OS is supposed to be a stable base for running programs and not a software package full of bloat and "features" that destroy backwards compatibility and cause third party programs to crash.

Sound like the description of Mac OS releases prior to 8, which was unstable ("cooperative multitasking") and compatibility with previous versions was never a design goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Danarchy said:

That will be true as long as Microsoft doesn't realise that an OS is supposed to be a stable base for running programs and not a software package full of bloat and "features" that destroy backwards compatibility and cause third party programs to crash.

Seriously, I don't need something to cook my breakfast and clean my house, I just want some fucking stability and an OS that doesn't eat up 75% of my RAM.

THANK YOU. This is the primary reason I have an intense dislike for Vista. I have 4GB of RAM, but I want anything and everything that doesn't need it to not use it. It's a libertarian philosophy to system resources, but it makes the most sense. I know I can dumb Vista's interface down (and I even take off all the themes and effects for XP as well) but Vista still ends up using too much.

<-- Is a proud user of Windows XP x64

Share this post


Link to post

Also Windows 7 is MS's first baby step in the direction of "cloud computing," which some are predicting is the end of local storage and natively executed software. They are going to be increasingly displaced by web-based applications and data storage services.

If nobody but me can see the privacy implications of this setup, or the financial implications (get ready to pay monthly fees to use your software, and fees to escape from the grasp of your data storage provider), then it is a sad day for the state of computing.

Share this post


Link to post

As a person who refrains from storing files on a network in lieu of the speed and security of local storage, I can appreciate this concern. I often don't even work off of network files at work, preferring to store them on my local drive (a thing that bothers most of the people I collaborate with for one reason or another).

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×