VectorLinux

The Vectorian Lounge => The Lounge => Topic started by: vector on November 13, 2007, 08:16:01 pm

Title: vista sucks
Post by: vector on November 13, 2007, 08:16:01 pm
you folks have to see this video its hilarious :
http://www.theblimp.blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?autostart=true&enablejs=true&feedurl=http://theblimp.blip.tv/rss&file=http://www.theblimp.blip.tv/rss/flash/345491&showplayerpath=http://www.theblimp.blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf

Cheers,
Vec
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: exeterdad on November 13, 2007, 08:39:59 pm
Nice!  :D
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: metvas on November 13, 2007, 09:21:38 pm
Confirms all I have heard about it.
Good catch vec
regards
Darrell
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: easuter on November 14, 2007, 12:29:40 am
LMAO!   :D
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Joe1962 on November 14, 2007, 02:42:42 am
Dang! That was hilarious... :D
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: exeterdad on November 14, 2007, 03:18:00 am
CEMENT aka Vista!  I still am cracking up about that.  How clever.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: blurymind on November 15, 2007, 09:52:15 am
omg, so funny  ::)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: nubcnubdo on November 15, 2007, 11:49:24 am
FOON-YA

here are the numbers:
http://exo-blog.blogspot.com/2007/09/what-intel-giveth-microsoft-taketh-away.html

graphical representation:
http://www.xpnet.com/iworldtest/
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: metvas on November 15, 2007, 01:20:41 pm
Hey nubcnubdo:
Nice find thxs.. very interesting and informative.
Darrell
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 15, 2007, 02:45:23 pm
It is easy to point without looking in the mirror.

This has been going on for awhile. In light of that
Linux is guilty although not to the same proportion.

The start was an initial install consumed 2 Gigs.
Then RAM started it continues to grow.

IMHO Linux is trying to chase the philosophy that it needs to
look like and be like Windows.

The primary response to command line tools are the are difficult
and not as functional where in the real fact is the reverse.

A defense of course would be that it is the reason for a larger
migration from the MS world.

Is that the way to continue.

--> Steps off soapbox.

Bigpaws

Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 15, 2007, 04:41:50 pm
My response to Bigpaws is that Linux gives you a *choice*. You can run a command-line based system if that's your desire. But you can have choice in graphical interfaces from barebones to extravagent eye candy.

The fact is the vast majority of computer users don't want to use command-line tools. Whether we approve or disapprove, that's the way it is. Should Linux conform to a geeks' idea of purity and say to the rest of the world, "take it or leave it"? Or should Linux accommodate the desktop marketplace?

However much one may long for the days of tight code (enforced by the severe limitations of hardware of the time), the fact is that today the hardware can accommodate just about anything a programmer can throw at it. So complaints about needing too much disk space or too much RAM or too much CPU power are looking backward to a state that no longer exists. Whether the OS is Windows, Mac, or Linux, it'll try to take advantage of hardware advances--and it should.

Consider my newer desktop. It has 600 gigs of hard drive space, 3 gigs of dual channel RAM, a 64-bit dual core processor, and a PCIe video card with its own memory. This computer is good but certainly not state of the art. But I paid for this stuff. Should it sit empty or idle, or should it be used to run many feature-rich programs at one time?

We can't pretend we're back in the days of the 486.

As for criticism of Vista, a lot of it is geek chic. Some of the critics have never used it or had already made up their minds that they hated it before they ever saw it. I have Vista on my laptop. That's how it came and I don't regret it. It's not slow, all of my hardware works going all the way back to a 1993 printer, most of my programs work including a few Win 3.1 programs, a couple of DOS programs, and all of my recent programs. But I do know how to manage a computer so it's safe and performs well. Many people don't. If they want to learn how, they can. If they don't, they're stuck with the consequences. I use Linux far more than I use Windows, but I don't toss my cookies when I do use Windows.

Vista is not something you put on an old computer, even one that's a couple of years old. So what? Who says you *must* upgrade, like it or not? Eventually we get to that place, but it'll be years before we're there (XP will be supported until 2014, I think).

I want to see Linux increase its market share among everyday users. We won't get there by being minimalist. Yes, there's a place for minimalist distros. But let's not look askance at the non-minimalist distros. Linux is about choice.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 15, 2007, 05:57:24 pm
My thoughts were going in the direction of
using an updated OS, no matter what it is.

MS is forcing users to update their equipment
to stay somewhat secure. There are alot of
Win 98 machines out there with no support on
older hardware. Why is that? That was my point,
that even Linux is starting to increase the hardware
requirements.

Not everyone has the ability to keep paying for upgrades
that is not needed.

That is the problem.

Bigpaws
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 15, 2007, 06:10:13 pm
My response to Bigpaws is that Linux gives you a *choice*. You can run a command-line based system if that's your desire. But you can have choice in graphical interfaces from barebones to extravagent eye candy.

Of course, that is true. Linux can work on almost every system. Perhaps the documentation is hard to find, but if you want to run it in a 286, it can.

Quote
The fact is the vast majority of computer users don't want to use command-line tools. Whether we approve or disapprove, that's the way it is. Should Linux conform to a geeks' idea of purity and say to the rest of the world, "take it or leave it"? Or should Linux accommodate the desktop marketplace?

I guess the answer is both. There is a distro for everyone, from ubuntu to slackware or lfs.

Quote
However much one may long for the days of tight code (enforced by the severe limitations of hardware of the time), the fact is that today the hardware can accommodate just about anything a programmer can throw at it. So complaints about needing too much disk space or too much RAM or too much CPU power are looking backward to a state that no longer exists. Whether the OS is Windows, Mac, or Linux, it'll try to take advantage of hardware advances--and it should.

Yes, but sometimes looks like the opposite. We have to upgrade our hardware if we want to run vista, but nobody is saying, "oh, my system is not using all his power, lets try vista on it." The question is, what is vista doing better than others (including XP), what do you get after the upgrade of the hardware and the new license?
us$ 1000 for surfing the web? Vista has nothing new! Just the interface. The new resources are wasted just in the desktop, the wallpaper, the clock, the weather applet, etc.
Where is the revolution, where is the new technology? where is the true innovation? We have nothing since years. Just multimedia, we can play, we can record, we can see... More of the same, the same principle again and again, but not really an improvement. Wireless, multimedia, portable sys, that technology is available since years, now they have a market, not true improvement there. 
I agree the internet and the availability of the newer tech and hi end stuff to the masses are a step forward. But we are doing nothing with that. The hardware is ten times faster, the desktop had been not suffered the same improvement, by far.

Quote
As for criticism of Vista, a lot of it is geek chic. Some of the critics have never used it or had already made up their minds that they hated it before they ever saw it.


That is an assumption, I used and I use Vista, and for me had been the same with a new look, and now it has more annoying things (you can disable them, I know), and better ways to control the piracy, the improvements are all in the ms side.

Quote
I have Vista on my laptop. That's how it came and I don't regret it. It's not slow, all of my hardware works going all the way back to a 1993 printer, most of my programs work including a few Win 3.1 programs, a couple of DOS programs, and all of my recent programs. But I do know how to manage a computer so it's safe and performs well. Many people don't. If they want to learn how, they can. If they don't, they're stuck with the consequences. I use Linux far more than I use Windows, but I don't toss my cookies when I do use Windows.

The argument against MS is more than that, surely you can use Vista or whatever, and every member on this forum could use it with some satisfaction, because they are good with computers. I can use it, works for me, I had no trouble with it, I can ply direct x 10 games, I ,I. There is a big world outside. Consider the money spent in the hole world in new hardware, consider the money spent in new licenses, the resources taken from the nature, the extra power this hard needs, there is a lot of things to think about. And a lot of factors are working here.

Quote
Vista is not something you put on an old computer, even one that's a couple of years old. So what? Who says you *must* upgrade, like it or not? Eventually we get to that place, but it'll be years before we're there (XP will be supported until 2014, I think).

Time is not a factor here, no matter when. As I said, there is lot of things to keep in mind. Ms has some mechanisms to push into Vista. Of course, nobody says you *must* upgrade, but the world actually works in a more complex way. Is not true we do what we want and just if we want, for example, I am a windows user, I had to work with it. And if we have to propose a Linux migration in, lets say, a school, we'll have to deal wit a lot of misconceptions and pre-judgments (is that an english word?). I am saying, the people we have to convince has not the concepts and tools to think in Linux as a possibility. And they didn't choose to think like that, and nobody else make the decision by them neither, we just think with the tools we have. But MS has a position in the power structure, so they can choose, and they choose wrong.

Quote
I want to see Linux increase its market share among everyday users. We won't get there by being minimalist. Yes, there's a place for minimalist distros. But let's not look askance at the non-minimalist distros. Linux is about choice.

Of course, we want to see Linux to increase its market share, but we want to change linux to certain point only to reach that goal. How much linux should change and what not is not a clear subject. 

Sorry about the long post, you know I like this kind of debate  ::).
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Joe1962 on November 15, 2007, 06:16:48 pm
... and pre-judgments (is that an english word?).
That would be prejudices... ;)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 15, 2007, 07:19:05 pm
thanks joe, you are the man here...
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 15, 2007, 09:50:32 pm
We have to upgrade our hardware if we want to run vista, but nobody is saying, "oh, my system is not using all his power, lets try vista on it." The question is, what is vista doing better than others (including XP), what do you get after the upgrade of the hardware and the new license?

That's assuming someone whose hardware isn't up to it longs for Vista, and so goes out and spends the money *solely* in order to get Vista. That's not what people do--at least not sensible people. We don't upgrade hardware or get a new computer just to run a new OS. We get a new OS when we get a new computer. I can't think of any mature user who bought a new computer solely to run a new OS. I'm sure there are some. Some people have a psychological need to be first with the latest. But a rational approach says you buy a new computer when your old one no longer meets your needs.

I've been told by people qualified to pass judgment that Vista has some significant internal improvements that are not obvious to users. From the user standpoint, I don't think Vista offers much that is worth a deliberate upgrade unless you long for eye candy. I do think the desktop looks better, but it's not something I'd get a new computer for. I've turned off the Aero features because I didn't like them--transparency, live taskbar thumbnails, Flip and Flip-3D. I don't like similar things in Compiz-Fusion either.

Quote
us$ 1000 for surfing the web?

Huh? The everyday price for the full version of Vista Ultimate (the most expensive) is $400 US. The upgrade price for Vista Ultimate is $260. And why would someone get Ultimate unless they needed both the home and business features? For the more reasonable Vista Home Premium, the version of choice for most users, the price is $240 for a non-upgrade copy and $160 for the upgrade version.

Quote
Vista has nothing new! Just the interface. The new resources are wasted just in the desktop, the wallpaper, the clock, the weather applet, etc.

The Sidebar is completely optional, so if someone doesn't want to use resources on it, you just turn it off. I know people who absolutely love those Sidebar gadgets. I have Sidebar turned off. Vista does have new applications included: a decent photo organizer and simple editor, a good calendar program, Media Center apps for using a computer TV tuner like a Tivo, Movie Maker and DVD Maker, etc.

Quote
Consider the money spent in the hole world in new hardware, consider the money spent in new licenses, the resources taken from the nature, the extra power this hard needs, there is a lot of things to think about. And a lot of factors are working here.

But that's assuming people are buying new computers just to get a new OS. They're not. They get a new computer because they want something better than their old computer. The "new license" thing is a delusion. The cost of a Windows license is much less for a major computer manufacturer than it is for someone buying a copy at a store. And due to price competition, the cost of the license disappears. You'll rarely see a computer with Linux or no operating system for a lower price than the same computer with Windows. Generally, I find these Linux computers to be overpriced compared to mass-market Windows computers with the same specs. One of my cyber friends who is shopping for a new laptop and wanted a Linux-only machine has found that what I just said is true--and he was surprised.

Quote
Of course, we want to see Linux to increase its market share, but we want to change linux to certain point only to reach that goal. How much linux should change and what not is not a clear subject.

I agree that Linux should not become just another Windows or Mac OS. What it *should* become is not so clear. I think we're headed in the right direction. I don't think Linux will ever become the dominant desktop operating system, but there's a lot of room for growth.

I think we have a rare--and brief--window of opportunity with the ASUS eee ultralight laptop and the Everex $200 PC at Walmart. These computers have the potential to introduce Linux to the mass market and people will see for themselves that Linux can be easy to use and can do everything the average user wants a computer to do. The opportunity may be brief because Windows XP is being adapted for the eee. There already are comparable PCs with Windows available at Walmart. Since people tend to go with what they know, we can expect that these computers with Windows on them may become more popular than the Linux machines. *WE* know that Linux will be a much better performer on limited hardware like this, but would an average buyer know that? And would they prefer performance over familiarity? So this will be very interesting to watch.

I want to make clear that I'm not beating the drum for Vista. I don't see any reason to upgrade XP on either of my desktops, even if Vista were free. But if I'm buying a new computer, I'd go with Vista rather than XP because it's the future, it has more potential, and it's usable right now.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: saulgoode on November 16, 2007, 02:14:33 am
We have to upgrade our hardware if we want to run vista, but nobody is saying, "oh, my system is not using all his power, lets try vista on it." The question is, what is vista doing better than others (including XP), what do you get after the upgrade of the hardware and the new license?

That's assuming someone whose hardware isn't up to it longs for Vista, and so goes out and spends the money *solely* in order to get Vista. That's not what people do--at least not sensible people. We don't upgrade hardware or get a new computer just to run a new OS. We get a new OS when we get a new computer. I can't think of any mature user who bought a new computer solely to run a new OS. I'm sure there are some. Some people have a psychological need to be first with the latest. But a rational approach says you buy a new computer when your old one no longer meets your needs.

All of the people I know who bought Vista did so because it was, or was expected to become, necessary to support their jobs (quite rational). All of them decided to buy new hardware to support their new OS -- perhaps in some cases this was a "choice", but most needed to purchase $1000 computers in order to support Vista's demands.


You'll rarely see a computer with Linux or no operating system for a lower price than the same computer with Windows. Generally, I find these Linux computers to be overpriced compared to mass-market Windows computers with the same specs. One of my cyber friends who is shopping for a new laptop and wanted a Linux-only machine has found that what I just said is true--and he was surprised.

Perhaps you could cite an example, every time I have compared a Linux or no-OS offering from a vendor to the same machine with Windows, the Windows machine is more expensive; though the difference is not the full retail price of Windows. The only exception I've seen is when a vendor offered a RAM rebate on their Windows machines and failed to offer the same for their Linux boxen (this was corrected after it was pointed out).
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Joe1962 on November 16, 2007, 04:12:12 am
Who says most people are rational?    ::)

Hardware manufacturers know this and they ramp up production of higher-end hardware (higher than normal for a given moment) when a new Windows version is due. They actually took a lot of losses this time around because Vista was delayed more than usual (even for MS) and they had all that expensive stock lying around.

A not quite OS related example (though it caused an OS upgrade too), but relevant to the rationality issue: I've seen research institutes that had to upgrade their hardware a whole generation or two (without prior warning or previous budget adjustments) because the corresponding ministry switched to a fresh version of Excel and suddenly started sending the forms that needed to be filled in for the monthly reports in the format of that incompatible new version. Of course, that newer version of Excel wouldn't run on their current OS, let alone their hardware.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 16, 2007, 07:22:04 am
The "rationality" is a good topic around this. There is a funny thing, "irrational" seems to be always the buyer, but never the seller. I guess the cause is not just the seller "good luck".

Quote
Huh? The everyday price for the full version of Vista Ultimate (the most expensive) is $400 US. The upgrade price for Vista Ultimate is $260. And why would someone get Ultimate unless they needed both the home and business features? For the more reasonable Vista Home Premium, the version of choice for most users, the price is $240 for a non-upgrade copy and $160 for the upgrade version.

I was thinking in a new laptop, hard and soft included.

Quote
The Sidebar is completely optional, so if someone doesn't want to use resources on it, you just turn it off. I know people who absolutely love those Sidebar gadgets. I have Sidebar turned off. Vista does have new applications included: a decent photo organizer and simple editor, a good calendar program, Media Center apps for using a computer TV tuner like a Tivo, Movie Maker and DVD Maker, etc.

Well, that kind of stuff are just the same, imo. There is no real use there. The world will be exactly the same after Tivo. Is cool, and I could like the sidebar, but I am sure I can survive without it. I want to see a computer doing something accord to the extraordinary hardware we have now. The hard is extraordinary, the soft is ordinary. As Con Kolivas pointed in an interview quoted in some thread, the Linux Desktop has a fault there too.
I think I give this example before. Take a Lotus version running on dos, and Excel, or the OO equivalent for that matter, and there is no substantial improvement. For the gamers, the first version of Quake run with 16mb of ram. We can have 4gigs now, and the first one is quite similar to the 4th edition. Ok, the blood looks better now  ::). But my point is, there is nothing new since years, and there is no proportional improvement between hard and soft. If you disable the sidebar in Vista, you get the same.
Perhaps there is improvements in the core, we'll never know it, perhaps if they release it with a "shared source license".
In the public, research (which is the same as public here) and enterprise area (an important percentage) the new license is a factor. And the hardware upgrade means a ton of money. we could use all that money for something useful. We have to see the big picture. The new world is global, for the good things and for the problems too.

I want to point something else, Linux can be interpreted as a realization of a science ideal, about sharing knowledge, mutual collaboration, seek of improvements, etc. MS is trying to hide any good thing they could make (and I am sure they really can do good stuff). I am sure Bill will be bored of all that money, and perhaps could share or spend it in something really funny, adventurous, exiting and useful.
We could work less, and have more fun, we could really improve our efficiency, our use of resources; with Linux or Windows, if Bill wants to be "cooperative" instead "destructive". We need a lot of research and we need to support the logistic area, we all know computers can help in a lot of levels of  our work, administration, and any order of our lives. How they can is not very clear, and we are very far of having a plan in that direction. I guess this is not about Linux or Windows any more, but about the modern way of life. Though, my idea about Linux and MS has no sense without pointing this.

Quote
I want to make clear that I'm not beating the drum for Vista. I don't see any reason to upgrade XP on either of my desktops, even if Vista were free. But if I'm buying a new computer, I'd go with Vista rather than XP because it's the future, it has more potential, and it's usable right now.

I know you ideas from other threads, it was clear to me.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: exeterdad on November 16, 2007, 08:33:24 am

Quote
That's assuming someone whose hardware isn't up to it longs for Vista, and so goes out and spends the money *solely* in order to get Vista. That's not what people do--at least not sensible people. We don't upgrade hardware or get a new computer just to run a new OS.

I have to say plenty of "sensible" people need to go out and buy new computers just to run the Vista.

My wifes father is a police chief of a smaller town in our state.  The software that is on all his computers in the station and cars is linked to the state, and a good chunk of the nation.  The supplier of the software is naturally upgrading, and for some reason Vista will be required. The state is following, in turn all the police stations need to upgrade as well if they want to be "connected".  First off, the license fees for the software (and all the needed "modules") is crazy.  Now he has to find in his meager budget, how to pay for 100% hardware replacement because his reasonably modern hardware isn't capable of running Vista.  We're not talking "Acer" laptops here.  We're talking about laptops (for the cars) that you can toss out the window and pick them up and keep on chugging.  He gave me a dollar amount a few months back.  I can't remember what it was, but I know it was sick.  Especially considering the small size of his department.

Changing the subject a bit, and referring to the benchmarks posted earlier.  Since the hardware manufactures are racing to build hardware that can run Vista while noticeably increasing the performance.  We Linux users, especially us can only gain.  We don't need the super hardware to be productive.  So our system will fly like it's never flown before.  :)

Not to mention that prices have to be kept down on the new stuff to be accepted, and much of the now obsolete, bargin bin hardware is being liquidated.  Hardware I couldn't justify buying in the past, and would LOVE to be running VL on.

It's nice to be a VectorLinuxian. Life is good.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: metvas on November 16, 2007, 10:32:57 am
Being a SoHo addict, here is a thought I can load up SoHo and with the base installation have everything other than my printer running with no command lines. The mainstream user wants just that. Net, email, printing +/- 90% of user function for a home use box.
So the use of command lines is NOT require for a base install on a single box even if behind a router.
Lets go back to why VL even exists. In the beginning VL v1.5 to v1.8 where all that existed and was targeted specifically at older machines, (that is old). It was not until v2.5 that Pentium was even supported 2001/2002. So our focus and goal was older hardware from the get go. We still have v1.8 for download and it is downloaded on a regular basis.

What do I think of Vista or Dual core? Not much for the average user it is like a V8 engine in a Volkswagen a waste of energy, resources and will contribute to world landfills in a huge way. That is where we (VL) come in. And why I have been pushing the Greening of VL as a Distro. We are Green we do retask older machines. We do save them from landfills. It is a “choice”, if you live outside the 3rd World only, but NOT if you live within it. Therein lies my problem my dilemma and huge dislike of M$, Vista and Intel/AMD. Along with all the other pigs withholding their drivers from open source.

To see this as nothing but cash grab by all the pigs at the trough would be fooling yourself considerably. Consider Red Hat I heard from a convention participant that Red Hat was pushing proprietary Apps at that convention and did not once focus on Open Source!!
Red Hat as you all know got their capital funds through Open Source…Novell what is that all about ??
So the end result of all this is we (Westerners) have a choice. Others do not. I feel a line has to be respected. Serve those who depend on Open Source for access to knowledge but not exclude VL from expanding into commercial enterprises. A very fine line for sure, but with some well thought out avenues proving to be very possible, without the compromise of our obligations to Open Source. Will I buy Vista, absolutely never. Will I assist others to install VL without command line, yes. Will I assist others to use command line, yes only if the want to. Will I advise others to use Vista, yes if they are convinced they should/must, to try too change their minds is foolish. As rbistolfi and joe1962 pointed out “ That would be prejudices...”
Regards
Darrell
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 03:17:53 pm
When I talk about upgrades, I have the home user in mind. When it's a company or police network, that's an IT decision and individual users don't have a choice. Actually, enterprises have been slow to move to Vista, just as they've been slow to move to any new MS or Macintosh operating system. It's too expensive, as the new OS nearly always requires better hardware than the old OS, software may have to be upgraded or replaced, and there are personnel issues as well (retraining users and facing the unhappiness that always accompanies any change in "the way we've always done it").

Certainly, many people can't afford to replace computers and it's important for them to have an affordable way to be connected to the rest of the world. It's a good niche for Linux. By all accounts, piracy is rampant in many parts of the world and what happens is that people get a cheap Linux computer, remove Linux, and put some version of Windows on it--not a legal copy and certainly free or very cheap. Linux offers people a way to be legal and not use pirated software. But you have to convince them that they want to use it and not Windows and Windows software, and therein lies the rub.

I have a cyber friend who refurbs discarded computers and installs Linux on them. He sets it up to be easy to use. He sells the computers for a low price and gives the potential buyer a trial period (two months, I think). If they like the computer, they pay him the low price. If they're not happy with it, they return it and he refunds the deposit. His hope was not only to provide a low-cost way to acquire a computer but also to give exposure to user-friendly Linux. That's his hope. In practice, though, he says that most of the people who buy the computer remove Linux and put Windows on it. I know we have people on this board who have the opposite experience, but I wonder how closely and how long you follow up on what happens ultimately to the computers you've refurbed. I've found it extremely difficult to convince the computer users I know to give Linux a try. Believe me, I try without going to the point of obnoxiousness.

The idea that getting a new computer in order to run more powerful software means the old computer goes to the dump is false. I've never thrown a computer away. I've always passed it down the family food chain to someone who doesn't have a computer or have given it to a nonprofit organization that needs a computer. If something no longer works, only then does it get discarded--and not to the landfill, to computer recycling. It is illegal where I live to discard things with circuit boards or that contain hazardous materials, which is just about everything in a computer. So it goes to computer recycling. We're in the process of getting together a big pile of computer stuff that no longer works and can't be repaired, or is so old that nobody wants it (as in a 2400 modem, 486 VL-bus motherboard that is huge and wouldn't fit into any case today, a broken monitor, a couple of 200-meg hard drives, two ancient laptops that don't work due to motherboard failures, and stuff of that nature). We have to *pay* for recycling, by the way. But it's the law that you can't just throw these things in the trash.

rbistolfi wrote:
>> I want to point something else, Linux can be interpreted as a realization of a science ideal, about sharing knowledge, mutual collaboration, seek of improvements, etc. MS is trying to hide any good thing they could make (and I am sure they really can do good stuff). >>

Well, here we get into Free Software ideology and I'm not a Free Software ideologue. I know many people on this board are, but I'm sure I'm not alone. I think Open Source is a good way to develop software and when it's free of charge, who doesn't like that? However, I'm willing to pay for good software if it meets my needs better than a free program that does similar things. Why blame Microsoft for following the same business model that has prevailed since before Linux was a gleam in Linus Torvalds's eye? Other companies do the same thing: Apple, Adobe, IBM, others too numerous to mention. As Apple a monopolist with regard to the iPod? Is Apple evil for dropping legacy support as new versions of the Mac OS have come out? In fact, Microsoft has been roundly criticized by many computer experts for including legacy support in new versions of its OSes. It's not until 64-bit versions of Windows that support for 16-bit applications has been dropped. My 1994 16-bit word processor and little 1993 database program and early '90s DOS Correct Quotes are all working under 32-bit Vista. What about Google? Is it poised to take over the world from Microsoft? What about RedHat and Novell, which charge a large bundle for technical support for their enterprise Linux versions?

Like it or not, greed is a large motivating factor in business. It certainly is both remarkable and admirable that so much Linux development is done by unpaid volunteers. That's one of the aspects of Linux that makes it both satisfying and fun to use. However, there is a down side to this model, too. Many very promising projects are abandoned because their developers run out of time, lose interest, or need to earn a better living from their labors. Projects like the Gimp and Scribus would be much farther along if they had enough full-time (and therefore paid) developers working on them instead of a few people working in their evening and weekend free time. This would definitely apply to Scribus, a program I follow quite closely and occasionally use. The reason I use it "occasionally" instead of "often" is that there are severe deficiencies in text handling that are on the roadmap to be rectified, but my, it takes a long time! I've been using Scribus for at least two years and this would-be professional level DTP program still does not have proper hyphenation and justification controls. They'll come in a future version--in how many years?

>> I am sure Bill will be bored of all that money, and perhaps could share or spend it in something really funny, adventurous, exiting and useful. >>

Well, Bill gives away multimillions for education, AIDS research, and childhood immunizations in the developing world. I'd say he shares it and spends it not on something funny, but on vital needs that benefit millions of very poor people. I wish more billionaires did the same.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 16, 2007, 04:47:58 pm
quote]I know we have people on this board who have the opposite experience, but I wonder how closely and how long you follow up on what happens ultimately to the computers you've refurbed.[/quote]

All of the machines that I have placed in service still have Linux. The first machine still
has Vector running fine for the past three years.

The reason that none of my linux machines get replaced by Windows is due to the
fact that I match the OS to the person. I spend more time with my clients to learn the
5 W's (my age is showing) and go from there.

Quote
Well, here we get into Free Software ideology and I'm not a Free Software ideologue


This is not a ideology. It is a system that works and has for centuries. Science shares information,
it does not horde it. The embrace to a new idea, thought or process has to be proven. In IT this
same information (any knowledge) is to be horded, branded and not allowed to be used. So when
a problem is solved by a previous problem and is a step in new problem the original work can not
be used. This is not a good process.

Quote
Well, Bill gives away multimillions for education, AIDS research, and childhood immunizations in the developing world. I'd say he shares it and spends it not on something funny, but on vital needs that benefit millions of very poor people. I wish more billionaires did the same.
.

IIRC Melinda started that not Bill.

My support for the home user having Vista and Office 2007 require more time to teach the "new"
interface. CTL+P does not print in Vista, Office 2007 has a total change in navigation. It is bad
when these users have to ask how to print when they have been using Office for years. Changing
an interface is not always good.

Bigpaws

Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 05:37:40 pm
>> CTL+P does not print in Vista >>

It does in mine. Has it changed in Office? I don't use Office. For everything else I use, control-P prints as it always has.

>> IIRC Melinda started that not Bill. >>

It's the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill provides the money. Melinda has worked fulltime with the Foundation, but Bill is also active and that's what he's going to do when he's out of Microsoft in a year. I know it sticks in the craw of Linuxians to give Bill some credit, but in this I think he deserves it.

>> This is not a ideology. It is a system that works and has for centuries. Science shares information, it does not horde it. The embrace to a new idea, thought or process has to be proven. In IT this same information (any knowledge) is to be horded, branded and not allowed to be used. So when a problem is solved by a previous problem and is a step in new problem the original work can not be used. This is not a good process. >>

Equating IT to science is an ideological stance. Inventions of various sorts have been and are patented. Copyright is guaranteed in the US Constitution and is part of a worldwide agreement (Berne Convention). So just because a group of people decide IT should be shared does not make it so.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 16, 2007, 06:13:03 pm
Quote
Copyright is guaranteed in the US Constitution

I missed that one, can you highlight it for me?

Bigpaws
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 16, 2007, 06:27:25 pm
Quote
Well, here we get into Free Software ideology and I'm not a Free Software ideologue. I know many people on this board are, but I'm sure I'm not alone. I think Open Source is a good way to develop software and when it's free of charge, who doesn't like that? However, I'm willing to pay for good software if it meets my needs better than a free program that does similar things. Why blame Microsoft for following the same business model that has prevailed since before Linux was a gleam in Linus Torvalds's eye? Other companies do the same thing: Apple, Adobe, IBM, others too numerous to mention. As Apple a monopolist with regard to the iPod? Is Apple evil for dropping legacy support as new versions of the Mac OS have come out? In fact, Microsoft has been roundly criticized by many computer experts for including legacy support in new versions of its OSes. It's not until 64-bit versions of Windows that support for 16-bit applications has been dropped. My 1994 16-bit word processor and little 1993 database program and early '90s DOS Correct Quotes are all working under 32-bit Vista. What about Google? Is it poised to take over the world from Microsoft? What about RedHat and Novell, which charge a large bundle for technical support for their enterprise Linux versions?

Granny, I never said a word about money. I hope linux companies and VL could make some money, not only to survive, I hope they can get something back and enjoy some, how say it, a comfortable life. About the other companies, perhaps the answer is yes, perhaps no. I think no company has a so strong attitude in order to build a monopoly. I think Google needs to be discussed too. I think a consortium has to manage the results of web searches, because a private interest can influence in the results order, which is as we know, crucial. I don't care about ipod, if I want to hear good music, I take my guitar ;). But internet is starting to be very important in the way we are related to the culture, information, knowledge, art, etc. So, we have to study if a monopoly can hold and control that kind of stuff.
Perhaps is free software ideology. I think that word, "ideology" sounds a little wrong today, but let focus on our subject. I have no problem with that, my main critic with MS is not it is closed software. The model of distribution and the license, the business strategy, the hole business model, are sometimes, aggressive with the members of this world. It avoid entires countries to access technology, which is crucial, almost a serious crime. I already told about the importance of not wasting resources.
As bigpaws mentioned, the way we handle knowledge today, and the way it is related to the technology production is a very new thing in relative terms. The idea of IP could be sound absurd in other age. This is very much older than free software.
So, I want people  paying for Linux, what I do not want is one company dominating any area in the hole world.

Quote
he says that most of the people who buy the computer remove Linux and put Windows on it.

I have no doubt about that. We are discussing now the cause of that.

Quote
Well, Bill gives away multimillions for education, AIDS research, and childhood immunizations in the developing world. I'd say he shares it and spends it not on something funny, but on vital needs that benefit millions of very poor people. I wish more billionaires did the same.

Well, thats ok, but the origin of the AIDS problem is poverty, and the problem is endemic, it expands in a geometrical way, and Bill's donations are linear. MS model contribute to generate that problem.
What I mean with fun and adventure, is this: ms is not contributing with anything to the history of computing. Their stuff are more from the same, they are avoiding risk, the take secure shots, they don't support innovative ideas.

Quote
I know it sticks in the craw of Linuxians to give Bill some credit, but in this I think he deserves it.

No, he doesn't. The charity thing has no value by itself. If we don't attack the main problem has no value at all. And as I said, MS model is not helping.

Quote
Equating IT to science is an ideological stance. Inventions of various sorts have been and are patented. Copyright is guaranteed in the US Constitution and is part of a worldwide agreement (Berne Convention). So just because a group of people decide IT should be shared does not make it so.

No is not. Computers are deeply related to the actual science. They can help in a lot of problems and MS model is just putting rocks in the way. I don't live in USA, and the patents system is a joke. The original intention was to protect scientist, was not to provide a tool for monopolize the tech world. The Berne Convention has no value in the hole world and legal doesn't mean right. Laws can be changed.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 07:36:59 pm
I missed that one, can you highlight it for me?

Article 1, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power...
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 16, 2007, 07:47:53 pm
Thanks

But isn't the discussion more of patent?

How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.

Bigpaws
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 16, 2007, 08:18:18 pm
I missed that one, can you highlight it for me?

Article 1, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power...
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries

Well, the argument here is MS is not promoting the Progress of Science.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 08:22:50 pm
the origin of the AIDS problem is poverty, and the problem is endemic, it expands in a geometrical way, and Bill's donations are linear. MS model contribute to generate that problem.

Whoa! AIDS afflicts both rich and poor. Social status and money don't protect anyone. Of course, impoverished people have no access to medical care and the medicines that can extend their lives, and there are millions of orphans left by parents who died of AIDS. So it's not just a problem of poverty, but poverty makes everything much worse.

Quote
The charity thing has no value by itself. If we don't attack the main problem has no value at all.

Tell that to someone who has access to medicine because of the Gates Foundation. I have a cousin who is involved in college education opportunities for poor people in rural areas, particularly Native Americans. She and her husband have a proven model for making higher education possible for these people who otherwise could never have access to it. They needed funding because the state either wasn't interested or couldn't afford it. The Gates Foundation came through for them and as a result, many young people were able to continue their educations who otherwise could not have. The Gates Foundation does not just give money away. They look for plans that involve people of the area and that can continue past the initial funding.

Quote
I don't live in USA, and the patents system is a joke.

That's pretty much universally acknowledged. Microsoft is among the companies that want the system to change. What we have now is a constant string of lawsuits. A company can't just refuse to play the game because they're all caught in the system. The law needs to be changed. Patents won't disappear, however.

Quote
The Berne Convention has no value in the hole world and legal doesn't mean right. Laws can be changed.

The Berne Convention has over 160 signatories, including Argentina. In addition, over 140 member countries of the World Trade Organization are bound by the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Argentina is a member of the WTO.

Of course "legal" doesn't mean "right," but since people disagree about what is right, law determines what can be done without adverse consequences, such as fines and prison. Yes, laws can be changed, but until they are, we must obey the laws we have or face the consequences. Consensus is required before a law is changed, and I don't think we are near consensus on issues of copyright and patents.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 08:34:20 pm
Well, the argument here is MS is not promoting the Progress of Science.

In your opinion. That certainly is not self-evident. At any rate, copyright is assumed. You don't have to prove that your work promotes the progress of science. The idea is that without copyright, authors and creative people will not have so much incentive to invest the time it takes to give concrete expression to ideas and thus the progress of science and arts would be impeded.

Copyright is not the same as a patent. Computer programs are copyrighted as expressions of an idea and are thus accorded the same status as a literary work. A patent applies to an invention or process. You are supposed to prove that your idea is original, which brings up questions of "prior art." Prior art is probably the sticking point, as it is time consuming and costly to find examples of prior art.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 16, 2007, 08:38:16 pm
From the Copyright site
Quote
What Is Not Protected by Copyright?

Several categories of material are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection. These include among others:

    *

      Works that have not been fixed in a tangible form of expression (for example, choreographic works that have not been notated or recorded, or improvisational speeches or performances that have not been written or recorded)
    *

      Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring; mere listings of ingredients or contents
    *

      Ideas, procedures, methods, systems, processes, concepts, principles, discoveries, or devices, as distinguished from a description, explanation, or illustration
    *


Is an OS not a system or process?

Bigpaws
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 08:52:19 pm
But isn't the discussion more of patent?

I don't know. I've lost track.<g>

Quote
How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be.

Not "may be," "is." Any tangible expression of an original idea is protected by copyright. "Original" means you didn't copy something that belongs to someone else. You hold copyright to your e-mails. Someone who uses them without your permission is breaking copyright law. However, since our e-mails generally have no monetary value, no court would take on your case.

As for patents, since the Constitutional clause mentions "Inventors" and "Discoveries" it would appear that patents may be covered. I Am Not A Lawyer, though, so I don't know if patents are considered to have their origin and authorization in the so-called Copyright Clause.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on November 16, 2007, 09:10:31 pm
Is an OS not a system or process?

IANAL--I Am Not A Lawyer. But I do know that computer programs have the same protection under copyright law as literary works.

According to the URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENT: TRIPS of the World Trade Organization:
Part II — Standards concerning the availability, scope and use of Intellectual Property Rights
Article 10:
"Computer Programs and Compilations of Data

"1. Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971)."

I don't see how an operating system would not fall under that provision.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on November 16, 2007, 09:17:27 pm
the origin of the AIDS problem is poverty, and the problem is endemic, it expands in a geometrical way, and Bill's donations are linear. MS model contribute to generate that problem.

Whoa! AIDS afflicts both rich and poor. Social status and money don't protect anyone. Of course, impoverished people have no access to medical care and the medicines that can extend their lives, and there are millions of orphans left by parents who died of AIDS. So it's not just a problem of poverty, but poverty makes everything much worse.

Ok, perhaps this will carry us far away from our topic. But the statistics shows the opposite. Of course rich people is not immortal. But the conditions to get a disease (is that the correct word?) are given by the context where we live. Cholera is very weird in the world. But we, a poor country, have it. Because we have no resources to keep a clean, healthy environment, and childes with no food have a tendency, and no water pipes causes infected water. In the same way, we have much more AIDS cases than better countries, because we don't have the resources (human and material resources) to prevent it. This is valid for almost every serious medical problem. Just look at the numbers in poor and rich countries. BTW, medical patents are very important in this problem.
But my point is, a) we are wasting resources. b) we are pushing the direction of research and the investment in research to areas pointed by a marketing strategy and computers are not helping as much as they can, To be honest, they are not helping at all. They are just an element of comfort.

Quote
Quote
The charity thing has no value by itself. If we don't attack the main problem has no value at all.

Tell that to someone who has access to medicine because of the Gates Foundation. I have a cousin who is involved in college education opportunities for poor people in rural areas, particularly Native Americans. She and her husband have a proven model for making higher education possible for these people who otherwise could never have access to it. They needed funding because the state either wasn't interested or couldn't afford it. The Gates Foundation came through for them and as a result, many young people were able to continue their educations who otherwise could not have. The Gates Foundation does not just give money away. They look for plans that involve people of the area and that can continue past the initial funding.

we could quote tons of particular cases and my argument is still there. I admire your cousin very much, and that is a good thing. But if he is promoting a business model that gives the back to the hole world, that activity would be as the Royalty throwing coins to the poor people of the village.

Quote
Quote
I don't live in USA, and the patents system is a joke.

That's pretty much universally acknowledged. Microsoft is among the companies that want the system to change. What we have now is a constant string of lawsuits. A company can't just refuse to play the game because they're all caught in the system. The law needs to be changed. Patents won't disappear, however.

Taken, we need a patent system which actually defends the science. The current is just subordinating science to the market. MS is worry because they will have no software to publish without stealing code from someone else. 

Quote
Quote
The Berne Convention has no value in the hole world and legal doesn't mean right. Laws can be changed.

The Berne Convention has over 160 signatories, including Argentina. In addition, over 140 member countries of the World Trade Organization are bound by the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Argentina is a member of the WTO.

I know, what I am trying to say (very badly) is that is not the writing of God. Even more, part of the international copyright convention was signed in Buenos Aires, I think in 1900.

Quote
Of course "legal" doesn't mean "right," but since people disagree about what is right, law determines what can be done without adverse consequences, such as fines and prison. Yes, laws can be changed, but until they are, we must obey the laws we have or face the consequences. Consensus is required before a law is changed, and I don't think we are near consensus on issues of copyright and patents.
--GrannyGeek

Of course! But I disagree about "consensus". Consensus didn't made the current law, was power, and fight. The war is mother of all the things, used to say some greek. And we have to keep in mind, people has not to be pushed to break the law! That is, the circumstances are very important, and the hole problem of law is how to pass from a general law to a particular case. That is not easy even more if the social environment is very aggressive, like the case of poor countries. 

Well, the argument here is MS is not promoting the Progress of Science.

In your opinion. That certainly is not self-evident. At any rate, copyright is assumed. You don't have to prove that your work promotes the progress of science. The idea is that without copyright, authors and creative people will not have so much incentive to invest the time it takes to give concrete expression to ideas and thus the progress of science and arts would be impeded.

Copyright is not the same as a patent. Computer programs are copyrighted as expressions of an idea and are thus accorded the same status as a literary work. A patent applies to an invention or process. You are supposed to prove that your idea is original, which brings up questions of "prior art." Prior art is probably the sticking point, as it is time consuming and costly to find examples of prior art.
--GrannyGeek

Of course, is my opinion. I think I give some arguments to support that idea though. Some are very bad, some not, some were missed in the debate. But - I think - the opposite is not clear neither, MS is at least, walking in the edge. We, as spectators and actors, can discuss the thing, but power will decide. Finally the true both, time, will judge.
Patents and Copyright are not the same, indeed. The GPL means nothing without copyright (you can't license something you are not the author). The difference between patents and copyrights is very clear to me. But the way we are using that tools (that is what the law, and perhaps the hole language, is) is under question here.

I think power and money imply some kind of responsibility, some kind of duty. We have a duty with the world around us. And more if that world gives us a privileged position.

Well, I think I have enough to think about. Thanks for a good debate, again.

EDIT: I want to re-read "The Library of Babel" story by Borges now. There is a logical argument I think goes against the "author" idea. And is an incredible piece of literature. For those interested in the "software" concept, there is something there. I give a famous english translation, here: http://jubal.westnet.com/hyperdiscordia/library_of_babel.html
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: bigpaws on November 16, 2007, 10:03:49 pm
Quote
We have a duty with the world around us.

I couldn't agree more.

Bigpaws
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: lordreinko on December 13, 2007, 07:04:35 pm
lol very true
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 14, 2007, 08:10:46 am
Um ... what were we talking about?  Oh yeah:  Vista sucks. 

"Homer: Yeah, Moe, that team sure did suck last night. They just plain sucked! I've seen teams suck before, but they were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked!" - from The Simpsons

To paraphrase:  I've seen OSes suck before, but Vista is the suckiest suck that ever sucked.

Okay, that's not really fair.  Windows 95 was worse, and Windows ME was possibly even worse than that.  But Vista sucks pretty bad.  It's a resource pig, it's buggy, it doesn't offer much substantively over XP (which for Windows I like pretty well), et al., documented pretty well on the web at this point.  I read recently that XP is Vista's biggest competitor.  I know that certain people have had a good experience with it.  That notwithstanding, a lot of people haven't.

I get a lot of calls from "friends" who know that I know a little about computers, and these friends tell me something like "my computer isn't working, could you fix it for me?"  I've been getting a lot of these calls about Vista since it came out.  It's a P.I.T.A.  Lately I've been telling people who aren't real friends that I'm too busy and that if they need help they can call the DorkSquad™.  Others I help and then give them a copy of VL 5.8 Live and show them how to run it.

Oh, and just for the record, I am a Free Software ideologue.  Sure, companies have the legal right to distribute binaries without the source code, but I think it's immoral.  I think that people have a moral right to do what they want with their computers.  That's why the FSF was founded, that's why the GPL (and other Free Software licenses) exist, and it's one of the many reasons I use Linux. 
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: nubcnubdo on December 14, 2007, 08:31:08 am
Quote
Both Mac OS and Mac Intel combined command less than 7% of the market share, while Windows Vista already accounts for over 9%. Not impressed? Factor in how long Mac OS has been available, and then remember that Vista has beaten that in a year.

source
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/3716486
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 14, 2007, 10:13:44 pm
To paraphrase:  I've seen OSes suck before, but Vista is the suckiest suck that ever sucked.

Or as the Romans would have said: "Vista suckinus suckinorum in suckula sucklorum est."

Lately I've been telling people who aren't real friends that I'm too busy and that if they need help they can call the DorkSquad™.  Others I help and then give them a copy of VL 5.8 Live and show them how to run it.

I'm an attention whore, so I would probably just do what they told me.

Oh, and just for the record, I am a Free Software ideologue.  Sure, companies have the legal right to distribute binaries without the source code, but I think it's immoral.

Immoral? I don't know, but I remember how strongly I disagreed with Jaron Lanier's recent op ed about how open source or free software (or, the unambiguous term I prefer above them both, software libre) is unoriginal. He cited examples like Google's PageRank algorithm and Adobe Flash as examples of commercial innovation, but I see several faults with that view:

You can see I had to get that off my chest. :) I don't know about any significant examples of innovation in the interface of software libre programs, but that's not where the magic happens anyway. Anyway, to say that free software is essentially derivative is absurd.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 15, 2007, 07:26:33 am
Hanumizzle,

You make some excellent points.  Actually, immoral might be a little strong, but proprietary software does not exist for the best interests of what is euphemistically called the "end user."  It exists for a very small number of people to make a very large amount of money.  There's nothing wrong with making money, but morally it helps if the exchange of goods/services for money is somewhat balanced.  Since the introduction of closed-source unFree software (30 or so years ago ... ?), that balance has not usually been present.  Since the dominance of Windows in the desktop market began, things have been even less balanced.  I don't care if the guy does give a lot of money to charity, it's money he made from selling people sh*t sandwiches, when they didn't have much other choice (or didn't know that they had a choice, which comes to the same thing).

Anyway, Vista sucks.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Freston on December 15, 2007, 07:46:19 am
My dad is hospitalized after a nasty accident. To keep him from starving from boredom I bought him this:

HP notebook
AMD64 (1.83 Ghz dual core)
2 GB RAM
Windows Vista Home Premium

From power on to first (light weight) application running: 4 minutes 20 seconds
From power on to disk indicator light off: >6 minutes
CPU usage on idle: fluctuating heavily from 1~25%
RAM usage after boot: 27%

Ratio of warning messages while starting third party applications: 1:1
Text of warning messages: You are running this application as user with limited rights. This application needs you to run with administrator rights. Do you want to cancel? Yes/No
=> So you have to say 'No' to start the application. And please, what safety measure is it if the system encourages you to run applications as administrator??

=====

Compared to my machine:

Packard Hell EasyNote
1.5 Ghz Celeron
512MB RAM
Vector Linux 5.8 SOHO

From power on to first application running: 1 minutes 35 seconds
From power on to disk indicator light off: 1 minute 35 seconds
CPU usage on idle: 3~7% (Depending on Amarok)
RAM usage after boot: 90%
Note: My lappy starts in full productivity modus. OOo, Konsole, FF, KCalc, Amarok, SuperKaramba and Kontact are all loaded and ready to go.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on December 15, 2007, 02:03:10 pm
My dad is hospitalized after a nasty accident. To keep him from starving from boredom I bought him this:

HP notebook
AMD64 (1.83 Ghz dual core)
2 GB RAM
Windows Vista Home Premium

From power on to first (light weight) application running: 4 minutes 20 seconds
From power on to disk indicator light off: >6 minutes
CPU usage on idle: fluctuating heavily from 1~25%
RAM usage after boot: 27%

Sorry about your dad's accident. I hope he has a speedy and complete recovery.

Those startup times are quite long and don't match my experience. Vista on my laptop is ready to go in about two minutes, which is still too long but sure beats 4-1/2 minutes. There is probably a load of unnecessary programs running at startup, or it's looking for a networked computer or drive or printer that isn't there. Do Start menu, type msconfig in the search box at the bottom, and check the Startup tab. Everything in there can be unchecked without killing Vista, though you'll doubtless want some of it. But chances are extremely high that there'll be useless stuff like media players, Quicktime, HP-specific utilities "to make things easier," and other things that don't need to be there. Another thing that delays startup is heavy antivirus software such as Norton. Replace it with something lighter (AVG Free is supposed to be easier on resources and less intrusive on the system). If he's behind a router he doesn't need a software firewall. He doesn't need three antispyware applications running.

One thing responsible for a lot of disk activity is constant indexing of the hard drive in order to speed up searches. I turn it off entirely.

If your father can be trusted to get his own critical updates, he should choose manual Windows updates rather than automatic. If he can't go completely manual, at least have updates set to notify you they're available and you can get them on your terms.

There are several services that don't need to run and take up memory. You have to be cautious with disabling services and processes. Look at http://www.blackviper.com/WinVista/servicecfg.htm for help with what services you need and how to disable those you don't want.

Windows will always use as much memory as it can. This is actually a good thing because why have memory sitting idle doing nothing? It's similar to Linux, where we have buffers and cache in memory so things can happen faster.

For better performance, turn off the eye candy such as transparency, Flip 3D, live Taskbar thumbnails, and any gadgets in the Sidebar you can live without. I have the Sidebar turned off entirely.

Quote
Ratio of warning messages while starting third party applications: 1:1
Text of warning messages: You are running this application as user with limited rights. This application needs you to run with administrator rights. Do you want to cancel? Yes/No
=> So you have to say 'No' to start the application. And please, what safety measure is it if the system encourages you to run applications as administrator??

This is for the sake of backward compatibility. Programs written for Win 9x or Win 3.1 or DOS don't conform to the NT series distinctions between administrator and user. So you couldn't run your oldies at all if there weren't a way to say "run as administrator." At least the user gets some notice that a program is doing something.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 15, 2007, 09:37:28 pm
I don't care if the guy does give a lot of money to charity, it's money he made from selling people sh*t sandwiches, when they didn't have much other choice

Even as a secular near-pagan generic monotheist who listens to black metal, I should point out that Bill Gates' charity is very, very self-aggrandizing, the kind that the gospel of St. Matthew looks down on. He likes it when people write puff pieces about him which, I guess, is OK, but then he wrote puff pieces about himself too.

Windows will always use as much memory as it can. This is actually a good thing because why have memory sitting idle doing nothing?

Because most users, regardless their niche or level of experience, want to run applications with that memory, rather than some operating system. The best kernel / low-level user-space suite is the one that tries to stay out of the way.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: GrannyGeek on December 15, 2007, 10:39:29 pm
Because most users, regardless their niche or level of experience, want to run applications with that memory, rather than some operating system. The best kernel / low-level user-space suite is the one that tries to stay out of the way.

The memory IS used for applications. The things kept in memory are those that are likely to be needed by an application or the OS. If all physical memory is used and an app needs memory, things are released from RAM or paged.

I have two gigs on my Vista computer. I've never run out of physical memory.

I don't have technical knowledge of the inner workings of any operating system. I'm just repeating what I've read and been told by those who do have this knowledge.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 15, 2007, 10:47:42 pm
I don't have technical knowledge of the inner workings of any operating system. I'm just repeating what I've read and been told by those who do have this knowledge.
--GrannyGeek

You're absolutely right, but I'm sure you'll agree that a Linux system running, say, Xfce4, has much less bloat than Vista even with all the unnecessary junk turned off.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: nubcnubdo on December 17, 2007, 02:14:40 pm
Headline: Vista and Leopard both make it onto PC World's "Biggest Tech Disappointments of 2007"

The reason why Vista disappoints, according to one reader:
Quote
The reason - Multiple Processors

I can not speak of Leopard but Vista is a problem where the "Why and How" is well known.

This time last year it was clear that the Vista team had built its operating system assuming that clock speed on future processors would be faster. This was in spite of Intel and AMD begging Microsoft to use free tools that would make the operating system product really thread and take advantage of dual, quad, and more processors that are clocked slower than PCs built in early 2007.

So today we have a situation where Vista runs slower than operating system products which can take advantage of multi-processors - like Linux - and operating systems which were coded in an age of slower single processing machines - like XP.

I really enjoy this article because it can be followed up by a neat history lesson. It was not so long ago when Intel and Microsoft were collaborators - a duopoly - and the US antitrust cases Microsoft has dealt with could have been filed against Intel just as easy as they were filed against Microsoft.

But Microsoft took the heat and Intel behaved as it was expected to by US antitrust law - it began retraining its employees and behaving like a competitor rather than a duopolist and hence avoided the heat. So closer to now...

In 2007 Intel allowed Apple to use its dual processors in a product offering just as a company not operating as a collaborator with Microsoft should do and by Mid 2008 every decision maker involving Itanium, a last collaboration involving Microsoft, was removed from the company as were its collaborating wrong doers at the respective partner companies (HP was also involved). This action was the doing of ZDnet/Cnet who by fine reporting forced the US congress to obtain testimony involving secret dealings between the three companies.

If Itanium had gone forward, the Vista team's assumption that clock speed on future processors would be faster would have held true. So this "assumption" was really based on anti-competitive behavior and the belief that Intel could still operate as a collaborator and an exclusive collaborator with Microsoft.

Vista's disappointment involves Alchin, the now gone head of the project, who was also the man who doctored video tape evidence in the second US antitrust case but somehow avoided jail time. The testimony involved removing the browser from the operating sytstem product which Microsoft officers did not want to do because the competing browsers and Java enablers threatened the business model.

Vista will be salvaged. It is not impossible to rework the operating system product so it takes advantage of multiple processors. The question we should ponder is how silent was the Vista team? Was that kind of team what the US and the world needs to come up with outstanding and life bettering products? Or is that team - which likely was highly oriented not to discuss anything that might alarm Alchin and Microsoft top management - poorly constructed and full of yes-master culture of silence communicators.

Frank L. Mighetto CCP
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 17, 2007, 04:01:14 pm
Quote
The reason - Multiple Processors

...

Vista's disappointment involves Alchin, the now gone head of the project, who was also the man who doctored video tape evidence in the second US antitrust case but somehow avoided jail time.

With a name like 'Microsoft', I wouldn't put any of their execs in an American prison either, for pity's sake.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: nubcnubdo on December 18, 2007, 12:33:27 am
concurrency (parallel programming)

The Free Lunch Is Over:
A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software, by Herb Sutter*
(March 2005)
http://gotw.ca/publications/concurrency-ddj.htm

*Herb Sutter now a chief (software) architect for M$.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Faster Chips Are Leaving Programmers in Their Dust (Dec 17, 2007)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/technology/17chip.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Freston on December 18, 2007, 03:25:30 am
GrannyGeek Thanks for explaining those issues with Vista, I appreciate it. My dad has no connection atm, and no connection to look forward to in months to come. He'll survive, but he crushed his knee real real bad and he'll be institutionalized for a couple of more months.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: BlueMage on December 18, 2007, 04:19:42 am
Faster Chips Are Leaving Programmers in Their Dust (Dec 17, 2007)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/technology/17chip.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Quote from: Article
Engineers and computer scientists acknowledge that despite advances in recent decades, the computer industry is still lagging in its ability to write parallel programs.

This is just silly.  I did engineering, with a substantial focus on software design and implementation (not as great a focus as on the mechanical and electrical/electronic but substantial enough that over a four year course, I did at least two computer subjects per year) and at least two of those subjects focussed on multi-threaded programs and parallel execution.  Granted, we worked on single-core devices, but the leap from multi-threaded single-core to multi-threaded multi-core seems (to me at least) to be nothing more than removing the software-based job scheduler and using a hardware implementation on-die that assigns threads to cores.

Naturally, I'm probably oversimplifying, but surely it shouldn't be much more than I've described :/

(I still love Vista - UT3 has hardened the cement of my love that is Crysis)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on December 18, 2007, 05:30:57 am
BlueMage:

Obviously I don't know if the article is correct, but I think the argument is that actual programming tasks can't be split to satisfy the speed of future CPUs with 12 or more cores.  No matter if software or hardware based scheduler is in charge. Basically, you will have cores idling because the program has not logically independent tasks (that is, tasks that can run in parallel) to provide.
Surely, IT analyst likes to say that everybody is making a mistake, and the actual paradigms will be obsolete in two weeks just to look smarter than the rest. That said, I am pretty sure MS, or one of the speedy-junkies-programmers will find the way.
That is if MS can distract their 10000 devs of their real job: to write security patches ;D

PS: I realize engineers, philosophers, scientists of any kind, rock singers, and gamblers have a tendency to build inductive conclusions from just a few cases.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: BlueMage on December 18, 2007, 05:42:55 am
well yeah, I'm generally assuming one thread per core in most cases :/  I don't expect to split threads, unless they were already amalgamated for whatever reason.

Also, we engineers are allowed to use inductive reasoning - we're usually a bit under the weather.  The rest are all just poseurs  >:(
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on December 18, 2007, 05:56:22 am
Quote
Also, we engineers are allowed to use inductive reasoning - we're usually a bit under the weather.  The rest are all just poseurs

LOL, Indeed, on that list, I only trust in engineers and gamblers.

<free-thinking-edit>
Quote
Also, we engineers are allowed to use inductive reasoning (...) The rest are all just poseurs

Actually,  inductive reasoning is involved in the building process for axiomatic systems, without them engineers (and anything using math) are nothing.
</free-thinking-edit>
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 18, 2007, 06:03:48 am
Quote
Alchin ... who was also the man who doctored video tape evidence in the second US antitrust case but somehow avoided jail time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... hiccup ... hiccup ... *snort* he he he he he hmmm.

These guys never go to jail, and if they did it would be the kind with the golf course and the clam bakes, not the kind where you end up married to the guy with the most cigarettes.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 18, 2007, 08:14:08 am
Quote
Alchin ... who was also the man who doctored video tape evidence in the second US antitrust case but somehow avoided jail time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... hiccup ... hiccup ... *snort* he he he he he hmmm.

These guys never go to jail, and if they did it would be the kind with the golf course and the clam bakes, not the kind where you end up married to the guy with the most cigarettes.

Justice is blind, but damned if she can't hear coins jingling in a rich man's pockets
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: BlueMage on December 18, 2007, 02:35:49 pm
Quote
Alchin ... who was also the man who doctored video tape evidence in the second US antitrust case but somehow avoided jail time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... hiccup ... hiccup ... *snort* he he he he he hmmm.

These guys never go to jail, and if they did it would be the kind with the golf course and the clam bakes, not the kind where you end up married to the guy with the most cigarettes.

Justice is blind, but damned if she can't hear coins jingling in a rich man's pockets

Of course she can - blind folk usually have far more acute hearing :)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Lyn on December 18, 2007, 02:52:05 pm
Interesting article on the BBC that sums up most of my concerns about Vista:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6319845.stm
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 18, 2007, 04:04:36 pm
From the BBC article:

Quote
In the name of shielding consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience" from the user.

In my mind, this is the logical end result of non-Free (as in freedom) software.  Whose computer is it?  Is it yours, or does it belong to or is it under the control of some company?  If you read most end user license agreements, your rights vis-a-vis the software and therefore your computer are just about zilch.  Since the monetary stakes are so high now in terms of multimedia (music, television, film), proprietary software makers want as much control over your computer as possible.  If you use Windows Vista, they already have quite a bit.  This isn't really about Microsoft per se, but the Windows Genuine Advantage is the genuine advantage the Microsoft has over you, the computer owner and user.

I know that I've been called a nutjob and conspiracy theorist, but we're not talking about alien abductions, Big Foot, or the Illuminati here folks.  This is all a matter of public record and has been reported on extensively in respectable news media.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 18, 2007, 04:17:05 pm
I know that I've been called a nutjob and conspiracy theorist, but we're not talking about alien abductions, Big Foot, or the Illuminati here folks.  This is all a matter of public record and has been reported on extensively in respectable news media.

Microsoft even owned up to their own predatory behavior (cf. Halloween Documents). The situation would only be comparable to so-called 'alien abductions' if a common sleep abnormality convinced the user that Microsoft had taken their computer over and made it completely slow and unusable.

Not that I'm saying that ever happened to me.

(Remember to sleep on your sides, kiddies...)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 18, 2007, 04:50:45 pm
Hanu,

The breakdancing teddy bear is mesmerizing.  I could watch it for hours.

Yeah ... the Halloween Documents ... Linux is a cancer ... SCO becomes MS's sock puppet ... imaginary patents ... etc.  It's almost easier to believe in alien *cough* abductions.

How much do these aliens think they can learn from the human rectum, and how many probings will it take to learn it?

Quote
(Remember to sleep on your sides, kiddies...)
ROFL

Tom
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 18, 2007, 05:31:38 pm
Hanu,

The breakdancing teddy bear is mesmerizing.  I could watch it for hours.

Who doesn't love Pedo Bear? Well, maybe small, vulnerable children.

Quote
(Remember to sleep on your sides, kiddies...)
ROFL

That's a not a reference to extraterrestrially-administered anal probes. It's honestly the best way to avoid hypnagogic sleep paralysis, the cause of stories about, e.g., incubi and alien abductions. I can't sleep on my back for that reason.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: BlueMage on December 18, 2007, 08:30:19 pm
Hanu,

The breakdancing teddy bear is mesmerizing.  I could watch it for hours.

Who doesn't love Pedo Bear? Well, maybe small, vulnerable children.

Your Pedobear distubs me.  However, I'll raise you a Leonida-bear.

Or I would, if ED still bloody had it!

Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 19, 2007, 02:40:58 am
Learn something new every day ...

I've heard of the Pedo Bear, but had no idea that was the guy.  He looks better than in his mugshot.

I also had no idea that sleeping on your side was the best way to avoid hypnagogic sleep paralysis.  And I've had hypnagogic sleep paralysis, except instead of incubi, sucubi, or extraterrestrials, I always have an '80s hair-metal band take me on their bus to tour around the country.

Anyway, Vista sucks.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 19, 2007, 02:45:15 am
I also had no idea that sleeping on your side was the best way to avoid hypnagogic sleep paralysis.  And I've had hypnagogic sleep paralysis, except instead of incubi, sucubi, or extraterrestrials, I always have an '80s hair-metal band take me on their bus to tour around the country.

If that band is Guns n' Roses, even an incubus is better. I'd feel less violated myself.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Freston on December 19, 2007, 03:52:52 am
So by deduction, if I want an anal probe I need to sleep on my back...


That's a bit contra-intuitive, isn't it??  ::)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: rbistolfi on December 19, 2007, 05:19:52 am
So by deduction, if I want an anal probe I need to sleep on my back...


That's a bit contra-intuitive, isn't it??  ::)

Here we say: "Is not user friendly."
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Freston on December 19, 2007, 05:38:10 am
Quote from: rbistolfi
Here we say: "Is not user friendly."
ROFL  :D Anal probes are not user friendly, I agree. See? Even alien technology has room for improvement.
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: exeterdad on December 19, 2007, 06:00:51 am
I think we all can agree that sleeping on ones stomach is invitation for a anal probe.  As seen in South Parks, "Cartman get's an anal probe" episode.
(http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~mmibab/ass.jpg)
After probe installed
(http://underworld.fortunecity.com/jedi/434/anal.probe.jpg)
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on December 19, 2007, 06:42:02 am
Chef: "Hey, down here. We are ready for your wisdom. And you only got twenty minutes before Sanford and Son is on."
Title: Re: vista sucks
Post by: tomh38 on December 19, 2007, 09:18:50 am
For a little Christmas/Yuletide/Whatever cheer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyUENvhsHi4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyUENvhsHi4)