General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2194795

    Vista, is it really worth it?


    by dave the computer guy ·

    Ok so I have to say I?ve been reading all the articles on Vista. I see all the visual improvement and hear about all the security enhancements and I have to ask myself is it really worth it?

    First off there are these really cool new window effects. Ok I have to say they look very cool. But from what I?ve been reading I?ll need a 256 Meg video card just to use them. Then if this is the case how are my games going to react? If I need a 256 Meg video card for a game I?m trying to play do I then need a 512 card to accommodate both my game and windows? Or am I going to have to drop my windows display into a lower mode every time I want to do something graphical?

    Then there are all these comments about how secure Vista will be. I?m sorry it?s a Microsoft operating system and I don?t care how secure they make it some one is going to crack it. Then I read about how the new Windows Defender will help block Spyware and prevent viruses. Well I have a Antivirus / Firewall / Spyware removal software that works just fine for that now.

    Finally what version of the new Windows will I buy? There are seven to choose from and the question then becomes how expensive is this venture going to be?

    Don?t get me wrong, I?m not going to just ship to Linux (though I thought about it). I like windows; I just wish Microsoft would take the time and produce something original. Even the new Windows effects look just like a combination of the new Mac OS and an OS by Sun called project looking glass.

    I guess I?d like to hear other people?s opinions on Vista and see if I’m just a radical or if others agree.

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3076916


      by choppit ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Personally, the only way I’ll use Vista is if it’s preinstalled and the only reasons I’ll buy an off the shelf box is as a gaming machine for my son, (he’s a 2 1/2 year old Linux user at present so I’ve got a few years yet). I’m predominantly a Linux user myself and ceased to be impressed by eye candy a long time ago (particularly where it imposes a performance penalty). I can understand the marketing drive behind Vista but personally I’ve found W2K and XP to be stable and secure enough for (my) home use. At work however, we’re likely to stick with MS on the desktop for the foreseeable future so will inevitably move to Vista as systems get replaced.

      • #3100158

        I’m with you guys

        by lesmond ·

        In reply to Vista

        I agree totally with you – it’s a Microsoft OS, and will without question be hacked. Of all the recent MS offerings, I personally prefer 2K, as all the XP eye candy is a pain, and I shouldn’t have to go to all that bother to turn it off. I offer PC support services, so will probably have to have a copy or two of Vista to get to know it, but I’m migrating to Linux for personal use. Few of my clients use XP in an office setting, 98 and 2K would be the most widely used, and I won’t be recommending moving. I can’t understand why I need 1GB of RAM and a 256MB video card to type a letter, when I can do the same job on my ThinkPad 701CS running Windows 95.

        • #3265211

          Eye candy?

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to I’m with you guys

          But just think of how GOOD all the new effects will make your word processor look while you are typing your letter!

        • #3265198


          by k12linux ·

          In reply to I’m with you guys

          I’ve been heavily in the tech field for quite a while. I’ve worked with Windows and attended “vendor information” sessions from MS since the Windows 3.0 era.

          *Every* version of Windows released has been accompanied by an army of marketing folk telling everyone how “this version” (3.1, NT v3.51, 95, NT v4, 98, ME, 2000, XP) of windows was developed with security and stability as it’s primary goals.

          We’re told that “this version” fixes all those design mistakes in the currently available versions. “This version” has the best performance ever. “This version” will kill UNIX and any other operating system because it is so secure. “This version” is so secure that the NSA and DoD have certified it. Etc.

          Yet nearly every version has included new features which security experts warned (well in advance) would expose the system to unacceptable risk. The experts explained why these things were bad ideas and how they could open a security hole yet MS went ahead and implemented them anyhow.

          Perhaps MS got it right this time. Maybe Vista really will be super-secure, super-stable, super-fast and super easy to use all at once. I won’t hold my breath. I’ll wait for it to be on the market for a while and see how it fairs in real life. THEN maybe I’ll consider upgrading if there are any confirmed compelling reasons to do so.

        • #3265139

          SSDD – got thar right!!

          by lesmond ·

          In reply to SSDD

          Personally I don’t bother with a “new” Windows release until at least the first service pack. I’ve only installed XP on one of my “work” PCs (which hides behind a very secure hardware firewall) about three weeks ago, although its been on a test bench machine for a year or so now.

          It amazes me that they get away with it. Suppoes a massive marketing budget always helps.

        • #3265095

          Marketing budget

          by k12linux ·

          In reply to SSDD – got thar right!!

          > It amazes me that they get away with it. Suppoes a massive marketing budget always helps.

          I remember when the XBOX was coming out around the same time Gates introduced “Trustworthy Computing” and vowed to end computer security woes in Windows. (2002 I think.) Security would become THE number one priority.

          Anyhow, I thought that their real commitments were pretty clear when they spent $100 million on trustworthy computing over the next year but $500 million on the XBOX launch alone.

        • #3263924

          Security has always been BG’s greatest concern

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to Marketing budget

          We are just a little confused about what BG wants secured: the M$ profit margin, all other priorities are secondary.

        • #3263784

          Poor old Bill

          by a_fairb ·

          In reply to Security has always been BG’s greatest concern

          Poor old Bill is riding a runaway train which needs huge cash injections at regular intervals. Trouble is 90% or more of the apps users actually need/use worked fine on 95, 98, 2k… The driver as always will be Office. The main reason our NT4 clients are being replaced is that they can’t run better than office 2000. Some users have bought Office XP or 2k3 and now we have to upgrade for compatibility. If we all just got off the train quietly and stuck to Office 2000 or OpenOffice, we would save a fortune and MS would have to find another way to part us from our cash.

        • #3263607

          Vista is so far away

          by itperformance ·

          In reply to SSDD – got thar right!!

          I have been running the latest build for Vista from MSDN. So far I am not impressed at all. I am running this on a an athlon xp 2800 processor clocked at 2.2 ghz, 3 gigs of ram and 300 gb SATA drive with a 256mb nvidia card. So far I am very discouraged. I remember running the bet a version of xp and it was a much better performer than this release of vista. The operating system looks pretty but functionally it is terrible. It is extremely slow does not interface well with or at all with most applications, which means you’ll have to wait for patches and or next versions of all of your applications. The hardware drivers are getting better from previous builds but still not there either. There are way to many clicks involved for simple tasks. Their are duplicative icons in control panel. The only positive so far is no BSODs. The security features are more of a nuisance then a sense of a security. It it is microsoft be sure that every hacker will be after it. I’m staying with XP it is solid does what it needs too, if you have good sense when using your pc and have firewalls hardware and software security should not be an issue. Of course there is always linux.

        • #3265190

          Similar with OSX

          by dlmeyer9 ·

          In reply to I’m with you guys

          Lesmond says:
          “I agree totally with you – it’s a Microsoft OS, and will without
          question be hacked.
          I can’t understand why I need 1GB of RAM and a 256MB video
          card to type a letter.”
          All right, now. First point … Vista could be the most secure
          consumer OS in the world and, because it’s from Redmond it
          WILL be hacked. This is what happens when folks HATE you. I
          don’t see a solution to this unless Bill Gates can hire Dr Who to
          help heal old wounds.
          The latest OSX (Tiger, 10.4) requires 256MB (512MB is
          noticeably better) RAM and a graphics card twice as buff as the
          previous version (Panther, 10.3) needed … for EYE CANDY. I’ve
          never seen a Mac in the wild with the eye candy turned ON!
          Maybe you can’t do anything about some of it, but folk turn OFF
          what they can. There are plenty of wonderful USEFUL features in
          Tiger, what’s this thing with genie-effects and the like?

          So … my sympathies, Windows guys. It’s one thing to chuckle
          and say silly things like “your new OS stole its ideas from our old
          one” and quite another to say “Oh, GAWD, not you, too!” And
          you Linux guys? You’ll likely get yours soon enough – and we’ll
          ALL be drowning in Eye Candy!

        • #3265020

          Eye candy already on the way for Linux

          by k12linux ·

          In reply to Similar with OSX

          > And you Linux guys? You’ll likely get yours soon enough
          > – and we’ll ALL be drowning in Eye Candy!

          Take a look at the (cool) videos at:

        • #3263919

          not likely

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Similar with OSX

          With Linux, sure, we’ll have some serious eye candy interface issues . . . except that with Linux you avoid these issues by just not installing the eye candy crap in the first place. It’ll probably be another ten years before a Linux kernel is developed that can’t run on an old Intel 386.

          No worries about drowning in eye candy on Linux. Just don’t jump in the eye candy pool, and you’ll be fine. I like to go wading in the two inches of eye candy called WindowMaker, and avoid the fat, bloated desktop environments like KDE and GNOME (both of which are feather-light in comparison to the Windows Explorer desktop for Windows XP).

        • #3263751

          Eye candy

          by craig ·

          In reply to not likely

          Being a graphic designer by trade , I am guilty of enjoying the odd bit of eye candy… I used to support MS systems in Advocates chambers but have recently completed the Novell clp certification and have been blown away by how powerful linux is , so much so I have not even booted my MS machine since completing the course, by all accounts I’m still a newbie in the world of Linux but so far I’m extremely impressed .

          I really do not see the attraction for a pretty looking gui anymore if the performance does not justify it being there.At least with Linux you can do away with the frills , if you eliminate the frills in Vista what do you have?… yup you have a resource intensive win2K.

        • #3285606

          A little too early for that question

          by jchapple ·

          In reply to I’m with you guys

          No point to talk about it now. Vista will not be out for a while. Just read up on the features, and see if there is a business justification to move. Right now, I cannot find one, especially since I will have to replace all my hardware to get it to run.

      • #3100157

        XP is fine

        by davmax ·

        In reply to Vista

        Personally I too can see little benefit in Vista at this stage. XP gets attacked but it really is not difficult to be well protected. Yes hard for the uninitiated.

      • #3100132

        Too much trouble…

        by ian lewis ·

        In reply to Vista

        I look after a network with Win2k (pro and Server), XP and Server 2003.

        Quite frankly the whole Vista thing looks like a waste of my time at this point. Microsoft have got themselves into a really odd position with multiple flavours of OS. (Yes Linux has it too but the development paths are by different groups).

        As it is there are a large number of Server 2003 options available. Is that strictly necessary? Having two versions of XP was on odd decision especially as Home is so lame, even weirder that so many suppliers ‘recommend’ XP Pro and sell Home by default.

        I’m happy to stick with Server 2003 for now. Windows 2000 and XP are fine too. The users are happy so I’m happy. Vista is just going to create a whole new (W)industry for Microsoft to use as a cash cow (they hope).

        In the meantime I’ll be keeping my eyes open and if, and only if, Vista is the best tool for the job will I use it. Maybe when it’s been out for two or three years, but by then Linux may well have sorted out the desktop.

        • #3100113

          Wait for the ‘final’ Vista Service Pack

          by chief makota ·

          In reply to Too much trouble…

          History has taught me that when dealing with Microsoft OS you gotta wait for their ‘final’ service pack before you touch it. I can guarantee you that there are lots of ‘holes’ in Vista that will need patching up as soon as it hits the market. I certainly am not going to upgrade to something that needs extra resources when I am doing just fine with Xp. Frankly I think Bill is trying hard to re-invent himself. Peace!

        • #3265228

          Seen this type of thread before…

          by drew17 ·

          In reply to Wait for the ‘final’ Vista Service Pack

          Some people are always pushing to have the latest and greatest regardless of the costs and despite the fact that there is no need for the upgrade.

          Like the guy above, I run a network that has about 90 workstations with probably a 70 / 30 split betwee Win2K Pro and WinXP Pro.

          WinXP offers nothing more to my users than Win2K. Granted, I’ve come to like XP — but it took a long time to get used to it. Having some legit training towards certifications in Win2000 Pro and Server I found that adding WinXP machines to the network offered a few challenges that took some time to overcome.

          I’m comfortable enough with WinXP now that I’ve worked the kinks out and got things set up the way I like. As time goes by I plan to replace the Win2K machines with XP pro.

          The last time I participated in one of these threads a guy said that “people like me” are just cheap and lazy but he failed to offer any technical justification for the undertaking the project.

          It’s the same argument I have about upgrading to the latest version of MS Office.

          Tell me what people NEED that they don’t currently have with Office 2000 and/or office 2002?

          Give me some reasonable justification to spend the money and I’ll consider it.

        • #3265205

          Yeah Right… Office updates

          by geeck ·

          In reply to Seen this type of thread before…

          Bill has often pulled update “OR ELSE” with many of his Office updates. From 95 to 97 there was an incompatibility between Word that forced an update of all Office 95 suites to Office 97 in a workgroup. Then another incompatibility in Excel from 97 to Office 2000 that forced another upgrade… To me this is absolutly crimminal in nature. He trys extends this same philosophy into OS development. Hey, they don’t call it the WIN-TEL cartel for nothing… “A Windows O/S forcing us to buy bigger and “better” Intel processors.

        • #3106335


          by darktearz2005 ·

          In reply to Yeah Right… Office updates

          I agree with you geeck, I started out on win98 then upgraded to ME to fix all the so called glitches, then I went to 2000…then bought a brand new computer. And as we know anything you buy new comes with the “new” OS, to make a long story short, I have gotten used to WinXP and I dont plan on upgrading unless I have no other choice. Hence the reason for Vista, eventually Microsoft will stop supporting XP then no one will have a choice but to upgrade. Its just a way to make more money and make people buy, I myself have been considering going to a Linux based system, I think it would be less trouble.

        • #3265137

          I couldn’t agree with you more

          by lesmond ·

          In reply to Seen this type of thread before…

          You are so right with this one. I can’t see the point in spending thousands on software that won’t make me more productive. I recently spent a week using a Windows 95 laptop with Word 6 (because I wanted to, and the laptop is a really cool one – ThinkPad 701CS, with the fold out keyboard) and got as much done as I would have with XP and Word 10.

        • #3263746

          Cheap and Lazy?

          by craig ·

          In reply to Seen this type of thread before…

          Who ever called you cheap and lazy has never been in charge of a budget and has too much time on their hands to sit around contemplating upgrades… have you ever considered an open source solution?.

          Linux offers much cheaper and much , much more stable solutions.Even if you stick to windows OS and upgrade to Open Office .

          It all boils down to the “if it’s not broken , don’t fix it” philosophy.

        • #3263749

          Final Service Pack?

          by craig ·

          In reply to Wait for the ‘final’ Vista Service Pack

          Is there such a thing as a final service pack… MS is like a fancy British sports car , looks goods but needs heavy and constant maintenance

        • #3264003

          Yes, about 3 – 5 years after release

          by kf6akz ·

          In reply to Final Service Pack?

          Certainly there’s a final SP; there are no more patches or upgrades being offered for DOS 6 or Windows 3.11, are there?

          Most places I’ve worked don’t install any MS products for 2 – 5 years anyway. The last place I left in 2005 was just getting around to upgrading the workstations to Win2k, and NOBODY had XP. This seems to me to be typical in the larger corporate environments.

        • #3263987

          small problem

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Yes, about 3 – 5 years after release

          That sounds like a great idea except for one small problem.

          Actually, it’s a huge problem. It’s even a bigger problem than security issues from an unpatched system.

          The problem is the EULAs. Ever since Win2k SP3, there has not been a Windows EULA that I’d trust on a computer that will hold any data of any importance whatsoever. You can always protect an unpatched system with firewalls, third-party security, and so on — even just take it off the Internet and use it as an isolated system to protect against security crackers, if need be. What you can’t protect against is representatives of Microsoft coming to your door pressing their legal privileges to control what’s on your computer if you have a Windows version any newer than Win2k SP2.

          I find Windows to be technically inferior, personally aggravating to use, and odious to my sensibilities because of the corporate practices of Microsoft, but I still occasionally find myself needing to use Windows. When I have to use Windows, though, I stick with Win2k SP2, because I don’t want the legal hassle that comes with any later versions. That’s just too much risk for me.

          I’m amazed so many people don’t share my reticence.

        • #3263075

          Final Service Pack? No such thing

          by flylta ·

          In reply to Final Service Pack?

          Everything out of Redmond since Windows 95 has been a service pack. Some they charge for and “Call” a new OS but lets be realistic, they are trying to fix what only works sometimes.

        • #3263134

          Vista Looks Pretty and that is all I am giving it at this time….

          by tom.x.spencer ·

          In reply to Wait for the ‘final’ Vista Service Pack

          I have been beta testing Vista for some time now and the only thing everyone is hitting on target with is the Eye Candy. Yep it is pretty cool and that is where I am going to stop. I say leave the Eyecandy to Graphics programs and Games. Give me a lame Windows 98 looking interface again and I am happy. If you must have eye candy put on Window Blinds. Much cooler skins for the OS.

          Working as a Systems Admin for a Engineering Firm that like to stay “CUTTING EDGE” we are going to deploy Vista as soon as it rolls out. What do I know I only have to support this stuff. Corporate makes the decisions ultimately. I have not seen much speed performace in Vista over XP with SP2, I will also give it the fact that it does boot quicker. Personally I like my morning stroll to get a cup of coffee and relieve myself of the presures of morning traffic. So that does not bother me.

          What really bugs me is the Login to the network. I do not feel it necessary that everytime I login I have to either type my whole freaking e-mail address/ passwor or Domain Name\Username / password to log in. Bring back the old style there.

          I was able to run all of the visual effects with a 128 PCIE card and 512MB RAM so I am not sure where you are getting you need a gig and 512MB but as of now in this current beta I can max out on eye candy and it is not taking much of a toll on the OS as if it was off.

          The only thing I think Microsoft should focus on is Cool effects for the home users and a stripped down interface for business.

          There is my 2 cents on this discussion…

        • #3265215

          When they say they “recommend Windows XP Professional” …

          by tommy higbee ·

          In reply to Too much trouble…

          … that really means, “Microsoft agreed to help pay part of the cost of this ad if we add the blurb that we recommend Windows XP Professional.”

          In other words, the verbiage is just something they have to add to the ad in order to get marketing funds from Microsoft, not an actual recommendation by the vendor.

          Why do they do it? Saves money on the old advertising budget.

        • #3263744


          by craig ·

          In reply to When they say they “recommend Windows XP Professional” …

          Just means that the vendor’s bottom is alot more sore than it was before he placed the add on his box

      • #3265076

        I could be wrong.

        by oldmarine ·

        In reply to Vista

        But this looks just like that SUN interface from a year or more ago. Looking Glass I still have a demo of it.

      • #3265597

        Use what works for u!

        by emil7055010015 ·

        In reply to Vista

        for me it doesn’t really matter, something’s worth if it is cost effective. it can be linux, mac os or windows. there is no such thing as 100% secure until the end of time, unless otherwise you kill all the people who always find fault of something there will always be vulnerability.

        • #3265477

          Who or what is u?

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Use what works for u!

          Is that just a typo, or is u an abbreviation of a corporation’s name? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say.

        • #3264116

          “u” is for you

          by emil7055010015 ·

          In reply to Who or what is u?

          sorry, doing text messaging on my phone freaquently just got into me!

      • #3264257

        IE-7 beta. Is this a fortaste of VISTA?

        by michael_orton9 ·

        In reply to Vista

        Just downloaded copy of IE-7 beta. I believe this will be shipped with VISTA.
        Initial impression.
        The worst browser I have ever used.
        Prefer Opera (win and Linux), Firefox (win & Linux).
        Both Firefox and Opera were very easy to learn.
        I gave up on IE-7. Even Spry Mosaic was easier to learn.
        Suppose I will have to get used to it, just to sort out other peoples’ PCs.
        Thats the only rreason I will try it again!
        Its a Creative, Realistic, Artistic Product, pity it is so hard to learn.

        • #3083780

          IE-7 beta. Is this a fortaste of VISTA

          by abobble2 ·

          In reply to IE-7 beta. Is this a fortaste of VISTA?

          If IE-7 is hard for you, then using any broswer is probably hard for you. You must be one of those persons that shy away from learning and/or using different types of programs, (i.e.lazy) and only use what is easiest for you rather than take the time to learn something new. I found nothing new nor different in using IE-7 than it was to learn to use Foxfire, with some exceptions.

        • #3106204

          IE 7 Beta

          by rgeiken9 ·

          In reply to IE-7 beta. Is this a fortaste of VISTA?

          Well, at least you got a chance to try it. I have downloaded it twice, and after getting about 1/2 way through the install, it comes up with a box that says that it can’t install it because of some cryptic comment which didn’t make any sense. I use Firefox now which I am very satisfied with. I only use IE 6 when absolutely necessary. I don’t think that I will ever use a Microsoft Browser full time in the future. They don’t innovate frequently enough to suit me. I also like Tabbed Browsing and can’t imagine not having that function available.

      • #3087460

        The 1 % Solution

        by j.a.leo ·

        In reply to Vista

        The 1 % solution to Microsofts, and therefore 90% of all users is simple.

        Take the top 1% of product developers across the board and have them perform the activites of a RED TEAM that agressively and very intellegently searches out every possible flaw immaginable in all product designs and force the other 99% in the development teams to incorporate their finds into the product designs before any coding begins.

      • #3106247

        OS as Toy or Tool?

        by mlansing ·

        In reply to Vista

        What a lot of this really boils down to these days is whether someone wants an OS for enjoyment or to get work done. Both are legitimate purposes – but let’s be real, with the cheap, relatively high performance hardware out there, we should be at a nice comfortable plateau where things just get better, not necessarily fancier, just cause they can. I have a mix of business, soho and home users as clients and I am just now getting folks comfortable with XP. MS should slow down the train and concentrate on crafting one (each) rock solid OS for home users, business users and multimedia users. I would be happy with an XP service pack 10 if all it did was address emergent hacks.

    • #3100156


      by orjan ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      So far, the only interesting thing I found is Bitlocker in the Enterprise version. By having the oppurtunity to restore the key through AD it should be a good solution for larger companies who needs to protect their data. I wonder though if the protection is good enough to handle the legislative demands in the U.S and Japan. Anyone knows? Third party solutions like Pointsec(which includes Linux, PDAs etc) costs approx. the same, have a bit better security today, but gives an overhead in the organisation. Anyone having a good insight in this?

      • #3100154

        Not Worth an Upgrade

        by wilko ·

        In reply to Bitlocker

        Having run through the latest preview build, which is suppossed to be feature complete, it’s hard to find anything exciting. Yes it’ll be more secure and bug free than XP (not hard to do)but it’s still just Windows with a cleaned up interface.

        We’ll get it at work since it’ll ship on new machines but for home use I’ve used Linux for a few years and have never missed Windows.

        Despite the massive advertising campaign MS will launch prior to release it’s hard to see why any home user would pay to upgrade an existing system for it.

    • #3100153

      Cost of Use going up?

      by swlchris ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      If the latest requirements are anything to go by, I don’t see too many 399.99 specials on tv from Dell being in the future.
      I have multiple operating systems on this machine which would miserably fail running Vista if their specs are to be used.
      I run XP Pro with 256 of ram, Vista would choke.
      I have a 32 meg Nvidia that Vista would laugh at. I have a 10 gb partition, don’t even wanna go there about bloatware.
      I’m not about to spend 2 grand buying the latest 3.0 or higher cpu and 4 gb of ddr and all the assorted extras to run a os ,which if I read more about, seems to have some issues that will take years more of writing patches to run half decently without totally screwing up.

    • #3100151

      At home

      by mjwx ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I’m going to stick to XP, Maybe I?ll have a vista on a separate partition but that will only be for testing/games that require vista (Damn Microsoft ) I want most of my ram, video memory, and processor power dedicated to whichever game i am playing at the time.

      At work, only if I have to. Most users wont want to switch to Vista anyway and I’m sure the cost of additional licenses (we’re a MS partner ) if not the cost of new HW to support it will certainly dissuade management.

      I don?t really want to see too much new from MS, I would rather see what they’ve got right get better. XP is a good OS for desktops. Yes I know its far from perfect but it’s nearest competitor can only manage 4% of the global desktop market (there a good reasons for this, mainly its lack of operability with other OS’s).

      Hype will only get you market domination, you need a decent product to keep you there. XP (and 2000) are functional if imperfect and I’m yet to see any business drop it in favour of Mac’s .

      The deciding factor in Vista’s success will be weather the mass average users (which are getting smarter in my experience) find vista easy to use. This being said I think the HW requirements will come back to bite MS as the great unwashed masses are pretty impatient.

      • #3100148


        by i.minchall ·

        In reply to At home

        Having used most of MS operating systems complete with crashes
        freeze ups, virus’s, security flaws, etc etc. i opted for a mac running
        OS X Tiger 10.4, end of problems.
        Take a close look at Vista then compare them to OS X Tiger you can
        see where MS have got there ideas from, and with a new version of
        OS X leopard to be released by the end of the year well!! no

        • #3263931

          Look at Tiger

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to Vista

          Cannot connect to an SBS server. Difficult with a 2003 native domain, Havent tried it with linux (NIS if I remember correctly) and it wont even recognise our 2000 BDC.

          Look at Vista (Beta)

          Can connect to SBS server and a regular 2003 domain, 2000 domain, Linux domain (Running Samba) and I am willing to put money on it to run under a NT domain.

          Mac OS is not a network able OS. It was designed to stand alone and bundling it with proprietary HW just increases the cost. This makes it useless from a business POV.

          Crapple are yet to make a viable alternative to Windows. That?s why they [b]still[/b] only have a 4% share in the global desktop market. The Mac server market share is non-existent. Apple’s “switch” to Intel based processors was the best chance they had to increase market share and that failed because of cost (mentioned above) and it inability to function in a domain. To business and consumers OS X 10.5’s release will not even be noticed. I don?t see this changing any time soon.

          As IT professionals we have to prepare for vista weather we like it or not.

        • #3263741

          MAC NOT Network ready?

          by craig ·

          In reply to Look at Tiger

          where’ve you been?… Of course MAC is network ready and has been for a while… they have the Xserv as a MAC server , all of which run on a unix platform now.

          Yes the cost is an issue but not because it cannot be done .You are not at the mercy of MS anymore , you have options LINUX being a very viable one , just a bit of research and bobs your uncle , this lie down and die mentality is why MS can dictate the terms.

        • #3265586

          I have been trying to get a MAC or 4 to talk to a SBS server

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to MAC NOT Network ready?

          Mac’s will under no circumstances will talk to a PC running SMB signing thus making an entire network vulnerable to man in the middle attacks.

          Ever tried to use an exchange calendar on a Mac.

          All I can say is that virtual PC for Mac?s is a good thing. Now i have solved all my NW problems by running an XP virtual machine on a Mac.

        • #3265451

          Er, what?

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to I have been trying to get a MAC or 4 to talk to a SBS server

          You’re out of touch. MacOS X runs on the Darwin kernel, incorporating Mach and BSD kernel code, so you can run Samba on MacOS X just as you can on Linux or *BSD. You can also run NIS, NFS, and a slew of other networking technologies that MS Windows can’t touch.

          Back to the textbooks for you. You have some homework to do.

        • #3264198

          I’d rather just get the mac’s out of the way.

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to Er, what?

          Two IT staff have 50+ workstations and 15 servers (all running winblows) to take care of BEFORE mac’s.

          Besides life is so much easier with only one crappy OS to deal with.

      • #3265222

        History lesson…

        by blarman ·

        In reply to At home

        You might want to check your history to see how Windows got where it is. There is a reason why the European Union has imposed huge fines on Windows for refusing to interoperate better with others. The reasons Windows maintains a hold on the desktop is because of some fortuitous historical events, deep marketing pockets, and a legal system that can’t operate fast enough to mean anything – not because of superior products.

        I personally prefer Windows 2000. I turn off the “Luna” interface on every XP box I have to work on because I hate having to relearn where all the admin settings are whenever a new OS gets put out. You don’t see that on Linux or Mac.

        I can’t see myself getting a PC with Vista on it. I’d rather build one and find a copy of XP Pro. I don’t want to tie up my graphics card and system resources on an OS interface no matter how cool. I don’t have a computer for the Operating System, but for the applications and being able to USE it.

        My 2 cents.

        • #3263934

          Mac’s cant go through a single upgrade

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to History lesson…

          Without changing everything on the interface. I have to work on 3 Mac?s, 2 10.4?s and 1 10.3 and all have different interfaces. XP hasn’t changed at all in 5 years and 2 service packs. If you turn off the “Luna” interface it hasn?t changed since 2000.

    • #3100150

      Looking forward to vista.

      by cr ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I personally am looking forward to vista, i think a more integrated/intuitive environment is what everyone needs, and hopefully this is one step towards that. With every new release it brings windows closer to something that everyone will enjoy.

      I dont believe linux is very practical even these days, getting wine to run the latest apps that are just released is always a hassle and sometimes just not worth the trouble. So until the apps i use are linux native i dont think ill be switching any time soon.

      • #3265279

        At what cost do you value your “Intuitive(ness)”?

        by maxx57 ·

        In reply to Looking forward to vista.

        You think that a higher price then the cost of XP is worth your money? Sure Vista will inevitable clear up all the gripes we have with XP, but how many new issues are we going to face? And at a higher cost? Why in the world would anyone ligically want to pay more for the same operating system then requires even more money to run (hardware)? Answer that for me and I’ll think about switching.

        • #3265229

          i think i have heard this before

          by avid ·

          In reply to At what cost do you value your “Intuitive(ness)”?

          every time MS releases a new OS i hear the same thing. “i will not buy it.” But what choice do we really have ? Other people will buy it. since it is my job to make sure my clients systems are running, reguardless of their chosen OS, i will buy vista. Because i have to learn vista so that i can fix vista when when my client’s vista machines break.

        • #3265177

          Some people need them…

          by overcharge ·

          In reply to At what cost do you value your “Intuitive(ness)”?

          ‘course some people need a car that will do 140+, but only drive on roads that are posted up to 70.

          Couple years back, a customer brought in a Celery HP and wanted to know why it wouldn’t run a $9 game. The video requirements were 256M, and the card would have cost more than his computer did new.

          First you try to talk them out of it, then you sell them what they wanted in the first place. Sometimes it’s hell being honest.

      • #3265213

        Are you looking forward to this?

        by nighthawk808 ·

        In reply to Looking forward to vista.

        Palladium: Microsoft’s plan to decide for you what you can and can’t do with your own computer. DRM won’t be an add-on layer to the OS, it will be an integral part of it. So forget about buying a CD and then copying it to your hard drive so you don’t have to put it in the drive every time you want to listen to it. Forget about fair use–Vista will put an end to that for you. And with Vista’s “Trusted” Computing platform being deeply intertwined with the hardware, when hackers pwn your M$ OS, they’ll pwn your metal, too.

        Microsoft’s partnerships with–among other scumbags–Sony, the company that brought you the XCP rootkit, should tip you off that allowing Vista to control your computer in a way that they deem acceptable is a VERY bad idea.

        Practical, to me, means being able to do what I want with my computer without worrying if Linus Torvalds, Bill Gates, or anyone else decided that it’s ok. On this front, Linux is orders of magnitude more practical than Windows will ever be because Vista is a step backward in practicality.

        Why wait for a native Linux port of some application when there are probably already half a dozen programs that do the same thing (and probably more) for free? Just because the name is different doesn’t mean the functionality is different.

        • #3265161

          Who supports Linux applications?

          by scifiman ·

          In reply to Are you looking forward to this?

          Windows “owns” the market for the foreseeable future so they have to be concerned with media rights, piracy, etc. much more than Linux. It’s a concern for Apple also as they have to deal with that a lot more. Not easy to find a middle ground for protecting rights yet giving users as much freedom as possible. It will take a while for them to work through these digital rights issues. It’s easy to be a starving artist when your young, but once established and getting an income from movies, music, writing, etc.- you sure don’t want to go back.

          As for the app’s on Linux, sure they have several of everything, somtimes dozens. Most aren’t all that great though, and if you have 30,000 users that all need to be using the same application, then you have to pick one. And find support for it. And other companies you communicate with have to support it with zero effort on their end. If I pick some obscure small application from the Linux distribution that becomes mission critical at my company, can I just call Novell for support? Or is it just one of 1500 little app’s they stuck on the DVD to fill up the space. Can I call the 20 year old that wrote it in his college dorm for help or request new features? At least MS is a central stop for everyone. Probably another reason it’s hanging in there, warts and all.

        • #3263731

          WTK AGAIN?

          by craig ·

          In reply to Who supports Linux applications?

          It’s called research… how do you keep a job with that mentality , you’re lazy . Why the hell would you chose an obscure app , clearly you’d make sure that the app is a viable solution beforee implementing it . Don’t get me wrong I’m not for or against any OS they all have their pros and cons , your attitude and work ethic needs adjusting , there is more Linux support than you could ever hope for , YET AGAIN… RESEARCH!

        • #3265672

          linux app support…

          by cr ·

          In reply to WTK AGAIN?

          there is plenty of linux support, but alot more apps are made for windows which could make you be forced to rely on an obscure app, also with alot of apps out there, theres a high chance that they will stop developing their app, this seems to be the nature of linux and a community that thrives on people living in their basements coding.

          I think this is due to one thing and one thing only, if ur developing an app are you going to write it for the majority or the minority? and alot of people would think that there is no need to port their apps to linux thus we are left with a windows biast market.

        • #3265631

          You have that backwards.

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to linux app support…

          When was the last time you got stuck with a copy of a highly functional, suddenly unsupported open source office suite, operating system, or development environment? Answer: never, because even if the original maintainer gives up on it others can pick up the slack, and the community at large is always willing to help out for free.

          When was the last time you got stuck with a copy of a highly functional, suddenly unsupported closed source proprietary office suite, operating system, or development environment? Answer: every time the vendor comes out with an expensive new version, or gets bought out by a rival, or is split up because of an antitrust case, or files for bankruptcy, or any of a myriad of other reasons.

          What kind of support is your Office 97 getting these days?

        • #3264546

          Support for older, outmoded Windows software

          by wizardtranslations ·

          In reply to You have that backwards.

          “What kind of support is your Office 97 getting these days?”

          Great support. Not from Microsoft, of course, but then again, I never relied on Microsoft for that. In fact, I don’t remember ever calling or emailing Microsoft.

          However, because there are/were so many users, it’s pretty easy to find an answer.

          Remember, most of the user’s problems do not come from computer bugs, but a lack of knowledge on the part of the user.

          Similarly, when you contact the hotline of a software manufacturer, they seldom solve your problem by sending you a new version. Most of the time, they tell you how it’s done and it works.

          So the real question, when you talk about support, is “how can I find the data I need”.

          Ask some random people if they know how to display hidden characters in Ms Word 97. How many people do you have to ask before you find one that knows? 2 or 3 at most.

          Take OOo. Do the same test, same question. Out of 10 random people, you will be lucky to even find one that knows what OOo is, let alone knows how to use it.

          Bottom line is, if there are more users, chances are the “support” (access to data) is better.

      • #3263928

        CR, Nighthawk and my thoughts on the future.

        by mjwx ·

        In reply to Looking forward to vista.

        CR: I am looking forward to having a play on the finished Vista (having used the 2 most recent Beta?s) but that is all I am looking forward to. Your problem with Linux IMO is that you are treating it like Windows. Linux does an excellent job at being a server but at the moment it does a dreadful job at being a desktop.

        Nighthawk: agree with everything you said but vista is coming weather we like it or not and as IT professionals we have to be prepared.

        All: In 5 to 10 Years OSS will surpass if not replace MS and other proprietary OS?s in the server arena at least. Within 15 we may very well see the same happen on desktop PC?s.

        • #3263822

          I agree

          by cr ·

          In reply to CR, Nighthawk and my thoughts on the future.

          that was actually what i was trying to convey in my message, that it is a dreadful desktop. I love linux, i love it to bits. however it was my main operating system for a grand total of 3months… then what happend? same thing that happens to most people who try linux, couldn’t get some damn peice of software working that i wanted. so i came back to windows. I love the stability of linux, and the tabbed desktops, and all the little features that make linux linux, but without the fancy apps that do things THE WAY I WANT THEM TO BE DONE, it just aint good enough. there may be a different app that is made for linux to do a task, but if it dosn’t handle as nice as the windows alternative then im going to choose windows anyday.

      • #3263735


        by craig ·

        In reply to Looking forward to vista.

        Dude do some research , linux has native apps that can replace those that run on windows… unless it’s gaming you’re after , then go and buy a playstation , computers are for adults that can think for themselves , MS takes away that function and has us rely on what they want us to do with a product that we paid for , it’s like Toyota dictating the terms in which you drive one of their vehicles even though you’ve paid for the thing.

        • #3263597

          Re: WTF?

          by cr ·

          In reply to WTF?

          dude wut are u on, linux does not have native apps to replace ALL those on windows, would you like some examples? photoshop, flash, dreamweaver, adobe prmeier, office (ok so maybe there is an alternative but its not as nice as office), sure some of these can be emulated, but not all, and i know in my experience of running linux as a desktop, there was always a time i’d come across an app i wanted to run that wuldn’t run on linux.

          Also, i do play games, but even without wanting to play games i still wouldn’t goto linux due to the other apps i like to enjoy using, i think perhaps you need to open your eyes alittle wider and look at what other people use their computers for and not just what you do, which is probably nothing.

        • #3265624

          replacement apps

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Re: WTF?

          There’s at minimum one highly functional equivalent professional grade alternative for each type of application you mentioned. I have listed here the application type, the application example you gave, one application example each that runs on Linux and is open source, and a URL for getting that open source Linux-compatible alternative.

          high functionality image editor
          Photoshop: The Gimp

          Shockwave Flash development environment
          Flash: FlashDevelop

          WYSIWYG web authoring system
          Dreamweaver: NVU

          nonlinear video editor
          Premiere: Cinelerra

          office suite
          MS Office:

          Games work just fine on Linux. In fact, with the use of Cedega (which costs significantly less than Windows), games often work [b]better[/b] on Linux with faster frame rates than you’d get on, for instance, Windows XP.

          The moral of the story:
          Don’t open your mouth if all you’re going to do is stick your foot in it. Clearly, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

        • #3265593

          re: replacement apps

          by cr ·

          In reply to replacement apps

          My point of the original post was that there may be replacement apps but they are inferior. also that ‘flashdevelop’ dosn’t even seem to be a replacement to flash… but u can prove me wrong if u want.

          also cedega also reiterates my point as it dosn’t play things that have just been released, for example Oblivion, which fails to run on cedega (i have used winex in its pervious forms and that was always the case then as is the case now).

          gimp is the only app there that may even have a chance of standing up against its counterpart, and these are all mainstream applications in windows, applications that almost everyone here knows of.

        • #3265569

          Are you really this dense?

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to re: replacement apps

          Oblivian will work now with the patch that doesn’t force the game to use pixel shader 2.0.

          Hell, tons of Windows boxes *STILL* can’t run the game either, so I fail to see your point.

          As for Cedega not working: You are full of it. The 1.10 patch for WoW (a big patch) was EASY to deal with. The folks at transgaming are on top of MAKING GAMES WORK ON A PLATFORM THEY WERE NEVER MEANT TO WORK ON.

          Please also answer why you think the apps are inferior? What functionality is missing?

        • #3265448

          don’t expect a useful response

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          That schmuck hasn’t even looked at the applications in question, most likely, and thus won’t have any clue what functionality is or is not missing. He also keeps using this mysterious “u” word. I can’t find it in any dictionaries indicating something that fits the context of his message — not even the incredibly bloated and “liberal” Oxford English Dictionary. Do you know what “u” means?

        • #3265346

          “U” is some type of Lemure I think

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?


        • #3264175

          I think you should both admit your thick

          by cr ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          saying did i read the list of apps is stupid, if u read and knew the apps in that list you would have noticed that flashdevelop is actually a windows utility not a linux one… and also is not a replacement to flash at all.

          quote: “FlashDevelop is a .NET open source script editor designed mostly for Actionscript 2 development. FlashDevelop is very quick to setup and easy to use as an external editor for the Flash IDE or as a complete open source development environment.”

          so common, dont be such idiots about things when clearly you havn’t read into things yourself.

        • #3263985


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          jmgarvin: “Lemur” you say? Frink! Frink ptang!

          cr: Apparently, you’re not paying very bloody much attention. You don’t seem to be aware of the existence of Mono — an open source implementation of the .NET framework for operating systems other than Windows.

        • #3265828

          cr is just as clueless as I thought

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          A) He didn’t get the “joke”
          B) He’s never heard of mono

        • #3265827


          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          “mono” means monkey in Spanish. “.NET programmer” means monkey in English. Any connection? 😉

        • #3265778


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          That’s bloody well hysterical. I’m glad I read that [b]before[/b] I took a drink.

        • #3265734

          More monkey business…

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          Kind of gives a whole new meaning to “one-banana problem”, doesn’t it?

          And, an extra special bonus joke:

          It has been hypothesized that if an infinite amount of monkeys had an infinite amount of time, one of them would eventually finish WinFS.

          See RFC2795 at

        • #3265710

          That’s just beautiful.

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          It brings a tear to my eye, it does. Thanks, nighthawk808.

        • #3084092

          Night, you’ve made my day

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Are you really this dense?

          This is high comedy that (saddly) I don’t think certain posters can understand (let alone comprehend)

        • #3265849

          Thanks, apotheon

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to replacement apps

          After seeing that same tired argument a few bazillion times, I created a list to copy and paste. A few months ago, I polished it up, expanded it, and put it on the Web at

          Thanks for saving me the trouble of Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V. I’ll have to add FlashDevelop and NVU to the list, though. I can’t stand Flash, and I hand-code my HTML, but apparently some people would find those apps handy.

        • #3265845


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Thanks, apotheon

          Thanks for the list. I’ll be using it, I’m sure.

          As for web dev tools . . .
          I do all my web development with three aterms open on one workspace (for vim and sftp) and Firefox open on another.

        • #3285534

          NVU = Dreamweaver???

          by wizardtranslations ·

          In reply to replacement apps

          I can’t really speak about some of these apps, but when it comes to comparing Dreamweaver and NVU,…

          What was that thing again? “Stick your foot in your mouth”?

          If NVU is anywhere near DW, I certainly missed some functions.

          Would you be kind enough to explain how to handle layers in nvu? Where are all my quick code bars? Where are my predefined js? How do I set-up the local server to test my php code? How do I handle the site on the local disk? Where is my site-wide search and replace? Where is my auto update of links when I change a file name? Server-side apps?

          I am not knocking on NVU, which is a nice bit of software, but it still has a LONG way to go before it compares to Dreamweaver.

          That said, these days, I hardly use Dreamweaver, because I like HTML-kit better (not a WYSIWYG editor, but really awesome).

          The issue Linux/Windows is a no contest if favor of Windows when it comes to applications. Why?

          Because most good apps from Linux are available for Windows and the other way around is not true.

          Suppose I prefer The Gimp, or simply don’t have the cash for Photoshop. Fine, no big deal. I download The Gimp for Windows, and I am up and running within the hour. I have the choice.

          On the other end, on Linux you *have to* find replacements and make it work. And if a function you use all the time isn’t available, too bad. And if many functions are not available (like in the case nvu/DW) tough luck because you don’t really have much of a choice.

      • #3153819

        Probably the biggest improvement since Windows 3.1

        by dinkster ·

        In reply to Looking forward to vista.

        While many people focus on the fancy user interface, the underlying development model in Vista is a radical improvement. This is probably the biggest deal since Windows 3.1 (I am dead serious).

        Vista is a dramatic improvement in UI design and development and in web communications and development.

        Most first wave apps may likely be minor ports of old apps. However, the new apps that make full use of WPF and WCF should be dramatically better than our current Win32 apps.

        WinFX is a really big deal that will chnage the computing world, at least from a developer perspective.

        I for one can’t wait!

    • #3100149


      by compsale ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Vista is a Microsoft product so there are 3 guarantees. 1- It will not work properly. 2- It will be full of holes that you can drive a truck through. 3- it will require hundreds of patches within the first 12 months. In addition, we are also hearing that to take advanatge of any of these new whiz-bang features, you will need huge RAM, huge Video Ram and very high speed CPU’s, factors out of reach of the average computer user.

      • #3100146

        Not one but 4 operating systems . . .

        by paredown ·

        In reply to NO REAL SECURITY

        So far as I understand it, the OS stream will be divided into four different flavours–like XP Home, XP Professional, Media center and a new fourth variant that will be like the Pro-pro version—this will be the only one available with the keyless install disk for corporate licence clients & the other three will use some variant of the existing authentication. So (in typical MS fashion) a huge amount of what is “new” is closing the door on piracy and has little to do with customer experience.

        I for one hate the XP Home/XP Pro divide (as a support issue)–this is merely a way to price up the curve for the extra authentication abilities for real networking–and invariably someone freelances on machine purchases with the “wrong O/S”

        And watch for even tighter DRM interference from MS for the Media Center variant…MS is now in bed with the “content providers” that are limiting fair use (no I’m not talking piracy, but if I purchase a CD, I think I should be able to rip it to MP3’s and use it on whatever device I happen to have lying around . . .)

        Add in the hardware reqs/bloatware installs, & I see little to look forward to …

        OTH, I’ve been playing with Ubuntu (and some other new distros like Novell/SuSE) and can only concurwith the others–MS will face little competition on the desktop, if only because the open source spend unconscionable amounts of precious development time on pet projects and leave some basics undone (like interoperability among Linux variants, standardized driver models, printer support, etc.) OTH Linux has won the smart device market…

        Call me blue …

    • #3100145

      Vista in the workplace, XP for home

      by tsteele ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      The hardware independent deployment aspect of the “commercial” versions of Vista will make it the OS of choice for large-scale operations. Being able to create a single image without having to worry about hardware variations will be a huge time saver for me.

      However, for the typical home user, I don’t see a great advantage of Vista over XP. The increased hardware requirements will make performance unacceptable on most machines in existence today. As others have pointed out, no matter what MS does, security will ALWAYS be an issue.

      The home market is tough to crack — look how many people still run some version of Win9x. IMHO, the only way Vista will dominate the home market will be through the OEM deals MS cuts with the manufacturers.

      • #3100109

        Yeah, right…

        by mckinnej ·

        In reply to Vista in the workplace, XP for home

        At my place of employment we’re still running W2K on 1.8 GHz Celerons with no upgrades in sight. Based on our upgrade schedule, I can expect to see Vista at work in 10 years or so.

        With tight IT budgets such as ours being the norm, I seriously doubt there will be a massive movement to Vista. There will have to be a significant and measureable business need to justify the cost. I’m not seeing that. This machine/OS are getting the job done. The steep hardware requirements make Vista an even harder sell. The initial market for Vista lies in the gamers and other early adopters.

      • #3265304

        Well if the target is corporate they as mistaken.

        by gprinsloo ·

        In reply to Vista in the workplace, XP for home

        I do not see corporate clients running out to upgrade every computer so that their users can have a great 3d gamming experience.

        Increased security at an average upgrade cost of say 100USD for hardware over and above the upgrade cost to the new OS. For a corporate with 100 machines. I think not. Its easier to incorporate an additional firewall into the existing configuration to increase security yourself or if YOU MUST place a new vista as a firewall/proxy on the corporate frontend if you think you can trust microsoft before the 2nd service pack.

        Perhaps a marketing strategy to compete with game consoles or telling the user that Xbox will be incorporated in vista might lure the home user or gammer, not corporates.

        I think users like voters world wide have become tired of empty promises and hyped up scam to sell a product or election promise.

        • #3263725


          by craig ·

          In reply to Well if the target is corporate they as mistaken.

          Got to hand it to Bill , the fact that we are all discussing Vista on this forum means that we are aware of it and are indirectly making other people aware of it , good press or bad press Bill is getting a great deal of Advertising through forums like these… was it planned to delay the release of Vista or have just not enough people discussed it yet.Bill might know as much as my Jack Russel about IT itself , but the bugger sure is a heck of a businessman .

          To be quite honest I think Vista will be the turning point for MS , they have alot to live up to when comparing to other OS’s (visual effects aside), if this is as shaky as XP was on first release we might find larger corprations switching to Linux or Linux type OS’s , Could Vista be MS’s monkey on the back .I think so.

      • #3263596

        Corporate Why?

        by dave the computer guy ·

        In reply to Vista in the workplace, XP for home

        I?d have to agree with the other posts. What advantage is there in this OS vs Win 2K or XP? I see you mentioned installs imaging. Most large scale corporations already have an imaging solution, such as Norton Ghost, so why would you pay for a new OS just to get something you already have? It?s the same with the new AV and Spyware stuff. We already run a corporate version of AV, Spyware removal, and Firewall. How do you justify budgeting for a new OS when you already have all these solutions in place and they work just fine.

    • #3100143

      Going to Bomb…

      by richards_unsubcribe ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Heres my take… half the boxes in the world are scarcely suitable for 98se let alone Vista… we’re talking a jump from 18 million lines of code to over 50… many boxes already groan under XP. Add the upgrades, patches, memory hungry apps, spyware, anti-spyware, Norton/AVG, software based firewalls, throw in a few open port viruses/trojans/worms after some idiot kid hooks the unprotected box directly to the net… the browser gets hijacked…then there’s that Sony rootkiit fisaco… need I go on? At the rate were going your gonna need a Cray just to run the basics. Vista will be bloatware, 1/4 the code alone will be devoted to various “security” issues such as the prevention of piracy…. then Microsoft has to make everything backward compatable from drivers to app support…. granny is not gonna give up her Word 97 that easily… and if it works for her why the heck should she?

      The average “surfer” can get by quite nicely with Win2k… what do they NEED Vista for anyway?

      It’s the equipment manufacturers who are driving this… desperate for another “prroduct cycle” with the “bigger better faster” hype … a bigger faster computer will certainly be needed to run the MS Vista bloatware that’s for sure.

      How many manufacturers offer a Linux distro on their new computers? Almost none, zero, zilch… Even if Linux were to be light years ahead of MS there’s no “big box” retailer anywhere that would offer or activly promote Linux because there’s no perception of “value added” in the sale if the software has to be given away. The last thing computer marketers want to see is for John Q consumer to ever get comfortable using Linux and OpenOffice.

      I predict Vista will bomb… because it will probably run properly only on the latest and fastest machines… only those with with fast processors, and lots of memory… 1 gig of ram will likely be the absolute minimum.

      • #3265310

        It won’t bomb, just slow rollout like XP

        by scifiman ·

        In reply to Going to Bomb…

        We can all expect Vista rollouts to be pretty much like XP was. Slow, over time, coming in with new PC’s as they get purchased. That realization is probably behind the Vista delay- MS knows few people buy single copies of an OS, and corporations will take 12-18 months to get on the bandwagon. It will happen though. And as the years go by MS will be adding “expansion” packs to put back in the 3 pillars that they had to strip out just to meet a Jan ’07 date. And 8-10 years before we see Vista’s replacement. It will get here, but you’re right that right now nobody really needs Vista.

        At work we still run Windows 2000 Server and our desktops are happy with XP. We’ll get Vista in as needed PC’s are purchased. We buy in the range of $800-$1600 for desktop and laptops so an extra $80 to get up to 1GB of memory isn’t a burden. I don’t have any user that can’t live without Aeroglass. I’ll probably get a single system early next year though for my developers to start to play with. If one of two people need a discrete video card, okay. I’m luck as I don’t have thousands of users to have to plan migrations for this time around.

        At home I’ll want a maxed out Vista though. But not until summer 2007 at the soonest. I’ll build a new system for that. Currently my XP Pro on an older Athlon 2800+, 1.5GB of RAM, 256MB 6800GS (AGP) is plenty strong enough of any game for the next 18 months, at which time I’ll hand down that box to my 8 yr old and it will be all she needs for a few years beyond that. It could run Vista too, but I probably won’t bother.

        • #3265280

          Corporate Mobile Users Will Be First

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to It won’t bomb, just slow rollout like XP

          There are several new features for laptops that will have your mobile force itching to move to Vista. First off, support for hybrid drives which are half regular notebook drives and half flash memory. Vista will boot on the regular drive and then use the flash part while working. The power requirements for this type of drive usage are so low it can extend battery use by HOURS. Next is a feature that your PowerPoint addicted sales people will love. Attach a USB drive to the notebook and the available space on that becomes usable memory to beef up performance of that presentation.

          I think that home adoption will indeed be slow when it comes to upgrades. New PCs will all ship with Vista.

          In the corporate world, expect mobile users to be first. Companies with Enterprise Agreements & Software Assurance will be first to roll Vista out to everyone whose PC will support it. Most companies have a 2-4 year PC refresh policy, so it may take that long for an Enterprise to fully roll it out.

          there are still lots of companies out there using Windows 2000 Pro for desktops. These are the guys that really NEED to upgrade. Windows 2000 is no longer supported by Microsoft. It is well past end of lifecycle and needs to be upgraded to ensure security remains tight in your environment. MS has not yet stopped making critical hotfixes for 2000 but expect that soon. Windows XP (with no service packs) is already not supported by MS. All hotfixes written today require either SP1 or SP2 be installed. When SP3 comes out, that will switch to requireing SP2 or SP3.

          the live demo I saw of Vista had a lot of people going OOOH and AAHHHH over the graphics enhancements. I think they are certainly cool new features but don’t tell a compelling enough story to get users to upgrade. I think that the tightened security, better performance (the TCP/IP stack was completely re-written for better performance)and way better power usage will be the reasons for people to move to this OS.

          I’ve been thinking I want to go to 64 bit and Vista would be my choice for that.

          I think it is good that Microsoft has pushed back the release date. MS knows how badly that will hurt the OEMs and would not do that unless they truly wanted to focus on the quality. As with any release I am sure we will find some minor problems here and there as people try to use some legacy hardware or software with it, but I expect this to be the best release of Windows ever.

        • #3265267

          legal issues

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Corporate Mobile Users Will Be First

          I think the reason Microsoft pushed back the Vista release has nothing to do with quality enhancement and everything to do with a lawsuit recently lost by MS that related to ActiveX. Check the news.

        • #3265186

          No, that is not a factor

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to legal issues

          Patches for the ActiveX issue are already available, including for IE7. Expect them to hit on the next patch Tuesday.

        • #3265086

          OS vs. browser

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to No, that is not a factor

          You don’t know software architecture very well if you can’t conceive of how Vista’s ActiveX capabilities don’t necessarily relate to IE’s.

        • #3263831

          Give it a rest

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to OS vs. browser

          This is not an issue of Vista or IE code being safe or ready. It has to do with a legal decision that requires Microsoft to change the way ActiveX is handled. Users will in some cases need to do a few extra clicks after installing the required patch to bring MS into compliance. The point I was trying to make is that Microsoft is shipping the new code for existing systems long before the release of Vista and therefore it will not be an issue with shipping Vista.

        • #3263753

          legal vs. technical

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to OS vs. browser

          Yes, it’s a matter related to ensuring ActiveX is handled legally. You’re right. Thus, [b]some code needs to be altered to handle it differently[/b]. What, you think the legal department just sets something down in writing and no programmers have to do anything to change the way software handles ActiveX controls? Is that it? It works by magic?

        • #3263745

          Legal VS Technical

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to legal issues

          Had to reply to this message instead fo the one below because max message level was reached.

          I know MS Legal does not have a magic wand to instantly change code. The point you are just not getting from this is that as stated above you said that you thought MS pushed back the release of Vista because of this one issue. That is rubbish. Microsoft has already notified Premier Support customers that they will get the required ActiveX update code on patch Tuesday of next month. It is already written. Do you really think the developers were told to wait to figure this out until the court decided on the case? No way.

          Back to the original argument, MS has delayed Vista to ensure the code is rock solid. compared to all of the other problems beta testers are currently reporting there is still a lot of work to do before this code will be ready for the public. The latest beta is looking considerably more stable and almost there, but after closely looking at where they were with all the important features the tough decision was made to push back the release.

        • #3263710

          short memory

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Legal VS Technical

          It seems that you are having trouble holding more than one thought in your head at a time. I will remind you again of the fact that there is a difference between an IE patch and the Vista OS, and ActiveX functionality in Vista might require work beyond what is done in IE (especially since IE doesn’t even implement ActiveX, it only allows it to pass through).

        • #3263625

          It is still already fixed no matter WHERE.

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to short memory

          Arguing on the Internet is like running in the special olympics. Sure you can do it but you are still a retard.

          I have personally seen the messages sent to Premier Support Customers and know that this has already been fixed and is not a factor in the delay of shipping Vista.

        • #3263605

          how touching

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to short memory

          Your faith in the honesty of Microsoft’s public relations flacks is truly inspiring.

        • #3265565


          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to short memory

          A glib remark and an appeal to authority…doesn’t get any more classic than that…

          Is this a usenet feed?

        • #3083996

          A very slow rollout …

          by dasein42 ·

          In reply to It won’t bomb, just slow rollout like XP

          The high end PC’s that are currently shipping with XP Pro installed will likely be the first to switch to Vista. But if the requirements are even slightly higher than XP the machines aimed at the low budget home market will stick with XP Home until they can bring down the price of a Vista capable machine sufficiently.

          My father just bought a “refurbished” Compaq laptop the other day – 1.8ghz 512mb. Of course it came with XP Home, but interestingly it also came with OpenOffice 2.02, not MS Office. Margins are tight at the low end of the market – the cost of Vista itself plus extra hardware will make it a slow introduction.

      • #3265287

        Software history repeating

        by ed woychowsky ·

        In reply to Going to Bomb…

        Whether you realize it, or not, Microsoft has morphed from a small sleet sailboat of a company into what is essentially a barge requiring months or years to change direction. Microsoft has become the IBM of the new millennia, however, unlike IBM whose bloated software products helped sell their over-priced hardware, Microsoft makes very little in the way of hardware. So, instead of them cashing in third parties are cashing in.

        What bothers me most are the rumor concerning the XBox development team being transferred to work on Vista and the rumor that sixty percent of the code will be re-written before January 2007. Microsoft appears to be setting themselves up to follow the Aston-Tate approach to software development, basically ship it now fix it later. While it probably won?t be fatal to a company as big as Microsoft, it will result in some drastic changes in management with the usual punishment of those not responsible and the guilty parties getting bonuses.

        • #3265268
        • #3265073

          Source of denials

          by ed woychowsky ·

          In reply to Not True

          Interesting, the source of your information all leads back to the PR firm of Wagoner Edstrom. Sounds a little like asking Nixon if he was a crook. I’ll consider the possibility of a disgruntled employee if you consider the possibility of a conflict of interest.

        • #3265811

          Get the FUD campaign

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Source of denials

          Certainly you aren’t suggesting that M$ would pay people to say good things about them, are you?

          Oh, that’s right, Microsoft has paid over 100 companies to write positive news about them. Call me cynical, but it seems odd that EVERY study that compares Windoesn’t to Linux and declares M$ the victor has been funded by–guess who?–Microsoft.

          They’ve even started foundations to pose as independent, “unbiased” sources. Here’s an excerpt from a breakdown of them at

          “Why are all these think tanks so down on Open Source? Well, the Small Business Survival Committee is concerned that using open source will expose small business to the risk of lawsuits. Citizens Against Government Waste is concerned that the Government might waste money on Open Source. Defenders of Property Rights is concerned that Open Source might be a threat to intellectual property rights. However, I was able to detect a common theme to all their criticism. They all seem to be funded by Microsoft.”

        • #3265743

          good point, but . . .

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Source of denials

          I agree that there’s a definite conflict of interest issue there, but that doesn’t mean what they’re saying isn’t strictly true. I prefer to take a middle road: I’m of the considered opinion that while the article about sixty percent of Windows being rewritten in less than a year is highly suspect, there is almost certainly a substantial grain of truth in it.

          For more details about my opinion, you might have a look at a piece I wrote in a weblog titled “Sixty Percent of Windows”:

          I’d explain more here, but it’s pretty lengthy.

      • #3263721

        Almost with this richards guy

        by craig ·

        In reply to Going to Bomb…

        Mr. Richards_Unsubscribe , I’m right behind on the Vista and Hardware retailer “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine setup”.

        As for manufacturers that offer Linux on boxes , HP is a good example of one such company , they found that by shipping pc’s with a free operating system (NovellSuse to be exact)they can bring the machine price down per unit thus selling more pc’s . HP is and has been involved with Linux for some time as are IBM and slowly slowly Dell are becoming part of the Linux family , Linux is not that far from becoming the main contender in the desktop enviroment aswell especially in the business world ,we know that they dominate the server and webserver side already…with HP , IBM , and almost Dell behind the Open Source cause it won’t be too much longer now… patience .

        All giants fall over at some time… IBM was an example.Bill is starting to trip up , and has to fall at some time… Vista will be his biggest trip wire so far.

    • #3100136

      Like anything, it depends on your needs…

      by blu_vg9 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      The security steps they’ve taken are significant, especially in the realm of browsing–the main attack vector for Windows these days, by far. Low-rights IE7 will go a long ways towards the elimination of these threats. Keep in mind, Microsoft has had some lousy security holes for some products, but not all–take IIS 6, for example. Because of their market share and because they are everyone’s favorite punching bag, it will be a race to find the first “Vista Virus.” Time will tell, but don’t rule out the possibility that they could nail it.

      I would really recommend checking out–there is a wealth of in-depth information from all sorts of different teams within Windows–kernel, file system, digital media, WPF, networking, printing, color handling, etc. I especially recommend the “going deep” series. You’ll quickly find out that there is a whole lot going on in Vista that rarely makes it into the zdnets and pcmags of the industry. It has been really unfortunate how little Vista coverage has gone beyond the interface, the backporting of certain technologies to XP, and the dropping of WinFS. But how do you explain the details of a TCP/IP networking stack in a 2 page article for a casual tech reader? You don’t.

      As for the graphics… first off, you don’t need a 256 MB video card, but you will want one if you want to run the enhanced graphics (Ctrl + Shift + F9 toggles it on and off). Once your video card’s memory is exceeded, the UI will utilize your system RAM, so the more video RAM, the better. The video subsystem runs in user mode rather than kernel mode now, also, so a video driver error isn’t a guarantee of a reboot anymore.

      Describing the graphics as a ripoff… well, that’s just silly, I think. Do you really care who “came up with the idea of transparencies” first? Transparencies were supported back in W2K days, but weren’t used in the general UI… does that mean it still beat OS X? Because we didn’t see Flip3D until recently, does that mean that the Looking Glass team first had the idea of a 3D UI, and Microsoft simply copied them? Who really cares? Transparency in a UI is hardly a technical achievement, nor is it some novel UI metaphor. In fact, it might be better to stay away from it, for the most part. People get really bent out of shape comparing these things. No one gets upset that another car manufacturer copies the “steering wheel and gas pedal” idea–the steering wheel and gas pedal UI metaphor–from another car manufacturer, do they? Of course there are going to be similarities; in fact, I think we count on the fact that there *will* be similarities.

      What I think *is* important, however, is the underlying technology capabilities that produce the graphics on the screen. Vista is very advanced in this regard, and leap frogs OS X. Incidentally, OS X didn’t introduce many of its advanced UI effects until it iterated through several versions, so the number of years that they’ve “led” is misleading… does anyone remember what a mess OS X was when it first came out??? Ultimately, it still doesn’t necessarily add up to better UI, of course, but the capabilities that are there in an easy-to-exploit fashion for developers–both 3rd party and for Microsoft–are pretty exciting. It will take some time before we see that catch on fully, I think.

      Again, check out It is full of great information–usually in video form.

      • #3265299

        I agree, to a point

        by majorflash ·

        In reply to Like anything, it depends on your needs…

        Although I agree with most of what you’re saying, I think sometimes people in IT (myself included) sometimes become too enamored with the technical achievment of the ‘advancement’ of an operating system, and forget that it’s only purpose is to facilitate what we want to do on our computers.

        I run XP (at work) and Linux and OS Tiger at home, and they all have their advantages and drawbacks. I’m far from a Mac zealot, but of the three, I feel that the mac is just more simple to use than XP, and I don’t have to ‘manage’ my anti-virus and anti-spyware stuff.

        I just don’t like that because MS has complete dominance over the desktop OS market, they get to basically bully the market with ‘new and improved’ products that often times are not really new, and are seldom improved enough to warrant paying for the upgrade.

        I mean how improvements can you make to a word processor, and keep charging people every year for a new MS Office subscription. I’m not as much a Mac lover as much as I’m anti-Microsoft. And Linux, well, that’s just different altogether.

        You said it best, it all depends on your needs, but as long as Microsoft has complete domination over the desktop OS market, (which let’s face it will be a LONG time), their users will suffer because there is no need for them to develop something truly innovative, and they will always be the biggest target for hackers.

        That’s just my opinion.

        • #3263920


          by mjwx ·

          In reply to I agree, to a point

          I have a small quibble with something you?ve said:
          [i]I feel that the mac is just more simple to use than XP[/i]

          I think the problem I have is semantics. The difference between simple and easy is much the same as the difference between stupid and dumb. You can be dumb but not stupid and you can be stupid but not dumb. While related they are drastically different

          So to say that OS X is simple is not to say it is easy. I consider Linux to be very simple to use but it is incredibly complex at the same time. in Linux I find the CLI to be more powerful and more ergonomic I have only 4 to 8 windows open all the time as opposed to 20 opening and closing all the time but I have to memorise the commands (and conf files).

          So I would submit to you that OS X while simple is not easy and easy has always won the desktop market. a simple task such as creating a roaming profile or using a profile on another server is difficult to configure on a Mac. Joining a domain is not as easy as it is in windows (network settings and directory access vs. computer name). Most OS X users I have met didn?t even know about the terminal or even what the utilities folder was for. Simple vs. easy.

        • #3265521

          ok, maybe I’m just stupid

          by majorflash ·

          In reply to Semantics

          I must say I’m not sure I understand what your point is. Let’s take a look at simple vs. easy. When I think of the term ‘easy’ in terms of managing a pc, I think of starting it up, doing whatever it is I need to do, and shutting it down.

          I just don’t think that windows allows users to use the pc in this manner the way that a mac does. For instance, to keep a windows pc running, the user has to make sure that their anti-virus definitions are current, the firewall is up, and their anti-spyware tool(s) are all up to date. The user has to manage the security of their pc proactively or suffer the consequences.

          On the mac, this type of periodic, preventive, maintenance us either unnecessary or handled by the OS without the user having to worry about it. Easy.

          I also realize that this does not mean that OS X is better or more secure than windows and that is largely due to the fact that hackers target the largest OS for their attacks, etc, etc. But as a user, I don’t care. As a software developer, I want to use the pc the same way a carpenter uses a hammer (as a tool to get a job done).

          There are things about OS X I don’t like (such as the floating windows you’ve mentioned), but at the same time, I’ve learned, as I’m sure many other mac users have, to become comfortable and effective in working in that environment.

          Yourself being a LAN administrator, I can see how windows boxes would be easier to manage on a network, but most users are not managing corporate networks, or trying to create roaming profiles. The simplicity of the tasks you’re mentioning, along with the fact that everything in windows is so tightly integrated to the core of the os is precisely why hackers find it relatively easy to wreak havoc on a windows pc.

          As for simple, add hardware to a windows pc, and then try to add hardware to a mac. I don’t care if I have to pay a little more for apple’s hardware if when I go to use it, it works, every time. There is no finding the ‘right’ drivers, no add/remove harware in the control panel, no hassles. It just works. Simple.

          My point is that for those of use who know where the utilities folder is, and who know how to work in the OS X enviromnent, it just works, and that’s something you can’t always say about windows.

          No OS is perfect, and OS X is far from perfect, but in my experience with working on both every single day, I still find the mac more simple and more easy to use.

          Sorry if I freaked out. I know I probably sound like one of those dudes with an apple t-shirt on, listening to my iPod, but I’m really not.

          I just look at Microsoft as the AOL of operating systems. It’s everywhere, and it’s comforatable, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the best.

          It’s a matter of taste, and each individual user has to make a choice depending on what they are using the pc for.

        • #3264192

          Stupid vs dumb was just an analogy

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to ok, maybe I’m just stupid

          Periodic Maintenance is not carried out if the machine is not shut down (Cron stops running). Mac?s don?t get shut down around here, that?s how I know.

          So far on 2 G5?s running 10.4(.4 I think) Office has broken twice, indesign has broken on both Mac?s, and a complete reinstall just brings back the same problem (this leads me to believe that the OS is at fault). All of that is just in the last month.

          On a PC, if set up correctly antivirus and firewall programs (we use both corporate antivirus (CA) and a corporate firewall (ISA)) will update automatically with no input from the user.

          I have seen OS X security used against the user, effectively blocking him out of his own files. OSX GUI said that he had access to the files but it still wouldn?t let him access them (a few photoshop and indesign files). I had to go into the terminal (something an average Mac user doesn?t know how to do) and set the permission to 777 (different on a Mac R+ I think from memory or it could X+ or XR I don?t remember).

          As for hardware, I like the ability to pick and choose. I can more easily customise a PC into a media box, number crunching box, gaming box, graphic design box and so on. If that makes it a little more complex then so be it. Besides this is something the average user wont be doing (this also creates work for me).

          The average Mac user doesn?t know where the utilities folder is let alone what it does (same as the average PC user). Personally I?d rather do everything in the command line, like in Linux.

          I?d love to rip out all our windows servers and replace them with Linux. Someday we may just do that, but I?m not the guy who makes the decisions (yet) I?m just the guy who does the work. My main gripe with Mac?s are in a corporate environment. These little white nightmare?s can ruin a perfectly good day faster that windows can crash.

      • #3265292

        Bye bye Vista

        by pado ·

        In reply to Like anything, it depends on your needs…

        Vista? I wish they’d called it ‘Horizon’.
        Then we could have all sat and watched the sun setting on MS.
        From what I’ve seen of it, and from what I’ve heard, it’s just a
        little ‘shinier’. ANY addressing of security is going to work for a
        WHILE. But at what cost? And for how long? (Not long).
        Eventually, MS will have to give us a Linux-based OS of some
        kind – or fail.
        You can laugh at the Mac OS too, but most Mac users just
        quietly work on. Unfailingly. Day after day, week after week, year
        after year. Mac will win the home user eventually because it
        accomplishes what most home users want to do with their
        computers, smoothly and unfailingly. I can print a high res
        19’x13′ photogrpah wirelessly, while using the internet or/and
        inputing digital video and listening to music all at the same
        time. NO problems. Ever. No matter what I throw at it it
        manages. No matter what I plug in to it, it works. What more
        could a home user wish for? More and more people seem to be
        switching to this platform – probably because they find
        themsleves impressed by iPod and iTunes and then gravitate
        toward the sensible solution for home computing generally.
        Clever Apple. Make it beautiful, make it WORK, then bring the
        prices down : )
        MS will retain the office environment for a long time to come but
        less because of it’s strengths than its familiarity.
        Big crunch will come when home users get tired of having to
        work on tired old clunky MS OS’s at work.
        Actually, I WANT Vista to work. It would be good to see an end
        to so many hassles. But it appears to be so bloated (and late in
        the game) that I seriously wonder if it will ever be a contender.
        XP has had a very marginal impact, from what I can see. And that
        was supposed to be the ‘big new thing’ not so long ago.
        You can fool some of the people some of the time….

    • #3100135

      No it is not, but few know what they are getting

      by deadly ernest ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Anyone who understands the cost in hardware and application effects would voluntarily move to Vista. Sadly the hardware manufacturers that are tied in with MS will ship with Vista pre installed (expect a 30% to 50% increase in basic price) and many companies and private individuals will just walk into the shop (or listen to the sales rep) and buy without investigating alternatives or finding out that they could get better systems for much less.

      The few medium to small businesses that use in-house or external IT techs with enough savvy to do a proper cost analysis will decide to go with cheaper vanilla systems and either oleder MS software or, more probably, other operating systems.

      From what I hear, some government authorities in Australia and USA are already looking at alternatives as they are concerned about budgetary restraints re the cost of large rollouts with Vista capable hardware. Just think of the total cost of 500 to 1,500 Vista capable machines with huge graphics cards, sata only hard drives and 512 MB RAM plus the cost of Vista itself — compared to vanilla hardware that has half the specs and loaded with Mac X or Linux. Through in the cost of MS Offie as against Open Office and the bean counters are getting very interested.

      With Vista being promised to be so far different to Win 98 or Win XP the staff will face a reasonable learning curve, so a switch in operating system won’t be such a huge training problem – especially if you switch to something like Linspire which has a close traditional Windows appearance.

      Then you have to add in the cost of replacement applications as MS have not yet gotten around to making new operating systems readily run applications designed for earlier ones.

      Another point is that Vista is designed to be very media and game friendly – how many corporate environments want the staff to utilse a lot of media and gaming capabilities? I would bet that some, but not all, could be turned off and that it will take a lot of effort to turn them off and elave them off. Whilst Linux can be readily set up to not have those capabilities even installed.

      • #3263848

        Where do you get these crazy ideas???

        by blu_vg9 ·

        In reply to No it is not, but few know what they are getting

        “sata only hard drives”

        Where on earth do you get the idea that Vista only runs on SATA drives? And “huge graphics cards” aren’t a requirement, either, unless you want to run Aero Glass (and even then, you certainly don’t need a “huge” graphics card by any modern standard).

        “vanilla hardware that has half the specs and loaded with Mac X or Linux.”

        OS X does NOT run on “vanilla hardware.” Not legally, anyhow.

        “…how many corporate environments want the staff to utilse a lot of media and gaming capabilities? I would bet that some, but not all, could be turned off and that it will take a lot of effort to turn them off and elave them off.”

        Group Policy–fantastic management tool, with nothing that compares well in the Linux world. Or script a custom install.

        There’s too much to discuss here–check out for great insight into why Vista is a compelling upgrade, at least for some. And XP SP 2 is still a fantastic OS.

        • #3263702

          Group policy? Say what?

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Where do you get these crazy ideas???

          It’s a terrible problem that you need to use group policies to manage user capabilities in the first place on a Windows system. On a Linux system, you don’t need to set a group policy to prevent someone from wasting all his time in the office organizing playlists because on a Linux system all you have to do is [b]not install the crap in the first place[/b]. Try equalling that level of control on Windows some time. You’ll fail.

          In addition, you’re apparently not familiar with user group privileges management, file permissions creation masks, and so on, if you think there’s “nothing that compares well in the Linux world”. In fact, I suspect you’re not even familiar with Linux, making clearly and egregiously untrue statements like that.

          Next, you’ll be saying there’s no such thing as access control lists outside of Windows, despite the fact that there have been ACLs on unixlike OSes for a very long time.

        • #3263661

          Yes, that Group Policy

          by blu_vg9 ·

          In reply to Group policy? Say what?

          Here is a distinction to clarify. First, I will say that I’ve used Linux, as well as Unix (mainly Solaris), Novell, Windows, and MacOS–all in a production environment, although only MacOS and Windows on end-user production workstations (precisely because that is their strength). But when you’re talking about stripping down the workstation installs, at some point you have to decide: are you looking for a “desktop”-style workstation, or are you really going for more of an “embedded” solution. In some scenarios, a stripped-down, embedded-style workstation makes sense–and these solutions exist in the Windows world as well. In my scenarios–and I think most scenarios–the workstation needs a broad range of functionality, including the ability to play media files and the like. And yes, people may want to play a CD on their computer sometime.

          What Group Policy does so well, though, is that it provides a universal, easy-to-understand, one-stop-shop mechanism by which you can *control* (not just remove/deny) the functionality available to end users–across all applications on the platform that store settings in the registry–applied over your system directory. The settings can be very specific–for example, if I want to allow browsing/playing Solitaire from noon to 1 for one group, and only allow it after hours for different group, I can easily accomplish that in 5 minutes for the entire organization through Group Policy. And at the same time, I could roll out a requested change to disable “automatic capitalization of the first word in a sentence” in Word for administrative assistants. And, I’ll remove the Auto-update notification in Adobe Reader for all users while I’m at it. It comes with Windows, it’s supported by a wide-range of applications (and you can create your own .adm file if you want), there is broad 3rd-party support for the tools, and it works.

          The closest thing I’ve seen on Linux is ZENworks… but take a look at the documentation:
          You’ll quickly see that, while it aims to accomplish the same type of functionality on Linux as Group Policy does on Windows, it is nowhere near as granular or powerful (the “text file policy” looks like an especially fun time!).

        • #3263604

          Holy crap, Batman!

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Yes, that Group Policy

          Micromanaging much? Whoever’s paying you to spend hours every day fiddling settings in that minute a manner is getting ripped off.

        • #3265645

          Way to address the point… :P

          by blu_vg9 ·

          In reply to Holy crap, Batman!

          It does sound that way, but trust me, this is the type of thing I’m asked to do–it’s not a mandate coming down from IT. I get these requests from HR, from people who do training, from all over within the business. There are some settings that are sort of policing-type measures, but most are geared around settings that make our applications fit our environment better. It does make a difference.

          I gave examples of some very finely-detailed settings that you can adjust, but that doesn’t mean that it comes at the expense of other, broader settings. I just used them as examples of how powerful and flexibile Group Policy is and to differentiate it from the management tools for Linux, which aren’t nearly as powerful. You can set application-specific settings for just about any application, and for each individual setting, you can either set it as a user-adjustable default (and do it based on Active Directory group, if you like), or you can choose to enforce it (again by user and/or group). The best part is it certainly does *not* take “hours every day”–it takes only a few minutes to change those settings, and then it’s done. I have yet to see anything similar on the Linux platform… or any platform, for that matter, of which I’m aware.

        • #3265622


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          “[i]management tools for Linux, which aren’t nearly as powerful[/i]”


          Snort. Nmap. Webmin. UnionFS. Synaptic. YaST. SELinux. Nagios. Secpolicy. Nessus. Netsaint. Gradm. Acidbase. Samba. NFS. AFBackup. Perl (and if Perl doesn’t sound like a management tool to you, you haven’t been working with Linux enough).

          Hell, even the basic, run of the mill user account stuff puts the Windows alternatives to shame.

          I think the problem is that you expect to find One Big Application That Does Everything. In the Linux world (and the Unix world in general), people make small utilities that each do one job and do it well. If you want to do a lot of things, you have a lot of utilities. If you want them to work in concert with each other, there are glue-code scripts that tie them together that you can use and, failing that, you can write your own very simply and easily.

          In Windows, you have five or six gigantic monolithic monstrosities that each try to do a significant percentage of Everything, and end up doing all those things to some barely acceptible, mediocre standard. Scriptability is lacking. Mixing and matching functionality doesn’t happen. Et cetera. The clicky interface soothes a lot of people, though, so they’re welcome to it.

        • #3265607

          Again, failure to address the point

          by blu_vg9 ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          You’re comparing snort and nmap to Group Policy? What on earth are you talking about? That is not the same type of management application AT ALL. Nagios? I’ve met Ethan Galstad personally, incidentally… and Nagios has absolutely nothing to do with the type of management I’m talking about. There are plenty of products for Windows out there that serve the same function as the products you mention–including many of those you mention (and that includes Nagios).

          Again, you’re failing to address the point. There is nothing that is COMPARABLE to Group Policy on the Linux side. Don’t tell me about system monitoring tools, or network sniffers, or the like. Heck yeah, I can script all sorts of things on the Windows side using Perl, too… but why would I when Group Policy does the job so well? Criticizing Group Policy by comparing it to snort and nmap… now there’s the nonsense. They don’t even *attempt* to serve the same function.

          Please, if you’re going to respond, make it relevant to Group Policy. If there is something that comes close to it on the Linux side, I’d love to know about it.

        • #3265567

          I have one word for you: cron

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          If you are so into GPOs and various group policy boondoogles, well have fun. All you are talking about is simple scheduling.

          I can create the exact same functionality via groups, umasks/file permissions, a handful of simple scripts and cron. What’s the difference?

          As a matter of fact…bag the scripts, I’ll do it all in cron.

        • #3265561

          CRON!! Ok, now you guys are just being silly

          by blu_vg9 ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          Doing what Group Policy does with cron–now that is hilarious! It’s like using a toothpick holder to build a house.

          Again, please (!) make your replies to this relevant to Group Policy functionality. If you think you can accomplish the same thing via simple file permissions twiddling (which is easily done on Windows as well, incidentally), you simply don’t get it. Look at the ZENworks documentation link I provided earlier–it’s clear that not only is the Linux OS support very limited, the Linux application support is horribly, horribly limited. ZENworks is a very sophisticated, powerful product, and Novell has bet the farm on Linux… yet ZENworks can’t accomplish anywhere near the same thing on Linux as it *itself* can on Windows.

        • #3265446

          two things

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          1. I wasn’t comparing group policy management in Windows to Snort (et cetera). I was responding to your ridiculous statement that I quoted at the beginning of my post. Please try to maintain context when responding to my statements.

          2. The point jmgarvin and I are trying to get across to you is that Windows group policy management is bloat. It can all be done with simpler, smaller tools. See my previous commentary about how the unix world does things with do-one-thing-well utilities rather than monolithic do-everything-poorly tightly integrated vendor stacks.

        • #3265386

          Reply To: Vista, is it really worth it?

          by blu_vg9 ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          1) Desktop management and monitoring tools, etc. are very different things. The context was Group Policy and desktop management–you’re the one who is expanding the context. Those other tools are a whole different set of topics, so bringing it into this discussion is hardly relevant.

          2) “Bloat”–for one, define “bloat.” That’s a trite FUD word, often used carelessly. It’s hardly bloat–it works very efficiently from a systems perspective. But more importantly, it saves administrators a huge amount of fiddling. It is NOT a one-stop shop for EVERYTHING systems admin-related, but it IS a place where you can manage a great deal of desktop settings.

          But even if it WAS all things system-admin related, what is your point? If you have a single interface that puts at your fingertips the collective power of all your scripts, utilities, etc., is that bloat too? If you’re going to make the point that a host of decentralized utilities does a better job than a centralized place that groups these functions–perhaps also made up of several utilities itself–you’re going to have to give definitive examples of why you claim that, not just a vague, speculative notion. Furthermore, you’re going to have to prove that this approach is better when the use of a centralized management tool such as Group Policy hardly precludes the supplemental use of those very same stand-alone utilities.

          If something like Group Policy existed for Linux, you’d be touting the power of that as “yet another advantage over Windows.” But the fact remains, there is nothing comparable. Will you please address directly how you can accomplish the same thing on Linux? Again, for the love of Pete, you simply CANNOT do the same thing via fiddling with file permissions.

        • #3264284

          rewriting history

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          You said (direct quote):
          “[i]the management tools for Linux, which aren’t nearly as powerful[/i]”

          It wasn’t me that expanded the context beyond Windows group policy management. That was you.

          You also said (direct quote):
          “[i]It’s hardly bloat–it works very efficiently from a systems perspective.[/i]”

          That’s BS. Windows has more than 50M lines of code in it. [b]That[/b] is bloat.

          More direct quote:
          “[i]If you’re going to make the point that a host of decentralized utilities does a better job than a centralized place that groups these functions–perhaps also made up of several utilities itself[/i]”

          You don’t read so well. I specifically mentioned that separate utilities are often tied together with glue code and unified interfaces to provide more complex and centralized management on unixlike systems. There’s nothing wrong with providing such unified access: the problem is in doing it by making your mail transfer agent an indivisible part of your text editor. Why include the same friggin’ functionality on your system thirty times over as redundantly repetitive reimplementation? There’s only one reason: insufficiently modularized functionality. In other words, The Windows Way.

          “[i]If something like Group Policy existed for Linux, you’d be touting the power of that as ‘yet another advantage over Windows.'[/i]”

          Actually, I wouldn’t be using it, just like I don’t use KDE. It’s a bloated monstrosity (even though it’s orders of magnitude slimmer than the user environment of Windows). The advantage to a Group Policy work-alike for Linux is that it doesn’t have to be installed in the first place, and neither do any of its supporting libraries.

          “[i]for the love of Pete, you simply CANNOT do the same thing via fiddling with file permissions.[/i]”

          Prove it.

        • #3264191


          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Way to address the point… :P

          “2) “Bloat”–for one, define “bloat.” That’s a trite FUD word, often used carelessly. It’s hardly bloat–it works very efficiently from a systems perspective.”

          No, it does not. The system resources it consumes are huge (50Mish). Further, it adds to the boot up time, which can be critical during a server failure. Finally, it adds NOTHING that cannot be done in various other ways.

          “But more importantly, it saves administrators a huge amount of fiddling. It is NOT a one-stop shop for EVERYTHING systems admin-related, but it IS a place where you can manage a great deal of desktop settings.”

          How about a default security level that doesn’t let the users do stupid things? Oh, wait, *nix does that. Groups can also be setup quite well in *nix, plus you setup various umasks and file permissions….What’s the problem?

          “But even if it WAS all things system-admin related, what is your point? If you have a single interface that puts at your fingertips the collective power of all your scripts, utilities, etc., is that bloat too?”

          The point is you can either use the decentralized tools or the integrated tool(s).

          “If you’re going to make the point that a host of decentralized utilities does a better job than a centralized place that groups these functions–perhaps also made up of several utilities itself–you’re going to have to give definitive examples of why you claim that, not just a vague, speculative notion.”

          That wasn’t the point…you missed it.

          “Furthermore, you’re going to have to prove that this approach is better when the use of a centralized management tool such as Group Policy hardly precludes the supplemental use of those very same stand-alone utilities.”

          Already done. Please re-read the posts.

          “If something like Group Policy existed for Linux, you’d be touting the power of that as “yet another advantage over Windows.” But the fact remains, there is nothing comparable.”

          Yes there is. The only point you have brought up that Group Policy can do is that it can schedule when user can or cannot use applications. I suggested you use cron. What else can GP do that *nix just can’t do?

          “Will you please address directly how you can accomplish the same thing on Linux?”

          How about what can GP do that *nix can’t? Gimme a list and I’ll tell you how to do it in Linux with disparate tools and integrated tool sets.

          “Again, for the love of Pete, you simply CANNOT do the same thing via fiddling with file permissions”

          WRONG. You can…please give me a concrete example where GP will do something more than file permssions (other than scheduling)

    • #3100133


      by jomer ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      the only reason i will upgrade to windows vista is if i will get a new system that is capable of 64bit computing.

      • #3265249

        Don’t have to go Vista for 64 bit – 64 bit Linux

        by deadly ernest ·

        In reply to 64bit

        is already available in a number of flavours. Having recently bought a 64 bit system I have not yet seen any benefit of 64 bit over 32 bit, however that may come later with more development.

        • #3265180

          64 Bit Windows Exists Today

          by absolutezero ·

          In reply to Don’t have to go Vista for 64 bit – 64 bit Linux

          Why wait for Vista to get ahold of a 64-bit Windows XP Platform when you can get it today?

          Windows XP X-64 has been out for well over a year. Most likely closer to two. I purchased this product back in December and needless to say, everything rocks. Thirty-two bit applications, to me, seem to generally work faster.

          As always, with the good, you have to consider the bad. On the downside, the problems I have had with this architecture is support. The 64-bit drivers that came with my m/b, video card, and the like didn’t work with the OS. No drivers exist for my scanner, and I spent over 6 hours hunting for a wireless driver for my Atheros chipset.

          You will see products advertised as requires Windows XP, 2000, ME, etc…..What you won’t see is works with X-64. I have run across very few companies that actually support this product which makes sense as most of the consumer market is still on Windows XP.

          Needless to say, X-64 now occupies a 15 GB partition which is just large enough to hold the OS and some games I like to play. SuSe, and yes I ponied up for the product, occupies the remaining 255 GB. Unlike the Microsoft OS, the 64 bit Linux platform readily supports all my hardware.

          To make a long story short, I will not be purchasing VISTA until my games stop working with XP X-64.

          Who knows….If companies start porting games natively to Linux (or Unix), I will never have a reason to by another MS platform. To be honest, when MACs drop a few more dollars in price, I will jump ship completely and head to MAC.

          IMHO, Microsoft should split the XP platform into their individual components, the base OS and the GUI. In this fashion, they can tailor the OS to what it is best suited for and do the same for the GUI.

        • #3265083

          not really

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to 64 Bit Windows Exists Today

          64-bit Windows XP is a broken, partial implementation, made up of half-measures and emulation more than it is of actual 64-bit functionality. In addition to that, support for 64-bit XP sucks, but will perforce be much better for Vista.

          On the other hand, there have been complete, fully functional 64-bit distributions of Linux since about a month after the first x86-64 processors hit the market.

        • #3264992

          Get real

          by georgeou ·

          In reply to not really

          “64-bit Windows XP is a broken, partial implementation, made up of half-measures and emulation more than it is of actual 64-bit functionality.”

          x64 is NOT emulation, all 32 bit applications run at full speed.

        • #3263917

          . . .

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Get real

          . . . but 64 bit applications are on crutches.

        • #3265564

          The 64bit MS OSs ride the short bus too

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to . . .


        • #3265444

          that was kinda my point

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to . . .

          The so-called 64-bit OS that MS is peddling hamstrings 64-bit applications, among other issues with the dearth of 64-bit applications that run on Microsoft platforms.

        • #3265033

          Now that I’d like to see

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to 64 Bit Windows Exists Today

          windows OS without having to use a gui.
          Hmmm. Unf***inglikely I believe.
          Still if he did we could all say he stole the idea off ‘Nix or perhaps VMS.

        • #3263860

          Glad it works for you – doesn’t for me

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to 64 Bit Windows Exists Today

          I got a 64 bit CPU, motherboard and Win XP Pro 64 bit edition in January and it has been a hell of a problem. Five brand new applications will NOT run on it, many devices do not run properly – the manufacturer’s drivers are removed and generic MS drivers with half the capabilities used no matter what I do. The applictaions and games that do work do not appear to be working any better or faster.

          I am waiting to get a hold of Fedora Core 5 and see how that goes as FC 4 works better on my 32 bit systems than Win XP Pro. And I just love Cedega for the Windows based games – brilliant, even plays the older W95 and W98 games.

    • #3100131


      by jonny.him ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      i really dont think vista is worth forking out like 200 or what ever bucks.the style side bar and look of vista can be achived by windows blind and system is pointless dont think its guna be as stable as xp.dont waste money on an update with pritty little features you can get for free!

    • #3100129

      Windows Vista? NO WAYS!

      by murtaza_taher ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Hey Dave,
      windows Vista, although it has fine cool looks, but its not worth the looks! if the looks can gobble up atleast 512mb for vista to run smoothly, i would prefer to stay with xp and install a transformation pack for vista, (which i already have!) and have windows vista on xp! stable, and efficient!
      the vista look is nice, and also (the transformation pack!) doesnt need all that memory, you can work smoothly and play games with vista look on xp for as little as 32mb video mem and 256mb ram!!
      why not!? wait for bill to notice how vista is a big time flop!

    • #3265305


      by mike_w ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Some of the security enhancements are long overdue and will go a long way towards eliminating some of the basic security issues with Windows as an OS. Internet Explorer will not run with administrative privledges regardless of the rights of the currently logged in user. Users who are members of the administrative group on the PC will not run with administrative privledges until they attempt an operation that requires this level of privledge. These two changes alone will improve the basic security of the OS and reduce the ease of exploiting a security vulnerability in the browser or the OS.

    • #3265303

      Way to costly for me

      by kiltie ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      The system requirements mean that I have to replace at least one of my computers with a top of the range model.

      I reckon this will cost a couple of grand, and I frankly don’t have that spare in finances

      Sorry MS, you have it badly wrong in assuming everyone has the latest hi tech equipment, you will lose a lot of business by this approach.

      • #3264242

        Who says it has to be costly

        by michael l hereid sr ·

        In reply to Way to costly for me

        If your computer runs Windows XP it will run Vista. I have it (latest build 32bit/64bit)running on this pc.
        MSI K8M NEO-v
        512 DDR PC 2700
        AMD Athlon X64 2800+
        WD800JB 80 gig hd
        MicroAdvantage DVD RW/CD RW
        Haupauge WinTV Go FM
        Ultra 400 watt Power Supply
        GeForce FX5200 128meg ddr(cost$35)
        Only thing I need to change is the old tech tv card.

    • #3265300

      Win2K is fine…

      by blackfalconsoftware9 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I am a middle-tier specialist and when I saw that MS was once again changing directions, this time from remoting to Indigo, I decided to start looking at Linux. I have a product on the Internet for remoting which appears to be a good addition to the new MONO environment so I am looking at porting it over in the future.

      Outside of this, I see no technical reason to leave Windows2000. I have experienced maybe only a single software crash in 4 years. Not bad for an MS operating system.

      As far as security goes Vista will not be any better than existing MS systems. When everything MS produces has a pathway into and out of the operating system there is no possible way such an operating system will ever be made secure.

      I think that Vista will be Microsoft’s swan-song in the industry. It may take a while but I see many MS technicians going over to Linux and bringing .NET with them to enhance the MONO platform.

      • #3263642

        I agree

        by astromusicman ·

        In reply to Win2K is fine…

        As the IT coordinator for a public school district, we mainly have Windows 2000 machines for use throughout our district. Very few have XP (maybe 5%) and about the same amount are still running 98.

        Win2K is just fine for the day to day word processing/ internet searching that is needed. Unfortunately, we don’t do much higher end stuff with the kids, as that might change what OS we would be leaning towards. XP just has a lot more fancy bells and whistles compared to 2000 and I don’t see a big difference between them (at least not big enough to want me to rush out and buy licenses to upgrade all of the 2000 to XP.

        I figure Vista will be the same for us. I can’t see running out and frantically looking to put Vista on any new machines. It may be at least 2 years before I even consider putting it on. I’ll let everyone else do all of the troubleshooting and patching before I’ll even consider getting a machine with Vista installed. If what we currently use works fine and you don’t need more, why even think about bringing in another operating system you would need to troubleshoot.

    • #3265293

      What, You think it is a Choice?

      by plumley9 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      DOS beget Windows 286 ->386 ->3.1 and it was good.

      3.1 beget ’95’ and it was better and 98 better still. Meanwhile business got NT a “SERIOUS” OS.

      BUT Microsoft is a business and it is about money.

      Windows 2000 is a great operating system, had holes from keeping compatability, but very solid.
      Business loved it home users yawned and stayed with 98. ME (strictly a revenue ploy) regretably came and went.

      XP, the next great thing, but the users are happy with 98 & 2000. So unless you buy a new machine no upgrades. First the cut off support to 98 and then publicized serious security flaws and then stopped patches. Move to XP or ELSE!
      Businesses got a little longer but 2000 is now unsupported and on a ‘Do NOT Resuscitate’ list.

      Do you think for one minute that Microsoft will leave a penny on the table. Within 6 months of Vista’s release the ‘unpatchable’ virus or worm will make 2000 unusable. And I fully expect XP to stabbed in the back shorly thereafter.

      And all of these opinions miss the most terrifying part of all – trusted computing. A system where you buy a computer and let them own it. Forget teaching your kids to program, edit audio or video files, or do anything original; ONLY those programs allowed by Microsoft will run.

      • #3265419

        Was with you but…

        by markdmac ·

        In reply to What, You think it is a Choice?

        I think your observations on the life cycle are good. You are correct about XP too. Microsoft policy is N-1 for patches. So Windows XP is already dead from that perspective. All new patches require a minimum of SP1 at this point. When SP3 comes out, SP1 support will go away too.

        I don’t think it fair to to cite this as unfair on Microsoft’s part however. After all, the service packs are FREE. It only makes sense for Microsoft to have to draw the line somewhere to be able to effectively provide patches and updates etc. Furthermore any other item you buy will have a warranty cut off and point where parts just are not provided anymore. Why should software be any different? It is difficult and costly to keep software engineers skilled in older technologies.

        Your point about trustworthy computing is misguided. The concept behind trustworthy computing is not to keep non-microsoft programs from your computer, it is to ensure that the programs you do purchase from Microsoft meet with customers expectations that they can be trusted to be secure and well engineered.

    • #3265288


      by jjpengr ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I use Mac OS 10.4 at home and I love it. I don’t care what Microshaft does for a new OS, it will be full of bugs and a target for hackers. I deal with XP at work, and despite the fact it is bloatware and takes forever to start up, it works OK; so no reason to even consider Vista. I’ll just ignore all the Microshaft hype.

    • #3265286

      It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

      by jamestryder ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      It’s time to get beyond this whole ‘well, if it’s a windows platform you’ve got to expect or be assured of a security risk.’
      What I mean is now that there are more people using Firefox we’re hearing more about Firefox bugs and Firefox security holes.
      What I mean is now that there are more people using O/S X we’re hearing more about O/S X bugs and O/S X security holes.
      Making broad statements that imply Windows and Windows alone has security issues is just plain inaccurate. I have always been of the opinion that when you are #1 you are the #1 target – no one likes to pick on the little guys; but the majority of people love to talk about the successful ones as if they are the only ones making mistakes; especially the press that writes about each Microsoft trip & fall.
      I do believe we owe a debt of thanks to Microsoft for having a lot to do with the technology world being where it is today (note I said ‘a lot’ – I didn’t say ‘only’).
      Yet, because Bill Gate’s worth is posted he gets targeted. Because Windows is on a majority of desktops around the world it’s targeted.
      Windows has security issues, sure. So does Apple, Firefox and even cell phones.
      Let’s stop with the bashing and get on with making a better mouse trap – if it’s possible.
      OK… that was my two cents 🙂

      • #3265256


        by apotheon ·

        In reply to It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

        If popularity was the major reason software got targeted, and volume of targeting was the major reason something had security issues, then Apache would be the most-exploited, least-secure web server. Instead, the problem web server is IIS (from Microsoft).

        Security through obscurity doesn’t work. Stop spreading FUD.

        • #3265324

          Time for some anger management classes

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to ridiculous

          Dude, you have some serious hostility issues. Switch to decaf and get your facts straight on the number of security warnings for the two technologies.

          You clearly just like to hate all things Microsoft. So don’t use Microsoft technologies and live a quiet peaceful life in your own private utopia. Now go play nice nice in your corner and let the grown ups have a nice dicussion.

        • #3264282


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Time for some anger management classes

          Do ad hominem fallacies make you happy? Are you unable to make salient points without devolving into insults?

          Do you lack the ability to present unbiased evidence? There’s no point in even click on an MSDN blog link to see your supporting evidence. Propaganda isn’t going to help your case with me.

          I’m not angry. I don’t hate all things Microsoft. As a matter of fact, I’m Microsoft certified and my all-time favorite pointing device is a Microsoft five-button optical trackball.

          You’re the one throwing a tantrum, using “bad words”, and failing to play nice with others. Perhaps it is you that needs anger management. You certainly need some reading comprehension instruction if you thought you saw anger in my previous post, and you definitely need to take a course or two in formal logic if you think this post of yours constitutes logical discourse.

        • #3265881

          Thanks for the laugh

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to Anger?

          Hope you didn’t wear out your thesaurus.

        • #3265847


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Thanks for the laugh

          I don’t own a thesaurus. I find thesauri in general to be objectionable, in fact. They promote lazy and inaccurate use of the language.

          What does a thesaurus have to do with anything I said? I suppose this must be your way of dodging actually responding to salient points.

        • #3265733

          Welcome to TechRepublic

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Thanks for the laugh

          Do you have any idea who apotheon is? Do you think he’s just trying to impress you with his vocabulary? No, he writes like an intelligent person because he is one. I’d think his username would be a clue. Perhaps you should scan some of his few thousand posts, or maybe you should check out his blog here on TR to see that he’s not showing off, he’s just well-written. Of course, you did know he has a blog here, right?

        • #3265708

          . . . and we thank you for your support.

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Welcome to TechRepublic

          I’ve also had some articles published here — but who’s counting?

        • #3263159

          Still not impressed

          by markdmac ·

          In reply to Welcome to TechRepublic

          I can respect the fact that apotheon has mastered the English language. I don’t post much in these forums so you guys don’t really know who I am either. Check out the Tek-Tips forums and you will find I am the number 1 MVP for Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2003, Exchange 2003, I am second top MVP for vbscript and third ranked MVP for Windows XP Pro. I’ve posted 5203 replies, and written 14 Faqs, some are the most highly rated. I was recently voted Tipmaster of the Week by the members of that site for the fourth time now. My Enterprise Login Scripts are in use in several hundred companies.

          I was a Microsoft employee 4 years ago. During my employment I received recognition for my work and am proud of the fact that I was one of many MS employees who volunteered time to help rebuild Wall Street after September 11th. I left MS after that when a relocation fell through, the result of the depressed market. I was already building a new house in AZ otherwise I would not have quit.

          After leaving MS, while employed for a Microsoft Certified Partner I had the privilege to work on Deployment Guides for Small & Medium IT. Some of my works are published on for deploying Windows 2003. Three roll outs I did for that Partner are documented on as case studies.

          I am aware of internal discussions regarding Vista and because of this believe I have a better take on this. I am willing to site Microsoft’s faults when they are accurate and find the constant MS bashing to be annoying.

          And here is the little bomb shell for you…I AM CURRENTLY A MICROSOFT EMPLOYEE as of November of last year.

          So, I can respect the fact that apotheon is active in these forums and commend such efforts. Anyone can have a blog, so that fails to impress me. I am exposed to truly brilliant people every day at work, so perhaps I set the bar a little higher.

          Apotheon points out that he is MS certified. I’m MCSE certified and have been for over ten years. I am also a Novell CNE and Comptia certified. Novell is no longer the player they used to be, so I don’t get any value from my CNE anymore but my Microsoft certification has given me a great career. I love this industry which we have Microsoft to thank for and I am grateful to them for pushing technology and innovation as they have.

          Thus far I have only observed negativity and distrust toward Microsoft from apotheon. As such it is hard for me to take him seriously.

          Disclaimer: The above opinion is my own and not necessarily that of my employer who I did not contact for comment.

        • #3263095

          Interesting Mark

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to Welcome to TechRepublic

          He distrusts your company therefore he’s negative towards it so therefore he can’t be taken seriously?

          So none of the issues he raises , merit even a response, never mind redress.

          Can you get your programmmers to check the return value when they call a function.


          Oh yes and can I have memory back when you’ve done with it. I need it to run an application. I know it’s an non-ms one and I foolishly thought I’d bought an operating system to do what I wanted to do, but it was an honest mistake. I was misled by an advert.

          We often gets trolls FUDing us on a regular basis, some may have confused you with one. Easy mistake to make I’m afraid, when the response to a technical issue is an advert, or a the chorus of a company song.

        • #3263045


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Welcome to TechRepublic

          Look, son, you seem to have missed many of the points of recent discussion.

          1. Go back and reread the part where nighthawk808 said I wasn’t trying to impress you. It’s true: I’m not. I don’t care if you’re unimpressed. I think the point nighthawk808 was trying to make is that I have a long history here and, based on that, people know me better than to assume I’m thumbing through a thesaurus looking for three-dollar words. In fact, the thesaurus argumentum ad ridiculum fallacy directed at me might be one of the key identifiers of someone as a big-mouthed newbie to TR, since only big-mouthed newbies tend to make that mistake. In other words, it’s probably in your best interest to get the lay of the land before you start mouthing off, as looking before you leap can help you avoid looking like a fool.

          2. The mention of me having a blog was pretty clearly not intended to impress you with its existence. Reading comprehension seems to be lacking. What nighthawk808 was suggesting was that you should perhaps read through some of my blog posts to get an idea of who I am before you start making lame assumptions and petty accusations regarding thesauri and the like. Research your subject before getting noisy about it. Of course, your apparent eagerness to start making up implied insults about people before you’ve done even minimal research into the characters of the people you attack certainly doesn’t incline the more thoughtful of us to assume you research any other subject before sounding off. As a result, your commentary about Windows and Linux is more suspect than it might otherwise be.

          3. Taking my mention of MS certification as some sort of assumption of authority on the subject, once again, betrays a lack of reading comprehension. I admit that in this case it might in part be due to the fact that I wasn’t as clear about the purpose of that mention as I could have been, but some of the blame is yours as well — you didn’t notice that the context of the statement clearly indicated I was refuting your implication that I am just an anti-Microsoft zealot who doesn’t know anything about, or consider, the technical issues of the matter. Instead of noticing and acknowledging that, you just assumed it was an assumption of authority, then started waving your dick around in response with all your talk of working for Microsoft and a string of certification letters after your name. In addition, to compound the problem, you continue to respond to me as though I’ve never used Windows for more than office receptionist tasks or World of Warcraft.

          4. I’d ask for some links to those case studies and other corroborating evidence about your stated experience, except that [b]I don’t care[/b]. If you can’t make your points sans appeals to authority, you can’t make points that are worth consideration anyway.

          5. Without comparable experience with Linux-based operating system (or other free unices for that matter), your truckful of claimed MS software experience means just about nothing for comparative analysis. That’s especially true when your arguments against Linux thus far are largely based on easily, and often, refuted fallacies, and on MS-centric marketing FUD. Security through obscurity and obviously false statements about software and/or hardware incompatibility won’t fly with this group. You’ll need to do more than repeat what you read on some discussion forum full of people raised on Microsoft and only Microsoft.

          6. The reason you’ve seen a lot of distrust toward Microsoft is simple: I don’t trust anyone that regularly lies to me and does everything in his or her power to obfuscate facts. I trust verifiable truths. I trust transparency, in government, in business, and in software. Microsoft is the opposite of transparency in every way, for most purposes. There are occasions when Microsoft manages to be transparent, but they’re few and far between. That doesn’t mean I won’t give a fair and accurate assessment of the technical merits of something offered by Microsoft, but it does mean that I won’t take marketing FUD at face value. On the other hand, I won’t just automatically assume everything that comes from MS is a lie, either. You should have a look at a recent ramble I’ve composed about the whole Vista delay for an example of the sort of middle road I often take on analyses of Microsoft policy, PR, and technical matters:

        • #3084059


          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Welcome to TechRepublic

          You’ve posted nothing to this discussion that would lead us to think you had anything to say. The ad hom. attacks on Apo were pointless and stupid. You provided nothing to the discussion and added to the FUD.

          “I can respect the fact that apotheon has mastered the English language. I don’t post much in these forums so you guys don’t really know who I am either.”

          Why attack those that you have no idea about? Apo is a reasonable (yet sometimes cranky) guy.

          “Check out the Tek-Tips forums”

          Let me start with:
          That site makes my eyes bleed. If anything could someone PLEASE make it usable? Might I suggest a book called “The Design of Everyday Things?” It was hard to get a feel for what was going one, esp with the colors that blended together…dark text on a dark background are pretty tough to read.

          The threading of the posts was nice though.

          “I am aware of internal discussions regarding Vista and because of this believe I have a better take on this. I am willing to site Microsoft’s faults when they are accurate and find the constant MS bashing to be annoying.”

          How is holding MS to a standard that we hold other software to bashing? FLOSS advocates will jump on Linux distros (or even the kernel folks) when something goes wrong. Why should MS be any different?

          Check out what people are saying about Fedora Core 5:

          “And here is the little bomb shell for you…I AM CURRENTLY A MICROSOFT EMPLOYEE as of November of last year.”

          What a surprise considering you parrot all the talking points in Get the FUD.

          “Thus far I have only observed negativity and distrust toward Microsoft from apotheon. As such it is hard for me to take him seriously.”

          Why is it so hard to see why many of us IT Pros distrust MS? Many of us have been at this a long time. Some of us are highly educated, some of us are educated in the school of hard knocks…but we all see the forest for the trees. When it comes to MS, the Emperor has no clothes. Security is not just an issue with being “popular,” but a huge issue because the architecure is WRONG.

          Further, after dealing with slow patch cycles (recently a f-secure employee released a patch faster than MS), bad patching (XP SP2), and a slew of misinformation (WMF flaw), we should trust MS and buy into the hype?

          I’d rather discuss the issues that MS has and what solutions there are to them. I’d also like to stomp out the FUD about Linux and how FLOSS will kill us all (according to MS).

          If you really wanted to start a civil discourse you should have brought up some valid points, not just ad hom attacks.

          So try again…this time, bring up points that relate to WHY MS is better or what niche MS fills that Linux can’t…and why.

      • #3265174

        Windows is inherently insecure

        by tommy higbee ·

        In reply to It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

        And when you make the argument that all software has some security issues, you ignore the fact that Windows is far worse. The problems with Windows are NOT just being the big target. Windows has a bad security design.

        * Internet Explorer integrated into the operating system. Bad Design, but it was done to kill Netscape.
        * Internet Explorer depending on ActiveX controls, which can do anything that INSTALLED software can do. Horrible design, but it was meant to kill Java.
        * Outlook helpfully executing file attachments without your knowledge. To kill Lotus Notes, maybe? Who knows?

        All of these things can be worked around, but they take a lot of effort.

        To deal with Internet Explorer being built in to the operating system, you have to make very sure that IE is always patched with the latest updates.

        To avoid ActiveX security problems, you really need to disable it everywhere. Good luck with that! Practically speaking, there’s always SOMETHING you need that requires ActiveX, so you have to set up your four security zones and only enable Active X in the trusted zone, then make sure any sites that need ActiveX are put into your trusted zone. For each employee. For each site.

        To avoid Outlook security problems, you have to disable virtually all file attachment opening, which is why you see a warning if you try to look at a picture in recent versions of Outlook. Practically speaking, lots of businesses have gone to scanning all incoming email and blocking certain file attachments just to cope.

        Yes, it’s not just Windows. But they didn’t just get stuck with the trophy: they earned it!

      • #3265023

        You won’t find anyone sensible

        by tony hopkinson ·

        In reply to It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

        who will claim any OS doesn’t have security issues.

        Still find a lot on people saying windows gets hit because there’s a lot of it though. That is not it, it’s gets hit more because you need less technical skill to hit it, and lots more skill (than is needed to merely use it) to make it less of a target.

        99% of it’s security problems are because some pratt thought client side scripting was a good idea. Commercially excellent, security wise a complete non starter.

        Until that gets binned or secured to the point where it’s unusable in the main, keep kissing security good bye.

        Can’t wait for low rights IE, the number of working things that won’t work will either be unbelievable or a damn lie.

        For all my distaste for ms, I’d be overjoyed if they got it right, not holding my breath though.

      • #3265328

        Well Said

        by markdmac ·

        In reply to It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

        Well said James.

        You hear a lot about IE problems, but the fact is there were more critical issues that required patching in Firefox than in IE in 2004. I don’t think 2005 numbers have been published yet for comparrison.

        • #3264278


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Well Said

          Your statement needs editing. You said:

          “[i]there were more critical issues that required patching in Firefox than in IE in 2004[/i]”

          What you should have said is this:

          “[i]there were more critical issues, according to one standard of measure, that were reported publicly by the Mozilla Foundation for Firefox than were reported publicly by Microsoft for IE in 2004[/i]”

          Of course, considering Microsoft’s tendencies in vulnerability reporting, that means essentially zero.

        • #3264183

          Have a good look over

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to Well Said

          those statistics, the numbers change depend on where you are sat. They aren’t wrong but different things are being reported. For instance MS’s report doesn’t include the ones reported in previous years that aren’t fixed yet. You might want to look at turn around times for all issues fixed, you’ll get a better picture, otherwise you are down to 9/10 housewives say so.

      • #3264277

        Not an argument for one or the other

        by the_fixer ·

        In reply to It’s time to get beyond ‘windows = security issue’ alone

        I use both Windows and Red Hat Linux and both have their pros and cons. I think that MS gets hit with a bad reputation for security and it has been deserved in the past. I do think they are doing a better job of it lately and if you check the US CERT web site (See link below) you will find that there are more security vulnerabilities listed for Linux in last weeks bulletin. My concern (and this only my perception) if you have an OS kernel that everyone has open access to, wouldn’t there be a greater chance that someone could find and exploit a security hole? JMHO.

        • #3263241

          Look carefully

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Not an argument for one or the other

          Windows and Linux are treated differently in how they are listed. The Windows vulnerabilities are ones that affect mainly the core of Windows, which is a small subset of what Linux offers. OTOH, a huge number of applications that run on Linux are included in the list. Not the kernel itself, which is kind of the only thing Windows is judged on, but the kernel AND everything surrounding it. To be a real comparison, you’d have to hold a flaw in WinZip against Microsoft, for example. Also, there’s not just Linux in that section, there’s also BSD. Would you include a Xenix flaw in with the Microsoft results? No, but that’s kind of what’s going on here. Furthermore, the same vulnerability is often reported multiple times. For example, if there is a bug in the kernel, there may be separate advisories posted for SuSE, Red Hat, Debian, etc., even though it’s the same thing.

          So, basically, Linux is fighting Microsoft with one hand tied behind its back, and it’s still winning. I’m not saying that US-CERT is up to something, because they’re not. It’s just a side effect of how they group things.

          As for the “risk” of letting people see the code, that argument was beaten down more ways than Rodney King years ago. But I’ll toss a few sentences out anyway.

          1 – This is true if you are talking about Microsoft. When you base your whole design process on keeping the code secret, it has to stay secret afterward. Otherwise, if the code does make it out into the wild, there is a good chance that someone will find something in it. Why? Because it hasn’t had the benefit of hundreds or thousands of eyeballs reviewing it like open source code has.

          2 – For every one malicious person poring through the code looking for exploits, there are 100 good people looking for those same holes so that they can be patched immediately. This is another reason Linux’s security is much better than it may appear if you only look at the CERT statistics by volume. Look at the number of days between a vulnerability being found and when it is patched. It is MUCH lower for Linux. Also, most vulnerabilities in Linux are found by the programmers themselves. Many of Windows’s vulnerabilities are discovered once there is an exploit in the wild. Why? Again because no one could look at the code to find it before all hell broke loose. And, finally, many Windows vulnerabilities are much more serious than the Linux ones. Numbers aren’t the whole story.

          I’ll stop here, because Eric Raymond showed years ago why open source design works so well in _The Cathedral and the Bazaar_ ( ), so there’s not much I can say that he hasn’t. But, Microsoft diehard or Linux geek, I highly recommend reading this. And it’s free, too.

        • #3263200

          Good points

          by the_fixer ·

          In reply to Look carefully

          Those are really good points. I will check out that site as well. I have big a big fan of the open source movement and have been using Desktop LX for my home laptop for several years and have never run into a crash or any other security issue. I use XP at work and see the benifits of the Windows systems as well.
          Thanks for the link, Nighthawk.

        • #3087266

          No problem.

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Good points

          If you need any help or anything else, let me know. The “send private message” feature is enabled on my account here for just that reason.

    • #3265283

      Some early replies give the wrong impression

      by frank hudson ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Some of the other replies are either FUD’ing or have read the press reports of Vista too quickly I think.

      “Requires a 256 meg video card” and the thought that the eye-candy isn’t really necessary–you gotta pick one or the other opinion friends, becuase if you don’t care about the later you don’t need the former. My test machine is running an Intel 845 integrated graphics motheboard. Pretty low end for 2006, and it runs Vista fine. No I don’t get the “glass”/transparency UI thing, but then if you’re like me and you don’t run all of XP’s eye candy either, why should one care?

      Press reviews often make too much of the way the UI looks. I (and many others in IT) are more concerned about how it works. In that area I see Vista as a modest improvement over XP. The “ask for the Admin password” feature is good and overdue, and that will help those that otherwise must run in Admin privledge levels. Better built-in search is welcome. I’ve yet to test the differnece for mass-roll outs, but in a corporate environment that will be very important. Even the ability to log in without logging out the current user (present in XP, but not when the XP box is a member of a domain) will be welcome in my work. Though there are features I haven’t really lab-ed out yet in the betas, my judgement is that this is more of a XP from 2000 or Win98 from Win95 (or Panther to Tiger, or maybe even XP SP2 from XP SP1) upgrade than the revolutionary change promised at Longhorn’s start. That’s good and bad–less to prepare for in a shop dependent on Windows applications software anyway.

      • #3265261

        So why upgrade then.

        by gprinsloo ·

        In reply to Some early replies give the wrong impression

        From what you say it is evident that taken away the graphic enhancement you only mention the login feature on your test system as being advantageous.

        so with a corporate setup running terminal server the client has all you mention and a ton more. So it implies that vista functionality for corporate uses can be attained with a 386 or 486 running a 5mb hard drive. Setting up terminal server to host the vista applications and look and bingo. You have multiple sessions and major admin privs and user restrictions.

        From what I see and hear there are NO ground breaking features, rather a nice new jacket for the same old bones, a couple of added vitamines to protect the heart but the brain is a bit slower and needs more memory and new glasses. IMHO not an upgrade, rather a cover-up for aging beauty.

      • #3265171

        Added security is the key

        by scifiman ·

        In reply to Some early replies give the wrong impression

        Well, they are doing a massive rewrite of core code to fix security issues. That of course will be welcome both at work and at home. If they get that part right then we should all migrate to Vista sooner than later. It’s a key reason by itself. The max eye candy won’t make me anymore productive.

        But on the other hand, just because W2K isn’t supported anymore doesn’t mean it stops working. I plan on keeping it around quite a while yet on the server side. No need to spend the money if you don’t need too. XP probably won’t sunset for a good 5 years at least. I have 10 humans and another dozen servers but I can’t afford to upgrade “Just Because It’s Released” anymore than a 30,000 PC mega company can. We’ll get Vista with new PC’s and go from there. Maybe by then we’ll move on to 2003 Server also, if there’s a compelling need.

        • #3263712

          STOP IT NOW!

          by craig ·

          In reply to Added security is the key

          Stop talking about added security , it’s windows the file system does not allow for the OS to be secure , it will always be vulnerable to something… it may be more secure than XP but by all accounts never secure , compare it to any other OS, MS is not a secure solution ,if you need security go and download Linux or if you have the money go and buy a MAC… but dear LORD do not Brag about MS and it’s Security… that’s like mice bragging about being the biggest mammals on earth.

          Rather go on about it’s good points… like it looks pretty good , okay so that’s it it looks good…ooops not much after that.

    • #3265277

      Vista Radical

      by codebubba ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Hi Dave,

      I wouldn’t say you’re a radical, no – a little bit of healthy skepticism can be a good thing.

      Don’t pick on Microsoft about “originality”, though … it’s pretty awful hard to be “original” on that scale when you’re dealing with something as involved as an O/S is these days. Don’t let anyone fool you – ALL the developers are gleaning ideas from each other on their presentation. Since Microsoft is in the #1 spot they are naturally going to get all the tomatoes thrown at them. They have thousands of developers – believe me, they are not just taking someone else’s code and repackaging it. To think that is a very predjudiced (bigoted?) and uneducated viewpoint. I haven’t met too many really competent developers who take that kind of view on anyone else’s work. Don’t get caught in that trap.

      As for Vista – I think they’ll do a good job on it, just give them time. They’ve invested hundreds of millions of bucks in development on it. Even so, I don’t know if I’ll upgrade immediately either. I’ve been very pleased with the performance of XP myself – it has been very stable and reliable.

      Just let Vista stand on its own merits. When it comes out just evaluate it in light of your own needs. If it fills those needs better than what you’re currently using then by all means upgrade to it. If not, then stay with what you’re using.


      -CB 😉

      • #3265223


        by kiltie ·

        In reply to Vista Radical

        I agree that MS do not
        “they are not just taking someone else’s code and repackaging it”

        They simply buy up the company they want to aquisition

        eg the anti spyware from Giant, repackaging it and renaming it…… and it is also the practice of other large corporations such as Symantec in aquiring Norton products, and others….

        Is the point made?

        • #3265195


          by codebubba ·

          In reply to right…..

          Hey Cliff,

          Sure they do. Every large company does that. The company I work for does that – we acquire smaller companies and integrate their product into our line – it makes sense. Sometimes instead of building it you buy it.

          The thing I’m trying to point out here is that people have a tendency to paint Microsoft with a one-colored brush; they just assume that everything Microsoft does is just purchased and resold. I’m sorry – but that’s just plain wrong. Who did they purchase Visual Studio from? How about Office? How about Windows?

          Come on, let’s be a little more objective around here, huh?

          -CB 😉

        • #3265147


          by kiltie ·

          In reply to right…

          you make a point, but some of your questions need answering.

          MS started off when Bill Gates bought QDos fron a dying computer company, created MSDos from it.

          His KEY strategical move was to somehow persuade IBM to bundle the new windows OS with IBMs PCs going out to corporations.

          This is easily researched on Google, my point is that most of windows consists of a series of aquisitions, although I concede that a lot of development has been made since.

          I read somewhere once that 80% of Windows market is corporate, so aimed accordingly.

          Windows was not designed for the internet, but the office environment, hence all its security problems.

          As to where Windows came from?
          I once owned a copy of windows 1.0 and it was almost identical with a program called GEM fom Alan Sugars range of AMSTRAD machines

          Go figure it out

        • #3265092


          by codebubba ·

          In reply to questions

          Hi Cliff,

          Right … Bill G. (And Paul Allen) did get the first MS-DOS from Seattle Computer; I remember that one. Subsequent versions of DOS were, I seem to recall, built internally, though. Remember how similar CP/M and DOS were back in those days? Agree … he and Gary Kildall (DRI) were both approached by IBM to build the O/S for the IBM PC. Kildall would not submit to IBM’s security measures, hence Gates won out there.

          80% of Windows Market is Corporate? Hmm … that could be.

          Also agree that Windows was “retrofitted” to the Web. Most systems developed back in the 80’s were. Sure it takes work to refit the security. So?

          I, too, had an eariler version of Windows (BTW, the first commercial release was 1.01, not 1.0) back when I worked at Quadram. (1986). At that time both it, and GEM, were little more than curiosities. I didn’t think GEM was all that similar, though – it was monochrome as I recall. At that time, GEM seemed a little slicker than Windows was. Like a lot of technologies back in those early days, though, it didn’t retain compatibility with the market which, like it or not, was MS-DOS.

          -CB 😉

      • #3263705

        Propaganda deluxe

        by craig ·

        In reply to Vista Radical

        If you believe that you’d believe in god aswell , Nice try buck… funny that after any new feature makes an appearnace on any other OS then all of a sudden as if by some magic fairy it appears on Windows , THEY DO COPY OTHER OS’s.Ms may have thousands of developers but all other OS’s have twice or many times the number that MS have , but yet they still manage to keep their costs way below that of MS and still produce a better quality product.

        Why would you say with pride they’ve spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the product, that’s shamefull… as of yet they have not released a stable and secure system but yet every time the promise they will , it’s called marketing that’s where the money goes, sell first fix later . that’s the bottom line… Dollars and profit not product quality

    • #3265271

      I’m on the fencepost

      by dark_15 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I personally think it is a bit early to tell. I mean, Vista has been delayed so many times, and it is not even going to show up until 2007 now! A lot of things can happen over the course of 6 months, so I am going to hold my breath until then.

      Also, take a look at these 2 links for more info on system requirements:

      In actuality, those are not bad requirements for an OS that will probably be around fr a good 4-5 years. Many of the complaints now are quite similar to the one people had about XP; for instance, a lot of people complained that 256 mb of memory was an outrageous requirement back when XP launched… and look at it now! 256mb is a commodity, and some baseline systems even have 512mb to start off to boot!

      As for the UI issues, I believe nearly all newer macs have some sort of seperate graphics processor (a Radeon 9200/equiv. or better, IIRC) for their visual effects. You can correct me if I am wrong… but I am quite sure they all do. Vista’s engine will be doing crazier effects than what OSX’s engine has been doing – therefore, it will require more power than OSX.

      Vista has come a long way from its early Longhorn Alpha releases… and it looks like it has a bit to go yet. Until Microsoft releases their software to the public (or gives us a public demo beta), I’ll sit on the sidelines and watch the bits and bytes fly.

    • #3265237

      No upside: No hardware improvement

      by progan01-yahoo ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      For ten years and more now, Microsoft has offered new or improved operating systems that more or less delivered on their promises, but only after the OS was put on a faster, more capable PC. The Win95 box that got upped to Win98 or 2000 could barely run it with 5 Gb of hard disk space and a 1-GHz processor. Those who upgraded to XP found that less than 10 Gb on the hard disk and a processor slower than 2 GHz meant their displays and other operations were considerably slower.

      This has been the pattern since we discovered Windows 3.1 didn’t really like living on a 286.

      All the problems you mention — security, interoperability with new media and, over all of this, performance — would be solved in time with newer PCs capable of handling 64-bit data streams at least 150% faster than they do at present.

      No such hardware is presently in development anywhere in the world.

      I have no doubt Vista would be very happy on a 5 GHz box with a Gigabus and a 1 Tb drive. You could probably do some powerful work on it. But no such specification is being developed. PC hardware development has stalled, Moore’s Law has been revoked, and the 3.4 GHz speeds of today will be the speeds of tomorrow.

      Which makes Vista as practical as dropping a Corvette engine into a Yugo. The power it promises can’t be delivered on the hardware it is likely to be installed on.

      Until such time as 5 GHz PCs are available at Best Buy, you can be sure that upgrading to Vista will only max out your hardware and deliver no significant performance or capability benefit equal to its cost.

      This is a dead end.

      • #3263861

        What of Dual-Core and 64 Bit?

        by scribe6 ·

        In reply to No upside: No hardware improvement

        I know there isn’t a lot of software written to take advantage of dual core processors, but that should change with Vista. Development to take advantage of dual cores is already working its way into the video game community. My guess is Adobe and Video editing software companies aren’t that far behind them.

        64 bit handling will also help alleviate this, as programs are rewritten for it. Again, some game developers have already done this (Valve and Crytek), and I’m guessing the video editing suites and other processor intensive type companies will be doing this as well. I know that SQL 2005 has both a 32 bit and 64 bit code set, based upon the software I received when I bought it for my company.

        No matter what the OS has been, there have always been increased hardware requirements when upgrading. The idea is that the newest version of [Insert OS Name Here] will take advantage of [Insert Great new Piece of Hardware here] better. You see this with OS X as much as you do with the Windows versions. Based upon what I’ve seen, the OS X for Intel Chips is not really compatible with the original OS X for the PowerPC chips. Part of this is the fact that the x86 architecture is completely different than the PowerPC architecture, but its also to take advantage of the features in the new processors from Intel.

        PC Hardware development is moving in other directions as well. We saw that with the introduction of 3-d Video cards, and we’ve continued to see that as RAID, USB and Firewire have come into the consumer market. There’s companies introducing special “physics” cards, much in the vein of the original 3D cards. PCIe has increased throughput across the motherboard, and DDR2 is making memory even faster and more accessible. Amd’s memory controller helped bring this about, and its new socket should help keep processors cooler while new manufacturing methors are dropping power requirements across the board.

        A PC isn’t about crunching numbers anymore, like it was with 3.1 and MSDOS. Its about digitally developing pictures, sending email to family or chatting with friends while adventuring through [insert popular internet based game name here].

        Its also a question of trade offs. Am I willing to pay $1500-2000 US for a new close to top of the line system so I can see all the really cool graphics in Vista, or will my current PC handle Vista well enough for what I need it to do?

        As for me, I was looking at getting a new PC in November/December, with Vista on it. It just means that I’m going to postpone my purchase for a couple of months. I’m also moving back to an “out of the box” solution from one of the Game Performance builders, to clear some of my headaches from building my own boxes.

      • #3264224

        Oh boy

        by michael l hereid sr ·

        In reply to No upside: No hardware improvement

        I tested Windows XP on a AMD 6-2 400mhz and it ran very nicely on 198meg PC133 memory and 20 gig harddrive. I ran this for about 2 years before I upgraded and I was never disappointed.

    • #3265235


      by nighthawk808 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Why pay good money for less functionality and the privilege of being treated like a thief until you prove otherwise by “activating” your copy of Windoesn’t. Linux has reached a point where it’s not just as good as Windows, it’s better. It’s gotten so far ahead that Vista won’t even begin to close the gap. When I switched to SuSE a couple of years ago, I couldn’t believe I stuck with Microsoft so long. Installing Vista would be a DOWNGRADE for my computer.

      I’ve got an overclocked XFX nVidia 6800GS PCI-E with 256MB GDDR3. I shouldn’t have to wonder if this will be powerful enough to run a GUI. Pixar created Toy Story with less graphics processing power than this, for God’s sake. Even by Microsoft’s low standards, this is a stupid idea.

      • #3265011

        not just stupid

        by giannidalessismo ·

        In reply to No.

        it’s ridiculous already. I have 1.5 gigs or DDR, Xp uses 15 % of this
        for starters, by the time i’ve got an app going, it’s over 50% of a 2.4
        ghz cpu and running out of memory. a bigger footprint than this,
        gee whiz. i’d be using Linux if the audio apps I need ported to it

        • #3083907

          Which one?

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to not just stupid

          One of the leading Linux audio editors recently released a rather feature-packed version, if I’m remembering it correctly. Which ones are you using now? I might be able to tell you whether it’s already available in a Linux version.

    • #3265233

      Honestly, XP is preferred still

      by w2ktechman ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I have actually told my boss ( a bit early) that when I am forced to support Vista, I was quitting. After playing with it on each of the releases, I have started learning Linux, although I still need a lot of help on that.
      I will stay on XP as long as I can, I have no plans to ever move to Vista, as it seems to me to be an overinflated POS-OS.

    • #3265227

      I can get that now

      by Anonymous ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I already have some of, if not all of the Vista “video features” working on a nVidia GeForce 5200 FX 128MB/128-bit video card. I use Stardock’s Object Desktop, and configure it the way *I* want to work. If I want a sidebar, I can make one, and put whatever I wish in it. If I want a semi-transparent interface, it’s there (Though I find that having something underneath a window show through makes things harder to read in the first place). Everything works smoothly and fast, no problems.

      I take about an average approach to security. The firewall, virus scanner, spyware scanner. The usual. Checked the firewall at’s Shields up and got a good bill of health there. I’m not too worried. I don’t open email attachments unless I’m VERY sure of the contents. I use Firefox mostly, and have the Script extention in that blocks ALL scripts, and let’s you allow or disallow by sites, or temporarily allow for one sessiononly. Handy. 🙂 And all the tabbed browsing stuff, of course.

      I see no reason to upgrade to Vista. I probably will, though, when they threaten no more support or updates for XP Pro. But right now, they do keep updating the OS when a new fix comes out so as long as that keeps up, then I’ll keep using it.

      By the time I really need to upgrade to Vista, I’ll more than likely be ready to upgrade hardware anyway. I do every few years it seems.

    • #3265193

      No Vista and M$oft is not worth the problems

      by oisleach9 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I have fully 35% of my customers that are still using Win2K and Win2K server and will not allow me to touch anything unless it breaks.
      All computers that are bouoght for these clients are either retrofitted with Win2K or made to work with the Win2K server. They do not use Active Directory because they see no benefit, Return on Investment for their offices to migrate further and pay more bucks, for no only the Windows OS but the required specialized software fixes.
      For the other 65% of my customers, they are all going Open source anyway, USing Either Open Office, GIMP etc that they plan to move to LINUX all the way as soon as Microsoft cuts off support for Win XP/2K. So my warning to Microsoft if you really want to keep a cash flow make sure not to cut off support for these OS’s otherwise all my customers that consist of 3 -5 Metropolitan offices will simply dump Microsoft for the other alternatives. Cost is cost and the heads of these companis are tired of being held hostage to constant Upgrades that they never use.
      Beware Microsoft you are at a crossroads.

    • #3265182

      I agree with you

      by dbucyk ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      It’s Microsoft. There’s always a way to crack an operating system.

      I only read the specs on system requirements and Microsoft doesn’t need all the fancy graphics.

      I just recently started to build my system.

      I only put in the base amount of memory and I’m going to put in a 256 MB video card.

      My processor will be able to handle that amount of processing if I install RAID onto my system which is supported on the motherboard.

      This is a never ending loop and eventually Microsoft better get the message before the consumers eventually rally together and eventually boycott Microsoft.

    • #3265175

      What else is new?

      by jgmsys9 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      We should all be used to this by now. Every time Microsoft releases a major OS update, you are are required to upgrade your hardware as well. Usually it’s just RAM, and sometimes the processor, but now we have to upgrade our RAM, our processors and our video cards as well. Should we expect anything less from the WIntel duopoly? Let’s face it; they’re in cohoots, and they always have been. And apparently, we can all now add Nvidia and ATI to that list.

    • #3265164

      I was on the fence until …

      by pebkac charlie ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      … I read this:

      It wasn’t the article. It was the discussion by the MS employees that made me think twice. Skip the article (just a gripe about firing the bosses because of the delay) and read the posts below. They are entertaining if nothing else.

      Taking that into account and the fact that Novell just released desktop eye candy for the Linux desktop that will do everything that the Vista is supposed to do, but on a Matrox MX400, why would one ever think about Vista?

    • #3265155

      MS Haters – 2 cents

      by jonf ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I am so tired of all the MS haters out there. You people are so biased against MS that you fail to see or even acknowledge the positive things Microsoft has done for the computer industry. You also put all the blame squarely on MS.

      Yes, Windows has issues just as every OS that has ever existed. Microsoft is the big target and thus suffers from more attacks than any other OS. They have made mistakes and have learned a lot from them although they need to keep security as the top priority.

      As a network administrator, I have not had a single security issue or breach on my network in over 6 years. We are purely Windows based (2000, XP, 2003). That is because I actually do my job properly and do not rely on the OS for security as nobody should regardless of the OS you use. Every OS is hackable and will always be hackable because nothing is perfect.

      The most recent breach I have experienced was with our corporate website a year ago which our ISP hosts on Linux. I am not saying Linux is better or worse just that it happens with everything. Hell, even Cisco has issues with their router OS?s frequently. I am more worried about the internet backbones than my LAN security because it is out of my hands.

      If you look at the latest vulnerabilities, you will see that MS has few on the list while Linux has multiple vulnerabilities, which I chock up to its modular design, and multiple vendor models.

      Vista will be a good (not great) improvement. You cannot expect an OS to be infallible. There are far too many variables, components, and millions of lines of code and thousands of programmers that maintain these systems.

      My 2 cents.

      • #3265141

        MS Haters

        by codebubba ·

        In reply to MS Haters – 2 cents


        Agree completely. It’s unfortunate but all too often these discussions degenerate into a flame-war or a discussion of “We hate Microsoft and here’s why”. It’s been my observation that it’s usually the 2nd-rate players that have the most negative to say about the leaders in ANY industry; never mind just this industry.

        I saw this happening 15 years ago back when OS/2 was trying to make a go of it and now here we go again. I tried to use OS/2 for awhile myself and was watching the OS/2 vs. Windows NT stuff going on. Same thing. The OS/2 crowd was running around doing little more than taking pot-shots at Microsoft and denegrating it, rather than spending time just working with their system and working to improve it. Where is OS/2 now?

        I don’t harbor any ill will towards the “open source” or Linux folks myself – but I’m seeing the same conditions on the discussion boards as I saw 15 years ago. Microsoft had their head down and just got the job done. They will probably do so again with Vista. OK, so they’ve had setbacks. Hell … any company of that size is going to have issues like this.

        Maybe I don’t read enough boards but so far I haven’t seen Microsoft users coming onto these boards (even when the subject was ABOUT Linux or Open Source) and taking pot-shots at the Linux crowd. Why? Because by-and-large people that use Microsoft stuff are satisfied with it. I support a number of people that use Microsoft stuff and not one of them has ever complained to me about how “crappy” the stuff is and “can you please move me to XXXXX because I HATE MICROSOFT”.

        It’s really silly. However – it will continue. As long as there’s a #1 player there will be #2, #3 … etc. that feel they can’t make their point without criticizing the leader.

        -CB 😉

        • #3265133

          Not everybody is 100% Against M$

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to MS Haters

          I have been using MS products for years, and I have found that many of the errors with Winx is either user or 3rd party programs. But, they do seem to over-do a lot of things.
          Although I have never really used other OS’s, I am now learning Linux because I will not go to Vista after reviewing it. First, many things changed (again), so I will need to re-learn just about everything all over again. MS states that it is easier and more intuative, but this is not correct. When you add more and more layers to do everything, it is not easier, MS needs to understand that.
          Secondly, still many of the functions are not easy to use, or do not work as stated by MS. I know its still in Beta form, and that 60% of the OS is being re-written, but that just shows how buggy it really is at this state.
          However, it is probably easier than learning a whole new OS completely, because commands change, etc..
          I plan on hanging on to XP for as long as possible myself. I see no real NEED to move to Vista. I am sure that HW will not really be a problem when Vista is finally released, things should run on the newest of systems just fine. It may take a year or 2 after its release before it really gets popular though, and after a few service packs. This would be the timeframe of which many people will be upgrading their systems anyway.

        • #3265118

          As an MCSE I doubt VISTA.

          by gprinsloo ·

          In reply to MS Haters

          Reality check.

          Face facts.

          There is nothing substantial that has been advertised to date regarding the vista release that makes it a MUST upgrade for the betterment of computing or user usability.

          MS in my opinion will be better off in investing in remote satellite computing via mini handhelds. That is where the need is.

          A mere facelift and fixes in security subsystem is not enough to justify costly hardware upgrades to enable a OS upgrade.

          Giving credit where it is due is great but lets be honest folks. MS has probably made a wise choice to hold back on the release. Perhaps they will still include something radical in line with tradition. (Ie. win3.1 to 95. OR 9x to XP OR NT to 200x server)

          Dont feed us garbage again by telling us that 98 is an upgrade to 95. It was a facelift and an inclusion of lots of drivers for plug and play which could have been incorporated in a service pack. O sorry, I forgot to automatic inclusion of Internet Explorer which may now legally not be included.

          Good Luck MS. Make us proud as at this point in time I believe most posts in this forum has merit, MS does not really have a lot to offer in vista.

          As the name rightly implies. WINDOWS VISTA. “WINDOWS VIEW” leads me to the question.


          Any which way MS will be breaking records again be sure of that.

        • #3265085

          As an MCSE I doubt VISTA

          by codebubba ·

          In reply to As an MCSE I doubt VISTA.

          No question about it – M$ is going to have to hit a “grand slam” to get deep penetration with Vista. As I said earlier, I think people should let it stand on its own merits and upgrade if appropriate, but I think “appropriate” may differ widely depending on your situation. XP has been pretty successful out there – you’re not going to budge users off it unless you can honestly sell them that there’s a compelling reason to do so. I think most folks are going to take the stance “If it ain’t broke … why fix it?”

          In my case I might upgrade out of curiosity only because I like to tinker with the latest technology. However I won’t move any of the systems the rest of my family has to it, though … the hardware won’t handle it. In that case I’d wind up buying 3 more new computers where the ones they have now do the job perfectly for them. I suspect many are in that situation.

          I sense a leveling off in the industry. I’m no expert on industry trends – but I think M$ is going to find it harder and harder to move the user base forward. It will happen – but I don’t think it will move at nearly the rate it has before.

          Just my 2-cents on that one.

          -CB 😉

        • #3265022

          You are not hearing the message

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to MS Haters

          You hear the loudest, most rabbid MS haters and then stopped listening is sounds like.

          Regardless of how much of a MS advocate you are, it is silly to not complain about valid concerns and hold them to a higher standard than they have been.

          both Bubba and jon, do you really think it is acceptable to have a company able to fairly well lock the security from illegal copies of XP, but can’t secure the way XP runs? The only major focus on security they have had is in sales, not the running of their product.

          Another very valid point is the turn around for critical patches, and even the warning of exploits so people can put a “work around” in place until a patch can be developed.

          This has nothing to do with #2 hating #1. It is what we SHOULD be able to expect out of ANY and ALL OS’s.

          If you pay for a product, flaws should be taken care of in an orderly manner. If MS knows about a major exploit and sits on it (like they have done in the past) and that exploit is “exploited”, should not MS be held accountable for the damage as a result of their not warning the customers about a KNOWN flaw?

          Expect more and hold them to a high standard, instead of making excuses and writing valid complaints off as just sour grapes. Until people START, there is no financial reason for MS to spend the extra development time, and right now it is more important to be first to market with any product.

          That, and don’t ever lock yourself into a single product as an “end all”.

          And of course, popular has never meant better. MS has always done MARKETING very well.

        • #3263649

          I hear the message the problem is I live in the real world.

          by golf24_7 ·

          In reply to You are not hearing the message

          In some respects I agree with what you say but it is not reality.
          I have spent most of my career in Quality Assurance and time and again I watch code ship with bugs and some cases known critical flaws. Why, reasons very from nobody will find it, it will never happen, the users should not do that to we have a deadline and we will meet it. The fact of the mater is I can not recall a single time that I have ever seen software delivered that has more then about 10 users actually delivered bug free.

          Additionally, I don?t care what OS you are running exposing it directly to the internet without proper patching and monitoring is absurd yet most people I know do this. They get high-speed internet plug their PC in to the modem and leave it on all the time not to mention they don?t run an Anti-Virus and if they do rarely keep it up to date nor do they deploy patches when they are released.

          Computers still need regular maintenance regardless of OS.

          On final note, we complain that Microsoft can?t protect our computers, that are all different and they don?t directly control, from possible millions of attacker?s everyday yet I bet most of us can?t even adequately secure our own homes.

          By the way you are correct that Microsoft has excellent marketing skills on that note so do most cigarette manufactures, car manufactures, Big businesses (ENRON) the point is we hear what we want which is rarely the whole truth.

        • #3265432

          Time for accountablity

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I hear the message the problem is I live in the real world.

          not complacency.

          If an auto maker ships a known defect, they are looking at major law suits where there are damages and even loss of life due to the defect.

          If a software developer sends a known defect, it is just part of the game and we scrug our shoulders and hope we have a good backup.

          We should be able to hold any and all software deveolopers accountable for any damage or loss due to a defect in their product, including down time.

          If MS sits on an exploit for six months and the exploit is discovered and used, MS should be held accountable for anyone with a properly patched system that was exploited.

          Expect more or you will never get more.

        • #3265381

          real world again

          by golf24_7 ·

          In reply to Time for accountablity

          I don’t know about your car but mine has had a couple of recalls and I did not get paid for them. You may also not realize that recalls generally only occur after numerous people have found/complained about a given problem. Furthermore any car that does not get a perfect score in a crash test should be considered defective but odly enough it isn’t. Why all these things drive up costs and delay delivery.
          Do I think they should be more proactive sure so should everyone else. I am not aware of very many other vendors that support their product for as long or as well as Microsoft does. When is the last time you went to a vendor with a problem in a product that you purchased over a year ago let alone seven years ago and got satisfaction.

          By the way I am not sure what you do for a living but imagine trying to do your job in a way that it will please millions of different users with diffearent needs tring to do different things.

          Also, I have noticed that most products do not have built in functionality to let you know there is a problem with a solution. If your lucky you get something in the mail assuming you registered properly and you have not moved.

          Get real.

        • #3264288

          And if you notice a defect

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to real world again

          do not most products have a warrenty on them?

          Your expectations are too low based on what you have been conditioned to accept, and not consistant with expectations for other products.

        • #3264007

          warranties and my 25 cents

          by golf24_7 ·

          In reply to real world again

          Most products come with what 90 days maybe a year. You want a longer warranty no problem but it will cost you extra. Not to mention that most require you to ship the product to them generally at your cost. Don?t get me wrong I want more, but the usually means it costs more and yes I know you can get Linux for free but does it function as well is Windows I think not. Do I really want to retrain my entire household on how to use Linux and even if I did why don?t you explain to a six year old and two year old hoe Linux is better but they can?t play their games on it? I guess my problem is I see the PC as more then just a tool I use it for entertainment as well.
          In my house I support 5 desktop users and one laptop all of whom currently run XP and most of whom will probably go to Vista when it ships. I may have to up a few graphics cards most notably my two year olds computer because he has an integrated graphics card. Otherwise I suspect Vista will run fine. On top of those I have a machine with the Vista Beta, Win98 virtual machine, one Mandrake box to Sun boxes with Solaris a Win2k server a win2003 server and a server with the longhorn core that I am playing with. Not to mention the friends and family I support. By in large the XP boxes take care of themselves I do spend a bit of time reloading Win98 boxes due to kids trying to load stuff that will never run on the old hardware namely games and the occasional virus. I also have to admit that the Linux and Solaris boxes run fine to however the require a lot more work to get up and running and I manually patch those.
          In principle I agree with you about Quality that is why I work in QA. That said I also realize that there has to be a balance and I personally think Microsoft does a far better job then most. Especially when it comes to support after the code is released. I see software go out with known defects everyday and the developers are more then happy to go back and fix those problems for a price. Microsoft?s way of doing it is every couple of years they release a new version and they charge you a couple hundred dollars per copy to use their software and have it supported. Do I like shelling out all that money no but I like the improvements and the support so I do just like I do for every application I like and use.
          By the way I will update my home to Vista first and then upgrade the computers for my company 3 to 6 months later unless I need new computers sooner. As far as I am concerned until a company can give me a better OS that does everything I want to do for about the same price or less I will stick with Microsoft.

        • #3263973

          oh goodie

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to real world again

          another dull knife in the drawer

          “[i]I know you can get Linux for free but does it function as well is Windows[/i]”
          I’m going to guess you meant “as Windows”. The answer is “No, it functions [b]better[/b] than Windows.”

          “[i]I think not.[/i]”
          That’s obvious.

          “[i]explain to a six year old and two year old hoe Linux is better but they can?t play their games on it?[/i]”
          Why would I want to lie to the kid? You can play games on Linux just fine.

          “[i]the developers are more then happy to go back and fix those problems for a price.[/i]”
          Wow, exciting. You can pay people money to fix their own mistakes. I need to get in on that racket: I’ll create stuff with defects, then get people to pay me to fix them. I could even have the fixes ready before people call! I’ll intentionally go back and add defects so that I already have the fixes on hand for solving the problem, then when someone wants to pay me to fix the defects I won’t have to do any actual work!

          Meanwhile, I’ll keep using open source software, which gets fixed for free and far more quickly than any proprietary software I’ve seen.

          Oh, yeah, and one more thing: linebreaks. Learn ’em, love ’em. Huge blocks of text without nice linebreaks are very, very difficult to read online.

        • #3265940

          Excuse me

          by golf24_7 ·

          In reply to real world again

          Sorry about the line breaks.

          Linux does not function better then Windows across the board. I will admit it does do some thing?s better but I can only do a subset of what I do on Windows in Linux. I do use both Windows and Linux at both home and work and I do not believe either are all that secure out of the box.

          By the way you can get Linux for free yes but if everyone does that then who pays the developers. If you use the software you should support the developers by paying for their add-on support or using the donation feature on their site. Those people need to eat to.

          You are right that some games will run on Linux but again you must settle for a subset of available titles.

          By the way I guess every time you work on someone?s computer it is fixed completely without error the first time if not you are being paid to go fix deficiencies in your work, same concept.

          By the way apotheon your initial comment was unnecessary in the future act like an adult if that is possible

        • #3265807

          *sigh* not this AGAIN

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to real world again

          “Linux does not function better then Windows across the board. I will admit it does do some thing?s better but I can only do a subset of what I do on Windows in Linux. I do use both Windows and Linux at both home and work and I do not believe either are all that secure out of the box.”

          What can you NOT do on a Linux box? I’ll list off the substitutes and/or complements to the tools you need.

          Out of the box Linux is more secure for a number of reasons (that I’ve iterated over and over…and again…you’ll see them)

          A) MS OSes mudge kernel space and user space. Linux has strict kernel space and user space. With SELinux this is even more apparent.

          B) The registry can be edited by anyone, even remotely! Linux doesn’t use a registry. In fact, the way Linux works is via libs and shared libs so that even in the event that a user land lib is used in some way for a malicious purpose, the kernel land lib is untouched.

          C) Run As… is crippled. For a proper implementation check out sudo in Linux.

          D) Integrating a browser into an OS is STUPID.

          E) Linux implements users, groups, and permissions properly. The problem is that Windows doesn’t. File permissions are ghettoed out in Windows and the 3 basic rules of security are thrown out the window (Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability). Hell, even authentication is mudged in with various kludges.

          F) Windows allows default actions that shouldn’t happen (out of the box). e.g. Hiding known file extentions, executing withing asking (ala Outlook), and forcing your to log in as Administrator for the first log in.

          “By the way you can get Linux for free yes but if everyone does that then who pays the developers.”

          This is a tired argument that doesn’t have a leg to stand on. If this were true, then why is Red Hat profitable? Why is Novell Suse predicted to be profitable soon?

          Free in the context of free software doesn’t mean free beer, it means free intellectually!

          “If you use the software you should support the developers by paying for their add-on support or using the donation feature on their site. Those people need to eat to.”

          Normally this would be true, but a miriad of *FREE* FLOSS applications have proved your wrong. I give you Apache as a prime example.

          “You are right that some games will run on Linux but again you must settle for a subset of available titles.”

          I have to settle for a subset with Windows too. Hell, you do realize that games made for Windows might not even run on your system? Elder Scrolls: Oblivion is a prime example. It requires Pixel Shader 2.0, but by default Windows doesn’t support this. You have to get a specific driver (if your hardware supports it) to run it.

          I can’t play The Simpson’s Hit and Run in Windows either…Copy protection doesn’t recognize the CD in the drive.

          Check out for the large number of games that ARE supported on a platform they were NEVER meant to run on.

          By the way I guess every time you work on someone?s computer it is fixed completely without error the first time if not you are being paid to go fix deficiencies in your work, same concept.

          By the way apotheon your initial comment was unnecessary in the future act like an adult if that is possible

        • #3263006

          Golf24_7, relax, breath, and then reread

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to real world again

          If you go back and look, not once did I tell you to switch to linux. Not once did I complain about price.

          Sure, linux is a good alternative, but that has nothing to do with what I have been trying to say to you.

          MS puts out shoddy work, only because they can get away with it. They get away with it because people like you make excuses for them. The more people look to linux as an alternative, the better product MS will HAVE to come out with. That or increase the FUD to keep people like you from thinking linux CAN replace a windows box.

          Again, if I have a video card go bad after two weeks, I expect it to be fixed. If the batch was sent out KNOWING they were flawed, then there will be class action suits.

          Quit making excuses. MS is more concerned with securing lisenced copies than it is about securing the copies, that is why it is much easier to hack a windows system than it is to pirate one. Until the customers that WANT to use Windows stand up, this will not be a concern.

          What incentive does MS have to improve their product to make someone like you happy? Your not going to look elsewhere anyways, so they don’t have to worry about if your happy or not.

        • #3265725

          This has already been done.

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to I hear the message the problem is I live in the real world.

          “Additionally, I don?t care what OS you are running exposing it directly to the internet without proper patching and monitoring is absurd yet most people I know do this. They get high-speed internet plug their PC in to the modem and leave it on all the time not to mention they don?t run an Anti-Virus and if they do rarely keep it up to date nor do they deploy patches when they are released.”

          See for the details. The results in short: unpatched, unsecured Linux boxen lasted an average of three MONTHS. Any guesses on how the Windows boxen did? Four MINUTES. It doesn’t get any more black-and-white than that.

          Since M$ likes to pay companies to write positive reviews, I’ll tell you who the major backers were for this project: Indiana University and the National Intelligence Council (a government agency).

          Windows boxen are compromised so fast that reinstalling the OS is somewhat dangerous. In the time it takes to download and reinstall all the patches, there is a substantial risk of system compromise. I didn’t make this idea up. I can’t remember where I first read it, but I’m pretty sure it was a mainstream (read pro-M$) tech magazine not too long ago (a year or so).

        • #3265704

          anecdotal evidence

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to This has already been done.

          In addition to the study you’ve cited, there’s personal experience: I’ve seen systems compromised immediately after install in the time it took Windows Update to open IE. That’s it. It was measured in seconds, not minutes, from the moment it was connected to the Internet. Within about three or four minutes, it had no less than a couple dozen viruses, worms, and various other bits of malware infecting it.

        • #3087503

          You are not hearing the message-PLEASE!!

          by abobble2 ·

          In reply to You are not hearing the message

          You seem to be like the lady that bought hot coffee at McDonald’s and burned herself with it. Hello—-Coffee is supposed to be hot!!!
          If know about securities breaches, and MS is sitting on it before a release patch is released. Hello—Then you should take measures to avoid the breach. Not burn yourself with it. Wake up. You want MS to do your thinking for you. Then you should become a robot and plug yourself into a computer and then you would surely have the right to complain about MS not fixing you properly.

        • #3104791

          *sigh* So we should write our own patches then?

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to You are not hearing the message-PLEASE!!

          Thanks, that’s great…What a little gem you have there, since the onus *IS* on the community to write patches.

          You know that MS isn’t releasing the patches for IE until the 11th…That’s ok, the community has taken up the slack and released patches.

          Don’t blame the manufacturer, blame the stupid user for being a unable to write their own patches….wait I thought that was the whole stance against Linux…It’s hard to use! If I have to write my own patches, doesn’t that make MS OSs hard to use?

        • #3104523

          You whiner!

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to *sigh* So we should write our own patches then?

          C’mon, my grandmother could write patches for an OS that only releases binaries. Source code is for long-haired Linux hippies or wussies who are afraid of SoftICE.

        • #3106773


          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to You whiner!

          When I was a kid we had to write patches, in the snow, up hill both ways, with a stone tablet, eating only what we could catch…

          Wait, that doesn’t make any sense at all 😉

        • #3106684

          In my day . . .

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to You whiner!

          Patches were for worn out elbows on jackets and hackers used hatchets.

        • #3285927

          Oh yeah? Well, in my day…

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to You whiner!

          We didn’t have punch cards that controlled looms–we had looms that made punch cards. And here’s why we called them patches: if we wanted to write a program, we had to knit it ourself. Black thread meant a 1, white thread meant a zero. And if there was a bug, we’d have to sew a patch onto the code to cover the original thread.

          Compiling got its name from when we used to stack all our programs on top of each other. When we were ready to run the program we’d spent weeks weaving, someone would yell, “Come pile!”

          We used washing machines as bulk erasers back then.

          CodeWeavers were really code weavers back in my day.

        • #3106580

          Are you some sort of plank ?

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to You are not hearing the message-PLEASE!!

          Coffee was designed to be drunk, not chucked in your lap.
          If I relied on MS to my security thinking for me, I’d be diagnosed as brain dead !

        • #3265018

          MS Haters? Not really.

          by dnsb ·

          In reply to MS Haters

          As for your comment about OS/2? Remember a few items about Microsoft and their licensing programs? The ones that forced manufacturers to pay for a Windows license for every computer they sold or pay significantly higher prices? Made it rather expensive to purchase a computer without a OS if you wanted to install your own choice of OS. The license that one company I worked for had to obtain to get the best price — nothing like having a Windows license for every computer the company owned despite the unlikelyhood of installing an Microsoft Windows on a MAC or Sun pizza box.

          Where is OS/2 now? The same place that CP/M, OS-68KWindows 1, 2, 3, Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, 4, etc are. How many other OS’s have come and gone over the last 30 years?

          Of couse, I might wonder how an OS that is so late managed to lose so many of the promised advanced features along the way? Do you remember those articles about WinFS? Indigo? Avalon? Monad? Next-Generation Secure Computing Base? Best things since sliced bread for those who insist on living on vapourware. Well, Avalon and Indigo as still there — sort of. Just “changed the way they are implemented” to quote on MS spokesperson.

          Want to watch high definition video? Be prepared to purchase a high definition digital content protection compatible monitor. Care to let me know when these are inexpensive and in stock at your local computer store? And don’t forget the new video card which will need to be HDCP compliant.

          Oh, I forgot. IE 7 — tabbed browsing, ActiveX disabled by default, anti-phishing features. Why do I get the feelign that I’m already enjoying those without have to choose from a smorgasboard’s worth of OS variants?

          Delivery dates? Announced in 2001 for 2004 delivery. Slipped to 2005, then 2006 and now 2007. Hmmmm… there does seem to be a pattern there.

          Sorry but I’ve lived through too many of Microsoft’s missed shipping dates to be anything but cynical about the company and it’s collection of hacks trumpeting the advantages of paying Danegeld to Microsoft. I remember one columnist and his endless articles about how great Windows 3.1 was and how the columnist never had any problems — a gentleman easily recognizable for his Windows logo tattoo. The same gentleman who after switching to trumpeting the joys of Windows 95 once admitted his Windows 3.1 computer locked up one or more times per day.

      • #3263925

        A little education

        by jmgarvin ·

        In reply to MS Haters – 2 cents

        A) Your web server was probably the point of entry and not the OS.

        B) MS doesn’t “declare” vulnerabilities. Look at the 10 year old WMF flaw.

        C) It isn’t about “hating” it is about holding MS to a standard.

        D) “The most popular sofware” argument is flawed. *nix makes up about 50% of the server market while MS makes up the other 50%. The web server market is controlled by Apached (65%-70%).

        E) MS is FAR more insecure than *nix. Due to various architectural vulnerabilities. The main thing is that the registry is a mess. Further integrating a browser into an OS is not smart.

        F) Vista gives us nothing more than eye candy. What does value added bonuses does Vista give us over XP or 2k client?

        • #3263898

          Security features!

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to A little education

          Didn’t you hear? Vista is chock full of new security features!

          Of course, security features on Windows are just band-aids over the stumps of missing limbs. Until Microsoft addresses the architectural failings you mentioned, the security “features” are just so much marketing hype.

        • #3263875

          I forgot!

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Security features!

          It comes pre-installed with the anti-spyware tool! GO GO POINTLESS SECURITY! 😉

      • #3083772

        MS Haters – 2 cents

        by abobble2 ·

        In reply to MS Haters – 2 cents

        I looked at your referenced page and it appears that you are more than correct. Other operating systems are have just as much or more problems than MS with security. Its just that we hear less about these other operating systems than we do microsoft. I agree whole heartedly with the fact of where computing would be had it not been for microsoft. MS has made possible for most to afford in a home now than in the years past. I can still remember when it was out of the realm of of most middle income families to even consider buying a compute. But now most can afford it.
        So irregardless of WHAT most people spout about ms i for one am glad to have experienced ms almost from the beginning and will continue to do so. As u state nothing is perfect when it comes to os’s all are open to attack and will always be.

        • #3104788

          Again with the FUD

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to MS Haters – 2 cents

          Cert usually lumped non-OS issues in with Linux because they just did. Sure it was a PHP problem, but will put it in the Linux catagory.

          That normalizes the data set enough to see that:
          A) The critical issues with Linux (the OS) are typically FAR smaller. The last REALLY critical issues was a fork() problem in the 2.6.9 kernel. There hasn’t been a hugely critical issue in the recent kernels.

          B) FLOSS issues are usually reported more quickly and responded to than MS issues. Re: the IE fiasco. Not only that but MS plays games with their reporting. The WMF flaw has been around forever, but MS counts it as reported and patched within a week.

          C) Windows is built on an insecure architecture. I’ve gone over this time and time again. The architecture of the OS is less secure than *nix.

          D) Application integration, esp with insecure apps like browsers, means more security issues

          E) MS has made computing more accessable, now let’s make it more secure. How about we start by talking about the flaws in the MS OSes and holding them accountable?

          BTW irregardless is redundant. You are (in essence) saying regardless regardless.

    • #3265136

      Vista, is it worth it?

      by sykandtyed ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      When i am ready for a new box and it comes pre-installed, maybe.

      I just built a new box that should(?)be good for 3 or more years with xp pro/2 and ms office pro 03.

    • #3265103

      Not that bad

      by rv1890 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Ok yeah, the average home user pc is probably going have a lot of problems running Vista, especially the way M$ makes most their products, but is really all that bad???. I can remember going from Win95 & ’98 to Win 2K & Xp. I had to upgrade my ram, video card and so on, but weve been doing that all along. Weve gone from 16mb cards to over 256mb, and 133mhz processors to 3ghz, not to mention all the patching and upgrades. So its really not that new. I guess we need to get used to it. Do we really the features all that M$ throws at us??, no, but to tap into the future of operating systems we need to adapt to change. Look on the bright side, its still better than having to use a Mac.

    • #3265056

      I’ll upgrade eventually

      by bbaltas ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I’ll upgrade to Vista eventually. The company I work for is a Windows shop, and we will probably start to convert to Vista as we replace our desktop systems – since we just completed a major upgrade of desktops it will be about two years before we purchase our next large group of PCs, which will probably use Vista.

      At home, I’m the same way. I have three computers, two with XP and one with Linux. I’ll replace my older PC late next year, and the new system will probably have Vista as its O/S – unless I do something strange and by a MAC (which is not out of the question).

      If Microsoft can give me a compelling reson to upgrade sooner, I’ll upgrade, but if not I’ll wait.


    • #3265010

      Wait and see

      by andre.hodge ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      From alot of the MCSE self study I have done over the last couple of years (don’t hold that against me 😉 ), I find that there seems to be alot of stuff that MS does to tweak things or make them more efficient that you don’t really know about until you really need it (which may be a couple of years down the track). Then I am reminded there is so much I don’t know about this stuff.

      When window 2000 was the norm and 2003 was released, I was asking myself at the time why would I want to go to 2003? Until I really did my homework and work on some real decent size networks only in the last couple of years did I have a response to that (i.e. renaming domains, improved replication, migrations, GPOs). Windows 2000 seems quite limited now.

      My guess the server version will be the key. There will be alot more refinement tools and abilities that I won’t need for a couple of years. It will probably be when the desktop version is used with the server that the real improvements are noticed. By then though, you probably won’t be able to buy anything else.

      One thing’s for sure, when I do need to use it, I know that there will be plenty of documentation on how to use it.

    • #3265008

      Longhorn name was more accurate

      by best_tech ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Vista … a wide-angle view. MS has never had much view and has a rep for wearing blinders in too many areas.

      Would I try/buy Vista? Maybe … if I won the $10,000,000 from PCH and found a rural house site in SW NM or SW TX and if I were feeling particularly sadisticcccckkkkkk … I’d hire 6 folks and give them each a computer and each a version (aversion??) of Squint(c) and have the paramedics on standby.

      Then I’d start taking bets on meltdown times.

      Microsoft cannot, after x years, provide a browser that is safe to use. How can they expect us to believe that IE7 *and* Vista are in any way more functional than what they’ve turned out in the past?

    • #3265001

      Don’t see how I’ll get around it

      by ethnicmike ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Soon enough Microsoft will start just packaging it in all of the new computers my company buys so my company won’t even have a choice.

      Basically Microsoft will push the change through as quickly as new businesses buy new computers.

      I can tell you one thing though, tech support is going to be a huge pain for a long time. Half the users at my company are not computer proficient and any change confuses them. I’m looking forward to trying Vista, but not supporting it.

    • #3264991

      Vista can wait

      by gometrics ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I’m happy with XP. I’ll probably be ready in a couple of years.

    • #3263902

      Go short on Microsoft

      by gdanzig ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      This is the beginning of the end. Hanging the box builders for the Christmas season, throwing ball bearings on the dance floor of “gotta have it” MS-bonded software market is going to break the strangle hold. Even the dumbest most ignorant management type can see it fianlly – Bush is a liar and Microsoft is too little for too much too late.

    • #3263877

      Vista, not an option…

      by jccarp ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I don’t think I’m particularly radical. I actually have enjoyed my Win2K machine. Never had problems, I am a grandmother, but did figure out that it ain’t rocket science to learn how to maintain some sensible security. It does require some dedication and regular attention though, and I do find the time needed for updating to be more and more annoying (not to mention keeping an eye on the third-party security apps).

      My biggest problem with Microsoft products has as much to do with attitude as anything. I’ll probably keep my Win2K around for a long time. But, I have been making a concerted effort during this last year to learn new software and to minimize my MS dependence.

      I believe the future is heading away from such Microsoftish things as lock-in, propriatary MS-only formats, and “bundling everything under the sun” into the OS. I think even us ordinary folks are seeing the wisdom of not putting all our eggs in one basket, much less letting Microsoft be in charge of the basket.

      I also believe that DRM in the hands of Microsoft will be a major headache to us all…

      …and people are actually starting to read EULAs. I don’t intend to “agree by clicking” to anymore of those one-sided, non-consumer-friendly, subject to change without notice licenses than absolutely necessary.

      Having billions of advertising and marketing dollars handy to make the Microsoft Way look friendly and cute, may help keep them going in the short term. But when the real face of MS begins to show through to even the little old ladies of the world, there’s definiotely a problem. One that can’t be glossed over forever, and that is going to become more and more obvious in the long term. It’s a downhill slide for them.

      I think the final straw that solidified my determination to permanently minimize my MS software investment was when Mr Gates publically made fun of the MIT One Laptop per Child project, last week, in such a snide, illinformed, ill-mannered, disrespectful, patronizing way.

      I have no desire to continue adding my hard earned dollars to Bill Gates’ fortune. He obviously doesn’t understand his customers, and doesn’t appreciate their value. I’m thinkin’ he’ll be learning all about it soon.

      So, to answer your question…no. No Vista for me. I said the same for XP, and meant it. I mean it now too. I hope that by this ime next year my little company will be running Red Hat, or SuSE, with windows installed only as dual-boot, or on a single computer that has very restricted outside access. Windows is perfectly safe, after all, if it’s not exposed to the outside world. Even little old ladies know that much :o)


      • #3263850

        Open Source Software is the future

        by mjwx ·

        In reply to Vista, not an option…

        I said it earlier but I’d like to say it again.

        OSS is the future but unfortunately the future isn?t here yet :|. So we have to live with MS for a little while longer now. 5 to 10 years in my estimation.

        MS will pressure PC vendors like Dell or HP to start bundling Vista with new PC’s. MS will do this, its their way. If Vista and more importantly DRM begins ends up restricting the normal every-user, mother of invention will force an alternative (I hope it is not Mac OS X) faster than expected.

        OS X will never be widely used as long as it is bundled with hardware but if they rewrite it for any hardware it will have a whole bunch of support issues with the lesser known hardware vendors. I think we will replace the currrent MS with a MS like apple. Lets all hope for a open source (Linux based 🙂 ) solution.

        • #3263761

          “future isn’t here yet”

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Open Source Software is the future

          Why do you say “the future isn’t here yet”? You can have that future as much as you like. You just have to make a decision to use the technologies you see as being “the future”.

          I don’t currently have a single Windows machine, out of six computers in my possession. If open source operating systems are the future, I’m living in the future. Why are you living in the past?

        • #3265585

          OK apo, i see you need me to explain what I meant.

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to “future isn’t here yet”

          By “the future isn’t here yet” I mean that the large-scale adoption of Linux as a desktop OS is not [b]currently[/b] a viable option for businesses (or average consumers. while you and I (I only use windows for games) can happily use Linux as a everyday operating system most people cant. It?s just not as easy to use as winblows.

          Apo, I’m not having a go at you but you need to put yourself in the average consumer?s perspective. Linux is a great step into the unknown for a system admin who has never used Linux. Although I sincerely doubt any one who has taken that step has looked back but average people don?t have a chance with Linux as it is. Take a hairdresser, as common as sysadmins but knows nothing about computers. As I was having a haircut this morning and talking as you do, to the hair dresser trying as hard as I could to convince her not to get a Mac. But when I bought up the topic of vista she replied “what?s Vista?”. My point in short is that most people are not tech savvy.

          I think we will have to have to wait out vista’s life cycle to see Linux desktops in all their glory. But hey if vista’s crap it will have a short life span.

        • #3265439

          that just doesn’t fly

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to OK apo, i see you need me to explain what I meant.

          Many businesses find large-scale Linux adoption quite viable. So do an increasing number of government agencies, to include the mass-migration of all municipal systems in Munich, Germany.

          If you think Linux isn’t viable yet for business, I recommend you have a nice sit-down chat with Sterling Ball, the CEO of Ernie Ball, probably the best-known guitar string vendor in the world. His company made the migration from Windows to Linux. In fact, they found it not only viable but highly preferable, way back in 2000. The whole migration happened in six months. Read all about it:

          Sterling Ball was not some technical know-all guru. He was a business manager. He managed to make the migration, and it saved the company huge gobs of money.

          I run across examples every day of the canonical eighty year old grandmother making the switch and suddenly realizing that life doesn’t have to be as difficult as MS Windows makes it. It’s not nearly as difficult as you make it sound.

          Why were you trying to talk the hairdresser out of getting a Mac anyway? MacOS X is a better OS than Windows any day of the week.

        • #3264189

          I said

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to that just doesn’t fly

          “large scale adoption as a [b]desktop[/b] os”

          The company I work for at the moment has heavily invested in MS at the moment. Now this may change in the future. Many small to medium businesses are in this position. Believe it or not but Linux has only recently became viable as a server for businesses and as I understand it many companies (mostly large ones that can afford to have a pool of Linux guru?s on staff) have adopted it.

          I like Linux. I wish I could use Linux on a more regular basis. I have also suggested that when we upgrade our file server we should use Linux as it would be an easy way for management to gain confidence with the use of Linux servers and it is not difficult to set up in a Windows domain.

          ?Why were you trying to talk the hairdresser out of getting a Mac anyway??
          Because she was a nice girl and I have been asked too many times ?how do I get this program to work on my Mac? only to say that it can?t.

        • #3264180

          and I replied in kind

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to I said

          You said “desktop”. I was referring to desktops as well as servers. Munich isn’t just using Linux for servers: it’s also using Linux for workstations. Ernie Ball isn’t just using Linux for servers: it’s also using Linux for workstations. In fact, Sterling Ball made the decision before the migration that his company wouldn’t use [b]anything[/b] from Microsoft, which even means not using Macs since Microsoft owns a substantial percentage of Apple’s stock.

          Do you think I was referring to 80 year old grandmothers using Linux for servers? I was definitely referring to desktops in that case, as well as the others.

        • #3264134

          I think I’ve made my opinion about linux servers quiet clear

          by mjwx ·

          In reply to I said

          And I also think that we agree about servers at least.

      • #3263757

        Windows EULA

        by apotheon ·

        In reply to Vista, not an option…

        You’re a smart one, I see. It’s pretty rare that I run across people aware of what’s in their EULAs.

        It’s because of changes in the EULA that I’ll never willingly employ Windows later than Win2k SP2 for anything other than a test platform with no saved data. When the EULA grants the vendor more legal privileges on my machine than I have, I can no longer trust that machine. I wouldn’t even want such a machine running without connecting it to a network, because if Microsoft comes knocking at my door there’s no legal recourse for an individual person with an individual person’s budget to keep the Microsoft lawyers from getting full access to any data I store on the machine.

        It’s a new era in untrustworthy computing.

      • #3264153

        that was a very well thought out reply

        by sir_cheats_alot ·

        In reply to Vista, not an option…

        that was a very well thought out reply…and it was actually relevent; unlike 90% of what has been posted earlier.

        I was beginning to think i was the only one who reads EULAs. Most don’t even bother because they know if they don’t click agree that the OS,or application won’t even be installed. i’ve seen the test version of Vista, and wasn’t impressed. Microsoft needs to lay off the “eye-candy” and focus on stability, and compatbility other-wise Vista will be just another Windows ME. I’m not sure where but in the EULA(i think its about 2/3 of the way down) reads something like this: Microsoft in no way guarantees that this software will even work! i’m not sure, it’s been a few years since i looked at it. i saw it on, and had to see it myself, and sure enough there it was.
        as stated earlier this means that there is no legal recourse against MS for the user if something were to go wrong(ie:install fails half way through). As far as security goes most people know if something goes wrong it’s usually the users fault. For example; clicking on a email attachment that norton reads as safe opening it instead of downloading and then scanning it with your own,or different AV program. Norton tends to catch only about half of all viruses…when it works that is. If you can’t already tell; i’ve had nothing but bad experiances with it, and therefore don’t trust it anymore. most all computer viruses don’t cause damage until the executable or whatever it might be hidden in, is ran.
        as many have said before the only truly secure OS is the one that has no internet access(but what fun is that without games?).

        Before the flamers start i dual boot Fedora Core 4,and Windows. i don’t favor either OS over the other. i have windows for games and that is it. i use FC(fedora core linux) for everything else now.

        this discussion has nothing to do with which OS is better. i’m tired of reading through the forums and seeing people argue over something so trivial. Which OS is better is nothing more than OPINION, and has no relevence here.

        that being said; I won’t be going to Windows Vista either.

    • #3263868

      Never on the first try

      by dennis.rhine ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      My standard answer is that I won’t use anything from MS until they have come out with at least one service pack.

      Also, even with all the discussion about security, as long and MS tries to keep tying extraneous programs into Windows (like IE, etc.), they will not be able to secure it. Too many avenues to close up and too many people who want to crack it.

    • #3263858

      Vista is a Flop Show

      by nikhil_rattan2003 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Guys i don’t want to waste my time. If i will waste i will waste on the bugs of win 2003 server.

      That can be usefull for anybody in the word.

    • #3263766

      I’m can’t wait for the Official Vista

      by golf24_7 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I love windows I have run every version since 3.11 and been pretty happy with them all except the Windows Millennium fiasco. They have improved and utilized the technology of the time in each release, requiring newer better hardware. I personal would like them to drop some of their backwards compatibility because it hamstrings what they can do on current hardware. The people running a machine that just meets the minimum requirements are probably not going to do an OS upgrade anyway trust me I support a lot of them. For those of us that are always tinkering/upgrading our hardware there is a good chance that we will want to upgrades the OS and more then likely will have no problem meeting the required specs.
      That said I still work with old equipment and generally speaking I load Win98 release 2 or Win 2000 on anything less then a P3 800mhz PC. Anything less then that is to slow for XP in my opinion and Vista will probably set that bar much higher.
      As for Vista so far I love the new interface. I will have all the eye candy turned on in high-end systems because it is cool. I like many of the default settings for security because they improve the security of the average uninitiated user. So far I have only spent a little time with the beta but each new drop seems to get better. They fixed several of the bugs I entered in the latest drop.
      Next, I agree that Linux has its place but it is not on the average users desktop. I work in Linux a lot for work and I even have a couple of Linux boxes at home for playing with running different flavors of Linux. I personally don?t find the GUI interfaces to be all that great and even if they were I can?t load a lot of software on them especially my games which is important to me.
      Finally, Not that I use a Mac very often but it has similar problems that Linux has with running lots of software, unless you run a windows emulator, which seems obtuse to me. Additionally, I don?t like their stranglehold on the hardware. I have to admit I do find it amusing that with each new Mac OS they seem to require better hardware to and what is worse a lot of the times that means a whole new system. As for security both Linux and Mac have wholes to that just aren?t exploited as much since worse case scenario you hurt maybe 5% of the internet users.

      sorry for the long rant

      • #3265701

        Here we go again.

        by nighthawk808 ·

        In reply to I’m can’t wait for the Official Vista

        I’ve had to type this so often my fingers are starting to do it on their own now, but here goes anyway.

        Let’s switch places and give Linux a 90% share on the desktop and give Microsoft 10%, but let’s leave everything else equal. Microsoft boxen would still exploited be in greater numbers. For example, if there are 900,000 Linux boxen in this hypothetical world and 100,000 on Windoesn’t, there would be approximately 60,000 compromised Linux machines and over 80,000 pwned Windows computers! (Recent studies show that over 80% of home Windows machines have been the victim of a security exploit at some time or another.)

        More than half of web servers run Apache, yet somehow an overwhelming majority of defaced web sites were on Microsoft IIS servers. Are you getting the picture yet? If not, how about this: when was the last time a major worm/virus/etc. that caused major disruption on the Internet transmitted via *nix machines? 1988, Morris worm.

        Now, when was the last time the same thing happened on Windows machines? Let me count the ways: 2001, Code Red; a few months later in 2001, Nimda; 2003, Slammer. And these are just the ones off the top of my head. I’m going to use the words “Microsoft” and “quality” in the same sentence without also including the word “not” for the first time. Here goes: Microsoft’s exploits are of very high quality.

        People don’t attack Windows machines just because they’re more popular, they also attack them because they’re so easy any script kiddie can do it. In fact, they’re so easy to break, they’ve bred an entirely new genre of kiddie: the “click kiddie”–someone who doesn’t even have the knowledge to write a simple script, and just clicks a box to scan your computer.

        Why try to break into a bank when you can just knock over a liquor store? Why try to hammer a crack into a Linux castle when you can walk through the garage door Windows left wide open?

        Tastes vary, but I’ll take KDE over XP’s GUI any day. Much more customizable, way way faster, and in almost two years I’ve had KDE crash on me exactly zero times (I counted them). Heck, I had Windows Explorer crash twice on me last night and all I was trying to do was the only thing Windows is good for: playing a video game.

        Don’t take this post personally. This isn’t an attack on you; it’s an attack on a bunch of old, worn out arguments that never held water.

    • #3265637

      Windows Vista

      by cwoody382 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Since Microsoft have security flaws in most products at this time including the current XP operating system, Office 2003 etc, it will be some time before I will update to Vista. Sorry to be synical,perhaps I will think about it when they release Vista2009 Second edition. As for firewall, AV and spyware I have three tools that work fine. If Microsoft spent more time and effort into building robust operating systems then they would be no need for AV/Anti Spyware and firewalls that exploit Windows vunerabilities and these products would be cheaper. Thinking about Vista from a corperate point of view, I will not be long before Microsoft pull the plug on XP support forcing bussinesses to upgrade whether they can afford to or not. I think perhaps this is another marketing ploy to confuse the majority of users to by a new product.
      In conclusion I aggree with Dave the Computer Guy

    • #3265633

      Too much hype can lead to disappointment

      by comp1systems ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Frankly, I have always been a believer that too much hype
      on anything can often lead to disappointment. Is this the
      case with Windows Vista? It’s been talked about so long, it
      doesn’t seem to be worth the wait any more.

      And with everything I have read so far I was left with this
      one question, “how well will it perform in a home and
      business environment?” And if we are going to need that
      big of a video card just to use the special and new windows
      effect, does this mean that newer computer systems will
      equipped with Vista automatically come with the 256 meg
      card installed, otherwise this means that anyone using an
      older card in a new or old system will find themselves
      running out spending money on a new card just to have full
      use of the features.

      And with regard to new security features, until they create
      something that cannot be hacked into, Microsoft will never
      be as secured as they would like to believe it is, and this is
      with respect to the next 100 operating systems they
      develop after Vista.

      It took me a long time to get around to using Windows XP
      because I just wasn’t sold on the new features reviews
      claimed it had. And when I got around to using it and
      upgrading my computers to it, the only thing I found
      different was the overall look which could be changed to
      classic for those who were old-fashioned to heart. They
      attempted to beef up their security features in XP, but later
      on with updates there were so many bugs in it that alot of
      the updates that had been downloaded had to be ultimately
      replaced. This is why I have my doubts about Vista.

      And now that the Intel chip is now running in Mac making it
      possible to run on a Windows platform, I am curious to see
      how the new Macs perform over the next year and hear the
      testamonies from consumers who bought the new Macs.

      Don’t get me wrong, I am a long time fan of Microsoft
      products, I just do not see them doing anything that
      fantastic in the security department. And until we can see
      just how well the new operating system runs, I am not
      getting my hopes up until I can actually put my hands on it
      and try it out for myself.

      So as far as I am concerned with Vista…it is a wait and

    • #3265589

      I hate the thought that

      by zlitocook ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I might need to support three or four versions of another Microsoft product! It is bad now with XP and it’s SP’s and company programs that only run on SP1 but not on SP2! But now we may have to support three or four versions of an MS system and have a help desk relearn all thier work. And MS is not done; there could be more to learn and what about updates! Will there be updates for one and a different update for the other?
      Linux is looking real good about now!
      We have problems with XP PRO on most workstations because we still use older applications and the venders we use are trying to upgrade. But we need to keep using the older apps until we can upgrade.
      But MS keeps going and not seeing what it is doing to the companies that can not keep up.
      Is this a way to say upgrade or drop out?
      Well Free is looking great for alot of companies now. Linux and others are being talked about in most staff meetings now.

      • #3265951

        I totally agree with you on that point…

        by comp1systems ·

        In reply to I hate the thought that

        It appears that alot of companies are finding that they
        cannot keep up with the speed of Microsoft. For reasons
        being they cannot afford to keep upgrading their systems
        everytime a new OS is released. Or new application
        upgrades are put on the market. Therefore, they are
        finding that until their budget can actually allow them to
        upgrade, they have to stay where they are. Linux has
        become a top subject. For one reason that I am hearing is
        that they don’t have to worry about keeping up. Or the
        cost that comes with purchasing new Microsoft OS and OS
        upgrades. It is no wonder why new businesses that start
        will start off using older applications until they can afford
        to upgrade.

        And with vendors that they use with regard to purchasing
        new systems, will often suggest upgrading inspite of
        budget restrictions. It’s tough on MIS departments who
        find that they have to flip flop in their work. It’s like a
        major rollercoaster ride. Learn one thing then discover
        they have to learn something else just to avoid being
        caught with their pants down. Is Microsoft making it
        difficult for some businesses and consumers who cannot
        keep up? I would say they are, but they are not going to
        slow down anytime soon just because one person cries
        about being left behind to use older applications and OS.
        It’s not their character.

    • #3265575

      New Gimmick from Microsoft

      by stargazerr ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Apparantely, Microsoft is planning to release the OEM version the same time as it is planning to release the corporate version. Sometime in November or early December.


    • #3264124

      vista (a new addition to the family)

      by dodgeviper ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      vista to me is just a nice to have, newer toy to have on a machine. it looks nice, has new features that you can use and it “boasts” bigger and better things then the version behind it, but it is just another new thing that is available for those who have the money and time to fool around with new toys

    • #3265853

      All good things come to those who wait.

      by nz_justice ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Wait till it comes out in early next year (but don’t hold your breath). Buy and Try then post a review on the TechRepublic.

      • #3265813

        Not a bad idea

        by jmgarvin ·

        In reply to All good things come to those who wait.

        I need to purchase a new home machine pretty soon. I was going to build it myself, but I wonder….

        We have a program at my job with Smell…Dude, I might get a Smell with Vista…

        Na, screw that…I’m not buying a Smell and I’ve little faith Vista will be out THAT soon.

    • #3265745

      I want it now!

      by amberhaze ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I am reminded of kids playing in a play ground….

      I want it now
      I want it for free
      I want it to be faster
      I want it to include everything I need
      I want it to be secure
      I want
      I want
      I want…

      oh wait a minute… guess I was describing where Linux was years ago… hehehe sorry I return you to your regularly scheduled windows programming….

    • #3265680

      What Never?

      by dogknees ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I read a lot of posts here, and it sounds like a discussion I had today.

      If you’re not going to go to Vista, and I assume by extension any other new MS operating system, what are you going to be running on your new PCs in 10 years time?

      It’s not if, it’s when. In the real world, particularly the business world, most people don’t really have a choice.

      So, what are you all going to be running on your next PC when you can’t buy XP any more, or on the one after that? I don’t see IBM reviving OS/2 any time soon. An linux won’t vut it for a lot of users. So, what are your choices.

      Never say Never!

      • #3263085

        Users or Businesses ?

        by tony hopkinson ·

        In reply to What Never?

        There’s a difference you know. The users at a business get what they are given. I look forward to the day when MS is not the automatic choice. If nothing else it will mean Redmond will have to start creating something we want to buy instead of something they want to sell.

        So indeed never say never.

        • #3263076

          Good point

          by amberhaze ·

          In reply to Users or Businesses ?

          As an example, I give you the K12LTSP project.

          It is a LINUX based project which gives a low cost integrated solutions for schools. It takes care of both servers and workstations. And best yet.. allows the recycling of old hardware by turning it into thin clients.

          While the first couple of cases were a hard sell, we now have local schools excited about this project as we have enabled them to move forward within thier budget constraints. And as One school board official put it, Microsoft has not even come to the table with any kind of comperable single package solution.

          While this particular example is very niche oriented, it is a good example of where 3rd party competition will hopefully generate a “kick in the butt” for venders like MS.

          I use as much MS product as I do LINUX based, and have no problem with using it when it is appropriate. I like the idea of options and so do my clients. I am very hopeful that with examples like the above, MS and maybe even some others will also look into catering more to specific needs and perhaps the competition will help us move forward into a much batter place.

        • #3087443

          Start them off at school at age four

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to Good point

          before they’ve become familiar with clicking on the big blue e, good plan.

          Do they have concerns about them being developmently challenged by not being familiar with windows though.

          Enquiring minds want to know.

    • #3263229

      Not really

      by dumblogic ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Every body in this forum knows of microsoft track record,how the bean counter and corporate bigwig are designing the software forget it.
      It is a feable atempt on microsoft part to disway the customer into thinking that they have a better or more secure product hog wash.
      Have you seen how long it take for microsoft to respond to a bug report and put a patch fix for it and sometime the cure is not worth it.
      Have you ever take a look at a antivirus sight and look at all the operating system that are effected by a certain virus, microsoft top the list you don’t hear about mac or linux being effect that much but microsoft is and it like a running joke around the computer tech field. What crap bill gate is going to feed us this time.
      Vista is just another feable atempt to prove that they are on top of thing.

    • #3263178

      MS In for Rude Awakening

      by spatstriptiphan ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      MS is going to find out the hard way that Vista is a big flop. A – No reason to upgrade from XP. The only reason I went to XP was because it got away from the kernal32.dll problem which made it much more stable than 98. B – 98% of potential buyers will have to go through a major hardware upgrade to run it well.

      Good Luck Bill – Your going to need it.

      • #3263036

        Man are you wrong

        by michael l hereid sr ·

        In reply to MS In for Rude Awakening

        If your computer will run Windows XP, it will run Vista. So where do you get the 98%. I bet you are one of the people that said “They would never use Windows XP as it would take too much to upgrade your hardware.”

        • #3087338

          Man you are a Bonehead

          by spatstriptiphan ·

          In reply to Man are you wrong

          Do some research before you reply. THe system requirements for Vista are hugh.

        • #3104766

          Why should I have to do some research as

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to Man you are a Bonehead

          I’m one of the tech beta testers of Vista. I already know what is required to run Vista. In fact I’m running Vista as I write this on 3 computers one is
          MSI K8M4M-V
          AMD Athlon XP 1700+
          512 meg ddr PC 2100
          WD 40 gig harddrive
          Toshiba CD RW/DVD drive
          On board Video/sound
          Gateway 17″ monitor
          Runs pretty good just no eye candy.

        • #3263554

          Then what’s the point?

          by dave the computer guy ·

          In reply to Why should I have to do some research as

          If you?re not going to take advantage of the new Windows graphics then why would you want to upgrade a system from XP to Vista? It’s the same OS with MS security instead of a third part security and a few graphic changes, not enough to justify an upgrade.

        • #3263317

          What’s the point:answer to “No”

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to Then what’s the point?

          1 IE is isolated from the OS just like FireFox(in other words it’s isolated from the os)
          2 Increased security built in(for one no program will install with out asking if you want it installed first-2 Vista will also iinform users about securtiy and privacy issues
          3 Nearly instant search for files on pc(The search function is much faster and better than all previous versions-WinFs will just make it more powerful)
          4 Improved tcp/ip for faster internet(is the part that gets you on the internet and allows d/l of progrmas-Vista improves on this also when ip 6v is available-Vista already has it)
          This is just a few of the added value of Vista

        • #3106774


          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to What’s the point:answer to “No”

          *Since you edited your post, I’ll edit mine…

          1) IE is still integrated into the OS it just runs in “protected mode.”

          2) What increased security specifically? Their anti-spyware tool? As for programs not installing without user interaction: I’ll believe it when I see it. It is too easy to quietly run code without user interaction.

          3) Nope, WinFS ain’t coming out with Vista. How is the search going to be made faster? Indexing the HDD? Magic?

          4) WTF? Ok, please for the love of god explain what this means. You claim that IPV6 somehow “makes the internet go faster.” Please go on. I’m interested how IPV6 will make everything so much faster.

          Rather than taking a few MS talking points, what technical merits does Vista give us?

        • #3264413

          Well I bet you have a graphics card

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to Then what’s the point?

          that supports Directx 9 and has at least 64 meg of memory. That supports Aero Glass in Vista.

    • #3263054

      Vista Sshmista

      by Anonymous ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      PALease is there anything in Vista I need?
      I would not buy it
      And 7 versions?
      What the heck for?
      So I need to learn all the nuances of another defective M$ product!
      The only time I will see Vista is when I am fixing it for someone else!

      • #3263513

        Lets be Rational…

        by lds_sailor ·

        In reply to Vista Sshmista

        I am a Network Administrator and have a few thoughts on Vista.

        1) I agree with the majority of you that eye candy alone is not sufficient cause to upgrade. I mean if all youre going to get is a newer interface, I can spend far less on a Windows XP skin program and make it look however the heck I want it to.

        2) If indeed the windows Vista source is just another evolution / refformation of the XP source code, Then its not going to take long to have someone exploit it. However in Microsoft’s defense, If someone wants to exploit something there is always a way. I would suggest if Microsoft is going to release a “new” OS, then it needs to be new.

        Scrap the original source code and use the past 5 years to make something truely new. Something that addresses the issues of today and not just patches them but deals with them head on.

        3) I can understand the need for a home and a business version of Windows, but come on 9 versons! I mean how the heck is anyone supposed to know what to buy or what they need.

        Now with that said, I am an MCP an soon to be MCSE. I am also very interested in Linux. Not because I think Microsoft is a big evil giant, rather becuase I dont think that anyone has all the answers. Linux has flaws to. As does MAC. The thing is, if we can’t learn from others mistakes then it’s our own dang fault that things break. Linux learned from Microsoft’s follies and created a good platform, is it perfect, NO but it gives another point of view.

        I will not be upgrading to Vista until I see a value to upgrading. In the mean time, like many of you I am getting more involved with Linux and Apple. I dont think there is a silver bullet but in order for Microsoft’s Vista to work, they need to think outside the box and make something truely NEW. Give me a reason to drop $300+ on a new Os and I’ll consider it, but dont pass off fancy visuals as a reason. Just my 2 cents worth guys.

    • #3106519


      by thestorys ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I agree with many comments here.
      The bottom line is. Microsoft needs to make more money…so we all get another unneeded upgrade shoved down our throats. It is the same old story. Looks like eventually we would get tired of it.

      I have grown tired of it and looked at Linux and we are starting to use it for some things. It does still have a way to go.

      Let’s face it, Microsoft makes things easier to get going and more user friendly than their competitors and that is why they are where they are. I am hoping that the Linux community will learn a few lessons from what Microsoft is doing right and continue to take a really great product and improve it more and more such that it will be a really great alternative.

      I still use Office 97 at home. It does everything I need to do, but eventually I’ll be forced to upgrade to a bloated newer version that I don’t like as well and for no reason other than to $end more money to M$.

      Open Office looks nice but who wants to take the time to relearn everything. Let’s face it, most of us are MS addicts and kicking the habit is hard.

      I too wish MS would support older things longer and not just create a new OS, just to be doing it, and not force it upon everyone.

      My 2 cents.

    • #3106237

      Graphics Cards>

      by yinbig ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      People, alot of people spend 300-400 on a graphics cards for your games, just to get the latest release / effects. So why then when an OS decides to do the same you are up in arms?

      Plus this high end will enable all entry level PC’s that run Vista being shipped with decent graphic options, no?

      • #3105841

        What the?

        by jmgarvin ·

        In reply to Graphics Cards>

        Wait…lemme get this straight:

        You are saying that since the OS required more resources that it will make games better?

        You are also saying that better graphics cards will be shipped with new computers…for free…just to run Vista?

        • #3285935

          It makes perfect sense.

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to What the?

          A Hummer H2 is a huge vehicle, so that means it’s a better car, doesn’t it? Ergo, Vista will be better because it has more code and has insane hardware recommendations. And who wouldn’t want to drop $500 on a video card so they can run Microsoft Word with decent frame rates? Have you ever tried fragging typos with a mere GeForce 6800GS? It’s not for the timid, let me tell you.

          But don’t discourage him, jmgarvin. I’ve already got my road to riches already laid out, and if people start waking up to this, it won’t work. Here goes: the day before Vista finally ships, I’m buying as much stock in ATI and nVidia as I can. I figure that if I start saving now, by Vista’s 2018 ship date I should be able to afford a few thousand shares of each.

        • #3285900

          A $35 video card

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to It makes perfect sense.

          Will run Areo Glass. All that’s needed is 64 to 256 meg of video memory-Directx 9 compatible-so your get rich idea won’t work.

        • #3285899

          Yes, but…

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to A $35 video card

          A $300 clunker of a car whose bumper is held on with baling wire and burns a quart of oil a week will get you to the grocery store and back, but that doesn’t mean it will do it well.

        • #3285898

          By the way here is a card I’m using

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to A $35 video card

        • #3285886

          I own that piece of crap

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to By the way here is a card I’m using

          I have to say not only does that card stink on ice, but its performance is questionable.

          While I do play WoW, I sometimes do get funky graphical hickups…I also sometime get freaky artifacts in X.

          Sure it’s a video card, but it’s a Pinto…Areo might catch it on fire.

        • #3286177

          Well for methe card is very good

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to I own that piece of crap

          but then the only game I play is Chess or watch TV/DVD movies and it works very good for me. It also works great with Aero Glass in Vista. Also if you check with Windows Catalog, you would have learned that
          EVGA e-GeForce FX 5200 Light – graphics adapter – GF FX 5200 – 128 MB
          has the designed for Windows XP logo from MS.
          As I ssaid it works very good for me.

        • #3105355


          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to I own that piece of crap

          An eVGA? And I thought I was slumming it when I bought a PNY. I don’t feel so bad now.

          jmgarvin, I’m surprised you bought an FX anything. IIRC (and correct me if I don’t), isn’t the FX, like the MX series before them, just a regular GeForce GPU minus all the whiz-bang things that make them actually nice processors? Kind of like the graphics equivalent of the Intel Celeron: rip out all the useful stuff since it’s expensive to manufacture and then sell a dirt-cheap skeleton of a chip.

          Anyway, on to the thing that led me to post: Mr. Hereid mentioned the “Designed for Windows XP” logo on the box of his card. Next to me, I just happened to have the box for a PNY GeForce 6200 I got a couple of weeks ago (I’ve been too lazy to take it down to the basement and throw it on the heap of old, dusty boxes). I picked it up and searched all over it for the logo, but it’s nowhere to be found. I could care less since the card is in a Linux machine, but I find that kind of odd. Adding to the mystery, it is obviously designed to be used in Windows, as there are two screenshots from The Sims 2 on the back.

        • #3264470

          Night, it was a moment of weakness

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to I own that piece of crap

          I figured for $25, how can you go wrong, right? I’m an idiot.

          Normally I pick REAL hardware, but in this case the price tag suckered me. It was a $50 card with a $25 rebate…I just couldn’t say no. So I picked it up and it was the WORST choice I could ever make.

          The FX cards have most of the wizbang things, but it depends on the card and depends on the numbers in front of it.

          So the moral of the story is: You get what you pay for…and sometimes less. I’d say this card is worth maybe $10, I over paid by $15!

    • #3286194

      Reply To: Vista, is it really worth it?

      by rewand1 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      Can you please unsubscribe me immediately Iam only 12 and my mom is getting mad with all the mails i am getting i have tried for two weeks to unsubscribe thanks

    • #3286163

      Average Guy, Average User

      by michaelkelly1 ·

      In reply to Vista, is it really worth it?

      I consider myself an average user. I listen, read, and sometimes learn from people I consider more knowledgeable (hopefully) than myself. Microsoft attracts trouble the way dog do attracts flies. Why is anybody’s guess. If something ain’t broke why fix it??? I suppose we fix things because we can. More bell, more whistles, alright, I want it. I suppose it breaks down to personal choice. If something works for a person and they want to stay with it fine, if not they can change or upgrade, whatever their choice my be. I like bells and whistles.

      • #3286145

        That’s the problem…Windows doesn’t work

        by jmgarvin ·

        In reply to Average Guy, Average User

        Look at the amount of critical security issues Windows has. Look at the mess Windows is making of the desktop market.

        That is why ENTIRE CITIES (ala Munich) are jumping ship…MS OSes are not reliable nor are they usable.

        Sure, bells and whistles are fine…so is the geewiz factor, but honestly, what does Vista give us that isn’t just a new interface*?

        * The answer is nothing. The only thing that made Vista worth while was WinFS, without it, there is no point. IE is STILL integrated into the OS (it runs in “protected mode”) and there in NOTHING in terms of real architectural change. It’s XP with a new skin.

        • #3105486

          Now Jim there you made a funny

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to That’s the problem…Windows doesn’t work

          Windows dosen’t work-I think there maybe a few million people that may disagree with you there.

          As far as Munich that decision was made in 2003 and they still have not done the job yet. I have also read that so far it’s costing them $12million more than if they stayed with Windows plus on some systems they will be running Windows in VM and they are not even started yet.

          Vista is more than Xp with a new skin-actually its based on the Server2003 SP1 – With added security features and other features.
          Tell you what Jim-when Vista goes Beta 2 and you can get/use it. Then tell us how wrong Vista is.

          As far as stability goes my Windows XP pc’s run 24/7 with no problems and I’ve done this since Windows XP went Gold(released to manufacturers).

        • #3105449

          *sigh* Again

          by jmgarvin ·

          In reply to Now Jim there you made a funny

          I’ve named the technical issues with Windows and you didn’t respond, so I’m not about to go down the same road again.

          Please post a link where it is going to be $12 million more and they are running Windows via VMWare (or whatever).

          Ok, what is the difference between Win2k3 and XP? What are the security features? What are the other features?

          Please screen shot your uptime…I just don’t believe you have never rebooted. As far as XP being stable, while it isn’t awful, it isn’t great either. I’ve noticed you’ve given up on secure…

          Before we discuss anything any more, please read:



        • #3105407


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to *sigh* Again

          Well . . . he said his XP systems run “24/7 with no problems”, or something to that effect. For all we know, he might be talking about one week.

        • #3105348

          My home Debian file server: 452 days

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to uptime

          I think that speaks for itself. Perhaps I should add that it was kept current on all security patches while chugging away uninterruptedly for 1.24 years. Unlike Windows, Linux doesn’t require a reboot just to apply a simple diff on four lines of code.

        • #3105203

          yes indeedy

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to My home Debian file server: 452 days

          I restart Linux machines under the following conditions:

          1. it’s a laptop
          2. there’s a hardware/power problem
          3. it has to be moved and isn’t plugged into a UPS that’ll sustain it that long

          That pretty much sums it up. My main server got restarted once earlier this year because of a hardware issue, but otherwise has been chugging along since August (when I first moved to this state) without interruption.

          In a month and a half, your uptime is going to show one day, though. The Linux uptime counter only goes up to 497, y’know. I wonder if/when they’re going to fix that.

        • #3105197

          Oh man…

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to My home Debian file server: 452 days

          I didn’t know it only went up to 497. If I would have known that, I would have waited another six weeks to upgrade to Sarge. I guess I’ll never see what happens, because the UPS this box was on is now in the big hardware graveyard in the sky and some bad midsummer thunderstorms inevitably knock out our power here at least a few times a year.

          Have you tried setting your clock to 03:14:00 on January 19, 2038 and waiting eight seconds to see what happens? My SuSE box won’t let me set a date later than the year 2031.

          Post edited to correct 03:18 to 03:14

        • #3264625

          2038 and Debian

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to My home Debian file server: 452 days

          I’m running Debian Etch/Testing, which still has the 2038 Unix Time Bug. I’ve got a Perl script here that counts the last two seconds before and first two seconds after the Unix Era, so I don’t have to change clock settings to test for the bug. On Debian, it rolls over to Fri Dec 13 20:45:52 1901.

        • #3105375

          Actually I do re boot now

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to *sigh* Again

          several times a week-esp when I’m checking out the Vista 32/64 bit versions-when not beta testing-I usually re boot 2 x a month but only for updates to windows or drivers only.
          You may want to read these


        • #3105349

          A Gartner Group story?

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Actually I do re boot now

          Surely you can’t take that seriously! I’d read the National Inquirer for IT news before I’d read their pulp. They are the Art Bell of technology coverage. No, wait, I take that back–I wouldn’t want to insult Mr. Bell like that. At least some of the things he had on his show made sense occasionally.

          From the first story: “It has also been revealed that the Open Source software bid was actually 51% more expensive than the proposal made by Microsoft, as Microsoft had heavily discounted its proposal in an attempt to keep the German customer.” That’s like a heroin dealer on a street corner complaining that the methadone clinic is more expensive, so obviously staying hooked on heroin is a more attractive proposition. And, of course, he would never jack up the price after you got your first hit in your system. No, that would be unethical, and Microsoft is a fine, upstanding corporate citizen. If you don’t believe me, just ask Steve “As-laid-back-as-John-Lennon-on-Valium” Ballmer.

          Also from the first story: LiMux project manager Peter Hofman says, “Right now we are proceeding as planned, and we have no hints … that the city council is regretting … their decision to move to Linux.” Did I miss something, or did that mean that they’re NOT unhappy about the transition?

          As for the second story, I have a hard time taking it seriously when there is a Microsoft ad running down the right side of the webpage. Call me crazy.

        • #3105198

          Let’s compare notes:

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Actually I do re boot now

          Microsoft’s website. As of today, last rebooted sixteen days ago. OS: Windows Server 2003 with IIS 6.0, of course.

          “The Enterprise Linux Resource”. As of today, last rebooted thirty days ago. OS: Linux with Apache 1.3.x, of course.

          That thirty days doesn’t sound too impressive, but then you have a look at the graph:

          Thirty days ago, hit 497 days of uptime. The uptime counter in Linux (unlike the one for Windows) rolls over to zero every 497 days. Hmm. So, the total is actually 527 days of uptime. Before that, there was a break in uptime that was at less than 497 days: it was, in fact, about 400 days, greater than the highest uptime figure on the graph by a factor of about 3.5 (that’s 3.5 times the uptime, for the lowest peak on’s graph, as for the highest on the graph). That was in late 2004. I suspect they upgraded the kernels on their servers or replaced hardware. They certainly aren’t rebooting every two weeks, like you do.

          Well. Yeah. The legendary stability of Windows.

        • #3105171

          OK if Windows is so bad

          by michael l hereid sr ·

          In reply to Let’s compare notes:

        • #3105166

          How did what happen?

          by nighthawk808 ·

          In reply to Let’s compare notes:

          The big blue line that shows Apache dominating the stats?

          Or are you referring to GoDaddy’s decision to put all its parked websites on IIS? After Slashdot got done with that one, it looked like it went through a food processor:

          BTW, GoDaddy is also the company that is so technically incompetent it can’t even tell when it is broken, so while you’re there, you might find this interesting:

          Have you been out of the loop for the last few years? The study you cited in the second story has long been known to have been bought-and-paid-for by Microsoft and intentionally put the Linux box at a disadvantage.

        • #3264615

          Schizophrenic much?

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to Let’s compare notes:

          I thought we were talking about uptime and stability. What does that have to do with market share and performance?

          Regardless, you obviously aren’t checking your own source material:

          1. As the news item at Netcraft indicates, the relative increase in market share for Windows and relative decrease in market share for Linux is entirely accounted for by the fact that a single business made some kind of mass licensing deal with Windows and chose to migrate 4.4 million servers. One company switching platforms isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement so much as a fluke of the business world. You might also have bothered to scroll down a little bit and notice the graphs, which show that the market share drop for Apache and jump for IIS, due to GoDaddy’s business deal, isn’t much of a measure of market success. As I’m known to say over and over again, market share (relative numbers) isn’t as important a measure of success as absolute numbers. The absolute numbers for Apache have been climing at an incredible rate — so much so that GoDaddy’s migration of millions of systems from Linux to Windows doesn’t even show in the absolute numbers graph. Hint: the blue line is Apache.

          2. I just lost all my bookmarks yesterday, so I’m afraid I don’t have the articles handy, but nighthawk808 is right: industry and tech analysts tore that “Windows Wins” crap, sponsored by Microsoft, a new bunghole. Also, it’s out of date, to say nothing of the fact that SMB isn’t a standard protocol for Linux. If you want a network filesystem for Linux, you should be looking at protocols designed for Unix, rather than the protocol that is primarily in the Windows bailiwick these days. Frankly, I’m disinclined to put much faith in any study that isn’t performed entirely independently.

          Comparing the two for fileserver performance and forcing RedHat Linux servers to use CIFS rather than letting it use something better suited to unix is a bit like checking to see whether a right-handed person or a left-handed person is a faster writer with his right hand. If you’d let the left-handed person