This is something that shows how ignorant people are and how FUD (spread by people like many on this forum) has an impact on normal people.
Full Article
Full Article
its not a dead horse.... it just eats a lot
*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
me too was thinking about this
Why not keep your craps in your pocket and play with your Arch?
sure... lets see... I delete the post, let it stay in jokes section, just like the thing I am bashing...
+10000000000
Xp and 2000 pro were built on same kernel arch..there is hardly any difference in their performance or stability. 2000/2001 digit magz review on xp suggests the same like the comment "go for xp if you have money to spend else stick to 2000 pro since no real adv that xp has got to offer"
This is the only reason made XP a success.
bang on target 8)
Use a Live CD . Use a Distro with the tonnes of packages which comes with it.
come on Live CD is not a productive solution..
Personally I don't think Vista is "crap". Not to mention the topic isn't about Linux so I'll choose to refrain.
Such a pity that one of the best products in Microsofts showcase as you put it turned out to lose its credibility by a couple of "lingeeks" and "macboys". What does the above form like 3% of the market?
Simple dude, if a h/w works with Ubuntu 7.10 and does not work with 8.04 then it is fault of Ubuntu. In the same way, if a h/w works with XP but not with Vista (esp those having a Vista capable label on them
OMFG.. you've become a typical MS employee...
LOL.. what a hypocrite...
You did Install Ubuntu once right? Does "Restricted Drivers" sound familiar?
I think the problem is that you just don't know how to use Linux, and expect that linux is 100% the same as windows and all things should happen the same way. Each one of your problems can be answered with one word - its not a problem at all in the first place.
State your hardware so that I can be of help to you.
Lots of features to provide ? What is that awssome thing in vista that I can't live without ?
+1. Linux is hardly wide spread. Its used, but not by n00bs who are as common in this world as dirt in people's shoes.
uber religious hypocrite
+1. This is very true.
ZOMG... Arch is easier than Windows... Dude.. what do you smoke????
When you post something in a public forum, post sensibly and use better analogies.
Now he's showing that he is one
I'm with you.. lol...
I'd say NO. My opinion is that its all the drivers (as Charan said). My uncle replaced his office desktop with a laptop which came with no OS. I tried to transfer the Vista with license from his desktop to laptop, thats about 8-9 months ago. Vista wouldn't work on the laptop due to driver issues, inspite of downloading and using every version of driver that existed on this planet for his various devices (Yes, I tried Vista certified, not-official and every version that you cud think of including XP version). Added to it, Vista + AutoCAD 2k8 SP1 was like unusable on 2GB of RAM inspite of GFX drivers working properly.
Frankly dude, those people should be shot down. People who believe others, people who are ignorant about things which they shouldn't be about etc. Was Mojave made to look like Win 3.1 or something? Don't people haf eyes? I'd say people who live their lives based on others' opinion haf no right to live. I'm not generalizing this, but this is what I think.
While SP1 fixes a lot of bugs, there is still a lot desired to be fixed. Ask Vishal
I swear its much easier for me.
1....
Its better to say that for YOU its easier to use vista than linux. Everyone is NOT the same. Whats easy for YOU needn't be easy for ME and vice versa. All this ease of use talk is relative. But since linux has different distros for different people, on an overall prespective, linux IS easier to use than windows.
And this is where it starts messing itself up.
Ubuntu ftw if u r unsure
... which is very true
Nope. Its clueless users who mess things up. Thats why several linux forums exist to give proper choosing advice.
Its basically the first time users who are clueless and apparently it is that section of people who are being discussed now.
Definitely I agree with that . Linux isn't exactly as user friendly as Vista , maybe it will be in the future (before anyone comes riding in on their horse to curse me out, you know and I know what i said is probably right) . However blaming how Vista was perceived by people on folks who use Linux and Macintosh is plain stupid. If there is any so called "FUD" created about the OS its by the same people who were on Windows itself. As a matter of fact your statement proves what I meant.
Next time tell MS not to come out with a half-assed product like they did with Vista. Pffft then blame Linux and Macs when their own customers start ranting about it.
I try my best to be correct most of the time. But I'm always open to people correctign me if I'm wrong.
The feeling is mutual
Yes I'm ashamed to say I don't know Hindi of course .
correcting. There you go.
You might want to capitalize your first letters of a sentence while you are at it too. Not to mention one word sentences are so not correct.
you really are going nuts. did I explain you explictly what was the reason behind that ? I never managed to read the guide fully. so I needed it. now, if I had a hard copy of the same guide, things would have been different. Vista has one. Arch too has one, which becomes accessable only if my printer is still working.
Really ?
What hes trying to convey is , that you had read the guide at some point to get through the install. Don't even say you could have managed to get Arch without reading it. The chances of getting Vista installed on your computer without reading a guide or FAQ is exponentially higher.
The same way a person who hasn't used Arch or any other Distro connect to the Internet. If a new person to Ubuntu could configure an Internet connection I can guarantee that a person on Windows could have done the same.
Anyone who says Arch is easy to Install in comparison to Windows Vista or Ubuntu is smoking something really good.
How exactly does the word "easy" take the context "simple, elegent and neat" ???
1. yup we are venturing into forbidden lands...
in simple words, the pic proves my original statement: there is a distro for almost everybody. there is something that each person can be confortable with.
No, an average Joe won't be needing a guide to install Vista and it does NOT come with any guide book. Even a self proclaimed Linux pro like you too need a guide to install Arch and you say its easy.
Still trying to figure out how to CONFIGURE a printer in Linux?
I don't know about LAN but for wireless; actually you don't need to configure anything on Vista to go online... lets not talk about Arch or Ubuntu. You can visit my blog for more info.
Probably you should use a Mac to find the definitions of those words.
There you go:
Only if everyone in this word were as patient as you.
Whats your point?
Now are you implying that ubuntu is as easy as Vista?
It proves nothing. I was like WTF coz I had no clue that this thing does not come with any GUI. It took me less than 15 min to configure my wireless and get on to IRSSI. And not to forget horrible 30KBps speed, thanks to opensource Intel wireless drivers that comes with kernel > 2.6.24.
Yes coz it comes with almost nothing.
didnt u read before downloading CORE. You expect 300MB to come up as graphical wonder
What installation has to with it ?
Actually its "keep it Simple"
Even 50MB DLS comes with GUI. And No, I did not read anything before installation. I usually trash an OS which requires a manual for installation.
Trash it ! Use what works for you. But viva la revolucion
Which distro are you talking about? If it is by any chance Ubuntu, no not at all. After a simple 6 step install and reboot, it prompted me to install proprietary nVIDIA drivers. Once installed it used my full widescreen resolution (1440 x 900) without me even having to set the resolution manually. Beyond that I really did not do any configuration at all (except changing wallpaper and installing my essential software using synaptic). Which part of it do you find not as easy as configuring Vista?
Unfortunately, it's not as easy as you have made it to sound.
Those are exactly the steps I had gone through when installing Ubuntu on my system which has an Acer widescreen display.
Go through other troublehooting sections and any other forum for that matter. You'd find 1000s of problems with Vista and XP systems too. So neither are they easier to setup than Linux.
Please explain how exactly I must draw a line between these two so that I can filter posts to suit you.
If your motherboard is not Linux compatible why blame Linux? Blame the maker.
What's this? ru trying to prove vista is better than linux?
He is just sharing his perception, Is that a blasphemy?
No not at all. If I have an XP compatible hardware, it should work with Vista (I maintain the same stance regarding Linux too). Of course, I can't expect a win98 hardware to work on Vista.
There haf been numerous instances with me where Ubuntu or any other binary distro just failed to install no matter what was done. XP worked out of the box without any issue. I never had to select or configure anything on my system. I just installed the drivers and voila I had a perfectly usable system in just 15 mins on XP.
There haf been numerous instances where Windows Vista just failed to install no matter what was done. Booted into Linux. I never had to select or configure anything on my system. I just installed the binary drivers with a one click install and voila I had a perfectly usable system in just 15 mins on Linux.
There are something called ACPI tables. They may be non-existant for Linux or broken. 90% of the boot installation problems are due to broken ACPI. In such cases, you can use the acpi=off switch when you boot into Ubuntu. I'm not saying should've done it coz you installed for the first time. When you make the above statement, you are perfectly correct
1. Stop the useless troll please.
As I explained, 90% of boot problems are due to ACPI issues. But the Linux distro companies are at fault for not alerting the users first place.
Dude.. stick to designing UIs... don't make a fool out of yourself by speaking something about which you haf no clue...
I have an Asus M2N-PV VM board. It is based on nForce too. I have absolutely no problem booting Ubuntu 8.04. I did not have to do anything with BIOS. But I don't dual boot, I use only Ubuntu.
1. ThanQ
Without drivers? OMFG...
Which is very true...
True... There is no doubt about the fact that 8.04 was the most broken distro ever released by Canonical. That was a huge blunder by them and they are liable to be condemned. A company whose distro is by far the most popular shouldn't be this irresponsible.
My Logitech Quick Cam some model, worked out of the box in both XP & Vista. So yeah, you don't need to install drivers for every hardware. I thought you might be knowing this.
The initial release of 8.04 had few problems. They had to compromise and provide few programs which were in development version (Firefox 3 beta 5 for example) as they'll have to support them for another 2 years. If they had provided current stable versions, they may become obsolete within 2 years (again FF 2 for example)
Wow!! I never knew that a day would come when creating bloated software which hogged hardware resources would be called a contribution to technology.
Yeah? QuickCam is some unbranded Chinese cam? Quickcam works without drivers in XP, Vista, Most Linux distros and Mac OS X without any drivers.
For some unbranded Chinese webcam?
Plz don't link this "few problems" with the ACPI bug, the kernel bug etc. This is by far the worst distro out there released by Canonical.
I would whole-heartedly agree on this with you and this is what I tried to highlight in my previous post. Canonical has been very irresponsible.
This where I fail to agree with you. Things were different when XP was released. The performance of OS to power of hardware ratio of Vista is very very bad as compared to any previous Windows version. It very evident. Just try running something like Auto CAD 2k8 or Maya or something + Vista on the standard hardware available today and compare it with the same during XP dayz. People who haf extensively used XP and previous releases and haf some knowledge about OS internals will agree to what I am saying.
haha.. thats the funniest thing I've ever read
Plz stop this BS dude.. nobody is trying to do that.. or even think as stupid as that.. people are not even able to run Vista properly with 1GB RAM.. and thats something which became a standard when Vista was released. The same goes for GMA 950.
Are you defending Vista as a consumer or as a profit oriented hardware manufacturer? What has this post gotta do with us consumers?
What do you expect on an antiMS.com/forum?
Just coz something works for your "ideal" hardware doesn't mean it works for the whole world. Jus come over dude.. I will anyday prove this wrong. You are mistaken.. all those exotic hardware use some obscure chipsets which fail to work on any OS'. Take that situation and then compare the OS'.
Come over to my place and I will show you at least 30 computers like this and more.
And the point is? Are you trying to say MS is helping the hardware vendors make huge bucks by duping the consumers into buying new hardware for Vista?
For once.. lets bar all those people in this forum who use Linux or haf even tried it once. Conduct the survey on purely Windows users and see what the result is
Created by your own users or people who "don't know how to configure a Workstation."
I doubt this forum is antiMS as you put it. Anti-Fanboy maybe. AntiMS , Nope don't think so.
A request to keep 'Linux' out of this thread. Things will get out of control, otherwise.
Windows Vista Blog said:
LMAO.....
Slideshow? I have not been able to see the video, my net is acting weird. Are you sure it is a slideshow, like power-point slides? Or is it a demo they were given, which you call a slideshow? FYI, most demos are like that only, if you have ever seen or taken one. A sales-rep showing you whatever product you are interested in.
I hope you could make sense of what you siad.
The links are working fine.
Slideshow was a sarcastic way of putting the word "demo". The joke here is not 'slideshow' but 'demo'..
Off course it's lame that people weren't actually given a hands-on, people like us who are the fidgety types would have wanted a hands-on. But, most demos are like that only.
The problem is that such a stupid event leads to 5 pages of useless discussions on forums like these and then MS fanboys start trolling and saying - See how great Vista is.. Mac and Linux users are spreading FUD against Vista. Vista has come out clean. It a winner. Starts to bash Linux/Mac OS X . blah.. blah.. blah..
GX said:
GX said:
GX said:
etc... etc... This is the problem!!!!GX said:
Well, now the other side will start bashing MS. And the story continues ...
Naah.. I usually don't... rather never if you dig up my posts.. but somehow felt I should take a break from my work
Maybe the person was a cross-dresser?
I think Ballmer talked about this recently when he said that they will be making amends in the way they deal with hardware manufacturers.
I know. I hate this attitude some people have that configuring from scratch is hard and next to impossible. I installed my OS from the scratch, and I am already seeing differences from my older install which had lots of pre-installed stuff.
look at desiibond's reply.
Oye its not at all true. I installed only AFTER configuring everything (arch had a menu where I was allowed to configure before installation). And including that time was too low. Just a few basic edits of some text files and I was done.
I know, I know. Thats why I say do the configuring AFTER you do the growing intrest in computing part.
MS is trying to educate those who think vista sucks without even looking at it. Of course, they are stupid to rely on stupid media comments
Microsoft showed Mojave participates what really Vista is. They enlightened them
wow. what an understanding by the author. It's authors like this that created wrong though on Vista
MS did agree that there was a problem and they fixed it. Look at Vista now, it's rocking. Seems like the author is stil living in 2007 January.
I am Vista user for 18 months (2yrs since beta testing). After reading the article, I would say that it's the author that is arrogant and nobody else.
Yea SHOWED. Like a video of all the nice features in Mojava/Vista.
What ?
Ya its rocking now.
I guess everyone here would agree that Mojave experiment is a bit lame. They showed just a video of all the good features in vista and after the users (dumb if I may add) gave it a higher rating, they conclude that it was all FUD that brought vista down in the first place. Can you beat that ? Just a video and 120 stupid people let brought them to that conclusion ? This is what I call arrogance.
Please don't call articles bullshit just because you don't agree with the authors views.
FYI Microsoft Watch is considered as a stupid blog by everyone, the author once a year produces an article that makes any sense. His writing style is such where he always makes points like "Microsoft thinks that its users are dumb, Microsoft we are not dumb." His articles aren't meant to be taken as standard, he himself doesn't know where he stands.
Nope, there are well respected blogs that point out genuine flaws technically, in marketing or anything generally related to Microsoft and those blgos are frequented by Microsoft. This particular blog is given no weightage. The first few paragraphs show how much Microsoft gives about this author.
maybe you are blind too
Oh really ? But you said I am a noob. What do you mean by dependencies ? I dont know anything
You are just running away because you have no answers. You are yet to tell me the benefits that vista has over XP.
1. Integrated system wide search.
All do-able on XP.
Really ?
Joking right ?
Enhanced ? in what sense ?
Maybe
Available on XP.
desiibond was right in everything he said about you. I just wasted my time. Sorry.
some concepts are always stolen badly from open source
Ok I understand. If some other OS is difficult to use, it is OS's fault. If it is Windows I should not complain I must bang my head against wall and learn.
Can I use Vista for 3 months to see if it is worth and then get a re-fund of my license fee if it sucks? Or do they allow a trial version for 3 months??
Vista came out with a half done product. It in plain words sucked big time. People obviously bought it expecting it to be able to teleport you to mars. Guess what? The First Impression backfired and people started hating it with more passion than pink polka dot pants. Whether you like it or not it was their own users who created this bad press. Don't call it FUD because these problems in some time did exist and piss off quite a few. You need not go nuts but over the fact that one person on this forum has an Ubuntu icon as his avatar. So get over it. Linking to an article that pisses you off barely qualifies as a reason to taunt other users on this forum with it. You have a problem with the source go talk to the author.
I did not try it on my system for this reason.
On several different laptop with RAM ranging from 1 GB to 3 GB. With GPU mostly nVIDIA or Intel. CPU some form of Intel Core 2 Duo.
How many hours did you spend on learning it? Not the commands needed for servers but the basic tips for desktop install (like choosing right hardware in a world filled with Windows only hardware for no fault of Linux).
See that's where you're wrong, from the start itself. Get your self Vista from anywhere, install it on your system, use it for 30 days. Don't like it don't buy the license. It gives you 30 days to try. Stop making NOTES that are not true. Man I've become so polite.
WoW thats great! I have a Core2duo 2.4GHz laptop with 4GB RAM and you want me to add more processor power and RAM just to run Vista? What do you expect me to buy? A $4500 Alienware with Intel extreme and SLI 8800GTX? Vista FTW.
Not to be mean but this is applicable in every operating system's. The only difference is you don't pay to be the scapegoat in Linux. But you do in Other Operating Systems.
You don't seem to get it do you? He doesn't want to have to pay for un-installing all the crapware and then fine tune it for the experience. Also let me ask you one thing. Are you 100% sure that every single Laptop installs Vista without a problem?
They have. From recent Ballmer emails it was clear that they are re-thinking the way they deal with the system manufacturers. Let's hope for the best. But, certainly it is unfair to blame MS and say Vista is bad because what you (not necessarily you) bought is loaded with crap already.
As Microsoft's product they should have probably done something to restrict that to a reasonable limit. I mean after all they don't seem to have problems in restricting other capabilities. For a person like you or some other expert like iMav this might be an easy task. How about those dozens of folk who just need email access. How about those people who wouldn't know what Crapware is from any other program. Are we now to condemn them because of Microsofts and Vendors inability to get their stupid right? You just criticized two people on this forum who from their posts show they aren't any toddlers at technology. So please as I said before ease your roll. Microsoft isn't your personal property theres no need to go aggressive about it.
The answer is in the above post. No company should weasel its way out of its products performance. Thats how quality business is done. Xp is probably given with the same crapware. Why does it work better to some? how about clearing that out.
Thank you . At last someone isseeing what im trying to get across. I think AnandK said the same. There should be a limit on the crap they put on anyones system. The consumer shouldn't have to go through the process of re-installing anything to use someones product.
Else If User bought a new Laptop
5. In either case it ends up with same result.
Didn't I say more than 30 days??
Either magic orextreme hardwork from your side to make it work. If I put same amount of time in configuring my Ubuntu box, I can get a super fast system with even more RAM left for apps.
These are not fault of Linux. Anyway why should I use Vista to run these? They run fine on XP too.
When did Vista start supporting more than 3 GB of RAM??